WEBVTT - Commodities, Bitcoin ETFs, and the Messi Effect (Podcast)

0:00:00.840 --> 0:00:04.000
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to the Bloomberg Markets Podcast. I'm Paul Sweeney, alongside

0:00:04.080 --> 0:00:05.240
<v Speaker 1>my co host Matt Miller.

0:00:05.640 --> 0:00:09.600
<v Speaker 2>Every business day we bring you interviews from CEOs, market pros,

0:00:09.720 --> 0:00:13.600
<v Speaker 2>and Bloomberg experts, along with essential market moving news.

0:00:14.160 --> 0:00:17.279
<v Speaker 1>Find the Bloomberg Markets podcast called Apple Podcasts or wherever

0:00:17.360 --> 0:00:20.520
<v Speaker 1>you listen to podcasts, and at Bloomberg dot com slash podcast.

0:00:21.079 --> 0:00:26.720
<v Speaker 1>Chicago Board of Trade corn prices this year down thirty

0:00:26.720 --> 0:00:28.880
<v Speaker 1>two percent. What is up with that? I'm meeting as

0:00:28.960 --> 0:00:30.360
<v Speaker 1>much corn as they ever have. I don't know what's

0:00:30.360 --> 0:00:32.360
<v Speaker 1>going on the price of corn. I guess it's more

0:00:32.360 --> 0:00:34.400
<v Speaker 1>supply than demand because it's a commodity. But let's check

0:00:34.400 --> 0:00:37.440
<v Speaker 1>out with somebody who does this stuff for a living. Literally,

0:00:37.760 --> 0:00:41.640
<v Speaker 1>Mike mcloughan, senior macro strategists for Bloomberg Intelligence. Mike, I'd

0:00:41.640 --> 0:00:43.479
<v Speaker 1>like corn as much as the next person. Why is

0:00:43.520 --> 0:00:45.519
<v Speaker 1>the price of corn down thirty two percent?

0:00:46.800 --> 0:00:48.960
<v Speaker 3>Well, hey, Paul, as a farmer, say it's the higher

0:00:49.000 --> 0:00:51.920
<v Speaker 3>price cure. That's the bottom line. Corn had a big

0:00:52.000 --> 0:00:55.280
<v Speaker 3>pump last year on the back of Russia. Russia's invasion

0:00:55.320 --> 0:00:58.400
<v Speaker 3>of Ukraine, and what does that typically do? It centifies

0:00:58.480 --> 0:01:02.320
<v Speaker 3>plenty more supply and we're it globally. The US has

0:01:02.400 --> 0:01:04.280
<v Speaker 3>ketchup a little bit. This should be a very good

0:01:04.280 --> 0:01:07.040
<v Speaker 3>crop this year. Crop this year near the highest production ever.

0:01:07.080 --> 0:01:09.360
<v Speaker 3>And most notably what had the most time they pick

0:01:09.400 --> 0:01:12.119
<v Speaker 3>up was a massive supply of corn and soybeans out

0:01:12.120 --> 0:01:14.480
<v Speaker 3>of Brazil. And they just do what they've been doing

0:01:14.480 --> 0:01:17.240
<v Speaker 3>for last almost twenty years. They just amp their production.

0:01:17.319 --> 0:01:19.600
<v Speaker 3>And when you farmers can make profits, they always create

0:01:19.640 --> 0:01:21.640
<v Speaker 3>a lot of supply. And that's the key thing to

0:01:21.720 --> 0:01:24.440
<v Speaker 3>remember about corn, soybeans and wheat is they are just

0:01:24.560 --> 0:01:29.080
<v Speaker 3>they should never stay up because farmers can make more money.

0:01:28.080 --> 0:01:31.000
<v Speaker 3>They'll plant when they can make money, like they did

0:01:31.120 --> 0:01:31.520
<v Speaker 3>last year.

0:01:31.520 --> 0:01:33.600
<v Speaker 1>You're right, because soybeans are down ten percent year to

0:01:33.680 --> 0:01:36.679
<v Speaker 1>date and wheat is down twenty eight percent year to date.

0:01:37.600 --> 0:01:37.800
<v Speaker 4>Yeah.

0:01:37.880 --> 0:01:42.039
<v Speaker 5>So America has held the top spot in terms of

0:01:42.120 --> 0:01:48.560
<v Speaker 5>corn exports for years, years and years and years, but

0:01:48.680 --> 0:01:52.320
<v Speaker 5>now Brazil may be challenging it. What's the dynamic there

0:01:52.360 --> 0:01:55.040
<v Speaker 5>and does this increase competition? Is that going to weigh

0:01:55.080 --> 0:01:57.880
<v Speaker 5>on the price of corn for the first single future.

0:01:58.600 --> 0:02:01.520
<v Speaker 3>Absolutely, it's the price of corn is heading towards four

0:02:01.600 --> 0:02:05.640
<v Speaker 3>dollars a bushel right now. It's just about just below five,

0:02:05.720 --> 0:02:09.239
<v Speaker 3>and it first traded that price in nineteen seventy four.

0:02:09.680 --> 0:02:12.079
<v Speaker 3>That was on the Great Grain Robbery when Russia imported

0:02:12.080 --> 0:02:14.239
<v Speaker 3>a whole I'm sorry this end Soviet Union imported a

0:02:14.240 --> 0:02:16.680
<v Speaker 3>whole bunch of grain. But what you pointed out simonto,

0:02:16.720 --> 0:02:20.440
<v Speaker 3>our body's in motion. Brazil's production has been increasing rapidly

0:02:20.840 --> 0:02:22.560
<v Speaker 3>for at least the last ten years. If you just

0:02:22.639 --> 0:02:25.760
<v Speaker 3>like at charts going back to beginning two thousand and

0:02:25.800 --> 0:02:29.000
<v Speaker 3>it's still handy that way. But what happened with this war,

0:02:29.080 --> 0:02:31.240
<v Speaker 3>which we pointed out right away, just created more and

0:02:31.240 --> 0:02:33.920
<v Speaker 3>more incentive to produce more corn. But also there's been

0:02:33.919 --> 0:02:37.120
<v Speaker 3>a paradigm shift in the US. The US now uses

0:02:37.200 --> 0:02:39.560
<v Speaker 3>almost forty percent of the crop for ethanol. But the

0:02:39.639 --> 0:02:41.440
<v Speaker 3>unique thing about that is, you know, that's for motor

