Speaker 1: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keene along
Speaker 1: with Paul Sweeney. Join us each day for insight from
Speaker 1: the best in economics, finance, investment, and international relations. You
Speaker 1: can also watch the show live on YouTube. Visit the
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Podcast channel on YouTube to see the show weekday
Speaker 1: mornings from seven to ten am Eastern from our global
Speaker 1: headquarters in New York City. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify,
Speaker 1: or anywhere else you listen, and always I'm Bloomberg Radio,
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg Terminal, and the Bloomberg Business app. Joining us now,
Speaker 1: really looking forward to this. Rebecca Patterson here with a
Speaker 1: really wonderful heritage, yes, or to our duty of Bridgewater,
Speaker 1: but far more than that writing heard at Bessemer Trust
Speaker 1: on Quiet Money. Rebecca, there was a point yesterday, as
Speaker 1: early in the press conference where I thought they could
Speaker 1: verbade him in and run it as a Saturday Night
Speaker 1: Live I've skit where the chairman was washing around the
Speaker 1: word data, we become data dependent, whatever the idiocy he
Speaker 1: was saying, the delicacies he was saying, how did we
Speaker 1: get in this spot where we are jaw boning a
Speaker 1: trend waiting for data and just trying to get through
Speaker 1: a press conference with gobbledegook. How did we get here?
Speaker 2: Well, I think the pandemic and the post pandemic period
Speaker 2: created a lot of humility within central banks globally, including
Speaker 2: the FED, and so I think that's probably made them
Speaker 2: a little bit more cautious. I'm pounding any proverbial fists
Speaker 2: on the table in terms of where they're going with policy.
Speaker 2: Stick to the data releases. If inflation stays on track,
Speaker 2: if growth moderates softly, wonderful, we can get some rate
Speaker 2: cuts this spring. And if it doesn't happen, the FED
Speaker 2: is allowed to change its mind. I think that's what
Speaker 2: I was getting at. But I think to the degree
Speaker 2: there was waltzing yesterday, so to speak, it largely is
Speaker 2: a reflection of what happened in the last few years
Speaker 2: and then realizing how complicated this particular economic cyclists.
Speaker 3: And Rebecca, you know, the market seems to have heard
Speaker 3: what the FED said yesterday. If you look at the
Speaker 3: WRP function worp go, you know, in the March meeting
Speaker 3: there was a fifty percent odds of a rate cut.
Speaker 3: Now that's down about thirty five percent or so. It
Speaker 3: seems like the market's getting the message. Is that kind
Speaker 3: of your your take as well?
Speaker 4: Yes and no.
Speaker 2: I mean I obviously that the UH pricing in of March,
Speaker 2: down pricing in of May up now about ninety three
Speaker 2: percent odds of a cut in May. What was striking
Speaker 2: to me, though, is when we look at what's priced
Speaker 2: in for FED funds today versus before the meeting, is
Speaker 2: we still have about one hundred and fifty basis points
Speaker 2: of easing priced in for this year. That hasn't changed
Speaker 2: really since before the press conference, So it's just getting
Speaker 2: compressed into a shorter timeframe. And I still am skeptical
Speaker 2: about that. I think you would have to see a
Speaker 2: lot of things go really perfectly right to get that
Speaker 2: amount of easing and get the double digit earnings growth
Speaker 2: that's still priced in for the SMP this year.
Speaker 1: Rebecca Patterson with US our Tech Analysts this morning. Rebecca,
Speaker 1: I looked at the operating cash flow of Microsoft yesterday
Speaker 1: and this is with your tour duty at JP Morgan
Speaker 1: years ago. I think we really don't understand the size
Speaker 1: the scope to scale a fortress Diamond or frankly fortress
Speaker 1: such an Adela as well. Apple computer today pre pandemic
Speaker 1: they had fifty nine billion in free cash sule Paul.
Speaker 1: Basically they've done a double sure in like four or
Speaker 1: five years. Do we understand the size of these companies, Rebecca,
Speaker 1: and how can we not own them? If they're that dominant?
