Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg P and L Podcast. I'm pim
Speaker 1: Fox along with my co host Lisa A. Brahmowitz. Each
Speaker 1: day we bring you the most important, noteworthy, and useful
Speaker 1: interviews for you and your money, whether you're at the
Speaker 1: grocery store or the trading floor. Find the Bloomberg P
Speaker 1: and L Podcast on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, and Bloomberg dot com.
Speaker 1: We are broadcasting from the Power in Practice Alumni Workshop
Speaker 1: for Commonwealth Financial Network taking place in Orlando, Florida. Topic now, though,
Speaker 1: is the agriculture industry. What with the trade wars between
Speaker 1: the United States and China, could farmers in the United
Speaker 1: States be affected for many years to come. Joining us
Speaker 1: now to help us answer to this question is Tom Halverson.
Speaker 1: He is the president and the chief executive of KO Bank,
Speaker 1: assets under management more than a hundred and twenty five billion.
Speaker 1: They are based in Denver. Co Bank is one of
Speaker 1: the four banks of the Farm Credit System. It provides loans, leases,
Speaker 1: and other financial services to rural communities across the United States. Tom,
Speaker 1: thank you very much for being with us. Tell us
Speaker 1: the current state of health of the agriculture industry when
Speaker 1: it comes to growing soybeans, certainly, I'm happy to do that.
Speaker 1: The fact of the matter is, you know, we are
Speaker 1: in the midst of this trade turmoil that you've been
Speaker 1: talking a great deal about as a result of negotiations
Speaker 1: have now been underway for quite some period of time.
Speaker 1: But if you roll the tape back further, the agricultural
Speaker 1: economy the United States UH started softening well back in
Speaker 1: fourteen periods. So if you look at the Department of
Speaker 1: Agricultures owned data on net farm income, for example, it's
Speaker 1: fifty lower today than it was in So before UH
Speaker 1: the disalignments that we've been experiencing with our NAFTA partners
Speaker 1: and with China occurred, the agri cultural economy was already
Speaker 1: soft UH, and the consequences of the negotiations UH that
Speaker 1: we've been experiencing over the over the recent months have
Speaker 1: exacerbated that tendency as a result of UH, the teriffs
Speaker 1: that we have imposed, in the retaliatory tariffs that Mexico,
Speaker 1: Canada and China have imposed UH and and response. So
Speaker 1: the agricultural economy was soft before it's it's softer and
Speaker 1: more vulnerable today. So Tom, what does that mean in
Speaker 1: terms of whether the US agricultural industry is headed for
Speaker 1: a recession, whether we accept well, whether we expect bankruptcy
Speaker 1: is to pick up as we've seen a little bit
Speaker 1: in the Upper Midwest. Well, you know, let's step back
Speaker 1: and answer that by recognizing that the agricultural economy is
Speaker 1: one of the most positive participants in the trade balance
Speaker 1: the United States. We have grown US exports of agricultural
Speaker 1: products over the last twenty five years dramatically, and it
Speaker 1: makes a very positive impact on the trade in current
Speaker 1: account balance of the country. But you're exactly right. The
Speaker 1: fact of the matter is that is manifesting itself in
Speaker 1: in UH, in stress in the rural economy, in the
Speaker 1: wide areas of the of of the country that manifests itself,
Speaker 1: and stress and and and bankruptcies and difficulties. Looking in
Speaker 1: various sectors, whether it's you know, soybean producers and growers
Speaker 1: whose whose markets are are under stress or UH dairy
Speaker 1: production complex for example, is experiencing similar levels of stress.