0:02:41.520 --> 0:02:44.440
<v Speaker 3>vehicles for gasoline. The you ney thing about that is

0:02:44.440 --> 0:02:46.320
<v Speaker 3>it's just going back the way we were before. And

0:02:46.520 --> 0:02:51.080
<v Speaker 3>you know, in nineteen twenty, before the automobile became proliferated,

0:02:51.120 --> 0:02:53.560
<v Speaker 3>a lot of the grains that were grown in as

0:02:53.600 --> 0:02:57.639
<v Speaker 3>country oats, and hey, we're for feeding horses. Now it's

0:02:57.680 --> 0:03:00.480
<v Speaker 3>just some of it feeds cars. So that's a key

0:03:00.520 --> 0:03:04.119
<v Speaker 3>thing to remember about corn. In most agriculture countries. Most

0:03:04.120 --> 0:03:07.919
<v Speaker 3>countries are we all subsidized their agriculture production, and we're

0:03:07.919 --> 0:03:10.079
<v Speaker 3>getting to the point now where farmers may be able

0:03:10.120 --> 0:03:13.079
<v Speaker 3>to be subsistent without a lot of these extra programs

0:03:13.080 --> 0:03:15.359
<v Speaker 3>from the government. A lot of it's because we use

0:03:15.560 --> 0:03:17.200
<v Speaker 3>it for clean fuel for ethanol.

0:03:18.080 --> 0:03:22.120
<v Speaker 1>Might sound interesting, I know it's all intertwined. How hard

0:03:22.400 --> 0:03:24.799
<v Speaker 1>or how easy is it to grow corn?

0:03:26.200 --> 0:03:31.120
<v Speaker 3>So corn is difficult. It's the most fertilizer intensive crop.

0:03:32.280 --> 0:03:34.640
<v Speaker 3>And as we mentioned that earlier segment, a lot of

0:03:34.960 --> 0:03:38.240
<v Speaker 3>farmers will say out in Illinois where I'm from, zilk corn,

0:03:38.400 --> 0:03:40.800
<v Speaker 3>grow bean, so they can plant corn the next year.

0:03:40.800 --> 0:03:44.560
<v Speaker 3>But it's the most intensive for you need a lot

0:03:44.600 --> 0:03:47.040
<v Speaker 3>of anhydros ammonia, which is the base for that is

0:03:47.120 --> 0:03:50.040
<v Speaker 3>natural gas, which has plunged this year, which means costs

0:03:50.040 --> 0:03:52.720
<v Speaker 3>of productions going down. But it's harder to grow. Beans

0:03:52.760 --> 0:03:55.040
<v Speaker 3>are much easier. You don't really need a lot of fertilizer.

0:03:55.360 --> 0:03:57.240
<v Speaker 3>But when you work them in rotation, they all work

0:03:57.240 --> 0:03:58.000
<v Speaker 3>out better together.

0:03:58.960 --> 0:03:59.480
<v Speaker 4>Well, And it's.

0:03:59.440 --> 0:04:02.560
<v Speaker 5>Interesting you you were mentioning the impact of the Russian

0:04:02.600 --> 0:04:07.880
<v Speaker 5>invasion of Ukraine before, but fertilizer is a place also

0:04:08.320 --> 0:04:13.240
<v Speaker 5>that is so incredibly dependent on China and Russia. And

0:04:13.280 --> 0:04:15.280
<v Speaker 5>what it sounds like you're saying here is not that

0:04:15.640 --> 0:04:19.159
<v Speaker 5>our desire for corn is or the global demand is

0:04:19.200 --> 0:04:21.440
<v Speaker 5>falling anyway, and simply that the US is eating up

0:04:21.480 --> 0:04:25.360
<v Speaker 5>more of the overall share for itself for non eat

0:04:25.640 --> 0:04:30.000
<v Speaker 5>eating purposes. Does this add to the I guess do

0:04:30.080 --> 0:04:35.280
<v Speaker 5>these shifts add to some of those sustainability concerns as

0:04:35.320 --> 0:04:39.760
<v Speaker 5>the United States is increasingly dependent on corn for like

0:04:39.880 --> 0:04:41.839
<v Speaker 5>transportation issues as well.

0:04:42.680 --> 0:04:44.960
<v Speaker 3>Not at all. We can grow more. We still have

0:04:45.000 --> 0:04:47.400
<v Speaker 3>about ten percent of our higher land in what's called

0:04:47.400 --> 0:04:50.600
<v Speaker 3>the CRP, the Conservation Conservation Reserve program. I used to

0:04:50.600 --> 0:04:53.320
<v Speaker 3>have my farm in that for a little while, and

0:04:53.320 --> 0:04:56.680
<v Speaker 3>it's where the government pays you to not farm. So

0:04:56.720 --> 0:04:58.520
<v Speaker 3>obviously not going to put your best form there. But

0:04:58.880 --> 0:05:00.720
<v Speaker 3>that's the key thing about what's just come point out

0:05:00.760 --> 0:05:04.600
<v Speaker 3>the facts of deflationary forces and corn. The average acre

0:05:04.640 --> 0:05:06.800
<v Speaker 3>of corn plant and this year will probably produce about

0:05:06.800 --> 0:05:10.200
<v Speaker 3>one hundred and seventy five bushels per acre. Just four

0:05:10.279 --> 0:05:12.960
<v Speaker 3>or fifty years ago it was half that. So that's

0:05:13.000 --> 0:05:16.839
<v Speaker 3>just what's happening with rapidly advancing technology, new seed technology,

0:05:16.960 --> 0:05:19.919
<v Speaker 3>new planting, techniques is we can just create more with

0:05:20.120 --> 0:05:22.960
<v Speaker 3>less every day. That's normally what happens with commodities. And

0:05:23.000 --> 0:05:27.359
<v Speaker 3>corn is the most significant agriculture crop on the planet

0:05:27.920 --> 0:05:31.080
<v Speaker 3>and it's the US has been the epicenter. But don't

0:05:31.120 --> 0:05:32.839
<v Speaker 3>worry about us creating more. And even if we have

0:05:32.880 --> 0:05:35.359
<v Speaker 3>a severe drought, there's a lot of different time zones.

