WEBVTT - Epic S&P Rally Is Powered By Assets You Can't See or Touch

0:00:01.400 --> 0:00:04.120
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to the Bloomberg Markets Podcast. I'm Paul Sweeney, along

0:00:04.120 --> 0:00:06.200
<v Speaker 1>with my co host of Bonnie Quinn. Every business day

0:00:06.240 --> 0:00:10.360
<v Speaker 1>we bring you interviews from CEO, market pros, and Bloomberg experts,

0:00:10.400 --> 0:00:13.600
<v Speaker 1>along with essential market moving news. Find a Bloomberg Markets

0:00:13.600 --> 0:00:17.000
<v Speaker 1>podcast on Apple podcast or wherever you listen to podcasts,

0:00:17.000 --> 0:00:21.439
<v Speaker 1>and on Bloomberg dot Com. Allow me to digress for

0:00:21.600 --> 0:00:24.759
<v Speaker 1>just this tiny second and invoked the memory of Ken Pruitt,

0:00:24.800 --> 0:00:27.320
<v Speaker 1>who used to be a wonderful anchor here on Bloomberg Radio.

0:00:27.400 --> 0:00:29.880
<v Speaker 1>He used to distinguish between the modern economy and the

0:00:29.920 --> 0:00:32.840
<v Speaker 1>older economy by talking about things that you can pull

0:00:32.880 --> 0:00:34.919
<v Speaker 1>out of the ground in terms of what companies are

0:00:34.960 --> 0:00:37.960
<v Speaker 1>doing well. Sarah Ponzac, who joins me in studio now,

0:00:38.440 --> 0:00:41.479
<v Speaker 1>has a version of that idea in a fantastic story

0:00:41.520 --> 0:00:44.760
<v Speaker 1>today where she talks about the epic SMP five Raleigh

0:00:44.800 --> 0:00:48.640
<v Speaker 1>being powered by assets you can't see or touch. Sarah,

0:00:48.640 --> 0:00:50.800
<v Speaker 1>give us a little rundown of what goes on there. Well,

0:00:50.800 --> 0:00:53.320
<v Speaker 1>thank you very much, Bonnie. The idea behind this is

0:00:53.360 --> 0:00:57.400
<v Speaker 1>really that all year long, we constantly hear about tech

0:00:57.520 --> 0:01:02.160
<v Speaker 1>outperforming tech out performance. The reality is that COVID nineteen sure,

0:01:02.200 --> 0:01:04.520
<v Speaker 1>it has sped this up, but this has been a

0:01:04.560 --> 0:01:09.800
<v Speaker 1>trend for a very long time, and in speaking with professors, researchers, economists,

0:01:10.160 --> 0:01:12.280
<v Speaker 1>one thing that you can really trace this back to

0:01:12.600 --> 0:01:16.480
<v Speaker 1>is the difference between intangible assets and tangible assets. So

0:01:16.840 --> 0:01:20.480
<v Speaker 1>intangible assets being those things that you cannot see, you

0:01:20.560 --> 0:01:23.399
<v Speaker 1>cannot touch, think of them as a brand name like

0:01:23.480 --> 0:01:29.399
<v Speaker 1>the iPhone, for example, or data collected on people, algorithms, software,

0:01:29.959 --> 0:01:31.920
<v Speaker 1>even you can think about it in the sense of

0:01:31.959 --> 0:01:34.680
<v Speaker 1>a vaccine being created. All the R and D that

0:01:34.760 --> 0:01:38.000
<v Speaker 1>does go into that, it's all considered intangible and it's

0:01:38.040 --> 0:01:41.400
<v Speaker 1>not recorded on a company's balance sheet. So a on

0:01:41.440 --> 0:01:44.320
<v Speaker 1>impotent On institute. They put out a report back in ten.

0:01:44.360 --> 0:01:47.280
<v Speaker 1>It was recently cited by Bank of America by Carlyle.

0:01:47.360 --> 0:01:50.400
<v Speaker 1>This has really become a topic of conversation and what

0:01:50.480 --> 0:01:52.480
<v Speaker 1>they found. The way that they did this was they

0:01:52.520 --> 0:01:56.680
<v Speaker 1>took total SMP five market cap and they subtracted out

0:01:56.720 --> 0:02:00.760
<v Speaker 1>what's called tangible book value. Then they said every thing else, well,

0:02:01.080 --> 0:02:05.400
<v Speaker 1>that's due to intangible assets, which represented eighty four percent

0:02:05.920 --> 0:02:09.240
<v Speaker 1>of the SMP five dred. Now there are some discrepancies

0:02:09.240 --> 0:02:11.680
<v Speaker 1>here about how you can actually go about calculating this,

0:02:11.760 --> 0:02:15.440
<v Speaker 1>and it's really difficult because so touchy feely and accounting

0:02:15.440 --> 0:02:19.640
<v Speaker 1>measures really aren't that great surrounding this. But yes, you

0:02:19.680 --> 0:02:22.320
<v Speaker 1>have to take into account that what we see in

0:02:22.360 --> 0:02:25.160
<v Speaker 1>the length of market cap and that gap is also

0:02:25.280 --> 0:02:29.200
<v Speaker 1>due to projected earnings from both tangible intangible assets. But

0:02:29.280 --> 0:02:32.080
<v Speaker 1>the reality is that growth in intangible assets has just

0:02:32.160 --> 0:02:35.640
<v Speaker 1>been astronomical over the past two decades, over the past

0:02:35.680 --> 0:02:38.320
<v Speaker 1>decade in particular, and now sped up by COVID nineteen.

0:02:38.320 --> 0:02:40.560
<v Speaker 1>And that has extreme implications for the economy and the

0:02:40.639 --> 0:02:43.280
<v Speaker 1>labor market too. And of course how you value these

0:02:43.280 --> 0:02:45.720
<v Speaker 1>assets is what's important, or how investors value them. I

0:02:45.720 --> 0:02:47.920
<v Speaker 1>should say, some of these are just runs, some of them,

0:02:47.960 --> 0:02:50.799
<v Speaker 1>as you say, or you know, intellectual property and so on.

0:02:51.120 --> 0:02:54.639
<v Speaker 1>Some of them produced revenue, others absolutely don't. Right, There

0:02:54.639 --> 0:02:57.880
<v Speaker 1>are many implications of this. Often spoken about is what

0:02:57.960 --> 0:03:01.600
<v Speaker 1>this means for value investing. There is large question about

0:03:01.639 --> 0:03:03.960
<v Speaker 1>if this is the reason why value seems to be

0:03:04.080 --> 0:03:07.160
<v Speaker 1>quote unquote dead, why value hasn't been able to outperform.