Speaker 2: I think you have to own them. The question is
Speaker 2: are you underweight benchmark weight overweight? And with the valuations today,
Speaker 2: with the expectations for growth as we've seen in the
Speaker 2: last few days, any disappointment versus what's priced in in
Speaker 2: their earning season get some profit taking. But if you
Speaker 2: take a longer term view and I try to on
Speaker 2: these things, I'm not day trading, you know, with that
Speaker 2: free cash flow, with the comparative advantages they have the motes,
Speaker 2: they have, the technology, the personnel comparative advantage. Whether we're
Speaker 2: talking tech or you mentioned JP Morgan, I would argue
Speaker 2: they're in that camp too. It's very hard to see
Speaker 2: them taken down now this year, as you know, we're
Speaker 2: going to have some regulatory kurdles for some of the
Speaker 2: tech stocks, which probably don't end with the decision.
Speaker 4: They'll go to the.
Speaker 2: Court, so it'll drag out for a while. But that
Speaker 2: could be another impetus for some profit taking. I'd say
Speaker 2: if you get that kind of profit taking on the
Speaker 2: tech stocks, it's an opportunity to buy for a longer
Speaker 2: term position.
Speaker 5: How do you feel about that?
Speaker 3: You know, we're right smack in the middle earnings, Rebecca,
Speaker 3: how do you feel about what you're seeing here in
Speaker 3: earnings and what we're hearing from companies. It seems like
Speaker 3: the technology sector is still in pretty solid shape it.
Speaker 5: You know, some of the others are still very cautious.
Speaker 2: Well, we've seen that divergent in the divergence in the
Speaker 2: economy over the last few years. If you look at
Speaker 2: the business sentiment surveys, the PMIS, we've seen a manufacturing
Speaker 2: sector that you know, reflected in those surveys, has been
Speaker 2: modestly contracting for fourteen fifteen months now, and the service sector,
Speaker 2: while strong, has been moderating. And so it's not surprising
Speaker 2: to me if you look across companies and sectors, you
Speaker 2: are seeing a difference between services, manufacturing, and then even
Speaker 2: within sub sectors.
Speaker 4: And I think that's likely to continue.
Speaker 1: Rebecca. We got to go to your wheelhouse, which is
Speaker 1: dollar currency, and Allison that what does the strong dollar
Speaker 1: the resilient dollar, what does that.
Speaker 4: Signal well in the last twenty four hours.
Speaker 2: It's simply a reflection of the March rate cut being
Speaker 2: pushed back some higher short term.
Speaker 1: In the last six months, the last year, it's an
Speaker 1: extraordinary how we've seen resilient dollar and underperformance of international equities.
Speaker 4: It's just yeah, running I agree with you, Tom.
Speaker 2: You know, you have to remember that compared to when
Speaker 2: we started our careers and trade flows, where the dominant
Speaker 2: cross border flow. Today it's capital flows and where does
Speaker 2: capital go. Capital go goes where growth is stronger, and
Speaker 2: ideally where valuations are attractive. Now, US valuations, we can
Speaker 2: argue are not so attractive, but growth is so much
Speaker 2: more attractive in the United States versus the rest of
Speaker 2: the world today, By and large, money keeps coming here
Speaker 2: and that keeps supporting the dollar and US stock market.
Speaker 1: Sounds like Bob Sinch from years ago at bear Stearns. Okay,
Speaker 1: Bob Sinch or Rebecca Patterson. Great, except the great destabilizer
Speaker 1: is Japan. If we finally get Japanese instability, what does
Speaker 1: that mean for our YouTube viewers in America?
Speaker 2: You know, Japan has been one of the few overseas
Speaker 2: developed markets out performing the US of late based on reflation,
Speaker 2: better growth, stronger inflation, but not too strong. And now
Speaker 2: the question is if the Bank of Japan pulls back
Speaker 2: from that aggressively easing monetary posture and you get a
Speaker 2: stronger yen, does that undermine exports in Japan? That's been
Speaker 2: a big engine of growth and a big engine of
Speaker 2: the reflation for that economy. So the stronger yen on
Speaker 2: the back of less easy monetary policy higher yields. To
Speaker 2: your point, we don't know how big a destabilizer that
Speaker 2: could be. It certainly could pause the equity rally there
Speaker 2: for some time, again underscoring the attractiveness of being in
Speaker 2: US large caps, But I think it's going to Japan
Speaker 2: has shown that they're going to be very incremental, very
Speaker 2: slow about this. The last thing they want is a disruption.