0:05:35.360 --> 0:05:39.120
<v Speaker 3>There's irrigation, and there's you know, plenty of production coming

0:05:39.160 --> 0:05:41.320
<v Speaker 3>out of from south of the border, from Brazil. So

0:05:42.360 --> 0:05:44.360
<v Speaker 3>you know, I look at it is I always like

0:05:44.400 --> 0:05:47.200
<v Speaker 3>to point out when people get bullish when markets go up,

0:05:47.520 --> 0:05:49.680
<v Speaker 3>grains are the number one commodity you never want to

0:05:49.680 --> 0:05:51.760
<v Speaker 3>buy after they go up. It's a higher price cure.

0:05:52.120 --> 0:05:55.640
<v Speaker 3>And the thing here's a new thing about ethanol is

0:05:55.880 --> 0:05:59.400
<v Speaker 3>we are now rapidly going to EVS. Total consumption of

0:05:59.480 --> 0:06:02.000
<v Speaker 3>unletted get in this country. He's still about five percent

0:06:02.360 --> 0:06:06.200
<v Speaker 3>below where it was before COVID, and now we're switching

0:06:06.240 --> 0:06:10.320
<v Speaker 3>EV so fast. Total sales of automobiles in the world

0:06:10.320 --> 0:06:13.600
<v Speaker 3>now almost fifteen percent EBS. All that was accelerated by

0:06:13.600 --> 0:06:15.800
<v Speaker 3>the war, and that means a lot of the demand

0:06:15.839 --> 0:06:17.400
<v Speaker 3>source for corn might be going away.

0:06:17.880 --> 0:06:21.200
<v Speaker 5>And I should note I'm looking at the chart of

0:06:21.360 --> 0:06:24.400
<v Speaker 5>corn prices. We're back really to levels where we were

0:06:25.320 --> 0:06:29.559
<v Speaker 5>in mid twenty twenty one. October twenty twenty one looks

0:06:29.640 --> 0:06:35.080
<v Speaker 5>like so, as you said, be cautious about getting into

0:06:35.120 --> 0:06:36.240
<v Speaker 5>commodities after so.

0:06:36.240 --> 0:06:40.680
<v Speaker 1>Mike Spike, Mike, the mclone family used to be used

0:06:40.760 --> 0:06:44.479
<v Speaker 1>on a farm in Indiana. How many farmers are there,

0:06:44.480 --> 0:06:46.200
<v Speaker 1>like the maglones out there, like give us a sense

0:06:46.240 --> 0:06:48.599
<v Speaker 1>of what's the farm economy in the US now versus

0:06:48.640 --> 0:06:52.080
<v Speaker 1>like family owned farmers versus I guess corporate.

0:06:51.720 --> 0:06:55.080
<v Speaker 3>Farms going much more corporate. So we it was always

0:06:55.080 --> 0:06:57.919
<v Speaker 3>a gentleman's farm. My grandfather bought it during the Great Depression,

0:06:58.240 --> 0:07:00.680
<v Speaker 3>and he always cash rented it. That's a term, use

0:07:00.760 --> 0:07:03.120
<v Speaker 3>your own the landing, just let other people farming. They'll

0:07:03.120 --> 0:07:05.359
<v Speaker 3>pay you a cash rent for that. Now I know

0:07:05.440 --> 0:07:09.880
<v Speaker 3>a few big of these big producers out in Champagne, Illinois,

0:07:09.880 --> 0:07:11.880
<v Speaker 3>which is some of the best ground in the planet,

0:07:12.360 --> 0:07:14.400
<v Speaker 3>and they own the land, they manage it, and they

0:07:14.480 --> 0:07:16.960
<v Speaker 3>just have farmers do it. So it's becoming much more corporate.

0:07:17.000 --> 0:07:20.240
<v Speaker 3>But it's so efficient. It's just incredibly efficient. The key

0:07:20.400 --> 0:07:22.080
<v Speaker 3>quote I get every time I get out there is

0:07:22.080 --> 0:07:24.680
<v Speaker 3>the technology is so hard to keep up with. For instance,

0:07:24.920 --> 0:07:27.800
<v Speaker 3>there's this thing called exact Shot from John Deere where

0:07:27.800 --> 0:07:30.320
<v Speaker 3>they can now when they plant that seed, give it

0:07:30.360 --> 0:07:33.040
<v Speaker 3>the exact amount of fertilizer where it needs where they

0:07:33.080 --> 0:07:36.880
<v Speaker 3>want it, and it can reduce fertilizer costs by sixty percent.

0:07:36.960 --> 0:07:39.640
<v Speaker 3>So it's just that rapidly advancing technology in the area.

0:07:39.680 --> 0:07:42.520
<v Speaker 3>It's hard to keep up. The weather is still unpredictable,

0:07:42.560 --> 0:07:45.360
<v Speaker 3>but we now have with hybrid seeds and things like

0:07:45.360 --> 0:07:47.800
<v Speaker 3>that you can do pretty well with. For instance, there's

0:07:47.800 --> 0:07:49.920
<v Speaker 3>ano example. When I was a kid, the average cornstock

0:07:50.640 --> 0:07:52.600
<v Speaker 3>had one ear, and now you have two or so

0:07:52.720 --> 0:07:55.280
<v Speaker 3>on per cornstock. My question is what stops that from

0:07:55.320 --> 0:07:58.280
<v Speaker 3>going to six ears per cornstock. It's just the trends

0:07:58.320 --> 0:08:01.240
<v Speaker 3>your friend for production, but app for prices.

0:08:01.560 --> 0:08:03.800
<v Speaker 1>Wow, all right, let's switch gears here. I could talk

0:08:03.800 --> 0:08:05.200
<v Speaker 1>to you know, and we're gonna be We'll get the

0:08:05.200 --> 0:08:07.440
<v Speaker 1>port pillows at some point. But let's turn to gold.

0:08:07.480 --> 0:08:09.680
<v Speaker 1>Here are we still just long gold and kind of

0:08:09.720 --> 0:08:10.520
<v Speaker 1>short everything else?