0:03:07.240 --> 0:03:10.600
<v Speaker 1>Is it the reality that value investors are missing this

0:03:10.720 --> 0:03:14.360
<v Speaker 1>key input of intangible assets. Bank of America, for example,

0:03:14.400 --> 0:03:16.679
<v Speaker 1>how a recent report on this and they created their

0:03:16.760 --> 0:03:21.760
<v Speaker 1>value Intangibles basket where they incorporated intangibles into value investing

0:03:21.840 --> 0:03:24.360
<v Speaker 1>and they got much better returns. There's also a value

0:03:24.360 --> 0:03:27.400
<v Speaker 1>et F, for example, that holds Amazon, and the reason

0:03:27.440 --> 0:03:29.480
<v Speaker 1>that it holds Amazon is because they do take into

0:03:29.480 --> 0:03:33.320
<v Speaker 1>account intangible value. But when you think about the macro

0:03:33.560 --> 0:03:37.200
<v Speaker 1>economic effects of this and the macro economic implications when

0:03:37.200 --> 0:03:40.480
<v Speaker 1>you think about a company with a lot of intangible assets,

0:03:40.480 --> 0:03:42.800
<v Speaker 1>for example, a software company, there's a lot of R

0:03:42.880 --> 0:03:44.840
<v Speaker 1>and D research and development that goes into this. But

0:03:44.880 --> 0:03:47.400
<v Speaker 1>once the software is created, or once a vaccine is created,

0:03:47.400 --> 0:03:50.280
<v Speaker 1>for example, they have immense scale and you don't need

0:03:50.360 --> 0:03:54.880
<v Speaker 1>too many people working to keep that scale growing, to

0:03:55.560 --> 0:03:59.560
<v Speaker 1>keep software being issued too many different people to many

0:03:59.600 --> 0:04:02.280
<v Speaker 1>different companies for example. Same with a vaccine having it

0:04:02.320 --> 0:04:06.240
<v Speaker 1>administered around the world. So what people wonder and what

0:04:06.360 --> 0:04:10.080
<v Speaker 1>the proof has shown is that aside from the growth

0:04:10.240 --> 0:04:13.640
<v Speaker 1>of intangible assets alongside it, I should say we've also

0:04:13.680 --> 0:04:16.200
<v Speaker 1>seen slower labor market recoveries because if you think in

0:04:16.240 --> 0:04:19.400
<v Speaker 1>the olden days, if you think with oil wells and factories,

0:04:19.440 --> 0:04:22.480
<v Speaker 1>you needed a lot of people to really power these

0:04:22.520 --> 0:04:25.760
<v Speaker 1>tangible assets. Well, with intangible assets, the idea is that

0:04:25.800 --> 0:04:28.960
<v Speaker 1>you don't need that much growth and employment, you don't

0:04:28.960 --> 0:04:31.360
<v Speaker 1>need that many people. So people are starting to think

0:04:31.360 --> 0:04:33.359
<v Speaker 1>about and really wonder about what this means for the

0:04:33.400 --> 0:04:37.520
<v Speaker 1>future of the economy. One interesting area is brand names,

0:04:37.520 --> 0:04:39.599
<v Speaker 1>as you said, And yesterday I was speaking with somebody

0:04:39.640 --> 0:04:41.839
<v Speaker 1>who owns many Reads or who's the CEO of a

0:04:41.920 --> 0:04:45.240
<v Speaker 1>red company, and he talked about how they've undone some

0:04:46.080 --> 0:04:48.880
<v Speaker 1>deals they had with Marriott or I h S for example,

0:04:48.960 --> 0:04:50.720
<v Speaker 1>and you have to wonder, you know, he talked about

0:04:50.720 --> 0:04:53.000
<v Speaker 1>a hundred fifty hotel brands that they used to work

0:04:53.040 --> 0:04:55.280
<v Speaker 1>with and now they're really consolidating that and going with

0:04:55.320 --> 0:04:58.080
<v Speaker 1>their own hotel brands like Sanesta. You have to wonder,

0:04:58.360 --> 0:05:01.360
<v Speaker 1>will some of these brands just go away or decrease

0:05:01.360 --> 0:05:03.960
<v Speaker 1>significant dy and value. Well, you have to wonder that.

0:05:04.040 --> 0:05:06.320
<v Speaker 1>And when you think about a brand, you have to

0:05:06.360 --> 0:05:11.080
<v Speaker 1>think about the emotions that comes with it, also just

0:05:11.200 --> 0:05:14.800
<v Speaker 1>how recognizable it is to a majority of people. When

0:05:14.839 --> 0:05:17.800
<v Speaker 1>I was working on this story, one example that came up,

0:05:17.839 --> 0:05:20.440
<v Speaker 1>for example, was the likes of band aid. For example,

0:05:20.720 --> 0:05:22.800
<v Speaker 1>band aid is a brand, but when we talk about

0:05:22.880 --> 0:05:25.040
<v Speaker 1>using band aids, I mean, I'll go ahead and say

0:05:25.080 --> 0:05:27.560
<v Speaker 1>the name you talk about using band aids, so that

0:05:27.680 --> 0:05:31.120
<v Speaker 1>is such value that is added to the company that

0:05:31.200 --> 0:05:34.679
<v Speaker 1>creates band aid. For example, you think about the likes

0:05:34.839 --> 0:05:37.480
<v Speaker 1>of Apple and It's iPhone. When people talk about phones,

0:05:37.520 --> 0:05:40.040
<v Speaker 1>a lot of people will just off handly use iPhone

0:05:40.080 --> 0:05:43.320
<v Speaker 1>because such a large proportion of the population uses it.

0:05:43.440 --> 0:05:45.799
<v Speaker 1>So when you think about the value of a company,

0:05:45.880 --> 0:05:49.920
<v Speaker 1>brand names are so important and the ideas the emotion

0:05:50.000 --> 0:05:51.719
<v Speaker 1>that comes with it. Another one that comes to mind

0:05:51.760 --> 0:05:54.800
<v Speaker 1>is Disney. Disney has such a great brand value that

0:05:54.839 --> 0:05:56.760
<v Speaker 1>comes with it. Even though it's a company that does

0:05:56.839 --> 0:05:59.719
<v Speaker 1>have a high amount of tangible assets, you also have

0:05:59.760 --> 0:06:03.040
<v Speaker 1>to think about the brand. To Sarah, there's so much

0:06:03.040 --> 0:06:04.680
<v Speaker 1>more we can talk about in this story, but we

0:06:04.680 --> 0:06:06.760
<v Speaker 1>do have to leave it there for now. Sarah Ponzac

0:06:07.040 --> 0:06:09.919
<v Speaker 1>is our Cross Asset reporter here at Bloomberg. Again, if

0:06:09.960 --> 0:06:12.320
<v Speaker 1>you have a chance to have a read through this story,

0:06:12.360 --> 0:06:15.679
<v Speaker 1>it really is just a fun story, but also extraordinary,

0:06:16.000 --> 0:06:20.840
<v Speaker 1>lust lustrative, and also educational epic SMB five values powered

0:06:20.839 --> 0:06:25.000
<v Speaker 1>by assets you can't see or touch. That Sarah Ponzac,

0:06:27.320 --> 0:06:30.159
<v Speaker 1>time for a conversation now about monopoly, and I'm not

0:06:30.200 --> 0:06:32.720
<v Speaker 1>talking the board game. I'm talking Google which our next

0:06:32.720 --> 0:06:36.600
<v Speaker 1>guest says should learn from Microsoft's a tough lesson. Jon

0:06:36.680 --> 0:06:40.039
<v Speaker 1>Oh Sarah joins us now Bloomberg opinion columnist. What was

0:06:40.080 --> 0:06:43.440
<v Speaker 1>the tough lesson that Microsoft learned, Joe that Google is

0:06:43.480 --> 0:06:47.760
<v Speaker 1>about to learn? According to you, you fight the federal

0:06:47.760 --> 0:06:53.240
<v Speaker 1>government at your peril. Uh, let's let's start there. Um.