Speaker 3: Rebecca, just real quickly here geopolitics front and center of
Speaker 3: course for global Wall Street.
Speaker 5: How does that factor into your outlook?
Speaker 6: Here?
Speaker 3: Do you buy some gold you try to head?
Speaker 5: How do you do that?
Speaker 2: I do think a small allocation of gold, and I'm
Speaker 2: talking about in a portfolio, probably something between two and
Speaker 2: five percent of the total is a good hedge not
Speaker 2: only against geopolitical risk, but also the possibility.
Speaker 4: That we have a harder landing.
Speaker 2: But I think in the case of geopolitical risk, what
Speaker 2: you always have to ask is, if this risk becomes reality,
Speaker 2: does it have a material impact on my view of
Speaker 2: the economy globally or in that region, and doesn't have
Speaker 2: a material impact on markets. Why the market doesn't react
Speaker 2: is because so far it doesn't change your broader economic thesis.
Speaker 2: If we do see that change, then the politics will
Speaker 2: matter a lot. And unfortunately it's the sort of thing
Speaker 2: that happens quickly, so you have to plan ahead. You
Speaker 2: have to do your scenario analysis now because when it happens,
Speaker 2: you don't want to be reacting with the market moving
Speaker 2: against you.
Speaker 1: Rebecca Patterson, thank you so much, greatly appreciate it. We're
Speaker 1: gonna turn serious here and I want to get to
Speaker 1: some mathiness here, so stay with me on this, folks.
Speaker 1: Where with sree Kamar, who we can always do a
Speaker 1: high level economics math shre to be honest and Ethan
Speaker 1: Ayris wrote a brilliant essay on trend out on LinkedIn
Speaker 1: a couple of days ago. I mentioned it yesterday with
Speaker 1: Bill Dudley, the former New York Fed President. Richard Claire
Speaker 1: to the Vice chairman shre Kamar with us and Shre
Speaker 1: If we're on trend and the trends is disinflation, the
Speaker 1: probability is you're not going to stay on trend. And
Speaker 1: so the Fed is waiting to see if we trend
Speaker 1: a surprising employment or we trend to weak employment. When
Speaker 1: we finally get off trend, then what then what do
Speaker 1: they do once they have a data point that cuts
Speaker 1: either way off trend.
Speaker 6: You're absolutely correct, Tom, that is the part of the
Speaker 6: problem in doing what I call seat of the pants
Speaker 6: analysis and policy implementation, because they don't have a fixed path.
Speaker 6: I have long been recommending something like a tailor rule,
Speaker 6: so that you have the formula in place and you
Speaker 6: follow it and you don't have the jerky moves pivoting
Speaker 6: from one to the other, which is exactly what you're
Speaker 6: pointing to. That is the risk taking. Look here in
Speaker 6: the near term, Tom, December thirteenth, there is Jero power
Speaker 6: sending the market upwards like a rocket. Shire yesterday he
Speaker 6: pulls it back. What happened between December thirteenth and yesterday
Speaker 6: to cause a big change to hawkishness, Nothing, if anything
Speaker 6: inflation numbers came out more benign than expected. So this
Speaker 6: is what is the problem with not having a long
Speaker 6: term view on the part of the FED.
Speaker 1: The problem tailor role, and it's beautifully done out in
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg terminal. I got the neutral real ray. Guess
Speaker 1: that CPI, I guess I can grab that. I got
Speaker 1: a Greek letter named alpha, we almost named vetno Alpha.
Speaker 1: Then I got a beta, I got an oken factor,
Speaker 1: and I got a nehbrew suit I've got to wear
Speaker 1: when I look at the tailor roll, come on street.
Speaker 1: This is mathematical mumbo jumbo. How do you use an
Speaker 1: algebraic stree Kamar rule when I got a pandemic in
Speaker 1: a triple stimulus? It doesn't compute.
