Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Markets Podcast. I'm Paul Sweeney alongside
Speaker 1: my co host Matt Miller. Every business day we bring
Speaker 1: you interviews from CEOs, market pros, and Bloomberg experts, along
Speaker 1: with essential market moving news on the Bloomberg Markets Podcast,
Speaker 1: on Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen to podcasts, and
Speaker 1: at Bloomberg dot com Slash podcast. Let's have Alison Williams
Speaker 1: in every week. What do you say, Well, I will,
Speaker 1: but we'll schedule out of you. One of the best
Speaker 1: bank analysts, international bank outlet analysts in the world, and
Speaker 1: she works for us, so that's a bonus. Plus, she
Speaker 1: loves talking about credit sweets. There is no one who
Speaker 1: prefers talking about credit sweets more than Alison Williams. All right, Alison,
Speaker 1: we had a just more going on, A million ways
Speaker 1: we can go. As Matt was say, let's start with
Speaker 1: credit squeez. Is it going to survive the weekend? Well,
Speaker 1: it's it's it's gonna be tough. We think that we
Speaker 1: think that you know for sure, and regular just have
Speaker 1: said that they're closely monitoring the situation. They have to
Speaker 1: be in discussions with the bank. I think that the
Speaker 1: moves that we saw this week were meant to study
Speaker 1: sentiment and assure investors. Um, the stock is telling us
Speaker 1: today that that hasn't necessarily helped. I think that there's
Speaker 1: there's two things. One is the liquidity and soundness of
Speaker 1: the bank. And I think that the SNB coming out
Speaker 1: and sank Swiss National Bank we have to differentiate because
Speaker 1: they also have the shareholder SNB. But um, you know
Speaker 1: that's yes, so they borrow the fifty four billion, or
Speaker 1: said they were going to borrow the fifty four billion.
Speaker 1: Credit swis from the government. The government has said, or
Speaker 1: the regulator has said, you know they are there. They're
Speaker 1: there to backstop the liquidity. But you know, to us,
Speaker 1: the issue with Credit Swiss is, you know, you have
Speaker 1: to study the confidence, you have to study the flows.
Speaker 1: You have to because that that really is their core business.
Speaker 1: And the move was meant to study client sentiment. The
Speaker 1: investor sentiment is telling you that they're not assured. I mean,
Speaker 1: there's so many ways we could go with this. First
Speaker 1: of all, when someone asks you if you're going to
Speaker 1: increase your investment in a bank in which you already
Speaker 1: owned ten percent, don't say absolutely not. Don't be vehement
Speaker 1: about the fact that you're never going to give this
Speaker 1: bank any more money again, because that's a bad idea.
Speaker 1: I guess the most important questions, though, Allison, are why
Speaker 1: would you work for this bank? I mean, clearly it's
Speaker 1: because you can't get a job somewhere else. Why would
Speaker 1: you have your money at this bank? Do you really
Speaker 1: trust that it's going to continue? And then why would
Speaker 1: you trade with this bank? There are already very important,
Speaker 1: large national banks that are cutting that relationship off, so
Speaker 1: I can't imagine how it goes on and in anything
Speaker 1: like the same form. Well, let's start with your last
Speaker 1: point with regard to trading and counterparty risk, because I
Speaker 1: think that that's the issue that we've probably gotten the
Speaker 1: most questions from investors about this week. And we certainly
Speaker 1: saw to your point, when their largest investors so that
Speaker 1: they weren't going to add additional investments that people you
Speaker 1: started to see that in the stocks of some of
Speaker 1: the biggest US banks. But when we look at that,
Speaker 1: you know, the two things that we think about are one,
Speaker 1: this isn't a new situation. It's been a couple of years,
Speaker 1: and you know, we would expect that the counterparty risk
Speaker 1: management departments of these banks have been managing down their
Speaker 1: exposures accordingly. And then secondly, if we look at the
Speaker 1: trading operations, which is something that we've discussed, I mean,
Speaker 1: they're a shadow of their former self. And that also
Speaker 1: tells you just that their activity with banks globally has
Speaker 1: slowed a bit on that front. So certainly there are
Speaker 1: still relationships out there we would expect, but that those
Speaker 1: exposures have have been mounaged down in terms of a
Speaker 1: counterparty if we and I guess I would like and
Speaker 1: it's if we look back to what happened with bear
Speaker 1: Stearns and Lehman, I think, you know, counterparties with Lehman
Speaker 1: were sort of on high alert beginning with m bear Stearns,
Speaker 1: which happened actually this month, several several years ago. But
Speaker 1: by the time when you know, when Lehman eventually went under,
Speaker 1: the issues really related to you know, money markets that
Speaker 1: held investment in leaning. It was less about sort of
Speaker 1: remaining counterparty risk. Yeah, that's kind of what we learned. Boy,
Speaker 1: Just as even as a neophyte boy, if you have
Speaker 1: if you lose confidence in the marketplace and counterparty risk
Speaker 1: comes into play, it's almost a game over. Alison on
Speaker 1: Credit Swiss. Is there anything more the government can do? Really? Um?
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm not even sure how to map out
Speaker 1: a scenario, you know where this scene kind of survives.
Speaker 1: I don't know. Did they take control of the bank,
Speaker 1: Can they force a sale to UBS? I buy the way.
Speaker 1: We'll discourage the use of the word merger because there's
Speaker 1: no way anybody's coming together with credit suite as an
Speaker 1: un part. Yeah, that's true. So I think I think
Speaker 1: that you know, when when we think about the government,
Speaker 1: I mean, and it's been very interesting just seeing what's
Speaker 1: happening both in the US and in Europe as as
Speaker 1: the government is trying to assure investors and certainly that
Speaker 1: the size and nature of credit suitezes is not comparable
Speaker 1: to the banks that failed in the US or First Republic,
Speaker 1: which investors are also worried about. But the connection is
Speaker 1: market sentiment and you have, you know, regulators in both
Speaker 1: of these countries trying trying to you know, stabley sentiment
Speaker 1: at the specific bank, but then also more broadly, and
Speaker 1: you know, as measures don't work, you have to try
Speaker 1: different things. I think when we think about credit suis um.
Speaker 1: You know, for for years people have talked about it
Speaker 1: as you know, as you said, a merger partner. Now
Speaker 1: it's you know, more of a takeout candidate. What exactly happens?