Speaker 1: And then when you go up to the next level,
Speaker 1: which is the aggregators of producers, products, agricultural co ops
Speaker 1: and the like, UH, they they may be experiencing difficulties
Speaker 1: as well. So there's belt tightening, and that means that
Speaker 1: people buy less new you know, machinery and equipment, and
Speaker 1: they're looking for ways to reduce their costs. And they
Speaker 1: are being caught for the first time in a decade
Speaker 1: as the rest of the economy is in a rising
Speaker 1: interest rate environment where for many years is now interest
Speaker 1: rates weren't really a significant component of of production agricultural
Speaker 1: cost side. Uh, it's becoming much more so. So for
Speaker 1: people who entered this period with from a position of
Speaker 1: relatively high leverage, you know, that exacerbates their tensions and
Speaker 1: their and their credit stress. Tom, does this does this
Speaker 1: uncertainty and this stress that you're describing, does it bleed
Speaker 1: over into other areas of the agricultural industry? And I'm thinking,
Speaker 1: because you know, your customers are not just food and
Speaker 1: agri business, but it's rural power communications, You've got water cooperatives, also,
Speaker 1: rural community facilities, agricultural credit association. You've got a variety
Speaker 1: of customers. Oh no, you're absolutely right. So if you
Speaker 1: look across wide swaths of the Upper Midwest, look at
Speaker 1: the Dakotas in Nebraska, Montana, for example, those are just
Speaker 1: a couple of examples but there is a very high
Speaker 1: correlation between the health and well being of the agricultural
Speaker 1: economy and the health and well being of the rural
Speaker 1: economy as a whole, because all of those industries, as
Speaker 1: you say, are very highly correlated and inter related. So
Speaker 1: when one of the biggest or the biggest in the
Speaker 1: case of agriculture, suffers, that has big knock on effects
Speaker 1: for the for the economy as a whole. You know,
Speaker 1: one thing that I'm struck by is when you were
Speaker 1: talking about how the entire agricultural industry in the US
Speaker 1: had been struggling a bit or seeing a slowdown for
Speaker 1: a number of years even before the trade tensions. I'm wondering,
Speaker 1: how much are people blaming trade for things that were
Speaker 1: already in place before those tensions emerged. Well, that's a
Speaker 1: good question people often get. Everyone gets confused and the
Speaker 1: difference between causation and correlation and and uh, you know,
Speaker 1: people look at what's happening, and they look at the
Speaker 1: headlines and the like, and it's easier to uh, to
Speaker 1: blame you know, another country or a market thing that's
Speaker 1: beyond your control. And I'm sure that there's some of
Speaker 1: that going on, But I find in my experience that
Speaker 1: that farmers and ranchers and people in the agricultural industry
Speaker 1: in the United States are some of the most thoughtful, smartest,
Speaker 1: well informed people about what's going on in the world
Speaker 1: that you can find anywhere. And the reason for that is,
Speaker 1: for two two and a half decades now, we have
Speaker 1: dramatically grown our export markets. So there are lots and
Speaker 1: lots of farmers and ranchers who's been all over the
Speaker 1: world making relationships with their Chinese customers or their or
Speaker 1: their customers and other parts of the world. So they're
Speaker 1: pretty attentive to what's happening and the underlying causes and
Speaker 1: market factors and supply and demand factors that affect the
Speaker 1: prices for their commodities. Well, in that case, what are
Speaker 1: they doing or can they do anything in order to
Speaker 1: mitigate the effects of these tariff wars? Well, I think everybody.
Speaker 1: If you go out and ask you go out and
Speaker 1: ask our customers, or go out and ask people in
Speaker 1: rural parts of the country, you'll find Yeah, they're all
Speaker 1: doing things. Number One, they're watching it with great care, uh,
Speaker 1: and they're trying to take it into consideration as they
Speaker 1: make their decisions. For next year, for example, you know,
Speaker 1: harvest is done, there's a gigantic crop of of agricultural
Speaker 1: commodities uh that's not being purchased at the moment, for example,
Speaker 1: in the case of soybeans by China. Uh. And so
Speaker 1: we have a lot of commodities with no with no
Speaker 1: market or an insufficient market, and farmers all over the
Speaker 1: Upper Midwest, for example, are having to decide what are
Speaker 1: they going to do next year? Are they going to
Speaker 1: grow as many soybeans as they did this year? Given
Speaker 1: the state of trade relationships? Are they gonna uh you
Speaker 1: know trade are they going to produce less soybeans and
Speaker 1: more corn? You know? And that has big knock on
Speaker 1: implications on seed suppliers, uh, fertilizer suppliers, you know, machinery
Speaker 1: manufacturers and all those people and farmers and ranchers are
Speaker 1: right now having to try and make decisions about what
Speaker 1: their capital structure and their business plan is going to
Speaker 1: be for twenty nineteen. Tom Howiverson, thank you so much
Speaker 1: for being with us. It's really an important area to
Speaker 1: keep an eye on, certainly as we've seen the price
Speaker 1: of soy in particular really flipping around depending on the
Speaker 1: trade headlines. Tom howiverson his chief executive officer of Kobank
Speaker 1: uh joining us here where we are broadcasting live from
Speaker 1: Commonwealth's Power and Practice Alumni Workshop in Orlando, Florida. Coming
Speaker 1: up Bloomberg Politics, Policy, power and law. A lot to
Speaker 1: talk about, including about some of the tariffs and trade tensions.