0:06:53.279 --> 0:06:57.080
<v Speaker 1>You know the the when you look at the complaint

0:06:57.120 --> 0:07:01.640
<v Speaker 1>that the Dust's Department filed against Google, it is uncannily

0:07:01.839 --> 0:07:06.440
<v Speaker 1>similar to the complaint the Justice Department file twenty two

0:07:06.560 --> 0:07:11.120
<v Speaker 1>years ago against Microsoft. Microsoft was accused of using it,

0:07:11.880 --> 0:07:17.400
<v Speaker 1>you know, operating system monopoly to squash um a competitor,

0:07:17.600 --> 0:07:21.160
<v Speaker 1>Netscape that had a browser that was competing with with

0:07:21.280 --> 0:07:26.440
<v Speaker 1>the Microsoft browser Internet Explorer. Um Uh. Google is being

0:07:26.480 --> 0:07:33.200
<v Speaker 1>accused of basically, um uh, going to going to Apple

0:07:33.320 --> 0:07:35.680
<v Speaker 1>and other companies and basically saying, we want to be

0:07:35.840 --> 0:07:38.560
<v Speaker 1>the pre we want to be the defalse search engine.

0:07:38.560 --> 0:07:41.040
<v Speaker 1>We'll pay you to put our search engine you know,

0:07:41.360 --> 0:07:45.120
<v Speaker 1>embedded in your in your devices and keep everybody else out.

0:07:45.600 --> 0:07:49.920
<v Speaker 1>It's very very similar, and you know, Microsoft lost that case,

0:07:50.240 --> 0:07:54.880
<v Speaker 1>and even though antitrust is um gotten a little more

0:07:54.920 --> 0:07:58.560
<v Speaker 1>las fair since then. I think Google's in a heap

0:07:58.600 --> 0:08:02.080
<v Speaker 1>of trouble. Well, there have been twenty two years in

0:08:02.120 --> 0:08:05.440
<v Speaker 1>the meantime. Is there anything in case slow or anything

0:08:05.480 --> 0:08:07.600
<v Speaker 1>in precedent that Google might be able to learn from

0:08:07.760 --> 0:08:11.840
<v Speaker 1>and use to its advantage. Well, the main thing that

0:08:11.920 --> 0:08:15.520
<v Speaker 1>they will argue about is how to define the market.

0:08:16.000 --> 0:08:19.239
<v Speaker 1>So if the if the market is defined purely as

0:08:19.280 --> 0:08:23.200
<v Speaker 1>the search engine market, then I think Google's going to

0:08:23.320 --> 0:08:26.360
<v Speaker 1>have real problems defending its position. But if they can

0:08:26.400 --> 0:08:30.600
<v Speaker 1>persuade the judge to make the market um, you know,

0:08:30.760 --> 0:08:36.120
<v Speaker 1>Internet platforms or something that's broader and wider than simply search,

0:08:36.679 --> 0:08:38.480
<v Speaker 1>then I think they've got a pretty good shot. I

0:08:38.480 --> 0:08:41.040
<v Speaker 1>think a lot. So it's a it's as technical term,

0:08:41.040 --> 0:08:44.480
<v Speaker 1>but it's super important in the antitrust is how do

0:08:44.520 --> 0:08:47.800
<v Speaker 1>you define the market? Uh? And if you define it

0:08:47.920 --> 0:08:50.040
<v Speaker 1>one way, it can you know, then you're a monopolist.

0:08:50.120 --> 0:08:51.920
<v Speaker 1>If you define it another way, then maybe you're not.

0:08:53.200 --> 0:08:57.480
<v Speaker 1>They will have teams and teams of lawyers, Joe, I

0:08:57.520 --> 0:09:00.480
<v Speaker 1>mean how will this play out? I mean will it

0:09:00.520 --> 0:09:02.560
<v Speaker 1>be a public spectacle? Will we be able to see

0:09:02.559 --> 0:09:06.000
<v Speaker 1>a lot of drama, a lot of theater? Um? Well,

0:09:06.080 --> 0:09:10.360
<v Speaker 1>in the past, Google has uh wound up usually settling

0:09:11.120 --> 0:09:14.599
<v Speaker 1>Uh with gup various governments or in Europe paid to

0:09:14.720 --> 0:09:17.720
<v Speaker 1>paid large fines. So the real question is will it

0:09:17.800 --> 0:09:21.920
<v Speaker 1>get to the trial stage. If it does get to

0:09:21.960 --> 0:09:25.040
<v Speaker 1>the trial stage, I think it's quite likely that it

0:09:25.120 --> 0:09:28.920
<v Speaker 1>will be, um, you know, one of those uh high

0:09:28.960 --> 0:09:32.880
<v Speaker 1>profile rock and roll you know trials with lots of

0:09:32.920 --> 0:09:37.360
<v Speaker 1>fireworks and you know, inflammatory emails and you know, so

0:09:37.440 --> 0:09:40.400
<v Speaker 1>on and so forth. Um. I'm sure one thing that

0:09:40.480 --> 0:09:43.760
<v Speaker 1>they learned from the trial is uh, not to act

0:09:43.760 --> 0:09:46.320
<v Speaker 1>the way Bill Gates acted during his deposition, which was

0:09:46.360 --> 0:09:51.680
<v Speaker 1>devastating for Microsoft. As you were called, he was his

0:09:51.679 --> 0:09:57.720
<v Speaker 1>his answers were he he barely seemed to know you know,

0:09:57.800 --> 0:10:01.199
<v Speaker 1>what the words meant, and when that was played in

0:10:01.240 --> 0:10:05.920
<v Speaker 1>the courthouse, that did not help Microsoft at all. Joe,

0:10:06.480 --> 0:10:08.840
<v Speaker 1>you know, Google is going to face this first, but

0:10:09.120 --> 0:10:11.360
<v Speaker 1>it's clear that some of the other major tech companies

0:10:11.360 --> 0:10:13.160
<v Speaker 1>are going to face this as well. Is there anything

0:10:13.240 --> 0:10:16.640
<v Speaker 1>to suggest that one company might prevail over some of

0:10:16.720 --> 0:10:19.439
<v Speaker 1>the others, or that that companies will take a different

0:10:19.480 --> 0:10:22.800
<v Speaker 1>tech when dealing with us, Well, each company is going

0:10:22.880 --> 0:10:24.600
<v Speaker 1>to have a different issue, you know, and that's what

0:10:24.679 --> 0:10:28.400
<v Speaker 1>makes this so hard. So, you know, Facebook, you know,

0:10:28.559 --> 0:10:33.240
<v Speaker 1>is the is the eight hundred pound gorilla UH in

0:10:33.320 --> 0:10:36.520
<v Speaker 1>social media. UM, and if the government went after them,

0:10:36.559 --> 0:10:38.920
<v Speaker 1>they would probably try to break them up and and

0:10:38.920 --> 0:10:42.600
<v Speaker 1>and you know, UH separate them from Instagram and What's App,

0:10:42.640 --> 0:10:47.000
<v Speaker 1>which which they both own. Amazon is the platform company

0:10:47.080 --> 0:10:51.640
<v Speaker 1>that is being accused of using data from UH it's

0:10:51.920 --> 0:10:55.640
<v Speaker 1>its own customers, companies that sell on Amazon to make

0:10:55.679 --> 0:10:59.240
<v Speaker 1>their own products to compete with these other companies. And

0:10:59.520 --> 0:11:02.800
<v Speaker 1>UH so that's what they'll be suit over UM an Apple.