Speaker 1: I think when we think about, you know, what what
Speaker 1: the bank looked like today versus a couple of years ago. Um. Again,
Speaker 1: there their trading operations are have a shadow of their
Speaker 1: former self. Um. The Swiss bank unit is what the
Speaker 1: Swiss government is going to want to protect. And then
Speaker 1: we have the wealth business, which I think you know
Speaker 1: a lot of people will think is a great fit
Speaker 1: with UBS, But what we've seen with UBS is they're
Speaker 1: taking a lot of those flows without the combination. So um,
Speaker 1: and I think it circles back to your earlier point it,
Speaker 1: you know, is what will regulators do in terms of
Speaker 1: forcing the issue or trying to help you know, some
Speaker 1: kind of combination that can protect the Swiss unit And
Speaker 1: really that's the unit that's important to their economy and
Speaker 1: the system that they oversee. All right, Allison, thank you
Speaker 1: as always for helping out here. Alison Williams Senior Global
Speaker 1: Banks and Asset Manager for Bloomberg Intelligence, and not only that,
Speaker 1: she was recently promoted to be co director of Research
Speaker 1: for the Americas for Bloomberg Intelligence. So she's got to
Speaker 1: now manage, along with her partner, you know, more than
Speaker 1: one hundred and fifty analysts, which is like hurting cats.
Speaker 1: I mean, these people take a lot of work. It's
Speaker 1: a lot of work, but she's up to it and
Speaker 1: she does a great job. She's got great experience on
Speaker 1: Wall Street, and she's been indispensable here as we try
Speaker 1: to figure out what's going on in the banking space,
Speaker 1: not just in the US, but overseas as well, focusing
Speaker 1: really on credit Swiss. You're listening to the team. Ken's
Speaker 1: her live program, Bloomberg Markets weekdays at ten am Eastern Bloomberg,
Speaker 1: the r Heart Radio app, and the Bloomberg Business App.
Speaker 1: We're listening on demand wherever you get your podcast. We
Speaker 1: actually know a couple of people in the rates business.
Speaker 1: Erica Aidelberg, she covers the mortgage back security business for
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Intelligence. She joins us here on our Bloomberg Interactive
Speaker 1: Broker studio, so a double gold star for being in
Speaker 1: the studio on a Friday. And Ira Jersey, he's a
Speaker 1: US interest rate strategist. I'm just gonna guess he's mailing
Speaker 1: it in from home, but so Erica, since you're here, Um,
Speaker 1: we're gonna go with you first. We may not even
Speaker 1: talk to to you, know. Um. So in this bank quote,
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna call it a crisis, although many people do.
Speaker 1: John Authors has said, don't call it a crisis yet.
Speaker 1: I'm I'm with John. I'm with John. But there's turmoil.
Speaker 1: Does that mean banks pull back? Can I not get
Speaker 1: my jumbo mortgage for this the Matt Miller estate up
Speaker 1: in Westchester? I mean, what are we seeing in a
Speaker 1: mortgage part market? Yeah, we are actually saying, according to
Speaker 1: the data, that I've seen banks pulling back on credit,
Speaker 1: and that was before this latest turmoil as we're calling
Speaker 1: it now. The mortgage credit availability index that the NBA tracks,
Speaker 1: which is depending on a mix of variables, is at
Speaker 1: decade lows. So that could make it harder. The one
Speaker 1: sector that's interesting, by the way, that's fascinating. So even
Speaker 1: as I look at the bank rate thirty year mortgage
Speaker 1: index just as my benchmark, and it has come down,
Speaker 1: it bounced back up in the last couple of days.
Speaker 1: But even if that rate is lower, mortgages still may
Speaker 1: not be available. Banks may not be giving out loans
Speaker 1: even if you could get them for cheaper, it definitely
Speaker 1: could tighten credit. Yeah, and I think this latest turmoil
Speaker 1: is going to make that even more of an issue.
Speaker 1: That being said, the jumbo credit index actually is the
Speaker 1: one sector that hasn't fallen quite as much as Fannie
Speaker 1: Freddie Jenny, you know, standard conventional mortgages. And I think
Speaker 1: that's partly because for better for worse, that is already
Speaker 1: a very high credit product, and the larger loans are
Speaker 1: more attractive for banks to originating than a lot of
Speaker 1: types hold on their balance sheets. So and a lot
Speaker 1: of those are actually in adjustable rate mortgages, which do
Speaker 1: have a better asset liability mix with the bank's balances.
Speaker 1: But bottom line financial conditions have tightened substantially since the
Speaker 1: failure of SVB Ira Jersey. Is that going to make
Speaker 1: a difference to our federal Reserve? It's ours yours again
Speaker 1: and iras Paul Okay. Is that going to make a
Speaker 1: difference to our Federal Reserve when they meet to decide
Speaker 1: whether or not to raise rates. Yeah, it absolutely will,
Speaker 1: I think in part because the Fed is worried about,
Speaker 1: you know, the financial sector and some of the knock
Speaker 1: on effects that you could have if you have additional
Speaker 1: bank failures and credit tightening even more. That being said,
Speaker 1: I still think that you know, with some of the
Speaker 1: lending facilities that they've they've used, there's a big a
Speaker 1: lot of people worrying about the fact that the discount
Speaker 1: window is over one hundred and fifty billion dollars in usage.
Speaker 1: It's probably just from a couple of institutions. They're worried
Speaker 1: that that show is a signal that there might be
Speaker 1: wider systemic risk. But I think that what the FED
Speaker 1: will will do here is say, look, we're gonna we're
Speaker 1: gonna hike twenty five baits points because inflation is still
Speaker 1: a problem. But we're also going to continue to have
Speaker 1: liquidity facilities as needed and encourage banks to use the
Speaker 1: existing liquidity facilities in order to stop any runs on
Speaker 1: additional banks that might have some liquidity issues. Well, they
Speaker 1: sure are doing that. You don't need to encourage them, right,
Speaker 1: They've already used the discount window like more than they
Speaker 1: did at the height of the Great Financial Crisis. Yeah,
Speaker 1: And I think that one of the issues that the
Speaker 1: FED had at the height of the financial crisis, or
Speaker 1: even at the very beginning, was trying to convince institutions
Speaker 1: to use some of the existing facilities. So they created
Speaker 1: all of these other you know, alphabet soup of facilities
Speaker 1: like the TOFF and the TAFF and all of these
Speaker 1: other facilities that ultimately where the discount window brought to you, right,
Speaker 1: instead of people actually using it. So so we actually
Speaker 1: just put out a note just about an hour ago
Speaker 1: talking about the fact that that the usage of the
Speaker 1: discount window might show that there's a little less stigma
Speaker 1: today than there was in say two thousand and seven,
Speaker 1: when it probably should have been used the first time. UM.