Speaker 6: You do it in two ways. One is the tailor
Speaker 6: rule is sufficiently flexible, meaning that it is not a
Speaker 6: fixed formula. And it basically says that when inflation is
Speaker 6: about target or below target, what you should what you
Speaker 6: should be doing, When GDP growth is above or below
Speaker 6: what you wanted to be, what you should be doing.
Speaker 6: And it allows you some amount of flexibility between those stuff.
Speaker 6: You don't have to go to the open rule. You
Speaker 6: do not have to go to the others. If you
Speaker 6: follow any particular rule diligently, you would be a lot
Speaker 6: better off than what we are doing now, where we
Speaker 6: don't have any fixed principles. That's where I come out at.
Speaker 6: It doesn't matter what principle you use. Use something as
Speaker 6: a rule rather than just decide that morning what you're
Speaker 6: going to do with interest rates and quantitative tightening.
Speaker 1: Shre.
Speaker 3: We've had a number of guests on over the last
Speaker 3: several weeks, both academics and market practitioners, who say the
Speaker 3: Fed should be cutting rates now inflation is already whipped.
Speaker 5: How do you view that kind of call?
Speaker 6: That is the call all that we had in the
Speaker 6: nineteen seventies, and we know how it turned out to be,
Speaker 6: because when you cut interest rates significantly, and if you
Speaker 6: did that today, the markets would rally, consumer spending would
Speaker 6: increase the economy then temporarily go on a much faster
Speaker 6: growth seting, inflation will pick up, and then it will
Speaker 6: make it much more difficult for you to bring the
Speaker 6: inflation rate down. That is the risk of cutting down
Speaker 6: interest rates sharply today, Shre.
Speaker 3: Are you surprised about how resilient the consumer is? I mean,
Speaker 3: we just had Royal Caribbean cruise lines take their guidance up.
Speaker 3: People are spending, They're going on cruises, they're going on trips,
Speaker 3: they're buying stuff. I'm actually kind of surprised how resilient
Speaker 3: the consumer is.
Speaker 6: There are two reasons for that part. You raise a
Speaker 6: good point. First of all, I think there was an
Speaker 6: immense amount of fiscal stimulus that was provided to the economy.
Speaker 6: At the end of twenty twenty two, the estimate was
Speaker 6: one point five trillion dollars worth of excess savings were
Speaker 6: in the hands of the consumers. So it is being
Speaker 6: spent the last months of the Trump administration, the initial
Speaker 6: months of the Biden administration, the stimulus that came forth
Speaker 6: is still being spent. That's one reason. Second, look at
Speaker 6: what has happened with the recent numbers on consumer disposable
Speaker 6: income and savings. Savings are rising much slower than consumer
Speaker 6: disposable income. Sorry, I should say the other way. Consumer
Speaker 6: savings are not rising. Consumers are essentially dipping into their
Speaker 6: savings in order to finance their spending, and that is
Speaker 6: going to cause it. Credit card loan defaults are increasing
Speaker 6: in the case of banks, and that is another way
Speaker 6: in which the consumer spending is being done. You saw
Speaker 6: what happened with the banking problems in the last couple
Speaker 6: of days. I've been writing Paul that, especially with the consumers,
Speaker 6: that you're only seeing the tip of the iceberg. You're
Speaker 6: going to see a lot more in the next six
Speaker 6: to nine months.
Speaker 3: So given that backdrop here, do you think the FED
Speaker 3: is the message? Yes, they was pretty clear or don't
Speaker 3: bank on us cutting rates in March. Do you think
Speaker 3: that's the right message? And do you think that message
Speaker 3: is subject to you know, if the data changes, maybe
Speaker 3: they'll change.
Speaker 6: Uh. If I would say that, if they stick to
Speaker 6: March and if they wait for inflation to significantly come
Speaker 6: down before they cut rates, that is the correct policy.
Speaker 6: But if what your own power does is to switch
Speaker 6: messages from meeting to meeting, from December to this meeting
Speaker 6: with no change significantly happening in the economy, that is
Speaker 6: going to be a problem. It's going to cause volatility,
Speaker 6: it's going to cast uncertainty in markets. But unfortunately that's
Speaker 6: the way the FED operates.
Speaker 1: I look sre and you know, we would like to
Speaker 1: talk to him for like an hor Yeah, you have
Speaker 1: no guess, lose Lisa, you know, lose.