0:11:03.040 --> 0:11:05.680
<v Speaker 1>If the government goes after them, it'll be because of

0:11:06.440 --> 0:11:10.040
<v Speaker 1>the way they enforce the rules and and handle their

0:11:10.080 --> 0:11:14.079
<v Speaker 1>own UM the app store, the propriety of the app store.

0:11:14.360 --> 0:11:16.679
<v Speaker 1>So each case is going to be different. They're all

0:11:16.720 --> 0:11:20.480
<v Speaker 1>antitrust cases, but but the the emphasis in each case

0:11:20.600 --> 0:11:23.000
<v Speaker 1>is going to be quite different. And it's really hard

0:11:23.040 --> 0:11:26.520
<v Speaker 1>to know at this point which of the cases are

0:11:26.520 --> 0:11:28.880
<v Speaker 1>the stronger for the Justice Department and which are ones

0:11:28.920 --> 0:11:31.320
<v Speaker 1>are the weaker. I think the other thing that's gonna

0:11:31.320 --> 0:11:35.440
<v Speaker 1>happen though, don't forget, there's also Congress, and so if

0:11:35.559 --> 0:11:39.480
<v Speaker 1>the Democrats take the Senate and UM the White House,

0:11:40.520 --> 0:11:44.200
<v Speaker 1>you're almost surely going to see laws being written and

0:11:44.320 --> 0:11:49.360
<v Speaker 1>passed that UM that outlaws some of the practices these

0:11:49.360 --> 0:11:52.360
<v Speaker 1>tech companies have been doing. UH, so that there's no

0:11:52.559 --> 0:11:55.960
<v Speaker 1>there's no ambiguity about about whether they violate the law

0:11:56.040 --> 0:11:57.920
<v Speaker 1>or not. They're just gonna say this is against the law.

0:11:58.000 --> 0:12:00.720
<v Speaker 1>You cannot do this Amazon, or you cannot do this Facebook.

0:12:01.520 --> 0:12:04.880
<v Speaker 1>It's so fascinating. I'm also curious as to whether a

0:12:04.960 --> 0:12:07.920
<v Speaker 1>change in administration should we get one, and that's absolutely

0:12:07.960 --> 0:12:10.800
<v Speaker 1>not not determined yet. But if we get one, doesn't

0:12:10.920 --> 0:12:13.160
<v Speaker 1>make a difference in this what's going to be a

0:12:13.240 --> 0:12:17.480
<v Speaker 1>year's one case. I don't think it does. UM. This

0:12:17.480 --> 0:12:21.400
<v Speaker 1>this case was clearly put together by the UM career

0:12:21.400 --> 0:12:25.400
<v Speaker 1>professionals at the Justice Department. They're not going to go anywhere. UM.

0:12:25.440 --> 0:12:28.720
<v Speaker 1>The Democrats, as I wrote in another column recently, are

0:12:28.800 --> 0:12:33.440
<v Speaker 1>really UM geared up to go after these big tech

0:12:33.480 --> 0:12:38.920
<v Speaker 1>companies on antitrust grounds. And UM the idea that Biden

0:12:38.960 --> 0:12:43.559
<v Speaker 1>administration would back away from this lawsuit is almost inconceivable.

0:12:43.840 --> 0:12:48.679
<v Speaker 1>If anything, they will add additional charges that are not

0:12:48.920 --> 0:12:51.600
<v Speaker 1>currently contained in in the in the in the in

0:12:51.640 --> 0:12:55.520
<v Speaker 1>the complaint right now. Yeah, I mean, it's really interesting.

0:12:56.160 --> 0:12:58.400
<v Speaker 1>There's also the question of how the do o J

0:12:58.760 --> 0:13:00.640
<v Speaker 1>is going to be staffed up and so on, Joe.

0:13:00.640 --> 0:13:02.720
<v Speaker 1>But you think these things just carry on sort of

0:13:03.080 --> 0:13:08.840
<v Speaker 1>seamlessly transition or no, well, seamlessly it is probably overstatement.

0:13:09.320 --> 0:13:11.800
<v Speaker 1>I mean, don't forget don't forget a T and T

0:13:12.080 --> 0:13:15.000
<v Speaker 1>T and T deal with time. Warner was just about

0:13:15.080 --> 0:13:18.560
<v Speaker 1>locked up when making del Rayhan became the antitrust chief

0:13:18.559 --> 0:13:23.720
<v Speaker 1>of the Juice Department under under under President Trump, and

0:13:23.760 --> 0:13:26.800
<v Speaker 1>he immediately reversed course on it with much of the

0:13:26.880 --> 0:13:30.160
<v Speaker 1>dismay of the career professionals. But in this particular case,

0:13:30.280 --> 0:13:33.920
<v Speaker 1>I think the career professionals and whoever hit their superiors

0:13:33.920 --> 0:13:35.679
<v Speaker 1>turn out to be are going to be going to

0:13:35.760 --> 0:13:39.679
<v Speaker 1>be aligned on this case. Joe. It's always so fascinating

0:13:39.720 --> 0:13:41.800
<v Speaker 1>to speak to you just on a stufford note, before

0:13:41.800 --> 0:13:44.800
<v Speaker 1>we let you can ask you what you think it's

0:13:44.800 --> 0:13:49.280
<v Speaker 1>going to happen tomorrow night, debate night. You can ask me.

0:13:49.320 --> 0:13:53.640
<v Speaker 1>But I don't know that's a fair enough answer. It's uh,

0:13:53.800 --> 0:13:55.720
<v Speaker 1>it's not fair to put an opinion columnist on the

0:13:55.720 --> 0:13:58.280
<v Speaker 1>spot like that, Joe. Thank you. Jonah Sarah is a

0:13:58.320 --> 0:14:01.920
<v Speaker 1>Boombrig opinion columnists covering business. We should say, and of

0:14:01.920 --> 0:14:03.959
<v Speaker 1>course I do check out if you haven't heard it.

0:14:04.520 --> 0:14:08.000
<v Speaker 1>His project the Bloomberg Wandere Project, the Shrink next Door

0:14:08.400 --> 0:14:11.640
<v Speaker 1>for all sorts of prizes, and really just a fascinating

0:14:11.760 --> 0:14:14.640
<v Speaker 1>liston as well. So Joe, thanks for joining today's column.

0:14:14.840 --> 0:14:18.400
<v Speaker 1>Is that Google should learn from Microsoft's tough lesson and

0:14:18.440 --> 0:14:23.200
<v Speaker 1>well worth a read for anybody out there. Let's get

0:14:23.200 --> 0:14:26.000
<v Speaker 1>back to the markets now. A very interesting conversation coming

0:14:26.080 --> 0:14:30.040
<v Speaker 1>up with Anderson Capital Management. Peter Anderson, who is located

0:14:30.080 --> 0:14:33.480
<v Speaker 1>in Boston and manage is something called the weather marka

0:14:33.560 --> 0:14:37.680
<v Speaker 1>fun It's a credit driven, concentrated, low turnover stock portfolio

0:14:38.040 --> 0:14:43.280
<v Speaker 1>that apparently incorporates a truly different esoteric stock selection process.