0:08:11.400 --> 0:08:13.840
<v Speaker 3>I look at gold as the most likely asset and

0:08:13.880 --> 0:08:16.600
<v Speaker 3>commodity to continue advancing. Now that's not so profound because

0:08:16.600 --> 0:08:19.600
<v Speaker 3>it typically outperforms most commodities over time, most knowly copper,

0:08:19.680 --> 0:08:22.200
<v Speaker 3>most noted crudilil. But the average price this year is

0:08:22.280 --> 0:08:24.840
<v Speaker 3>nineteen thirty three, one nine and thirty three. I love

0:08:24.920 --> 0:08:27.840
<v Speaker 3>saying that, Paul, because that was a significant year where

0:08:27.880 --> 0:08:32.920
<v Speaker 3>Franklin Delano Roosevelt debased the dollar versus gold, and that

0:08:33.080 --> 0:08:36.120
<v Speaker 3>bottom all the deflation. Air forces bottom the stock market

0:08:36.320 --> 0:08:40.559
<v Speaker 3>and it bottomed deflation. But I look at gold, that's

0:08:40.559 --> 0:08:43.679
<v Speaker 3>the highest averaged price ever nineteen thirty three. I see

0:08:43.720 --> 0:08:45.640
<v Speaker 3>that's a bull market that's just waiting to break out.

0:08:45.679 --> 0:08:47.920
<v Speaker 3>The key triggers would be some form of fed pivot.

0:08:48.120 --> 0:08:51.080
<v Speaker 3>As you mentioned the earlier segment, the WRP function is

0:08:51.200 --> 0:08:53.520
<v Speaker 3>tilting that way, and I think the key thing to

0:08:53.559 --> 0:08:56.560
<v Speaker 3>get that pet fed pivot is probably a stock market decline.

0:08:56.600 --> 0:08:58.920
<v Speaker 3>But to me, gold is and I just show it

0:08:58.920 --> 0:09:01.439
<v Speaker 3>on the year, it's up six percent. On a twelve

0:09:01.480 --> 0:09:04.160
<v Speaker 3>month basis is up ten percent. Virtually every other commodity

0:09:04.240 --> 0:09:07.440
<v Speaker 3>is down. Here's a question what stops that trajectory. I

0:09:07.480 --> 0:09:10.080
<v Speaker 3>suspect it's more likely accel right, And as you heard

0:09:10.080 --> 0:09:12.880
<v Speaker 3>Ona Wong in the previous segment point about recession. Here's

0:09:12.880 --> 0:09:15.240
<v Speaker 3>one thing I point out about gold is there's one

0:09:15.320 --> 0:09:18.520
<v Speaker 3>hundred percent probability when an unemployment rallies from this level,

0:09:18.520 --> 0:09:20.800
<v Speaker 3>I mean goes higher, that we'll have a recession, because

0:09:20.800 --> 0:09:22.200
<v Speaker 3>that's the way it's always worked, and that to me

0:09:22.320 --> 0:09:24.400
<v Speaker 3>is what's going to trigger gold. So my theme this month,

0:09:24.440 --> 0:09:27.079
<v Speaker 3>as I'm probably mean my commodity outlook is golds has

0:09:27.120 --> 0:09:30.280
<v Speaker 3>been outperforming all other commodities. What stops it versus I'm

0:09:30.280 --> 0:09:32.200
<v Speaker 3>a fareful it's going to accelerate, all right.

0:09:32.080 --> 0:09:35.959
<v Speaker 1>Mike, always great, great segment. Always appreciate getting your color there.

0:09:36.000 --> 0:09:40.080
<v Speaker 1>Mike mcgloan's senior macro strategist for Bloomberg Intelligence is sconced

0:09:40.559 --> 0:09:42.120
<v Speaker 1>down in Miami Beach.

0:09:43.640 --> 0:09:47.000
<v Speaker 6>You're listening to the team Ken's are Live program Bloomberg

0:09:47.120 --> 0:09:50.480
<v Speaker 6>Markets weekdays at ten am Eastern on Bloomberg dot com,

0:09:50.559 --> 0:09:53.720
<v Speaker 6>the iHeartRadio app and the Bloomberg Business app, or listen

0:09:53.760 --> 0:09:55.880
<v Speaker 6>on demand wherever you get your podcasts.

0:09:58.400 --> 0:10:01.439
<v Speaker 1>Sim Own Foxman, Paul Sweeney, You're in Bloomberg Interactive Broker Studio.

0:10:01.440 --> 0:10:03.640
<v Speaker 1>We're streaming live on YouTube, so head over to YouTube

0:10:03.640 --> 0:10:08.319
<v Speaker 1>dot com and search Bloomberg Radio. Let's look ETFs and

0:10:08.400 --> 0:10:11.000
<v Speaker 1>usually I want to talk about flows, where the money's going,

0:10:10.960 --> 0:10:12.120
<v Speaker 1>and all that kind of stuff. But I want to

0:10:12.120 --> 0:10:14.439
<v Speaker 1>do in the context. I'll start off at least by

0:10:14.480 --> 0:10:18.080
<v Speaker 1>talking about bitcoin ETFs because our next person, our next guest,

0:10:18.120 --> 0:10:21.920
<v Speaker 1>has some experience in that, Greg Taylor, CIO of Purpose

0:10:22.000 --> 0:10:25.320
<v Speaker 1>Investments up there in Canada, So Greg, I guess in

0:10:25.360 --> 0:10:27.800
<v Speaker 1>the ETF biz, at least here in the US, A

0:10:27.800 --> 0:10:30.160
<v Speaker 1>lot of talk this week has been, hey, maybe we're

0:10:30.160 --> 0:10:34.120
<v Speaker 1>going to get a bitcoin spot ETF. You guys already

0:10:34.120 --> 0:10:35.600
<v Speaker 1>have that in Canada, don't you. Can you tell us

0:10:35.600 --> 0:10:39.040
<v Speaker 1>a little bit about the bitcoin ETF.

0:10:40.200 --> 0:10:42.720
<v Speaker 7>Yeah, for sure, and thanks for having us on. Yeah,

0:10:42.840 --> 0:10:45.240
<v Speaker 7>in Canada. We like to think that we're one of

0:10:45.320 --> 0:10:47.600
<v Speaker 7>the first innovators in the ETF space. A lot of

0:10:47.920 --> 0:10:50.360
<v Speaker 7>the first and the ETFs globally have hopped in Canada,

0:10:50.360 --> 0:10:53.280
<v Speaker 7>and one of those of late has been the first spot,

0:10:53.320 --> 0:10:57.040
<v Speaker 7>the Bitcoin ETF, which we launched the Purpose in February

0:10:57.040 --> 0:10:59.480
<v Speaker 7>of twenty twenty one. And I think it's great to

0:10:59.679 --> 0:11:02.120
<v Speaker 7>hear the US is finally catching up and then to

0:11:02.160 --> 0:11:04.600
<v Speaker 7>launch one as well, because really, when you look at

0:11:04.880 --> 0:11:07.400
<v Speaker 7>any type of ETF in a commodity world, you do

0:11:07.480 --> 0:11:10.240
<v Speaker 7>want to have spot versus futures, and I think spot

0:11:10.280 --> 0:11:13.280
<v Speaker 7>ETF is something that would be welcome to the crypto space,

0:11:13.320 --> 0:11:15.920
<v Speaker 7>and the experience we've had with it has been very positive.