Speaker 1: And because of that, you know, there is this backstop
Speaker 1: for uh, for bank liquidity that that hopefully will be
Speaker 1: used in times of need, not in times of you know,
Speaker 1: to try to avoid that that crisis level UM that
Speaker 1: could potentially rear up and and and there is risk
Speaker 1: here for for sure. And that's one reason why I
Speaker 1: think people are still skittish about about markets and why
Speaker 1: the Federal Reserve had to step in create another new facility.
Speaker 1: What's the new acronym BTFP or whatever. Yeah, yeah, So
Speaker 1: it's the it's the the Bank Term Financing Program. And
Speaker 1: so so what that allows is for banks that own
Speaker 1: treasury and agency securities UM to basically fund them for
Speaker 1: a year UM and not have to worry about UM,
Speaker 1: you know, whether or not they have to go into
Speaker 1: the open market. Well, the best part about that is
Speaker 1: they can do it at par even if they're trading
Speaker 1: at seventy or eighty cents, right, you get one hundred? Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean that's that's like a consent. That's like a
Speaker 1: great free lunch, isn't it, Erica? These are mortgage backed securities, right,
Speaker 1: So what are they trading at right now? If you
Speaker 1: go out, are some of them trading at a lot
Speaker 1: less than par? Yeah? A lot of them are trading
Speaker 1: in the load of mid part. So of course you
Speaker 1: know they're money good. So ultimately they're worth par if
Speaker 1: you want to call it that, UM. But right now,
Speaker 1: if you had to trade him on a market market basis,
Speaker 1: because they were low coupon securities that were issued when
Speaker 1: rates were lower in twenty twenty one, in twenty twenty,
Speaker 1: they are trading in a much lower dollar price because
Speaker 1: it's a lot of lower coupon than you'd get for
Speaker 1: a current coupon today. So Eric, I know you got
Speaker 1: a no doubt, you know, calling out that the bank's
Speaker 1: mortgage backed security demand falling. Ira, No, I'm also talking
Speaker 1: to Erica. Oh Erica, okay, okay, sorry, sorry, So Erica
Speaker 1: talks to us about the banks MBS demand here, what's
Speaker 1: going on there in the marketplace? Well, even prior to
Speaker 1: this current um what do we call it? At it tomorrow?
Speaker 1: In this current turmoil, bank demand had been falling all year.
Speaker 1: Part of the reason that it's been following is because
Speaker 1: their deposits have been falling. I think there's also, um,
Speaker 1: you know, lower reserves they need to invest want to invest,
Speaker 1: but mostly it's the deposit base had been falling all
Speaker 1: a year. It had risen sharply at the beginning of
Speaker 1: the pandemic, as savings that had risen, and you know,
Speaker 1: people had pandemic cash to spend, and then their securities
Speaker 1: holdings had gone up abruptly. Both of those have been
Speaker 1: declining as cash reserves and cash balances have been fallowing.
Speaker 1: Cash deposits. By the way, I thought you were I
Speaker 1: didn't know you're going to Aidelberg. I thought you were
Speaker 1: confusing Jersey with Kazatski. You know, because a lot of
Speaker 1: times Eric Kazatski joins us here on Newnies and it's
Speaker 1: kind of the same universe. But um, Jersey, let me
Speaker 1: ask you about what the FED does in relation to
Speaker 1: what the ECB did. I was on the IDEs of March,
Speaker 1: sitting at home and the throes of COVID hallucinations, reading
Speaker 1: Ben Emmon's note about the two thousand and seven two
Speaker 1: thousand and eight parallels, and I was like literally terrified
Speaker 1: about what was happening. And then we got the news
Speaker 1: that the ECB raised rates fifty basis points, and I
Speaker 1: felt a real sigh of relief because to me, it's like,
Speaker 1: if they can raise rates in this environment, it must
Speaker 1: not be that bad. Is the FED going to want
Speaker 1: to send some kind of similar message. Well, I think
Speaker 1: they do, and that is that they're still an inflation
Speaker 1: fighting mode, right, And even if they do pause, I
Speaker 1: think what one of the things that they'll say is
Speaker 1: that they're not going to be cutting interest rates early, right,
Speaker 1: And I think that that's you know, we went from
Speaker 1: pricing pricing cuts this year to pricing no cuts, and
Speaker 1: now we're back to pricing a significant amount of cuts
Speaker 1: before year end. And I think if the Federal Reserve says,
Speaker 1: and I think this is something quite frankly, the FED
Speaker 1: probably needed to do over the last two meetings and
Speaker 1: say these are the circumstances. These are the necessary but
Speaker 1: not sufficient conditions for what would make us cut interest rates.
Speaker 1: Number one is inflation is at you know this level.
Speaker 1: Number two is that um, you know, the unemployment rate
Speaker 1: starts to go up, right, and those are that's their mandates, right,
Speaker 1: and so you would need to have, um, you know,
Speaker 1: those necessary conditions in order for them to cut Now
Speaker 1: we kind of know that, but the set hasn't explicitly
Speaker 1: set it. So until they do, they won't um going
Speaker 1: back to the funding programs. And I think this is
Speaker 1: the important thing, right, the central banks with the lender
Speaker 1: of last resort, not necessarily um you know, the the
Speaker 1: arbiters of which institutions are supposed to survive. Right. So
Speaker 1: the so the thing is when when you have an
Speaker 1: issue where there's a bank with good assets, right, and
Speaker 1: this is this is the point here. If you have
Speaker 1: a bank with good assets, we're just going to leave
Speaker 1: it there because we have to. But I get what
Speaker 1: you were saying to Yeah, you're listening to the Take
Speaker 1: Cancer our Live program Bloomberg Markets weekdays at ten am
Speaker 1: Eastern on Bloomberg Radio, the tune in app, Bloomberg dot Com,
Speaker 1: and the Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen live
Speaker 1: on Amazon Alexa from our pledge New York station. Just
Speaker 1: say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty. I want to get
Speaker 1: right to our next guest, David Dindy, CEO and co
Speaker 1: founder of Atomic Invest. Right, here's the dude. He gets
Speaker 1: his bachelor's and chemical engineering from Stanford, all right, so
Speaker 1: that he's a geek in my mind immediately. Then he
Speaker 1: gets a masters in chemical in computational and engineering. So
Speaker 1: this is a smart fella here. David, thanks so much
Speaker 1: for joining us. Can you first, David? Paul means that,
Speaker 1: by the way, in the best, in the best possible.