Speaker 1: Are they easing? Are they not? What are the details
Speaker 1: we don't know? Does it for us? And Lisa Almos
Speaker 1: along with my coast and colleague Pim Fox. This is Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: I want to turn now to one of the headline
Speaker 1: events of the day. This is really an incredible contribution
Speaker 1: from a contributor to Bloomberg Opinion, former head of the
Speaker 1: Bank of England, Mervin King, writing a column. Well, I'm
Speaker 1: gonna let Clive Crook sort of give us the details
Speaker 1: there because he was the editor for this particular column.
Speaker 1: And Clive Crook, Bloomberg Opinion editor, joins us now from Washington,
Speaker 1: d C. Clive, what was it like to actually receive uh,
Speaker 1: Lord King's column at this particular time when the Brexit
Speaker 1: is got coming up for a vote. Well, it's uh,
Speaker 1: it's a fantastic piece. That's anything to say about it?
Speaker 1: In my view. I think it's the best piece on
Speaker 1: the subjects I've read, and it's a withering attack on terrace.
Speaker 1: Some mays Brexit deal and he explains what's wrong with it,
Speaker 1: essentially that it gets the worst of all worlds. You know,
Speaker 1: it isn't a it isn't a compromise any meaningful sense.
Speaker 1: It sacrifices British sovereignty and it and it will cause
Speaker 1: economic damage as well. So I mean it's a terrific piece. Well, Clive,
Speaker 1: why is he writing this now? Well, I mean, you
Speaker 1: know the decision is about to be made. I'm sure
Speaker 1: he wants to influence it. He's calling on Parliament to
Speaker 1: reject the deal, and if they read the piece and
Speaker 1: think about it, I think they might well decide to
Speaker 1: do just that. Well, any idea being that the deal
Speaker 1: is the worst of both old as you were just saying,
Speaker 1: I guess what I'm trying to understand is is he
Speaker 1: trying to sort of augur for what uh the European
Speaker 1: Union judge just ruled, which is perhaps take a revote
Speaker 1: and try to undo Brexit altogether. Well, I think his
Speaker 1: position in this column is not um, you know, pro
Speaker 1: Brexit or anti Brexit. It's against this specific deal. Um.
Speaker 1: So you know, I think there's another it's a separate issue. Really,
Speaker 1: you know what happens next, what kind of deal Britain
Speaker 1: should seek. But the point is that this particular deal
Speaker 1: that's on the table is terrible. That's what That's what
Speaker 1: Irvin King is arguing. UM. So he doesn't really go
Speaker 1: to the question of you know, so do we have
Speaker 1: a no deal brexit or do we do we stay
Speaker 1: in Um, that's not what he's grampling with. He's saying
Speaker 1: this particular deal is the result of, as he puts it,
Speaker 1: monumental in competence, and he calls it a betrayal of Britains.
Speaker 1: It's this deal that's bad. Now the e c J
Speaker 1: H Well, it isn't an e c g J ruling,
Speaker 1: you know, it's it's advice from a lawyer that the
Speaker 1: c J usually takes very seriously. UM. So I do
Speaker 1: think it's increased the chances that Britain could unilaterally revoke
Speaker 1: Article fifty and put the whole process on pause. Um.