0:11:15.960 --> 0:11:18.800
<v Speaker 7>And since we launched our fund in February twenty one,

0:11:18.880 --> 0:11:21.319
<v Speaker 7>it's gotten over a billion of assts. It's one of

0:11:21.360 --> 0:11:24.199
<v Speaker 7>the most heavily traded in the TSX, and I think

0:11:24.200 --> 0:11:25.920
<v Speaker 7>it's been a really good experience for a lot of

0:11:25.920 --> 0:11:28.200
<v Speaker 7>investors and a good way to get access to the

0:11:28.200 --> 0:11:30.400
<v Speaker 7>crypto market in a more regulated environment.

0:11:30.640 --> 0:11:35.280
<v Speaker 1>So, based upon your experience with a spot bitcoin ETF,

0:11:35.320 --> 0:11:38.480
<v Speaker 1>are you what do you think has been or the

0:11:38.520 --> 0:11:41.560
<v Speaker 1>SEC or the US regulators have kind of missed judged

0:11:41.720 --> 0:11:44.760
<v Speaker 1>about a futures versus a spot ETF.

0:11:46.160 --> 0:11:47.920
<v Speaker 7>Well, when I think when you go between futures in

0:11:47.920 --> 0:11:50.920
<v Speaker 7>a spot, I think there's no real argument that a

0:11:50.920 --> 0:11:53.400
<v Speaker 7>spot one is way better. And when we set up

0:11:53.400 --> 0:11:56.680
<v Speaker 7>to launch our ri ETF, we weren't really inventing the wheel.

0:11:56.760 --> 0:11:59.080
<v Speaker 7>What we did is we really kind of copied or

0:11:59.080 --> 0:12:02.640
<v Speaker 7>mimicked the way other commodity ETFs have done. Basically, the

0:12:02.720 --> 0:12:06.520
<v Speaker 7>GLD is a widely traveled ETF in the US on

0:12:06.600 --> 0:12:09.000
<v Speaker 7>spot gold, and I think it's looking at when you

0:12:09.040 --> 0:12:11.319
<v Speaker 7>look at a spot versus the futures, there's always better

0:12:11.400 --> 0:12:14.480
<v Speaker 7>because the futures is always going to lose basis points

0:12:14.520 --> 0:12:17.079
<v Speaker 7>on the role, so it was curious why the SEC

0:12:17.200 --> 0:12:20.480
<v Speaker 7>would approve a futures based ETF versus a SPOT because

0:12:20.480 --> 0:12:21.880
<v Speaker 7>at the end of the day, the futures are going

0:12:21.960 --> 0:12:24.640
<v Speaker 7>to have to be backed by something, so there is

0:12:24.679 --> 0:12:26.600
<v Speaker 7>a way to get back in the system. But having

0:12:26.720 --> 0:12:29.600
<v Speaker 7>a futures based ETF isn't really good for anyone or

0:12:29.640 --> 0:12:30.600
<v Speaker 7>the system.

0:12:31.040 --> 0:12:33.840
<v Speaker 5>No, we saw a share or sorry, we saw the

0:12:33.880 --> 0:12:37.800
<v Speaker 5>price of bitcoin pop after the decision came down.

0:12:37.840 --> 0:12:40.920
<v Speaker 8>In this case, I think there was a lot of enthusiasm.

0:12:40.960 --> 0:12:44.520
<v Speaker 5>Hey all these people are going to pile into an

0:12:44.520 --> 0:12:49.240
<v Speaker 5>ETF rather than try and go out and buy bitcoin themselves.

0:12:49.640 --> 0:12:52.200
<v Speaker 5>That said, you know, there's a JP Morgan strategist talking

0:12:52.200 --> 0:12:55.120
<v Speaker 5>about how you know, if you have a launch, say

0:12:55.200 --> 0:12:59.640
<v Speaker 5>of one of these these bitcoin ETFs, it's not really

0:12:59.679 --> 0:13:03.160
<v Speaker 5>going to change the overall market enthusiasm for this. It's

0:13:03.200 --> 0:13:07.040
<v Speaker 5>just going to draw liquidity away from other products.

0:13:07.960 --> 0:13:09.400
<v Speaker 8>Is this a zero sum game to you?

0:13:10.960 --> 0:13:12.680
<v Speaker 7>I don't think it is yet, because I still think

0:13:12.679 --> 0:13:15.600
<v Speaker 7>crypto is a commodity that's still really in the early

0:13:15.640 --> 0:13:19.520
<v Speaker 7>innings of of its growth, and I think having a

0:13:19.559 --> 0:13:21.800
<v Speaker 7>spot ETF which is one of the best ways to

0:13:21.800 --> 0:13:23.520
<v Speaker 7>get access to it is only going to bring on

0:13:23.559 --> 0:13:26.520
<v Speaker 7>more investors. Currently, if you want to get exposure to

0:13:26.559 --> 0:13:29.680
<v Speaker 7>crypto the traditional way, it's really not the easiest system.

0:13:29.720 --> 0:13:32.640
<v Speaker 7>You have to open a separate account with the crypto provider.

0:13:32.679 --> 0:13:34.800
<v Speaker 7>You get figured if you're doing a cold or hot wallet,

0:13:35.120 --> 0:13:36.800
<v Speaker 7>and a lot of people just don't want to do that,

0:13:36.840 --> 0:13:39.120
<v Speaker 7>so they want to wait for an ETF that's going

0:13:39.160 --> 0:13:42.520
<v Speaker 7>to be easy and contract the index. And further to that,

0:13:42.800 --> 0:13:44.400
<v Speaker 7>I think a lot of people are looking again at

0:13:44.440 --> 0:13:47.080
<v Speaker 7>real assets. With the amount of money printing going on

0:13:47.080 --> 0:13:49.280
<v Speaker 7>in central banks, there has been a case to add

0:13:49.280 --> 0:13:52.320
<v Speaker 7>more of your portfolio towards real assets, and certainly the

0:13:52.320 --> 0:13:55.400
<v Speaker 7>commodities and gold and real estate are benefiting from this.