0:14:43.800 --> 0:14:46.240
<v Speaker 1>So Peter, welcome and give us just a little hint

0:14:46.240 --> 0:14:50.080
<v Speaker 1>of what this esoteric stock selection process might be. Well,

0:14:50.120 --> 0:14:52.920
<v Speaker 1>good morning, Bonnie. Yes, so I come from a fixed

0:14:52.960 --> 0:14:56.800
<v Speaker 1>income background and inequity background, and not many people have

0:14:56.920 --> 0:15:00.240
<v Speaker 1>that combination. Usually you stay in one swim lane for

0:15:00.320 --> 0:15:03.040
<v Speaker 1>your profession. But I switched over to equities and I

0:15:03.040 --> 0:15:07.200
<v Speaker 1>found it very convenient and helpful, frankly, to borrow from

0:15:07.240 --> 0:15:10.880
<v Speaker 1>the fixed income marketplace the different tools they use and

0:15:10.920 --> 0:15:13.720
<v Speaker 1>apply that to equity analysis. So what I have is

0:15:13.760 --> 0:15:17.000
<v Speaker 1>a current portfolio or fifteen stocks, but they are derived

0:15:17.080 --> 0:15:20.920
<v Speaker 1>mainly by looking at dislocations between how the bond market

0:15:21.000 --> 0:15:23.360
<v Speaker 1>might have an opinion on a company versus how an

0:15:23.400 --> 0:15:26.360
<v Speaker 1>equity market would have an opinion on the same company.

0:15:27.720 --> 0:15:30.280
<v Speaker 1>So what does it led you to put into your

0:15:30.320 --> 0:15:34.800
<v Speaker 1>portfolio in the last six months? And have you changed much? Uh?

0:15:34.840 --> 0:15:38.400
<v Speaker 1>You know, my turnover is very low relatively speaking. You know,

0:15:38.440 --> 0:15:40.720
<v Speaker 1>there are a lot of competitors out there. Mutual funds

0:15:40.800 --> 0:15:43.280
<v Speaker 1>would have over ad percent turnover, but mine is only

0:15:43.320 --> 0:15:47.400
<v Speaker 1>about twenty five. So that's an indirect way of saying

0:15:47.440 --> 0:15:51.200
<v Speaker 1>that my turn my new stock selection is pretty slow.

0:15:51.320 --> 0:15:53.880
<v Speaker 1>At most. Ill pick maybe one or two stocks a year,

0:15:54.440 --> 0:15:57.960
<v Speaker 1>and uh, I hoping that's a sign of my conviction

0:15:58.200 --> 0:16:01.560
<v Speaker 1>on the holdings that I currently have, of uh in

0:16:01.680 --> 0:16:07.040
<v Speaker 1>terms of my outlook for their market appreciation. Okay, how

0:16:07.280 --> 0:16:09.720
<v Speaker 1>specific can you get when you talk to us about

0:16:09.760 --> 0:16:12.200
<v Speaker 1>what's actually in your portfolio? Because last year, for example,

0:16:13.080 --> 0:16:17.280
<v Speaker 1>return on an eighteen stock portfolio. Yes, yes, and I've

0:16:17.600 --> 0:16:19.360
<v Speaker 1>delighted to talk to you about that, and I wanted

0:16:19.400 --> 0:16:22.120
<v Speaker 1>to also tie that in to you know, what my

0:16:22.240 --> 0:16:25.080
<v Speaker 1>current assessment is of where we are. I think it's

0:16:25.160 --> 0:16:28.920
<v Speaker 1>extremely difficult right now. You know, COVID has just kind

0:16:28.960 --> 0:16:32.440
<v Speaker 1>of dropped a bomb on all the standard metrics that

0:16:32.600 --> 0:16:35.880
<v Speaker 1>either economists use or equity analysts used. I think they're

0:16:35.880 --> 0:16:39.280
<v Speaker 1>having a very very hard time formulating, oh, what is

0:16:39.280 --> 0:16:41.480
<v Speaker 1>going to happen, say with the next three months. So

0:16:41.560 --> 0:16:44.360
<v Speaker 1>I don't take an approach like that. This approach takes

0:16:44.400 --> 0:16:48.200
<v Speaker 1>a longer view, and I tried to simplify UH supply

0:16:48.320 --> 0:16:50.880
<v Speaker 1>demand and try to get a clearer sense of what

0:16:51.040 --> 0:16:55.760
<v Speaker 1>stocks out there will endure and indeed appreciate regardless of

0:16:55.840 --> 0:16:59.400
<v Speaker 1>what happens in the White House, how long the virus lasts,

0:16:59.480 --> 0:17:02.360
<v Speaker 1>or whether an we have our hopes for the vaccine

0:17:02.560 --> 0:17:06.159
<v Speaker 1>or dash. So with that in mind, some enduring themes

0:17:06.200 --> 0:17:08.480
<v Speaker 1>are believe it or not, pet care. That's the most

0:17:08.520 --> 0:17:11.840
<v Speaker 1>recent editions I've had in the portfolio, and I have

0:17:11.920 --> 0:17:14.600
<v Speaker 1>a theme of pet care sub theme if you will

0:17:14.640 --> 0:17:17.440
<v Speaker 1>have three stocks in there, and I can explicitly tell

0:17:17.440 --> 0:17:20.880
<v Speaker 1>you what they are, the Trupanion Fresh pet in Zoetics.

0:17:20.920 --> 0:17:25.400
<v Speaker 1>Each one has a very specific place in the pet

0:17:25.440 --> 0:17:28.240
<v Speaker 1>care of this nation. At least we own over a

0:17:28.320 --> 0:17:31.440
<v Speaker 1>hundred million cats and dogs out there, and I've write

0:17:31.520 --> 0:17:34.679
<v Speaker 1>reason to that no matter what happens, we treat our

0:17:34.720 --> 0:17:40.360
<v Speaker 1>pets equal to and to a family members in a family.

0:17:40.880 --> 0:17:45.240
<v Speaker 1>So Trupanion is the only publicly traded stock that provides

0:17:45.320 --> 0:17:48.840
<v Speaker 1>healthcare insurance for pets, and their market penetrations is only

0:17:48.920 --> 0:17:53.120
<v Speaker 1>one percent of the entire hundred million animals out there.

0:17:53.200 --> 0:17:56.080
<v Speaker 1>So just think of that. If it doubles its market share,

0:17:56.119 --> 0:17:59.320
<v Speaker 1>it's only up two percent in market share, but it

0:17:59.440 --> 0:18:03.800
<v Speaker 1>certainly double its revenues in fresh pet is gourmet food

0:18:04.000 --> 0:18:09.600
<v Speaker 1>for pets and zoetts. Provides the medication, the prescription medication

0:18:09.680 --> 0:18:14.159
<v Speaker 1>that once you bring your pet to UH doctor veterinarian,

0:18:14.280 --> 0:18:19.280
<v Speaker 1>you will usually get UH prescription for medication and most

0:18:19.320 --> 0:18:21.199
<v Speaker 1>likely the way if this is a manufacturer of that.