Speaker 1: But it doesn't need to be noted that, you know,
Speaker 1: the European Commission is arguing the opposite, and the European
Speaker 1: Unions leaders are also of the view that revoking Article
Speaker 1: fifty and halting this process in its tracks would require
Speaker 1: the unanimous agreement of the other European governments. So although
Speaker 1: this advice I think increases the probability that the Court
Speaker 1: itself will rule that a unilateral revocation is possible, it
Speaker 1: doesn't make it a done deal by any means, And
Speaker 1: the Commission and the European Union's leaders are pushing back
Speaker 1: against that view. What has been the reaction from European
Speaker 1: leaders and would they want Britain to come back into
Speaker 1: the European Union. Well, that is an excellent question. Um,
Speaker 1: I'm not sure what the answer is yet. I mean,
Speaker 1: the truth is they haven't really addressed it collectively. You know,
Speaker 1: there is no, as it were, agreed European Union view
Speaker 1: on this. Some European Union leaders have said that they
Speaker 1: want Britain to stay in, but um, I don't think
Speaker 1: that view would be unanimous myself. I think if Britain
Speaker 1: did revoke Article fifty, um, I think some EU leaders
Speaker 1: might wonder if that was actually in the interests of
Speaker 1: the European Union. You know, many people in Europe are
Speaker 1: as sick of the Brexit process as many people in
Speaker 1: Britain are and I think they just want Britain and
Speaker 1: their complaints to go away. So I don't think, you know,
Speaker 1: Britain would be welcomed back unanimously with open arms by
Speaker 1: any means. Well, Clive, just in thirty seconds here, I'm
Speaker 1: wondering what's the risk and how much does it go
Speaker 1: up that there is a hard Brexit or a no
Speaker 1: deal Brexit, which is a worst case scenario for a
Speaker 1: lot of people if this deal is rejected. I think
Speaker 1: it is a significant risk. Um. I think, um, you know,
Speaker 1: because the problem is that it's the default option. Time
Speaker 1: is running out now, and if nothing else happens, Britain
Speaker 1: leaves the European Union on March twenty nine, so interventions
Speaker 1: are necessary to stop that process. And um, I think
Speaker 1: there is a risk, almost by accident, um, that Britain
Speaker 1: might decide it wants to stay after all, or it
Speaker 1: wants to slow this process down, and it might just
Speaker 1: not be possible to do that. So I think a
Speaker 1: hard Brexit is a real, a real possibility. Clive Crook,
Speaker 1: thank you so much for being with us. Clive Crook,
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Opinion editor, talking about that fabulous Mervin King Carlin
Speaker 1: Murvin King, of course, is a former Bank of England governor,
Speaker 1: talking about how the current deal on the table waiting
Speaker 1: to be voted for is the worst of both worlds,
Speaker 1: arguing against voting for it. Meanwhile, perhaps there's a little
Speaker 1: bit of a glimmer saying that perhaps there's a chance
Speaker 1: for them to take a revote on Brexit. We are
Speaker 1: broadcasting live from Commonwealth's Power and Practice Alumni Workshop in Orlando, Florida,
Speaker 1: and we are joined by Marianna Goldenberg, founder of Cure
Speaker 1: Wealth Management. Marianna, I'm so glad that you're here because
Speaker 1: there have been a series of tax changes that have
Speaker 1: actually changed the calculus for some people, including as we've
Speaker 1: discussed on this show with respect to divorce, because after
Speaker 1: this year, I believe alimony payments will not be tax deductible.
Speaker 1: So I'm curious from you whether you're seeing more people
Speaker 1: taking that into account, expediting their divorces this year and
Speaker 1: what you're expecting into your end. Thank you, Lisa for
Speaker 1: having me on your show. I'm very honored, and thank
Speaker 1: you my broke a deala Commonwealth Financial and Joe in
Speaker 1: particular for having me on the show. Uh you're absolutely right. UM,
Speaker 1: I do see quite a bit of divorces happening today
Speaker 1: due to the changes in the tax law. Just a
Speaker 1: little bit of a background. I am a Certified Divorce
Speaker 1: Financial Analyst, which is a designation that you receive UM
Speaker 1: and helps you understand the laws, the divorce laws from
Speaker 1: legal standpoint and also also financial ramifications of UM going
Speaker 1: through divorce. UM. As you discussed before, there are some
Speaker 1: changes happening in two thousand nineteen. The alimony that used
Speaker 1: to be deductible for people paying the alimony and taxable
Speaker 1: for the receivers is no longer be taxed. So what's
Speaker 1: happening now People are rushing in to settle their divorces
Speaker 1: before the end of the year because they will be
Speaker 1: grandfathered starting in two thousand nineteen UM. And it's quite
Speaker 1: an interesting phenomena because people are trying to figure out
Speaker 1: that creative ways to UH to split the assets and
Speaker 1: make sure that two parties UH separate for the rest
Speaker 1: of their life and stay financially UM strong and able
Speaker 1: to build back their resources after they go through divorce.