0:13:55.520 --> 0:13:57.480
<v Speaker 7>But I think there's also a way to get that

0:13:57.520 --> 0:14:00.400
<v Speaker 7>crypto with into that bucket of real assets. I think

0:14:00.440 --> 0:14:03.120
<v Speaker 7>there's demand for real assets or just demand for crypto,

0:14:03.280 --> 0:14:05.280
<v Speaker 7>and people want an easy way to do that, and

0:14:05.320 --> 0:14:07.760
<v Speaker 7>I think having a spot ETF is one of the

0:14:07.840 --> 0:14:10.280
<v Speaker 7>simplest ways to get access to it. So I don't

0:14:10.320 --> 0:14:12.400
<v Speaker 7>think it's a zero sum game. I think once the

0:14:12.520 --> 0:14:14.839
<v Speaker 7>US does get a spot ETF, I think that will

0:14:14.880 --> 0:14:17.960
<v Speaker 7>open up more buyers and sellers, and that's probably why

0:14:17.960 --> 0:14:21.280
<v Speaker 7>the commodity reacted so well to a hints that it

0:14:21.320 --> 0:14:23.440
<v Speaker 7>does seem like the US getting closer to approving this.

0:14:24.280 --> 0:14:25.680
<v Speaker 1>Great Let's step back and take a look at the

0:14:25.680 --> 0:14:28.600
<v Speaker 1>ETF space in general, give us just an overview. Are

0:14:29.080 --> 0:14:32.360
<v Speaker 1>is the money continuing to gush into etfses? To give

0:14:32.440 --> 0:14:34.040
<v Speaker 1>us a sense of how this year's been.

0:14:35.280 --> 0:14:38.200
<v Speaker 7>Yeah, we've had netflows and that positive flows this year.

0:14:38.920 --> 0:14:41.000
<v Speaker 7>ETFs have definitely been a way that a lot of

0:14:41.040 --> 0:14:43.520
<v Speaker 7>people are getting access to it. One of the big

0:14:43.560 --> 0:14:46.400
<v Speaker 7>box spots for us and I think for the whole

0:14:46.440 --> 0:14:49.440
<v Speaker 7>ecosystem in ETFs. In the last few months has been

0:14:49.960 --> 0:14:53.200
<v Speaker 7>really looking at the money market ETFs. Certainly money market

0:14:53.240 --> 0:14:56.080
<v Speaker 7>has become a hot topic of late, and with a

0:14:56.240 --> 0:14:58.520
<v Speaker 7>yields for cash in the five to six percent, I

0:14:58.520 --> 0:15:01.280
<v Speaker 7>think that's been an area people are trying to get

0:15:01.320 --> 0:15:03.200
<v Speaker 7>access to and I think that's where a lot of

0:15:03.280 --> 0:15:05.560
<v Speaker 7>the games with the whole sector have been. But I

0:15:05.560 --> 0:15:08.440
<v Speaker 7>think over time, people are looking for access and simple

0:15:08.440 --> 0:15:10.760
<v Speaker 7>ways to get it, and in a low fee environment,

0:15:10.800 --> 0:15:12.560
<v Speaker 7>I think ETFs are one of those ways to get

0:15:12.600 --> 0:15:13.200
<v Speaker 7>access to it.

0:15:14.000 --> 0:15:17.760
<v Speaker 5>Greg we've been hearing from some investment strategists, investment strategies

0:15:17.800 --> 0:15:20.840
<v Speaker 5>pointing to sort of defensive sectors in a way from

0:15:20.920 --> 0:15:24.640
<v Speaker 5>like the tech driven height that we've seen over the

0:15:24.680 --> 0:15:29.840
<v Speaker 5>past couple of months. Are we seeing places like healthcare

0:15:30.440 --> 0:15:34.280
<v Speaker 5>and places like energy reflected in some of the ETF

0:15:34.360 --> 0:15:38.400
<v Speaker 5>flows and will we see more of that as we

0:15:38.560 --> 0:15:39.640
<v Speaker 5>head towards the end of the year.

0:15:40.920 --> 0:15:44.000
<v Speaker 7>I think that's certainly the hope. And being a Canadian,

0:15:44.040 --> 0:15:46.440
<v Speaker 7>we're definitely what our indice is tilted more towards the

0:15:46.440 --> 0:15:48.480
<v Speaker 7>cyclicals and the resource sector. I think we'd love to

0:15:48.480 --> 0:15:51.920
<v Speaker 7>see that rotation away from technology towards the commodity sectors,

0:15:51.960 --> 0:15:55.520
<v Speaker 7>and we are starting to see that. Certainly. The last

0:15:55.600 --> 0:15:58.000
<v Speaker 7>few years has been really good for the commodity growth,

0:15:58.040 --> 0:16:02.040
<v Speaker 7>as we've seen both entered and base metals do quite well.

0:16:02.080 --> 0:16:05.120
<v Speaker 7>And I think that's really setting up quite nicely for

0:16:05.160 --> 0:16:07.760
<v Speaker 7>the second half the year. There's a lot of rumblings

0:16:07.800 --> 0:16:11.360
<v Speaker 7>about China launching other stimulus program into September, and as

0:16:11.360 --> 0:16:13.520
<v Speaker 7>the world starts to talk more about a soft landing

0:16:13.640 --> 0:16:16.520
<v Speaker 7>more stimulus from China. That's setting up for a decent

0:16:16.600 --> 0:16:19.080
<v Speaker 7>move in the commodities, and I think that could cause

0:16:19.120 --> 0:16:22.600
<v Speaker 7>more rotation away from these these textocks which have really

0:16:22.640 --> 0:16:25.120
<v Speaker 7>driven in this is higher to start the year, and

0:16:25.200 --> 0:16:27.600
<v Speaker 7>maybe some of that money flows back to the cyclicals,

0:16:27.640 --> 0:16:31.119
<v Speaker 7>which are setting up quite nicely. From a supply demand economics.