Speaker 1: I try to stay away from the numbers. David, talk
Speaker 1: to us about Atomic invest. What are you guys doing there.
Speaker 1: We provide wide labeled walt management and treasury services to bangs,
Speaker 1: fintex and credit unions. So, for instance, if you have
Speaker 1: a fintech app that you work from or that you
Speaker 1: work with that is launching investing, we are on the
Speaker 1: background serving as the infrastructure partner as well as the
Speaker 1: regulated entity for them, so that leads me, David to
Speaker 1: the big question. And if I am a startup that's
Speaker 1: just gotten a boatload of money from a VC and
Speaker 1: I put it all in a bank in Silicon Valley,
Speaker 1: Suddenly last week I wanted to move it quickly to
Speaker 1: one of the big four Wall Street banks. Do you
Speaker 1: help me with that sort of thing? Yes, And actually
Speaker 1: we helped hundreds of companies over the last six days
Speaker 1: do exactly that. Wow, just share more context. You know.
Speaker 1: Part of our infrastructure also includes treasury management and the
Speaker 1: ability to open cash management and accounts with banks and
Speaker 1: custodians like Banking New York Melind who has entered into
Speaker 1: a strategic partnership with Atomic and so we saw hundreds
Speaker 1: of such companies looking to open accounts with US and
Speaker 1: to transfer their assets into a place that they feels safer. Hey, David,
Speaker 1: you know here just in Wall Street in New York,
Speaker 1: we're all trying to get a sense of is this
Speaker 1: systemic in the banking community or is it specific to
Speaker 1: the Bay Area maybe some of those depositors and so on.
Speaker 1: What's the feeling out there in the Bay Area about
Speaker 1: how bad this is, how bad it could get. What's
Speaker 1: a feeling on the ground. The feeling on the ground
Speaker 1: right now is that the rist and collapse of SVB,
Speaker 1: Sulfurgate and First Republics percarious situation has emphasized the need
Speaker 1: for quality, resilience, stability, and corporate cash management. We've also
Speaker 1: seen that our companies are now elevated corporate treasury management
Speaker 1: as something that needs to be a key, key competency
Speaker 1: that needs to be prioritized. And so I think many
Speaker 1: people right now. You know, initially the first couple of
Speaker 1: days where a couple of days of panic, but over
Speaker 1: the last two or three days, people have been thinking
Speaker 1: more strategically in terms of how can they have an
Speaker 1: automated cash management solution that allows them to diversify, strategic
Speaker 1: to allocate their assets into treasury builds as well as
Speaker 1: institutions that they feel are safe, like Atomic, So you
Speaker 1: can help them manage their cash in ways that also
Speaker 1: provides returns. Right now, obviously, because rates are up, what
Speaker 1: about other kinds of problems, David? For example, you know
Speaker 1: the official limit on insurance is two hundred fifty thousand dollars,
Speaker 1: but I'm sure that most of the companies you deal
Speaker 1: with need to have more cash on deposit than that
Speaker 1: just to operate simple things like payroll. How do you
Speaker 1: deal with that? Yes, so most of the companies we
Speaker 1: deal with have tens of millions, if not hundreds of
Speaker 1: millions of dollars in deposits, and so the typical FDIC
Speaker 1: insurance limit of two hundred and fifty just doesn't make
Speaker 1: sense for them. And so for those companies, we sweep
Speaker 1: them into a money market sweep that offers up to
Speaker 1: two point five million dollars of FDIC insurance through a
Speaker 1: multi bank program. At the same time, we look to
Speaker 1: see what their liquidity needs are as well as how
Speaker 1: much cash they have on hand and structure custom ladders
Speaker 1: that allow them to put the cash that that might
Speaker 1: not need in the next month or too into treasuries, which,
Speaker 1: as we all understand or full you backed by the
Speaker 1: US government. That way, if a company has fifty million
Speaker 1: dollars or one hundred million dollars, they can rest assured
Speaker 1: that they're cash is either in these FDAC in short sweeps,
Speaker 1: or is it a security that is backed by the
Speaker 1: US government in whole. Davids, as founder and CEO of
Speaker 1: Atomic invest, what have you done with your firms cash?
Speaker 1: We actually moved our firms cash into our own platform.
Speaker 1: Prior to these events, we did have a relationship with SVB,
Speaker 1: and it's sad to see how things have unfolded. But
Speaker 1: right now we manage our own cash on our own platform,
Speaker 1: custodied with a Bank of New York Melon Pershing, and
Speaker 1: we also now go ahead, please, we also have our
Speaker 1: own ladder where we keep a small amount of working
Speaker 1: capital and cash and the rest of it is in
Speaker 1: treasury builds and money market funds. So, David, as I
Speaker 1: understand it, one of the reasons that Silicon Valley Bank
Speaker 1: was created several decades ago was because small startup companies
Speaker 1: coming out of the valley the big banks, the existing
Speaker 1: banks would not bank them. Has that changed at all?
Speaker 1: I mean, if I take my money out a Silicon
Speaker 1: Valley bank, am I not going to have the same
Speaker 1: problem the I think. The thing that is changing right
Speaker 1: now as we speak as results to this dislocation is
Speaker 1: a model away from you know, one bank banking all
Speaker 1: of these startups like a Silicon Value Bank, to a
Speaker 1: model where you have an infrastructure provider like Atomic that
Speaker 1: essentially allows companies to be able to access the services
Speaker 1: of these larger banks. Without having to contend with, you know,
Speaker 1: some of the limits or constraints that those larger banks
Speaker 1: might have in serving small companies. So I do think
Speaker 1: that the model will change drastically. I think that it's
Speaker 1: going to be fintech companies that offer these services to
Speaker 1: companies powered by infrastructure providers like Atomic in that respect.