Speaker 1: So that's that's what's been happening in different areas, and
Speaker 1: I think UH specifically, women get really short changed in
Speaker 1: this whole rush to do this because they don't quite
Speaker 1: understand what that means to them financially down the road.
Speaker 1: Everything looks at it today. Okay, today, it's gonna cost
Speaker 1: me X number of dollars in taxes. They don't look
Speaker 1: at what it will be in the future. Uh. If
Speaker 1: I settled with retirement funds, am I able to live
Speaker 1: comfortably down the road using this fund to? Am I
Speaker 1: better off taking the taxable investments and create a cash
Speaker 1: flow from there. So I think that's the rush decision
Speaker 1: that that unfortunately is caused by the new regulations. But
Speaker 1: I think there will be much more creative ways of
Speaker 1: handling down the road. Um, if people spend time and
Speaker 1: look at the overall picture, not at what's happening today. Maryanny,
Speaker 1: you excuse me. You earned a degree in mathematics and
Speaker 1: finance from the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania. Many people
Speaker 1: are familiar with that. How many people are familiar with
Speaker 1: the designation Certified Divorce Financial Analysts. Thank you for asking. Um,
Speaker 1: it's it's a question that I've been asked a lot.
Speaker 1: When I initially received the designation was into about eight
Speaker 1: years ago and there are not that many of us
Speaker 1: that we're doing that. Uh, today I see it much
Speaker 1: and much more. The reason I looked into this and
Speaker 1: I thought it would be very um helpful for me
Speaker 1: in my actus is because as I my practice matured
Speaker 1: from starting at Maryland and spending ten years there in
Speaker 1: another eleven at LPL, I realized that more and more
Speaker 1: of my clients are becoming a women that are were
Speaker 1: referring other women, um because they either were state at
Speaker 1: home moms that needed help with finances, or they were
Speaker 1: very successful executives that were busy building their career and
Speaker 1: not having enough time spent on the financial side of it,
Speaker 1: or taking or using their employee I'm sorry, employer benefits
Speaker 1: to better their life. So to me, this was an
Speaker 1: ability to learn something that I didn't know on the
Speaker 1: legal side, and ability to work with other advisors such
Speaker 1: as their attorneys or c p a s to make
Speaker 1: sure that as a team we look at the well
Speaker 1: being of people. Just thirty seconds, I'm wondering, have you
Speaker 1: seen a fewer or more women wanting to go into
Speaker 1: the advisory business? Um? I wish I could say I
Speaker 1: see more. It's much more than I started Uh, the
Speaker 1: statistics are showing that when I started, there was about
Speaker 1: five women for each hundred female or male advisors, and
Speaker 1: right now I've been seeing sixteen percent, where at Commonwealth
Speaker 1: it's a little higher. We're about female advisors, which is phenomenal.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much for being with us and sharing
Speaker 1: all this information. Much appreciated. Marianna Goldenberg is the founder
Speaker 1: of Curo Wealth Management. They are based in Langhorne, Pennsylvania.
Speaker 1: We are broadcasting from the Power in Practice Alumni Workshop
Speaker 1: for Commonwealth Financial Network in Orlando, Florida. You're going to
Speaker 1: Disney World? I don't think so. I think maybe our
Speaker 1: engineering expert Charlie Vulmer will make a trip to Disney World.