Speaker 5: Bar exactly, Senta Monica too straight.
Speaker 1: There's a lot. Yeah, I know he's smarter than we are, yes, Sre.
Speaker 1: Just to wrap this up, is there a theory at
Speaker 1: the FED now or are they literally staggering from meeting
Speaker 1: the meeting.
Speaker 6: I think it's the latter, Tom. I think they are
Speaker 6: staggering from meeting to meeting. Powell tells to you that
Speaker 6: they are data dependent, which means they act based on
Speaker 6: the latest data, and that may not be what is
Speaker 6: good for the long term, but unfortunately that is the
Speaker 6: FED formula right now. And you've heard it from the chairman,
Speaker 6: not just from me.
Speaker 1: Sre. Thank you so much, Sri Kamar, or this here,
Speaker 1: this is some important conversation. It's fallen off the radar,
Speaker 1: but it is gospel from Margie Patel. She has been
Speaker 1: doing this for ages and she has been right, right, right,
Speaker 1: And one of the important things is she shifted from
Speaker 1: coupon to dividend growth in terms of a measured portfolio
Speaker 1: at all Spring Global Investments. Margie, it's really fallen off
Speaker 1: the radar in this great lift we've seen in the
Speaker 1: equity markets, which is used to cash share buyback. We'll
Speaker 1: hear that from the tech companies today, but also dividend growth.
Speaker 1: One of our guests, Paul Sweeney, is apoplectic about this
Speaker 1: that Apple that Microsoft should install a responsible adult dividend policy. Margie,
Speaker 1: should they?
Speaker 7: I really wouldn't be in a position to judge that.
Speaker 7: I think that, for example, Microsoft has been exceptionally strong
Speaker 7: in their capital expenditures, so I would really look for
Speaker 7: the long term and see that they're using their cash
Speaker 7: wives and to invest for future growth, not necessarily doing that.
Speaker 1: Paul, I think you're onto something here. I'm going to
Speaker 1: jump in and say, I get all the rationalization of
Speaker 1: not doing a dividend, but there's something American about it
Speaker 1: that's as simple as I can put it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, And it just goes to the issue of these
Speaker 3: tech companies. Mark, We're going to hear from some of
Speaker 3: the big tech companies after the close tonight, and we're
Speaker 3: just marvel at the free cash flow that these companies generate.
Speaker 1: Here.
Speaker 3: What are you looking for after the close here today?
Speaker 3: From you know, some of the real leaders in this marketplace,
Speaker 3: some of these big tech names.
Speaker 7: Well, we saw some yesterday and I think we'll see
Speaker 7: more of the same today, which is they still have
Speaker 7: a strong, sustainable growth well into the future, and it's
Speaker 7: more a question of the markets nervous. The market wants
Speaker 7: to have a little correction. So we saw a negative
Speaker 7: reaction yesterday when the Big three reported. Maybe we'll see
Speaker 7: that tonight. I think the market will chop around here
Speaker 7: because it just wants to have a little bit of correction.
Speaker 7: But still the fundamentals look great, so there's no reason
Speaker 7: why stock shouldn't go up all year.
Speaker 3: In the discent holdings, well, you know, part of that
Speaker 3: I assume is going to be earnings.
Speaker 5: They are going to have to come through here.
Speaker 3: And I see kind of you know, high single little
Speaker 3: double digit earnings as I look forward on the Bloomberg
Speaker 3: terminal here for the next twelve eighteen months. Do you
Speaker 3: feel like there's earnings risk in some of.
Speaker 7: Those I No, I think most of them, most of
Speaker 7: the big tech companies have a path for sustainable growth
Speaker 7: for as far as we can see. In other words,
Speaker 7: several years. And the surprises we've had a few of
Speaker 7: the negative some surprises have really come from other sectors
Speaker 7: with a healthcare, transportation things, industrials, things like that.
Speaker 1: I mean, Paul, we got to frame this out, you know,
Speaker 1: I get hysterical about this. Paul absolutely nails at folks.