Speaker 1: Happy to go into more detail. Well, just speaking of detail,
Speaker 1: I got a question that's kind of in the weeds,
Speaker 1: But we had a story about depositors that move their
Speaker 1: money out of SVB. But pick you any bank that
Speaker 1: does that kind of business. They found out then or
Speaker 1: they even knew before that they had clauses where they
Speaker 1: weren't allowed to have access to certain loans if they
Speaker 1: didn't have you know, specific deposit levels, and then now
Speaker 1: they're trying to deal with the legal morass of do
Speaker 1: they put money back in or how do you deal
Speaker 1: with that kind of issue. Yeah, some of our clients
Speaker 1: have covenants that require them to keep their money with
Speaker 1: the specific bank where they've taken out a venture, where
Speaker 1: they've taken out ventured debt from, and so we work
Speaker 1: with them to help them facilitate that and their programs
Speaker 1: that were putting in place to actually provide the liquidity
Speaker 1: for those companies to pay out those loans, and we
Speaker 1: would take those loans instead, at least in a secured
Speaker 1: fashion in that respect. David thinks for joining us, really
Speaker 1: fascinating story. It seems like you're right in your company,
Speaker 1: are right in the middle of it, David Dindy, CEO
Speaker 1: and co founder of Atomic Invest, which is really interesting.
Speaker 1: They're out there in the valley mat and you know,
Speaker 1: the one of these fintech stories that may become much
Speaker 1: more central to kind of how a lot of those
Speaker 1: companies do their banking. Yeah, I think it's absolutely fascinating.
Speaker 1: This is one of the companies that's you know, on
Speaker 1: the ground, on the front lines, helping to move this
Speaker 1: money around, helping to work with these vcs that we
Speaker 1: talk about, you know, from this coast in a kind
Speaker 1: of theoretical way, but they're actually doing the work with
Speaker 1: them and watching this providing infrastructure and watching this money
Speaker 1: move around. So I think really cool to get in
Speaker 1: touch with David for a little bit. Yeah, very interesting
Speaker 1: and just getting quick update on these markets. SMP down
Speaker 1: now one point three percent, kind of plumbing the bottoms
Speaker 1: of the intra day Trading. You're listening to the Team
Speaker 1: Cancer Line program, Bloomberg Markets. We Jason ten Am easting
Speaker 1: on Bloomberg dot Com, the I Heard Radio app, and
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg Business app. We're listening on demand wherever you
Speaker 1: get your podcast. This is a treat, folks. We get
Speaker 1: to speak with Ned Lamont, Governor of the State of Connecticut.
Speaker 1: Governor Lamont, thanks so much for taking the time. The
Speaker 1: conversation here on Global Wall Street over the last ten
Speaker 1: days has been, you know, kind of the concern we're
Speaker 1: seeing in the marketplace about some of these banks and
Speaker 1: what does that mean for the global economy. From the
Speaker 1: state of Connecticut, s or how are you thinking about
Speaker 1: your state's economy, your state's soundness of the banking system,
Speaker 1: How are you thinking about those How has that evolved
Speaker 1: over the last week or so. Look, we watched it
Speaker 1: as carefully. We're a small state. This is obviously, you know,
Speaker 1: a national issue. Well, this is Connecticut, where the land
Speaker 1: is steady habits. I you know, there's a little bit
Speaker 1: of the madness of crowds when you see everybody, um,
Speaker 1: you know, running to the bank window to get their
Speaker 1: money out. And I'd like to think that we follow
Speaker 1: our banks very closely. We have a good, strong relationship there.
Speaker 1: We know what their asset base is. We haven't seen
Speaker 1: any ripples. I do worry that it's going to make
Speaker 1: banks a lot more cautious around the country and that
Speaker 1: could impact the economy. Are the banks in Connecticut sound
Speaker 1: right now? You have full confidence in them? I really do?
Speaker 1: You know everything I've learned to understand. We have a
Speaker 1: strong economy, we have a diversified economy, manufacturing, life sciences.
Speaker 1: They're all growing strong right now. I think that's reflected
Speaker 1: in the balance seat of our banks. Governor. One of
Speaker 1: the discussion points here is regulation. Dodd Frank should their
Speaker 1: Dodd Frank regulations, which really are They've been rolled back.
Speaker 1: They were rolled back in twenty eighteen to really just
Speaker 1: focus on some of the larger systemically important banks. But
Speaker 1: now we're seeing, geez, maybe some of these regional banks
Speaker 1: should have some more regulation. What's your opinion there? I
Speaker 1: think they probably should. You know, um, the smaller banks
Speaker 1: are a lot more regional. The more regional and have
Speaker 1: a sort of a customer base that's a little more narrow.
Speaker 1: Let's say Silicon Valley Bank was all the innovation and Um,
Speaker 1: you know media type of investors. So, um, I think
Speaker 1: you should keep a very close side to make sure
Speaker 1: that their risk is diversified. Yeah, Governor, I wanted to
Speaker 1: touch on an issue that we've heard a lot delight
Speaker 1: at lately ESG, etc. And so forth, as far as
Speaker 1: underwriters for for debt in certain states, the underwriters are
Speaker 1: being held to a new standard. Um. Your view of that,
Speaker 1: and is it a disservice to the taxpayers the service
Speaker 1: of the taxpayers of the the banks are involved in
Speaker 1: their communities and making some you know, donations and contributions
Speaker 1: to our communities. I don't think so. I like the
Speaker 1: fact that the corporate community or the banking communities not
Speaker 1: in Ivory Tower. They're involved in their community. That's what
Speaker 1: community banking is. You know, your first and foremost, you've
Speaker 1: got to make sure you take care of your depositors
Speaker 1: than your shareholders. But I think they have a broader
Speaker 1: mission as well. So I think a lot of this
Speaker 1: ESG has been exaggerated, Governor. What we saw during the
Speaker 1: pandemic many things. One of the fallouts from it was
Speaker 1: a lot of people leaving the Tri state area, and
Speaker 1: for many reasons, but many of them tax related reasons.
Speaker 1: Talk to us about kind of how you think the
Speaker 1: tax situation is in Connecticut and maybe even the region,
Speaker 1: because if this region in Connecticut in particular wants to
Speaker 1: remain competitive, is there an argument that they need to
Speaker 1: be more competitive on a tax basis to something like
Speaker 1: a Florida, Texas some of those companies that seem to
Speaker 1: attract a lot of people and companies during the pandemic. Well,
Speaker 1: first of all, during the pandemic, we probably had about
Speaker 1: fifty sixty thousand families move into the state of Connecticut.