Speaker 1: What you're wearing? Your mouse ears? No? No, these are
Speaker 1: my own. I know it's confusing, but thank you for that.
Speaker 1: We are broadcasting from the Power in Practice Alumni Workshop
Speaker 1: at Commonwealth Financial Networks annual meeting here in Orlando, Florida.
Speaker 1: Joining us now is Tim Dessetti. He is a senior
Speaker 1: partner at Infinitas. They are based in Overland, Kansas, but
Speaker 1: he joins us here on site. Tim, thank you very
Speaker 1: much for being here. I want to jump right into
Speaker 1: it because I think one of the issues that you
Speaker 1: have experienced with is crucial to the industry, and that
Speaker 1: is handling consolidation and mergers. How do you put together
Speaker 1: disparate organizations that all say they want to help the client,
Speaker 1: but they have a different tool kitten, maybe a different
Speaker 1: level of experience in doing that. What has been your
Speaker 1: your experience, Yeah, thank you, Bammy, it's a it's been
Speaker 1: a fun and interesting right over the last few years.
Speaker 1: You know, we had the we had that kind of
Speaker 1: combination of perception and reality in the world in terms
Speaker 1: of uh, you know, a lot of the huge, larger
Speaker 1: firms are are perceived to be the best firms and
Speaker 1: and what we really had, you know, uh, strength and
Speaker 1: being associated with Commonwealth Financial Network. You know, we had
Speaker 1: a group of advisors that were really considered to be
Speaker 1: some of the best advisors in the marketplace, and uh
Speaker 1: it really wanted to bring a consolidated firm together so
Speaker 1: that we could you know, make each other better. Uh,
Speaker 1: you know, battle some of those perceptions in the world
Speaker 1: that if you just don't have umpteen billion dollars under management,
Speaker 1: you're just not a good firm. So uh so, how
Speaker 1: much consolidation. Have you seen over the past few years,
Speaker 1: I mean, has it been accelerating? Well, Kansas City has
Speaker 1: been kind of a hotbed for that. I mean, the
Speaker 1: vast majority of the big firms are mostly doing it
Speaker 1: through acquisition, acquiring other practices. Trying to get bigger um
Speaker 1: ours was not a story of acquisition, but more of
Speaker 1: a story of just merger, merging practices together so that
Speaker 1: we could uh make each other better, take advantage of
Speaker 1: talent and specialized areas of planning. But it's it's an
Speaker 1: absolute trend. You go across the country and talk to
Speaker 1: other advisors that everywhere people are talking about some form
Speaker 1: of Have you ever seen faster rates of consolidation in
Speaker 1: the industry, I haven't, No, I mean it's it's very
Speaker 1: very prevalent in the Midwest for sure. What kinds of
Speaker 1: back office issues do you face most when you try
Speaker 1: to combine different practices, Well, there's there's always a battle
Speaker 1: of culture, you know. We uh part of the reason
Speaker 1: is to be better for your clients, but you also
Speaker 1: want to make an environment it's better for your team.
Speaker 1: You know, we have a tremendous staff and and team
Speaker 1: in Kansas City and and working together has been of
Speaker 1: benefit to them as well. So culture is a big challenge. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, we're we're all very successful financial advisors, so
Speaker 1: you know, getting everybody to be on one page in
Speaker 1: terms of a team vision, in terms of what we
Speaker 1: want to accomplish for our clients, what we want to
Speaker 1: accomplish them. I have a if I have a room
Speaker 1: where they're just where you realize there's either not enough
Speaker 1: oxygen or there are too many heads in the room. Now,
Speaker 1: you know, I perceived that that could exist, and I
Speaker 1: know the room that we have there in Kansas City.