Speaker 1: In the brutal correction we've had, we're down one point
Speaker 1: nine percent in the standard ports in the peak. In
Speaker 1: my long term log exponential moving average is down a
Speaker 1: plunging two point nine percent in this bullmarket. That's a
Speaker 1: daily chart, Paul. We are addicted to going up every day.
Speaker 5: It seems like it.
Speaker 3: MARKI we heard from some Federal Reserve yesterday. It looks like,
Speaker 3: you know, get a hold steady here the Bank of
Speaker 3: England today holding steady. What's your interest rate outlook here
Speaker 3: for constructive equity market?
Speaker 7: Well, really, to me, a four percent across the curve
Speaker 7: looks pretty constructive for the economy, and I think short
Speaker 7: rates will come down whether it doesn't seem like it's
Speaker 7: going to be marched. But really it's irrelevant to the
Speaker 7: strength we had last year in the economy. Very strong employment,
Speaker 7: consumers in good shape, business is in good shape. There's
Speaker 7: no sector under stress. So in a sense, you might say,
Speaker 7: Federal Reserve next interest rate action is irrelevant to the
Speaker 7: equity market and to the economy overall.
Speaker 1: Market market lifts here, market Pattel driving the market higher.
Speaker 1: Paul Sweeney nastick up half a percent off the courtage,
Speaker 1: I say.
Speaker 3: Yesterday exactly all right, So Margie, we're gonna have some
Speaker 3: big tech numbers at tonight and presumably gonna be pretty solid,
Speaker 3: you know. And Tom King, of course was long magnificent seven,
Speaker 3: so he's just clipping coupons at this point.
Speaker 5: What are the rest of us do who maybe have
Speaker 5: missed that trade here?
Speaker 3: How do we kind of approach twenty twenty four in
Speaker 3: terms of trying to find some opportunities?
Speaker 7: Well, I think you have to look at companies that
Speaker 7: have a path to above average future growth and really
Speaker 7: not be hung up on the fact that, well, this
Speaker 7: has been a great stock, great future, but it's up
Speaker 7: a lot over the last year, so therefore I'm not
Speaker 7: going to buy it. I think that's never a good
Speaker 7: reason to buy a stock because it's already been up.
Speaker 1: Mark you. The yield market is speaking, and I'm going
Speaker 1: to look at the ten year real yield, which framed
Speaker 1: out about a one point eight zero and plunges the
Speaker 1: right word, folks, The inflation adjusted yield is now plunged
Speaker 1: to one point sixty five percent. On a chart. If
Speaker 1: it hits a one point fifty nine one point five
Speaker 1: nine percent. That's a huge deal. What does a stock
Speaker 1: market do, mark you Peatel, if the inflation adjusted yield,
Speaker 1: that restrictive cost of money yield, if it really breaks
Speaker 1: down to a lower level.
Speaker 7: Well, it just says to me, it's another positive factor
Speaker 7: for sustainable growth. And what's different with this cycle is
Speaker 7: companies use the last decad this consumers did to restructure
Speaker 7: take advantage of zero interest rates, so they really aren't
Speaker 7: very hurt by when the Fed raised rates. It really
Speaker 7: is not a big matter to them when the Fed
Speaker 7: cuts rates. It's more of what's their prospective return on investments.
Speaker 3: So we had another little scare yesterday, Margie in the
Speaker 3: banking space with your community bank, and I think most
Speaker 3: analysts research that I've read says it's kind of specific
Speaker 3: to a New York community bank, maybe some of their
Speaker 3: loans and so on. Are you concerned about the financial
Speaker 3: system or do you think banks are a good place
Speaker 3: to go in twenty four.
Speaker 7: Well, I think there's so much regulation. I think I'm
Speaker 7: pretty luke war about the banks as a growth vehicle. Personally,
Speaker 7: I think they should put back in the uptick rule
Speaker 7: because I think that's what's enabled people to applyle into
Speaker 7: a name and destroy sequity value and raise concerns about
Speaker 7: their going forward. And I think that that's really a problem.
Speaker 7: The FED was cut and raising short rates. It called
Speaker 7: the banks in and buying. As far as the assets.
Speaker 1: In Margie, what do people do that didn't participate? I
Speaker 1: mean they went down in the pandemic. Maybe they went down.