Speaker 1: Unfortunately for New York, a lot of them did come
Speaker 1: from New York. To your broader point, what I've got
Speaker 1: to do in Connecticut is make sure people know we
Speaker 1: have a stable fiscal situation. Remind people that were having
Speaker 1: the biggest tax cut in the history of the state
Speaker 1: is before the legislature right now. So for everybody earning
Speaker 1: less than two hundred and fifty thousand dollars, you know
Speaker 1: you're paying probably less in Connecticut than you are in
Speaker 1: a lot of other states. We do have a progressive
Speaker 1: tax structure, so we make sure we keep an eye
Speaker 1: on that compared to other states. But that's not going
Speaker 1: up a governor, Can we those of us who live
Speaker 1: in a high tax states expect to start deducting the lead.
Speaker 1: You're getting everybody's blood boiling with this one, including Paul
Speaker 1: and myself. But with the state and local tax deductions.
Speaker 1: Can we expect that to go back the way it
Speaker 1: was anytime soon. What's happening on that front. Well, obviously
Speaker 1: that's a federal determination. That was a tax increase on
Speaker 1: blue states. Up here in the Northeast, we got hit
Speaker 1: on that particularly hard because of our property and income
Speaker 1: tax and capping the deductibility. We put and play something
Speaker 1: golo to pass through edity credits. So at least for
Speaker 1: all those LLCs, we're able to hold them harmless, and
Speaker 1: it makes it a lot easier they can deduct overall
Speaker 1: on their balance sheet, even though they can't do it firstally.
Speaker 1: So we're trying to mitigate that effect as best we can. Governor.
Speaker 1: One of the key issues for most states, certainly those
Speaker 1: in the Northeast, is transportation infrastructure, and just this week,
Speaker 1: Republican lawmakers in Connecticut legislature by passed the Democratic majority
Speaker 1: to force a public hearing on a bill to eliminate
Speaker 1: the highway use tax I know this is something you've
Speaker 1: is a tax, is a levy. You've support what's going
Speaker 1: on in Connecticut with this issue. The highway user fee,
Speaker 1: just like you have in New York, is paid disproportionately
Speaker 1: by a big tractor trailer trucks that come right through
Speaker 1: our state. Many cases, we're just a pass through state.
Speaker 1: They're going from Massachusetts in New York and beyond. They
Speaker 1: create a lot of wear and tear on our highways,
Speaker 1: so they are paying a mileage fee. You know, over time,
Speaker 1: you're going to find the gas lean tax is less
Speaker 1: and less of a revenue driver as we move to
Speaker 1: all electric vehicles. So I think this mileage fee, which
Speaker 1: you see on the track and trailers, is one where
Speaker 1: we can divertify our revenue sources. Everybody thinks we're getting
Speaker 1: free money from the Feds. Why do you need to
Speaker 1: be able to pay your own way? But the Feds,
Speaker 1: you know, we've got to pay twenty or thirty percent.
Speaker 1: A lot of those grants are competitive, so we got
Speaker 1: to show our ability to put up our share. But
Speaker 1: then we can leverage thanks to the Infrastructure bill, you know,
Speaker 1: three to one. Yeah, one of the issues we hear
Speaker 1: about every day. I mean some of the people I
Speaker 1: work with childcare, especially working moms, single working moms. What's
Speaker 1: the status of child's care in the state of Connecticut.
Speaker 1: Interesting you ask them here at a Baringer Ingleheim and
Speaker 1: rich Field. They've got a childcare facility here which we
Speaker 1: were celebrating, and so we have the biggest expansion of
Speaker 1: daycare childcare in the history of the state. It gives
Speaker 1: the kids the very best head start. It allows mom
Speaker 1: and dad to get back to work. We have fewer people,
Speaker 1: you know, working. I've got to get them back off
Speaker 1: the sidelines into the game and daycare. Childcare is a
Speaker 1: big piece of that, making it accessible and making that affordable.
Speaker 1: So what's the next step in Connecticut and for other
Speaker 1: states as well well? For us, we're providing a twenty
Speaker 1: five percent tax credit for new facilities, and for Brenger
Speaker 1: Ingleheim is subsidizing daycare for their workers here and they've
Speaker 1: got a few thousand of them. We're providing a tax
Speaker 1: credit to help and send them to continue to do
Speaker 1: the right thing. Governor, many parts of the country are
Speaker 1: dealing with an opioid crisis in their communities. Can you
Speaker 1: give us a sense of how the situation is in
Speaker 1: Connecticut what the state is trying to do to combat it. Again,
Speaker 1: many parts of the country really really getting ravaged by this.
Speaker 1: I can tell you that coming out of COVID, the
Speaker 1: level of addiction and fatalities related to opioids related to
Speaker 1: Sentinel has been severe, and we've been addressing that in
Speaker 1: terms of you know, everything from mental health to narkhan
Speaker 1: and police and going after those folks who are distributing
Speaker 1: Sadly Sentinel. It's just it's everywhere right now, and it's
Speaker 1: so dangerous. So we're coming after that with law enforcement
Speaker 1: as well as treatment. Well, what are the state's finances
Speaker 1: look like right now as I imagine a budget preparation
Speaker 1: is underway. Yeah, we're pretty solid. We've got fifteen percent
Speaker 1: set aside as a rainy day fund. Our revenues are
Speaker 1: holding up pretty well. Our income is up compared to
Speaker 1: last year. Capital gains is down a little bit, but
Speaker 1: we had anticipated that, and again that allows us to
Speaker 1: have the biggest tax cut in history of the state,
Speaker 1: which I think will be passed in the next ninety days.
Speaker 1: Is there an appetite? I just want to get this
Speaker 1: one because I've asked this every governor I've talked to,
Speaker 1: is there appetite in your state for anything like pension reform.
Speaker 1: There's a lot of appetite. First of all, one of
Speaker 1: the things I've done is because we had a big
Speaker 1: unfunded pension liability, nobody put money in de pension for
Speaker 1: the last fifty years. We paid down about eight billion
Speaker 1: dollars a pension debt in the last four years. That's
Speaker 1: not reform, but at least it's stableising what was a
Speaker 1: bleeding situation. And we're going to have to look more
Speaker 1: broadly at pension for him as the next you know, budget,
Speaker 1: as the next employee contract negotiations come up over the
Speaker 1: next couple of years. We don't pay enough up front.
Speaker 1: We're having a hard time recruiting young employees. But there's
Speaker 1: a lot of big backside pension benefits that you get
Speaker 1: at a very early age. That's a less value when
Speaker 1: it comes to recruiting that twenty seven something who's thinking
Speaker 1: about where they want to go the consulting firm or
Speaker 1: the Connecticut Department of Education. I want them at our doe.