0:18:21.359 --> 0:18:25.440
<v Speaker 1>So this is a long term perspective. Uh, from now

0:18:25.600 --> 0:18:28.000
<v Speaker 1>through the end of the year. I think that there

0:18:28.000 --> 0:18:31.720
<v Speaker 1>will be incredible volatility, but who can predict who's going

0:18:31.760 --> 0:18:35.080
<v Speaker 1>to win, when the virus will end, when the vaccines

0:18:35.119 --> 0:18:37.080
<v Speaker 1>will come out. But I think these socks have an

0:18:37.160 --> 0:18:41.440
<v Speaker 1>enduring quality. Are any of your holdings at all dependent

0:18:41.520 --> 0:18:45.080
<v Speaker 1>on more stimulus coming? You know, I try to stay

0:18:45.080 --> 0:18:47.479
<v Speaker 1>away from me because when you think about it, pets

0:18:47.640 --> 0:18:50.840
<v Speaker 1>are definitely, you know, something that costs some money. You know,

0:18:50.880 --> 0:18:53.600
<v Speaker 1>you just said it yourself, right, So you're essentially trying

0:18:53.640 --> 0:18:56.600
<v Speaker 1>to gather the extra pennies that people have, and in

0:18:56.640 --> 0:18:59.480
<v Speaker 1>this case it's through their pets. But a lot of

0:18:59.480 --> 0:19:02.639
<v Speaker 1>people who have pets that you know, don't get extra stimulus,

0:19:02.640 --> 0:19:04.600
<v Speaker 1>will not be able to get their pet that extra

0:19:04.640 --> 0:19:08.639
<v Speaker 1>operation or that medicine. Yes, that's a possibility, but I

0:19:08.640 --> 0:19:11.720
<v Speaker 1>would also say that if that's the case, it's almost

0:19:11.800 --> 0:19:14.760
<v Speaker 1>like saying you wouldn't be able to provide for your

0:19:14.800 --> 0:19:17.680
<v Speaker 1>own family member. So I think there is a strong

0:19:18.240 --> 0:19:22.520
<v Speaker 1>commitments and I would say almost an inelastic demand for

0:19:22.720 --> 0:19:26.720
<v Speaker 1>pet care in this country, at least the way um

0:19:26.800 --> 0:19:31.240
<v Speaker 1>the demographics read and all the latest polling of pet

0:19:31.480 --> 0:19:35.159
<v Speaker 1>um owners say that this is top on their list

0:19:35.640 --> 0:19:37.760
<v Speaker 1>next to a family member to spend. So I think

0:19:37.800 --> 0:19:40.600
<v Speaker 1>you'd really have to erode. There's a lot of inelastic

0:19:40.640 --> 0:19:43.760
<v Speaker 1>demand elements out there that I try to avoid, uh.

0:19:43.800 --> 0:19:46.280
<v Speaker 1>And I do think that these stocks, for instance, will

0:19:46.320 --> 0:19:50.960
<v Speaker 1>be unaffected by a stimulus as some other sectors, such

0:19:51.000 --> 0:19:53.720
<v Speaker 1>as data security and data storage. Those are other to

0:19:53.720 --> 0:19:56.119
<v Speaker 1>two other themes that I play in the portfolio, but

0:19:56.240 --> 0:20:00.280
<v Speaker 1>I think also have enduring qualities. Interesting. Alright, Peter's thank

0:20:00.359 --> 0:20:03.520
<v Speaker 1>you some wonderful things to think about. Their Peter Anderson,

0:20:03.520 --> 0:20:07.119
<v Speaker 1>as founder of Anderson and Capital Management, talking to us

0:20:07.119 --> 0:20:10.520
<v Speaker 1>there about some pet care stocks and then also data storage,

0:20:10.720 --> 0:20:13.080
<v Speaker 1>and of course we know storage of all kinds has

0:20:13.119 --> 0:20:16.600
<v Speaker 1>been pretty popular in this pandemic, a lot of people transferring.

0:20:16.640 --> 0:20:21.920
<v Speaker 1>There's the literal physical buildings into physical storage in inner

0:20:21.920 --> 0:20:23.920
<v Speaker 1>cities as well. So that's another theme that we can

0:20:24.240 --> 0:20:29.200
<v Speaker 1>look at another day. Let's get now to our next

0:20:29.240 --> 0:20:31.640
<v Speaker 1>guest who keeps an eye on emerging markets, but also

0:20:31.680 --> 0:20:34.600
<v Speaker 1>so much more than that. Damian Sasaur is just an

0:20:34.640 --> 0:20:37.240
<v Speaker 1>absolute genius when it comes to watching the markets. He's

0:20:37.280 --> 0:20:41.080
<v Speaker 1>chief Emerging markets credit strategist for Bloomberg Intelligence. But I

0:20:41.119 --> 0:20:42.639
<v Speaker 1>know that in his spare time he does a lot

0:20:42.680 --> 0:20:45.960
<v Speaker 1>more than that, such as looking at frontier markets. And Damian,

0:20:46.000 --> 0:20:48.560
<v Speaker 1>if you don't mind me jumping you with the question,

0:20:49.359 --> 0:20:52.239
<v Speaker 1>we haven't really spent any time on Nigeria or on

0:20:52.280 --> 0:20:54.920
<v Speaker 1>any of the problems that have been having that we've

0:20:54.960 --> 0:20:58.040
<v Speaker 1>been seeing on the periphery. Have you looked at any

0:20:58.040 --> 0:21:00.280
<v Speaker 1>of the frontier markets that are that are suffering right

0:21:00.320 --> 0:21:05.160
<v Speaker 1>now and where is experiencing the most trouble. So it's

0:21:05.160 --> 0:21:07.040
<v Speaker 1>interesting actually that you bring that up, Bonnie. And by

0:21:07.040 --> 0:21:09.479
<v Speaker 1>the way, I'm blushing, thank you for the introduction. So

0:21:09.600 --> 0:21:11.360
<v Speaker 1>you know, the reality is in Nigeria. You know, you've

0:21:11.400 --> 0:21:13.720
<v Speaker 1>had some protests. Nigeria is kind of a closed market.

0:21:13.720 --> 0:21:16.520
<v Speaker 1>There's a big dislocation between the niro, which is its

0:21:16.520 --> 0:21:19.600
<v Speaker 1>local currency, and and the black market rates. So you know,

0:21:19.720 --> 0:21:22.280
<v Speaker 1>I mean, you know, it's not really an investors market

0:21:22.440 --> 0:21:26.040
<v Speaker 1>from a US dollar investor perspective, but you can get

0:21:26.080 --> 0:21:28.600
<v Speaker 1>some really high carrying a lot of frontier markets for

0:21:28.600 --> 0:21:31.440
<v Speaker 1>for example, Egypt and Uruguay and Ghana. You know, you've

0:21:31.440 --> 0:21:33.760
<v Speaker 1>got double digit yields and all of those economies, um,

0:21:33.800 --> 0:21:35.960
<v Speaker 1>and you know, you know you can get that, albeit

0:21:36.280 --> 0:21:38.400
<v Speaker 1>with increased currency risk. So I think that's the real

0:21:38.480 --> 0:21:40.879
<v Speaker 1>risk here. But my goodness, the moving the dollar is

0:21:40.880 --> 0:21:43.760
<v Speaker 1>definitely catching people's attentions. And you know, I can see

0:21:43.760 --> 0:21:45.199
<v Speaker 1>a lot of people putting more money to work in

0:21:45.200 --> 0:21:47.760
<v Speaker 1>the front along the frontier and emerging markets. Right, So

0:21:47.960 --> 0:21:50.600
<v Speaker 1>net net is it better for these markets when that

0:21:50.640 --> 0:21:53.120
<v Speaker 1>happens or is it is it a disaster? Do they