Speaker 1: Maybe they're in triple leverage dog cash. Great, But what
Speaker 1: do the people do that didn't participate in the Margui
Speaker 1: Patel bull market of last year? How do you catch up?
Speaker 7: Well, you can't catch up for the past ever, right, John,
Speaker 7: But you just have to say, from this point forward,
Speaker 7: are their attractive returns in the equity market compared to
Speaker 7: just full in cash? What's the condition to be called overall?
Speaker 7: And you have to be positive and say I'll make
Speaker 7: more money in equities than I will in term, even
Speaker 7: though short terms of say five percent.
Speaker 1: Margi Patel, thank you so much, greatly appreciate it. With
Speaker 1: allspring today today's front page is Lisa Matteo. She had
Speaker 1: so many choices today it was an unlimited bounty, say
Speaker 1: a bounty of headline choices. Lisa, what do you have?
Speaker 4: All right?
Speaker 8: Since we were talking about Tesla. This is like the
Speaker 8: big story the Delaware judge rule must pay package was
Speaker 8: too much. I found a different angle to it. A
Speaker 8: story this is in the Financial Times that they's saying
Speaker 8: that the lawyers who represented the shareholders they could get
Speaker 8: a payout worth billions of their own Okay, so they're
Speaker 8: gonna add they may ask that Delaware court to pay
Speaker 8: them up to one third of how much value was
Speaker 8: restored to shareholders. How much could that be? That's up
Speaker 8: to the quarter a right, But the stock base incentive
Speaker 8: package at issue. It was initially valued at two point
Speaker 8: six billion, but it grew to fifty five billion, as
Speaker 8: we knew, because Tesla hit those financial performance share price targets.
Speaker 8: So the lead lawyer of that firm, it's called Bernstein, Littowitz,
Speaker 8: Burger Grossman, they said it could be a few weeks
Speaker 8: before they submit that feever question, they haven't said what
Speaker 8: it's going to me.
Speaker 1: Paul helped me here. But the basic idea is your
Speaker 1: Annia cell Express in Wilmington, you sort of it's off to
Speaker 1: your left as you go, Yes it is. But the
Speaker 1: answer is they really I don't care about image or
Speaker 1: media or PR. It's like the hard ball court. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's how I looked, am I right.
Speaker 3: Yeah, And it's you know, supposedly and I think for
Speaker 3: most cases it's very pro shareholder, and you know, that's
Speaker 3: kind of just what they're all about here. So the
Speaker 3: lawyers here are saying, Hey, we potentially save shareholders fifty
Speaker 3: five billion dollars or whatever the number is.
Speaker 5: We want our piece. Yeah, exactly, good.
Speaker 8: For the next all right, now, demand for air travel,
Speaker 8: it's not only return, but it is surpassed the pre
Speaker 8: pandemic levels. Yes, this is for New York City area airports,
Speaker 8: all right, one more than one hundred and forty four
Speaker 8: million passengers. That's what came through. We're talking LaGuardia, JFK,
Speaker 8: and Newark the breakdown. LaGuardia had a new high thirty
Speaker 8: three million passengers. JFK had more than sixty two million.
Speaker 8: Newark had a pretty good jump to nearly fifty million.
Speaker 8: But then you have a lot of the construction. I
Speaker 8: mean you've been to the airports lately, right, You've seen
Speaker 8: terminal network yes, terminal AG yes. And now they're going
Speaker 8: to be replacing that that air train system too.
Speaker 1: I went in the air train at Newark, like you know,
Speaker 1: it was like a nightmare. The thing is like ancient,
Speaker 1: like I'm looking down going, am I going to make it?
Speaker 1: They're going to replace that. They're going to replace it,
Speaker 1: and it's needed because when I'm there standing, there's like
Speaker 1: a stairwell, Paul, that goes down to nowhere. That's people
Speaker 1: going to another terminal on a bus.
Speaker 3: I think, so, yeah, so they're doing it a terminal
Speaker 3: age grade. They're doing terminal B now. So they and
Speaker 3: the Guardian two they had gat job.
Speaker 6: Yeah, they had the.
Speaker 8: Delta Terminal City and then JFK. They're in the middle
Speaker 8: of it now there.
Speaker 4: In the midst there they're going to be doing JFK
Speaker 4: forever forever.