0:16:31.160 --> 0:16:34.120
<v Speaker 7>There's not a lot of supply for modern new minds

0:16:34.160 --> 0:16:36.840
<v Speaker 7>and new oil bills coming on. So I does feel

0:16:36.840 --> 0:16:38.760
<v Speaker 7>like the second half of the year could remind could

0:16:38.880 --> 0:16:41.320
<v Speaker 7>could belong to more the cyclicals than the text talks.

0:16:42.160 --> 0:16:44.120
<v Speaker 1>Hey, Greg, thanks so much for joining us. Really appreciate

0:16:44.160 --> 0:16:48.720
<v Speaker 1>getting your thoughts. Greg Taylor, CIO at Purpose Investments checking

0:16:48.760 --> 0:16:51.920
<v Speaker 1>in with us, giving us the latest on the ETF space.

0:16:52.080 --> 0:16:56.880
<v Speaker 1>Just continues to see amazing funds flow into the ETF space.

0:16:56.960 --> 0:16:59.960
<v Speaker 1>Makes you wonder about the future of the mutual fund business,

0:17:00.040 --> 0:17:02.320
<v Speaker 1>which we all grew up with, and now it's really

0:17:02.320 --> 0:17:05.639
<v Speaker 1>fair I think in large part due to the cost differential,

0:17:06.080 --> 0:17:07.639
<v Speaker 1>ETFs aer a way to go for a lot of folks.

0:17:07.680 --> 0:17:10.560
<v Speaker 5>Yeah, it's places like Betterman, etc.

0:17:11.080 --> 0:17:14.080
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it's easy, yeah exactly, and it's interesting. I think

0:17:14.160 --> 0:17:17.320
<v Speaker 1>what I understand is from tax free accounts still a

0:17:17.359 --> 0:17:20.240
<v Speaker 1>place for mutual funds, but otherwise ets and the cost

0:17:20.280 --> 0:17:22.120
<v Speaker 1>truction and reporting and all the type of stuff seems

0:17:22.160 --> 0:17:23.280
<v Speaker 1>to be a better rapper.

0:17:23.640 --> 0:17:26.760
<v Speaker 6>You're listening to the tape Ken's are Live program Bloomberg

0:17:26.840 --> 0:17:30.439
<v Speaker 6>Markets weekdays at ten am Eastern on Bloomberg Radio, the

0:17:30.480 --> 0:17:33.680
<v Speaker 6>tune in app, Bloomberg dot Com, and the Bloomberg Business App.

0:17:33.760 --> 0:17:36.560
<v Speaker 6>You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our

0:17:36.600 --> 0:17:41.640
<v Speaker 6>flagship New York station. Just say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.

0:17:42.359 --> 0:17:44.520
<v Speaker 1>All right, we get some smart research coming out of

0:17:44.560 --> 0:17:47.919
<v Speaker 1>the folks at Bloomberg Intelligence. Joe Levington one of the

0:17:47.920 --> 0:17:50.840
<v Speaker 1>smarter folks we like at BI. He's a director of

0:17:50.840 --> 0:17:53.480
<v Speaker 1>credit research, so we better be good. But he's got

0:17:53.480 --> 0:17:56.119
<v Speaker 1>a nice note out here on Tesla and it's a

0:17:56.160 --> 0:17:59.040
<v Speaker 1>little bit different twist here and Joel covers the credit

0:17:59.080 --> 0:18:01.920
<v Speaker 1>side of some of these industrial companies. He joins his

0:18:02.040 --> 0:18:04.879
<v Speaker 1>life here in our Bloomberg Interactive Broker studio. Joe, what

0:18:04.920 --> 0:18:07.960
<v Speaker 1>do you think about tests there? Because our friends, you know,

0:18:08.080 --> 0:18:11.760
<v Speaker 1>in Detroit Ford GM Stalantis. I think they've got some

0:18:11.960 --> 0:18:13.080
<v Speaker 1>labor problem, don't they.

0:18:13.200 --> 0:18:16.840
<v Speaker 9>They have a massive labor problem coming up. There's a

0:18:16.840 --> 0:18:19.199
<v Speaker 9>strike with the UAW that's going to be set for

0:18:19.240 --> 0:18:23.800
<v Speaker 9>September fourteenth, as they work through their contracts expectations are

0:18:23.840 --> 0:18:26.639
<v Speaker 9>that pricing could go up thirty to forty percent on

0:18:27.359 --> 0:18:30.560
<v Speaker 9>their labor costs, which creates an opportunity for a low

0:18:30.600 --> 0:18:33.240
<v Speaker 9>cost player like Tesla to come in and continue to

0:18:33.280 --> 0:18:36.760
<v Speaker 9>price down. You know, Paul, the average Tesla price is

0:18:36.760 --> 0:18:40.159
<v Speaker 9>down about thirty seven percent this year already. And if

0:18:40.200 --> 0:18:42.560
<v Speaker 9>you really, yeah, even if you look at consensus estimates

0:18:42.600 --> 0:18:44.280
<v Speaker 9>just on their cars at the beginning of the year,

0:18:44.600 --> 0:18:47.239
<v Speaker 9>it would have the market was expecting about fifty four

0:18:47.240 --> 0:18:49.960
<v Speaker 9>thousand dollars of cards down to forty six thousand. So

0:18:49.960 --> 0:18:53.520
<v Speaker 9>they're really applying the pressure on these other old line

0:18:53.680 --> 0:18:58.880
<v Speaker 9>ice engine manufacturers to really step up or step out.

0:18:58.920 --> 0:19:01.080
<v Speaker 9>And you're starting to see some that's stepping out already

0:19:01.119 --> 0:19:04.840
<v Speaker 9>occurring that might be exacerbated by this by a potential strike.

0:19:05.280 --> 0:19:05.399
<v Speaker 7>You know.

0:19:05.520 --> 0:19:08.240
<v Speaker 5>What's interesting with the strikes though, is if the auto

0:19:08.320 --> 0:19:14.440
<v Speaker 5>workers are pretty successful, then doesn't it create pressure on

0:19:14.680 --> 0:19:17.320
<v Speaker 5>Tesla's own workforce to.

0:19:17.200 --> 0:19:18.600
<v Speaker 8>Say, hey, they got a good deal.

0:19:19.000 --> 0:19:21.240
<v Speaker 5>Maybe maybe we'll we'll get a good deal if we,

0:19:21.680 --> 0:19:25.639
<v Speaker 5>you know, resist the anti union efforts of Tesla and

0:19:25.720 --> 0:19:27.000
<v Speaker 5>go ahead and organize.