0:21:53.119 --> 0:21:55.320
<v Speaker 1>need to run to the I M F and runder

0:21:55.320 --> 0:21:58.400
<v Speaker 1>any program that that will host them. Well, it certainly depends,

0:21:58.480 --> 0:22:00.200
<v Speaker 1>right I mean, certainly the I m F is there

0:22:00.320 --> 0:22:03.000
<v Speaker 1>for you know, real troubled economies. I mean, we saw

0:22:03.080 --> 0:22:05.960
<v Speaker 1>what they're doing with with in places like Argentina, Ukraine,

0:22:06.040 --> 0:22:08.280
<v Speaker 1>you know, even Ecuador. But you know, when you're looking

0:22:08.280 --> 0:22:10.119
<v Speaker 1>at the front here, you know, and and some of

0:22:10.119 --> 0:22:12.560
<v Speaker 1>the markets I just mentioned, I wouldn't say stable is

0:22:12.600 --> 0:22:15.800
<v Speaker 1>the right word to to characterize them, but certainly more

0:22:15.840 --> 0:22:18.359
<v Speaker 1>stable than than than the former. So you know, Egypt

0:22:18.440 --> 0:22:20.480
<v Speaker 1>is one place where you can carry really really well

0:22:20.520 --> 0:22:22.800
<v Speaker 1>in the short end. You can get double digit yields there.

0:22:23.119 --> 0:22:25.840
<v Speaker 1>But again, you know, those economies are subject to real

0:22:25.960 --> 0:22:28.840
<v Speaker 1>volatile moves in their local currencies relative to the dollars.

0:22:28.920 --> 0:22:30.840
<v Speaker 1>So you know, for example, if we see you know,

0:22:31.560 --> 0:22:33.520
<v Speaker 1>a Trump victory and the dollar rallies off the back

0:22:33.560 --> 0:22:35.560
<v Speaker 1>of that, all bets are off, right, So you know,

0:22:35.600 --> 0:22:38.160
<v Speaker 1>you have to be very selective, and most people use

0:22:38.240 --> 0:22:41.640
<v Speaker 1>that exposure as sort of a satellite within their core

0:22:41.680 --> 0:22:44.119
<v Speaker 1>emerging market portfolio. So it's really more of a terro

0:22:44.200 --> 0:22:46.399
<v Speaker 1>risk kedge or like what I like to call a

0:22:46.400 --> 0:22:50.120
<v Speaker 1>free call option. We like to call that a free

0:22:50.119 --> 0:22:52.720
<v Speaker 1>call option as well. Of course, Damian talks us about

0:22:52.800 --> 0:22:54.760
<v Speaker 1>the some of the things that did get resolved this

0:22:54.800 --> 0:22:58.000
<v Speaker 1>week in terms of some of this Latin American countries.

0:22:58.000 --> 0:23:01.560
<v Speaker 1>In the South American countries, we saw Argentina, for example,

0:23:01.640 --> 0:23:05.359
<v Speaker 1>take a big step. Bolivia too. Yeah, no, absolutely, So

0:23:05.440 --> 0:23:08.800
<v Speaker 1>you know Bolivia is obviously pivoted more towards the socialist bent. Um.

0:23:08.840 --> 0:23:11.040
<v Speaker 1>You know, look, what's interesting is, you know, if you

0:23:11.040 --> 0:23:13.040
<v Speaker 1>just want to just kind of think about Latin America,

0:23:13.400 --> 0:23:16.560
<v Speaker 1>Latin America is really underperformed. Um. I'm talking local Latin

0:23:16.640 --> 0:23:20.000
<v Speaker 1>America effects relative to the broader emerging market universe. And

0:23:20.280 --> 0:23:22.080
<v Speaker 1>you know, if we do see you know, the US

0:23:22.119 --> 0:23:24.200
<v Speaker 1>E pretty market reopening. You know, if we do see

0:23:24.200 --> 0:23:26.160
<v Speaker 1>a steeper U S treasury yield curve, if we see

0:23:26.200 --> 0:23:29.400
<v Speaker 1>the election risk subside, and you know vaccine sentiments improved,

0:23:29.720 --> 0:23:32.800
<v Speaker 1>Latin America for FFX is gonna is gonna rally off

0:23:32.800 --> 0:23:34.719
<v Speaker 1>the back of US. I mean, so you know, for me,

0:23:34.800 --> 0:23:37.480
<v Speaker 1>I'm actually looking at a basket of Latin American currencies

0:23:37.520 --> 0:23:40.800
<v Speaker 1>for example, Brazil, Mexico, Chile, Colombia. You know, that's sort

0:23:40.800 --> 0:23:43.439
<v Speaker 1>of a way of playing for you know, um, you know,

0:23:44.160 --> 0:23:47.119
<v Speaker 1>good news after the election, right and so um, So

0:23:47.200 --> 0:23:48.679
<v Speaker 1>that's one thing that you know, we think a lot

0:23:48.680 --> 0:23:51.280
<v Speaker 1>of investors should take a long, hard, good, a long

0:23:51.320 --> 0:23:54.640
<v Speaker 1>look at here in the current environment, Well what evaluations like,

0:23:54.840 --> 0:23:57.680
<v Speaker 1>I mean, what's priced in our people already sort of

0:23:57.800 --> 0:24:02.000
<v Speaker 1>getting involved? Is it already of date? Now? Latin America

0:24:02.040 --> 0:24:04.480
<v Speaker 1>is one that's really lagged the broader complex. So it's

0:24:04.480 --> 0:24:06.919
<v Speaker 1>one that we like, I mean, like Brazil. Like Brazil

0:24:07.000 --> 0:24:09.240
<v Speaker 1>has itsissues, but in my opinion, it's going to receive

0:24:09.280 --> 0:24:12.680
<v Speaker 1>some tactical re leafs, primarily because short positioning remains elevated,

0:24:12.920 --> 0:24:15.600
<v Speaker 1>the macro risks are abating, and quite frankly, the budget

0:24:15.600 --> 0:24:17.280
<v Speaker 1>discussions are going to be pushed out, so left it

0:24:17.320 --> 0:24:19.960
<v Speaker 1>in November municipal elections, so you could have a two

0:24:20.000 --> 0:24:22.840
<v Speaker 1>to three month window here where the RAYL really regains

0:24:22.880 --> 0:24:24.600
<v Speaker 1>a lot of the lost ground in the rails off

0:24:25.400 --> 0:24:27.600
<v Speaker 1>of the dollar year today it's Banni, So you know

0:24:27.640 --> 0:24:30.119
<v Speaker 1>that would be one. Mexico's another. You know, Mexico is

0:24:30.200 --> 0:24:33.040
<v Speaker 1>now testing that twenty one level, that key twenty one

0:24:33.119 --> 0:24:35.439
<v Speaker 1>level in the currency, and you know, if it breaks

0:24:35.440 --> 0:24:37.119
<v Speaker 1>below that, you know we could easily see it go

0:24:37.160 --> 0:24:40.320
<v Speaker 1>down to levels we saw a pre pandemic, and so

0:24:40.560 --> 0:24:43.280
<v Speaker 1>you know, again these are currencies are ways to kind

0:24:43.280 --> 0:24:46.680
<v Speaker 1>of more liquid, cheaper ways to play for a US

0:24:46.720 --> 0:24:49.639
<v Speaker 1>equity market reopening or sort of a recovery basket, so

0:24:49.680 --> 0:24:51.560
<v Speaker 1>to speak, because as we know, a lot of value

0:24:51.560 --> 0:24:54.679
<v Speaker 1>stocks in the US are still quite crazy, right And

0:24:54.720 --> 0:24:58.040
<v Speaker 1>of course it all depends on you know, whether we

0:24:58.080 --> 0:25:00.440
<v Speaker 1>get back to trade discussions on how that works as well,

0:25:00.520 --> 0:25:03.520
<v Speaker 1>and immigration policy and so on. So really, you know,

0:25:03.560 --> 0:25:07.199
<v Speaker 1>the change that might occur with this election could have

0:25:07.320 --> 0:25:10.760
<v Speaker 1>a big influence on valuations. Now, well, it already is.