Speaker 1: A governor, it's been about twenty year anniversary of the
Speaker 1: Iraq Ward and obviously impacted so many people here in
Speaker 1: this country and others. How did it impact you in
Speaker 1: your trajectory of your career? Oh? Big time. And I
Speaker 1: was I had a little telecommunications company and we were
Speaker 1: wiring up big institutions, and I just thought the invasion
Speaker 1: of Iraq was a colossal error in judgment. You know,
Speaker 1: we're going to be great as Liberator is going to
Speaker 1: pay for itself. So I stood up. I challenged a
Speaker 1: guy named Joe Laberman, who had the Democratic candidate for
Speaker 1: vice president previously. And you know, in a primary here
Speaker 1: twenty years ago, and I think twenty years later, I
Speaker 1: think I think most people realized it was a terrible mistake.
Speaker 1: What it meant in terms of blood, what it meant
Speaker 1: in terms of treasure. Now, in hindsight, everybody was against
Speaker 1: the invasion of Iraq, but not at that time, Governor.
Speaker 1: One of the issues here on Global Wall Street of
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Radio and Television, which we talk a lot about,
Speaker 1: just as kind of over the last week to ten days,
Speaker 1: with some of these banking issues, it's just kind of
Speaker 1: brings to light, you know, the venture capital community. I
Speaker 1: didn't know you've had a business background. Your wife isn't
Speaker 1: an venture capital business. How do you think that may
Speaker 1: be impacted going forward over the next several years. How
Speaker 1: the banking crisis impacts investment capital and yeah, just venture
Speaker 1: venture capital and just you know, kind of growth capital
Speaker 1: for new technologies and so on. Well, I put the
Speaker 1: lens back. First of all, I think one of the
Speaker 1: greatest strategic advantages this country has is a liquid capital market,
Speaker 1: and that starts with investment capital. That starts with the
Speaker 1: venture capital, in particular seed capital, which is what we're
Speaker 1: doing in this state. We've had more new business startups
Speaker 1: the last three years than we had in the last
Speaker 1: twenty three years combined. So I really worry about the
Speaker 1: risk appetite pulling back, and part of that's reflected in
Speaker 1: the nervousness in and around our banking system. I'll leave
Speaker 1: it at that. Hey, Governor, you want to make some
Speaker 1: predictions for the presidential race. Who you support, should Joe
Speaker 1: Biden run again, and who do you think the Republican
Speaker 1: nominee will eventually be. I had the catch right now.
Speaker 1: I think it will be Biden versus Trump. But you know,
Speaker 1: I probably said it's gonna be a Clinton versus Boys
Speaker 1: eight years ago, so I'm not very original. On that,
Speaker 1: but more importantly, which of you was the big duke
Speaker 1: supporter in basketball? So I just want to run into
Speaker 1: the Yukon Huskies. That's where I wanted to go, and
Speaker 1: I will make well. I want to prediction there because
Speaker 1: you have a great coach there and Danny Hurley, he's
Speaker 1: a New Jersey product, comes from the great Hurley family
Speaker 1: coaching tree and his brothers also coaching in the NCAA
Speaker 1: tournament at Arizona State. Of course, his father, Bob Hurley,
Speaker 1: is a legendary high school coach from Saint Anthony's, New
Speaker 1: Jersey City. So talk to us about your Yukon Huskies here.
Speaker 1: He's done an amazing job. The men's basketball team wasn't
Speaker 1: winning there for a little while, having had a great
Speaker 1: tradition under Jim Calhoun. They've got five years of improvement.
Speaker 1: I think they're one of the certainly top ten teams
Speaker 1: in the country. They're playing really not well and we
Speaker 1: got a guy named Gino Oriamo on the other side.
Speaker 1: When it comes to women's basketball, they're going to be
Speaker 1: going to the final four. Very good ned Lamont best
Speaker 1: elucty to Yukon Huskies there. Love to see that program
Speaker 1: get back to where it was. You're listening to the
Speaker 1: tape cats are live program Bloomberg Markets weekdays at ten
Speaker 1: am Eastern on Bloomberg Radio, the tune in alf Bloomberg
Speaker 1: dot Com, and the Bloomberg Business App. You can also
Speaker 1: listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York
Speaker 1: station Just Say Alexa playing Bloomberg eleven thirty. FedEx reported
Speaker 1: numbers last night, and my untrained eye, they missed numbers.
Speaker 1: But the stock is up. So this is a story.
Speaker 1: It sounds like cost cutting and cost cutting is certainly
Speaker 1: in vogue for many companies in many different industries these days.
Speaker 1: You don't have to be just a startup company. You
Speaker 1: could be a you know, like a company like FedEx.
Speaker 1: Leek scal he's a sector head, senior analysts. He covers
Speaker 1: all the freight, transportation and logistics for Bloomberg Intelligence Lee
Speaker 1: FedEx stock it's up eight point two percent today. What
Speaker 1: did the street like? Yeah? I think you know, FedEx
Speaker 1: has been a company in transition and it's kind of
Speaker 1: been a while, like people are really expecting them to execute,
Speaker 1: and what it seems like is management is finally executing.
Speaker 1: You know, FedEx is probably late to the game in
Speaker 1: terms of aligning its resources to demand. You know, ups
Speaker 1: is kind of was doing that a couple of years ago,
Speaker 1: but it looked like some of the cost cutting measurements
Speaker 1: that measures that they've been doing have really started to work.
Speaker 1: You know, they beat expectations by seventy cents to share,
Speaker 1: so they're earning. Their physical third quarter came in at
Speaker 1: three dollars forty one cents, which was seventy cents above expectations,
Speaker 1: and that was really, you know, to your point, being
Speaker 1: driven on the cost cutting side, especially in its ground
Speaker 1: business and it's eight business, which is it's less than
Speaker 1: truckload business. And they also guided up, so they raised
Speaker 1: a full year guidance, so it was implied EPs for
Speaker 1: the fourth quarter. Their physical fourth quarter of a four
Speaker 1: dollars and fifty seven cents to five dollars and seventeen cents,
Speaker 1: which was well of a consensus of four dollars and
Speaker 1: twenty three cents. So, you know, people are recalibrating their
Speaker 1: expectations for the fourth quarter, and I think they're they're
Speaker 1: they're recalibrating their expectations for physical twenty twenty four UM
Speaker 1: for FedEx, So you know, I think you're going to
Speaker 1: see earning festimates from the street to move higher in
Speaker 1: the coming days and weeks. Okay, when you cut costs,
Speaker 1: are you cutting into future growth? I mean there's it's
Speaker 1: a sort of a fausty and bargain for some companies. No,
Speaker 1: not really. So they're doing some like temporary cuts, which
Speaker 1: is you know, really dealing with the demand trends, so
Speaker 1: maybe like cutting some flights, parking some airlines and things
Speaker 1: that when demand picks up they can easily get back
Speaker 1: into business. And they're also you know, FedEx has always
Speaker 1: been considered a little more bloated than some other companies,
Speaker 1: and I think they're just dealing with that bloat um.