Speaker 1: Larry Summers once lost it, the one the former president
Speaker 1: of Harvard and doing so much with David Weston. Summers
Speaker 1: went mental at a conference I was at over terminal
Speaker 1: one at JFK. He said, this is a third world terminal.
Speaker 8: Of course, all right, final, we're hitting the Wall Street Journal.
Speaker 8: This is a new dining drink.
Speaker 5: I'm troubled by this one.
Speaker 8: Yes, there they love the steakhouses, right, they like the
Speaker 8: am beyond the drinks, the peace people, but they don't
Speaker 8: want to get the steak. Steak's too expensive, that's the problem.
Speaker 8: Wholesale beef prices are up. A steak dinner's going to
Speaker 8: cost like one hundred bucks a person, so they don't
Speaker 8: want to dish out that. You know, they're they're sharing steaks,
Speaker 8: sharing plates. I have to admit, I.
Speaker 1: Do it, do the sharing.
Speaker 8: And they're they're offering smaller portions like four round steaks
Speaker 8: are coming on the menu pretty soon. But it's a
Speaker 8: health thing too, I mean, more people are.
Speaker 5: Health if you're not even the steak you're getting what
Speaker 5: do they got? Lopster?
Speaker 3: They have a lobster dish and then maybe a fish
Speaker 3: dish and that's it.
Speaker 4: Chicken.
Speaker 5: Yeah, yeah, I guess you don't go to the steak taken.
Speaker 1: Okay, this is keen steakhouse where the pipes up top.
Speaker 1: No relation to me.
Speaker 5: That's why it goes to place.
Speaker 1: I sit to the right. Yeah, of the barber. It's
Speaker 1: sort of like lockovers in Boston. You look at miss
Speaker 1: years ago. Yeah, I got lamb chops. The legendary mutton
Speaker 1: shop is sixty eight bucks. The prime New York sarly
Speaker 1: And is sixty two dollars.
Speaker 5: Yes, it did.
Speaker 1: So if you got four people. Well you're popping two forty.
Speaker 3: Before before you hit the one.
Speaker 1: You know, I mean, it's a lot the appetizers here
Speaker 1: twice I'm getting hungry, twice baked Vermont blue cheese puffe.
Speaker 1: It used to be like eight bucks, nine bucks, nineteen dollars.
Speaker 5: Now for the appetizer, you gotta dig in the wallet.
Speaker 5: If you're going to sneak.
Speaker 1: That'd be fun.
Speaker 5: You absolutely take shirt. They love me, you know, send
Speaker 5: the build of Retto Keeper. I'll be fine.
Speaker 1: Lisa said, we had to go. So you split your steak?
Speaker 1: Do you get this?
Speaker 8: I do do that sometimes because they give you these
Speaker 8: huge portions and they never finish it. Like the tomahawk
Speaker 8: is like the size of it, you know, it's huge.
Speaker 8: So we split it.
Speaker 1: So they let you do that now because they charge
Speaker 1: restaurant or they charge you, charge.
Speaker 8: You, but it's cheaper than getting two right now.
Speaker 3: Do you have a household of people eat meat or
Speaker 3: do you have any non media No.
Speaker 4: We're all carnivoro.
Speaker 8: You love a steak, but they do have veganough.
Speaker 1: Everybody at my ess. Even if that bill it's all
Speaker 1: tofu stuff. You know, it's all like Asian, you know,
Speaker 1: it's like tofu, and it's not even gluten free.
Speaker 5: It's just tofu.
Speaker 8: But you can bring steak leftovers to the dog.
Speaker 1: Dog the third dog tofud you know, I mean, okay.
Speaker 5: Thank you so much.
Speaker 1: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast, bringing you the best
Speaker 1: in economics, finance, investment, and international relations. You can also
Speaker 1: watch the show live on YouTube. Visit the Bloomberg Podcast
Speaker 1: channel on YouTube to see the show weekday mornings from
Speaker 1: seven to ten a m. Eastern from our global headquarters
Speaker 1: in New York City. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify,
Speaker 1: or anywhere else you listen, and always on Bloomberg Radio,
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg Terminal, and the Bloomberg Business app