0:25:10.760 --> 0:25:12.359
<v Speaker 1>I mean, just look at the China you on, I mean,

0:25:12.359 --> 0:25:14.080
<v Speaker 1>and we're at the strongest level. I think we're six

0:25:14.160 --> 0:25:16.119
<v Speaker 1>sixty four dollar you on now, I mean, that's the

0:25:16.160 --> 0:25:19.159
<v Speaker 1>strongest level we've seen since July eighteen. And look, you know,

0:25:19.200 --> 0:25:22.240
<v Speaker 1>I've long been an advocate of receiving in China. UM

0:25:22.880 --> 0:25:25.840
<v Speaker 1>the People's Bank of China wants a stable affirm currency

0:25:25.840 --> 0:25:29.200
<v Speaker 1>to attract for an influence, it's maintaining domestic confidence. And look,

0:25:29.200 --> 0:25:32.119
<v Speaker 1>it's the only central bank in Asia to embark on

0:25:32.320 --> 0:25:35.480
<v Speaker 1>effects intervention where they're actually selling dollars in the last

0:25:35.600 --> 0:25:38.200
<v Speaker 1>year through August, So you know, that's you know, it's

0:25:38.240 --> 0:25:41.359
<v Speaker 1>it's actually coming out of the pandemics much stronger than

0:25:41.400 --> 0:25:43.439
<v Speaker 1>its peers, and it's one area that we like to

0:25:43.440 --> 0:25:45.800
<v Speaker 1>look at. But you know, there is beneath the surface

0:25:45.920 --> 0:25:47.960
<v Speaker 1>some fiscal vulnerability. I mean, we put out of debt

0:25:48.000 --> 0:25:50.800
<v Speaker 1>just this morning, Vonnie talking about e mxternal debt ratios

0:25:50.800 --> 0:25:53.119
<v Speaker 1>which are rising across the whole of emerging markets. I

0:25:53.119 --> 0:25:56.720
<v Speaker 1>mean full year hard currency debt issue and from emerging

0:25:56.760 --> 0:25:59.680
<v Speaker 1>markets is on track to eclipse seven hundred and fifty

0:25:59.720 --> 0:26:02.840
<v Speaker 1>billion dollars this year. The former high was in only

0:26:02.840 --> 0:26:05.200
<v Speaker 1>four hundred and seventy one billions, So they are levering

0:26:05.280 --> 0:26:08.400
<v Speaker 1>up and that is certainly a risk going forward. Yeah,

0:26:08.440 --> 0:26:11.720
<v Speaker 1>for sure, Damian, you mentioned, you know, six sixty four

0:26:11.800 --> 0:26:14.800
<v Speaker 1>on the off shore, you on, this has been creeping lower.

0:26:14.840 --> 0:26:16.640
<v Speaker 1>I mean it was around six seventy for a long time,

0:26:16.680 --> 0:26:18.840
<v Speaker 1>and then there was a big range between the off

0:26:18.840 --> 0:26:21.920
<v Speaker 1>shore and the on shore that's now narrowed. What's going

0:26:21.960 --> 0:26:24.880
<v Speaker 1>on with the Chinese currency, Well, I think the reason

0:26:24.960 --> 0:26:27.399
<v Speaker 1>we saw that that the entrere off shore basis, you know,

0:26:27.480 --> 0:26:29.600
<v Speaker 1>widen out, had more to do with the fact that

0:26:29.840 --> 0:26:31.800
<v Speaker 1>you know, China was on vacation for eight days. But

0:26:31.880 --> 0:26:34.040
<v Speaker 1>you know, now that's kind of it's kind of subsided,

0:26:34.440 --> 0:26:36.320
<v Speaker 1>you know, for me, the best way to express a

0:26:36.400 --> 0:26:39.800
<v Speaker 1>China view if your bullish on China is through the

0:26:39.840 --> 0:26:41.600
<v Speaker 1>short end of the curve, right, I mean, like everyone's

0:26:41.600 --> 0:26:44.200
<v Speaker 1>talking about receiving in the belly and China government bonds

0:26:44.280 --> 0:26:46.560
<v Speaker 1>at three and five year tenners. But you know, for me,

0:26:46.640 --> 0:26:48.959
<v Speaker 1>I mean you can get you know, one to two

0:26:49.000 --> 0:26:51.399
<v Speaker 1>hundred basis points above treasuries just by carrying on a

0:26:51.480 --> 0:26:54.879
<v Speaker 1>one year or less basis right, So using efforts forwards

0:26:55.000 --> 0:26:58.040
<v Speaker 1>to not only take advantage of a strengthening currency relative

0:26:58.080 --> 0:27:01.840
<v Speaker 1>to the US dollar and also very large pickup over treasuries.

0:27:02.080 --> 0:27:04.000
<v Speaker 1>It's a really nice it's a really nice way to

0:27:04.000 --> 0:27:07.240
<v Speaker 1>play this market into your end in my opinion, Damien,

0:27:07.400 --> 0:27:11.119
<v Speaker 1>really fascinating speaking with you. Always are you coming? You see,

0:27:11.320 --> 0:27:12.960
<v Speaker 1>you know a matrix when you look at markets, and

0:27:12.960 --> 0:27:14.639
<v Speaker 1>it's just really it's really great. And of course you

0:27:14.680 --> 0:27:18.080
<v Speaker 1>have all of the um history as well, so it

0:27:19.040 --> 0:27:22.199
<v Speaker 1>rings bells. I'm sure for you to other ears and

0:27:22.400 --> 0:27:26.280
<v Speaker 1>eras and other years. Damien Sasaur joining us there. He

0:27:26.520 --> 0:27:32.520
<v Speaker 1>is chief Emerging Markets credit strategist for Bloomberg Intelligence. Thanks

0:27:32.520 --> 0:27:35.840
<v Speaker 1>for listening to Bloomberg Markets Podcast. You can subscribe and

0:27:35.880 --> 0:27:39.680
<v Speaker 1>listen to interviews at Apple Podcasts or whatever podcast platform

0:27:39.720 --> 0:27:43.160
<v Speaker 1>you prefer. I'm Bonnie Quinn. I'm on Twitter at Bonnie Quinn.

0:27:43.320 --> 0:27:46.000
<v Speaker 1>And Paul Sweeney I'm on Twitter at pt Sweeney. Before

0:27:46.040 --> 0:27:48.880
<v Speaker 1>the podcast, you can always catch us worldwide at Bloomberg

0:27:48.960 --> 0:27:49.200
<v Speaker 1>Radio