Speaker 1: But it's often, uh more a story of just people
Speaker 1: looking for that greater good, uh you know, greater good
Speaker 1: for one another for their own practice be as well
Speaker 1: for their clients. So we've had a really good go
Speaker 1: of it. So how much is the consolidation just joining
Speaker 1: forces and sort of providing uh you know, counterpoints for
Speaker 1: one another in terms of skills and assets. And how
Speaker 1: much is trying to gain economies of scale and then
Speaker 1: downsizing in certain areas. Yeah, absolutely, there's all. There Absolutely
Speaker 1: was the reality of economy of scale, you know, looking
Speaker 1: at the numbers and saying, look, we're we're in a
Speaker 1: as Matt had said before. You know, we're in a
Speaker 1: fee consolidation type industry. We want to have reasonable fees
Speaker 1: for our clients. Everybody's much more aware of of fees,
Speaker 1: you know, whether it be through d O L or
Speaker 1: just through being you know, just the fee based progression
Speaker 1: in the business. So economy of scale was was a factor.
Speaker 1: You know, we were able to consolidate a large group
Speaker 1: of firms and not really decrease our costs necessarily, but
Speaker 1: definitely not increase our costs and and get more physical
Speaker 1: goods so to speak for the consolidation. But but the
Speaker 1: bigger part of it is really the specialization being able
Speaker 1: to work with other advisers that might specialize in special
Speaker 1: needs families, that might specialize in executive stock options, that
Speaker 1: might specialize in retirement plan um, you know, fiduciary management.
Speaker 1: So just it's you can't be all things to all people,
Speaker 1: but with the right sized firm you can be in
Speaker 1: a better way. What what's your view of where people
Speaker 1: are taking risk where they shouldn't right now? Where are
Speaker 1: they taking risk that they that they shouldn't? Should they
Speaker 1: should people take some of their gains and be happy
Speaker 1: or do you feel because you know, we're pretty long
Speaker 1: into the bull market. Yeah, you know, if it's statistically speaking, though,
Speaker 1: you know, there's a lot of uh, a lot of
Speaker 1: gain probably still yet to Um. We're in a really
Speaker 1: good economy. UM. I think you know, paim, maybe the
Speaker 1: opposite of some case is true people have been too
Speaker 1: conservative and not you know, and missing out. I can't
Speaker 1: replace money that you miss out if you miss out
Speaker 1: on being in the market. I have people come to
Speaker 1: me and say, you know, I've been in cash for
Speaker 1: five years. I'm ready now, Okay, Well we I can't
Speaker 1: replace that that loss in terms of your loss on
Speaker 1: the up side. So I think it's a balance, you know,
Speaker 1: simply speaking, one of three things is gonna happen. It's
Speaker 1: gonna go up, it's gonna go down, it's gonna stay
Speaker 1: the same. You've got to have a strategy to make
Speaker 1: money in every one of those environments. And uh, you
Speaker 1: know that that's the approach we're taking. Tim Decidi, thank
Speaker 1: you so much for being with us. Really appreciated. Timbs,
Speaker 1: senior partner at Infinite Us, talking about the rash of
Speaker 1: mergers and acquisitions, the fastest paced pim uh he has
Speaker 1: ever seen. We are broadcasting live from Commonwealth's Power and
Speaker 1: Practice Alumni Workshop in Orlando. I just want to get
Speaker 1: you caught up on the market because what we are
Speaker 1: seeing is a deepening sell off with the NASDAC now
Speaker 1: eating the way down down about nine tenths of one
Speaker 1: percent PIM a lot so oil has turned lower by
Speaker 1: the way, where I was higher. Now we're I mean
Speaker 1: basically on change, but it is turned lower in the
Speaker 1: late morning trading. It's just interesting, and I do have
Speaker 1: to wonder, going back to what we were talking about
Speaker 1: with Dave, how much is this being driven by signals
Speaker 1: from inverting yield curves and how much is this from
Speaker 1: some of the conflicting messages that we've gotten out of
Speaker 1: the White House with respect to how concrete a trade
Speaker 1: truce really is with the US and China. I'm Lisa
Speaker 1: Abram Why it's along with my co host and colleague
Speaker 1: Pim Fox. This is Bloomberg. Thanks for listening to the
Speaker 1: Bloomberg p m L podcast. You can subscribe and listen
Speaker 1: to interviews at Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, or whatever podcast platform
Speaker 1: you prefer. I'm Pim Fox. I'm on Twitter at pim Fox.
Speaker 1: I'm on Twitter at Lisa abramowit's one before the podcast.
Speaker 1: You can always catch us worldwide on Bloomberg Radio