Speaker 1: You know, they announced a bunch of you know, middle
Speaker 1: management and senior management cuts, um, which which they're doing
Speaker 1: across the organization. They're talking about you know, you know,
Speaker 1: they operate two very separate networks. They operate a ground
Speaker 1: network and an express network, which is unique because you know,
Speaker 1: most companies in the courier business they'll have one network,
Speaker 1: so ups their express and their domestic business is kind
Speaker 1: of all in one operations. And you know, FedEx is
Speaker 1: looking at ways where they can combine those two networks,
Speaker 1: you know, and gain kind of some of the scale
Speaker 1: and um and and and and benefit that that will
Speaker 1: bring and just increase productivity overall, because at the end
Speaker 1: of the day, you know, these networks were built for
Speaker 1: B two C commerce and as B to B I'm sorry,
Speaker 1: they're built for B to B commerce, and as you know,
Speaker 1: business to consumer commerce or e commerce is picking up,
Speaker 1: you know, they need to kind of change the way
Speaker 1: these accident intensive networks operate. That's kind of where I
Speaker 1: wanted to go, Lee. Is I think about FedEx and
Speaker 1: ups and DHL and boy even Amazon, Um, how have
Speaker 1: the business has changed since the pandemic. It just seems
Speaker 1: like is there more capacity in the system now? Is
Speaker 1: the demand at a going to grow from this higher level? Um?
Speaker 1: How has it changed? Yeah? So I mean, if you
Speaker 1: want to talk about like pre pandemics today, so obviously,
Speaker 1: you know we had a surge in you know, B
Speaker 1: B two C or e commerce demand as more and
Speaker 1: more people were you know, stuck at home and not
Speaker 1: able to get out. You know, that pulls forward e
Speaker 1: commerce penetration by three or five years. And so what
Speaker 1: that did is that that really brought a rush into
Speaker 1: this lower margin business into their their network. So if
Speaker 1: you think about it, you know, when you see a
Speaker 1: FedEx delivery person coming to your house delivering one package,
Speaker 1: you know, the margins on that it's pretty small relative
Speaker 1: to them going to a lawyer's office and delivering one
Speaker 1: hundred packages. Um. So you know, so what they're trying
Speaker 1: to do is build dnser networks to be able to
Speaker 1: you know, lower their costs to deliver um. And so
Speaker 1: you know, in addition to your questions about what's different,
Speaker 1: you know, obviously we had you know, very tight labor markets.
Speaker 1: Those labor markets are loosening a little bit. You know,
Speaker 1: it's it's a lot easier to find people today was
Speaker 1: a year ago that you know, some much pressures that
Speaker 1: they're casing. But in generally speaking, you know, they just have,
Speaker 1: um not necessarily reinvent themselves, but just take a look
Speaker 1: at their networks and figure out, you know, how should
Speaker 1: they be operating with this new paradigm of you know,
Speaker 1: more home deliveries versus you know, um, you know, B
Speaker 1: to B deliveries. What what counts for innovation in this industry? Um, So,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of things. So there's there's software, so
Speaker 1: the acting tracing technologies. They're always constantly improving that. They're
Speaker 1: trying to figure better ways to route freight. Um they're
Speaker 1: they're making big investments and automation, so they're trying to
Speaker 1: get more of their sorting hubs automated, so more and
Speaker 1: more of their freight doesn't really get touched by people,
Speaker 1: and if it is touched by people, they charge a
Speaker 1: surcharge for that. And that was really you know, one
Speaker 1: of the things coming off the call last night was that,
Speaker 1: you know, pricing remains rational across all of its businesses,
Speaker 1: which is really good. You know, they still can get
Speaker 1: price increases even if volumes are declining in some of
Speaker 1: their businesses by mid to high single digits, so you
Speaker 1: know they'll be able to offset that. You know, they're
Speaker 1: they're they're earning you know what, we're down by you know,
Speaker 1: significant double digits versus last year. Obviously, you know last
Speaker 1: year was an unsustainable level, but their their revenue was
Speaker 1: only off by you know, like low single digits. You know,
Speaker 1: you're still you're still seeing them able to price in
Speaker 1: this difficult market. Thirty seconds, you cover everything on the
Speaker 1: logistics fronts. Is the supply chain fixed, the supply chain
Speaker 1: will never be fixed because there's always changing and always complicated.
Speaker 1: But the good news is that, you know, there was
Speaker 1: a lot of news last year and about you know,
Speaker 1: the backup at the ports. Well there's really there hasn't
Speaker 1: been a backup at the ports for quite some time
Speaker 1: since November, so that's good news. You know, the next
Speaker 1: wrench in the system could be a strike at you know,
Speaker 1: FedEx's big competitor, or ups or contract ends at the
Speaker 1: end of July. That actually might be a near term
Speaker 1: benefits of FedEx as shippers looks a secure capacity ahead
Speaker 1: of the uncertainty. You know, we think there, you know,
Speaker 1: is a low probability of a strike. You know, we
Speaker 1: don't we don't think. We don't think it's going to happen,
Speaker 1: but you know, shippers have to prepare. We were at
Speaker 1: a conference last week or actually sorry this week, uh,
Speaker 1: talking to a bunch of shippers and they were telling us,
Speaker 1: you know that they're they're engaging with other providers to
Speaker 1: make sure their stuff gets to where it needs to be.
Speaker 1: All right, I got good stuff, Lee sector Head. He
Speaker 1: covers all things logistics for Bloomberg Intelligence. Thanks for listening
Speaker 1: to the Bloomberg Markets podcast. You can subscribe and listen
Speaker 1: to interviews at Apple Podcasts or whatever podcast platform you prefer.
Speaker 1: I'm Matt Miller. I'm on Twitter at Matt Miller nineteen
Speaker 1: seventy three. And I'm fall Sweeney. I'm on Twitter at
Speaker 1: pt Sweeney. Before the podcast, you can always catch us
Speaker 1: worldwide at Bloomberg Radio