0:19:27.080 --> 0:19:30.760
<v Speaker 9>Yeah, one hundred percent, And I would start with a

0:19:30.840 --> 0:19:33.440
<v Speaker 9>base of if you know, labor costs go up thirty

0:19:33.480 --> 0:19:36.760
<v Speaker 9>to forty percent at Ford. At a non unionized plant

0:19:36.880 --> 0:19:38.840
<v Speaker 9>like at Tesla, if it goes a fifteen percent, you're

0:19:38.880 --> 0:19:41.399
<v Speaker 9>still ahead of the game point at least on a

0:19:41.440 --> 0:19:43.960
<v Speaker 9>relative basis, and you're already very far ahead of the game.

0:19:44.160 --> 0:19:45.680
<v Speaker 9>You have double the margins that you do out of

0:19:45.720 --> 0:19:49.000
<v Speaker 9>Ford or General Motors relative to Tesla, So it just

0:19:49.080 --> 0:19:51.280
<v Speaker 9>kind of further expands that difference.

0:19:51.520 --> 0:19:56.280
<v Speaker 1>Has there been any move to unionize Tesla over the years. No,

0:19:56.400 --> 0:19:59.000
<v Speaker 1>is there any expectation that will happen to UAW saying

0:19:59.040 --> 0:20:00.159
<v Speaker 1>we're just not going to deal that.

0:20:01.000 --> 0:20:02.199
<v Speaker 9>I don't know if they're saying that we're not going

0:20:02.280 --> 0:20:03.720
<v Speaker 9>to deal with it, but maybe this isn't the right

0:20:04.080 --> 0:20:05.520
<v Speaker 9>moment for that to occur.

0:20:05.840 --> 0:20:09.919
<v Speaker 5>My impression is that Elon Musk's been quite resistant to it.

0:20:10.840 --> 0:20:14.240
<v Speaker 5>What I mean, I mean, and if you I mean

0:20:14.320 --> 0:20:18.360
<v Speaker 5>you look at the kind of the labor agitation that's

0:20:18.400 --> 0:20:21.800
<v Speaker 5>been happening across the country between ups coming in with

0:20:21.840 --> 0:20:25.320
<v Speaker 5>a fantastic deal, pilots getting good deals, all that sort

0:20:25.359 --> 0:20:25.800
<v Speaker 5>of stuff.

0:20:26.240 --> 0:20:28.280
<v Speaker 8>You know, you do wonder if there if there will

0:20:28.320 --> 0:20:29.280
<v Speaker 8>be an uptake.

0:20:29.560 --> 0:20:33.639
<v Speaker 5>But but Tesla's had it as well. Some issues with

0:20:33.680 --> 0:20:35.359
<v Speaker 5>its cyber truck.

0:20:36.440 --> 0:20:38.200
<v Speaker 1>I wonder there is no truck. I mean, how can

0:20:38.240 --> 0:20:41.600
<v Speaker 1>you be how can you be an ev how can

0:20:41.640 --> 0:20:44.920
<v Speaker 1>you be an auto manufacturer in US without a truck? Well,

0:20:45.320 --> 0:20:45.720
<v Speaker 1>I mean.

0:20:47.080 --> 0:20:51.159
<v Speaker 8>I would love a truck, you know, it's fun. It

0:20:51.160 --> 0:20:51.760
<v Speaker 8>would be great.

0:20:51.800 --> 0:20:53.720
<v Speaker 5>But you can now I don't have a parking SPI

0:20:54.160 --> 0:20:56.720
<v Speaker 5>so trying to find street parking truck.

0:20:57.480 --> 0:20:58.840
<v Speaker 8>However, it would be cool looking.

0:20:59.680 --> 0:21:02.160
<v Speaker 5>But you know, we have a story out from yesterday.

0:21:02.640 --> 0:21:06.240
<v Speaker 5>Tesla's cyber truck is long on hype and short on specifications.

0:21:06.480 --> 0:21:09.480
<v Speaker 5>And how meaningful is this to the company overall?

0:21:09.720 --> 0:21:10.040
<v Speaker 1>It's not.

0:21:10.200 --> 0:21:12.280
<v Speaker 9>I mean the cyber truck is very, very niche. I

0:21:12.280 --> 0:21:14.280
<v Speaker 9>know sometimes it gets compared to the F one fifty.

0:21:15.240 --> 0:21:18.640
<v Speaker 1>I drove the F one fifty lightning awesome.

0:21:18.720 --> 0:21:21.280
<v Speaker 9>It's a machine. Yeah, it is a very big machine.

0:21:21.280 --> 0:21:24.120
<v Speaker 9>And Fordy is dominant in that area and we'll stay dominant.

0:21:24.320 --> 0:21:25.960
<v Speaker 9>The cyber truck is a niche product. And if you

0:21:26.000 --> 0:21:28.160
<v Speaker 9>look at consensus, that's exactly how they view it. It's

0:21:28.160 --> 0:21:32.320
<v Speaker 9>not meant for the contractor. It's meant for probably a

0:21:32.400 --> 0:21:36.240
<v Speaker 9>high net worth mails want to be able to make

0:21:36.240 --> 0:21:36.679
<v Speaker 9>a statement.

0:21:36.760 --> 0:21:40.719
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I guess how the how are the bonds of

0:21:40.800 --> 0:21:43.320
<v Speaker 1>the big automakers, How are they trading these days? How

0:21:43.359 --> 0:21:48.640
<v Speaker 1>concerned are they about I guess first just this this

0:21:49.119 --> 0:21:55.040
<v Speaker 1>transition from internal combustion engines into into electric Like if

0:21:55.040 --> 0:21:57.040
<v Speaker 1>I were stockhold I would want to want to get

0:21:57.040 --> 0:21:58.399
<v Speaker 1>anywhere near these names.

0:21:58.560 --> 0:22:02.520
<v Speaker 9>How about the bonds, Paul, As always, the stocks have

0:22:02.600 --> 0:22:04.840
<v Speaker 9>really sold off over the last month or so if

0:22:04.840 --> 0:22:07.200
<v Speaker 9>you look at Ford and General Motors, but the bonds

0:22:07.200 --> 0:22:10.000
<v Speaker 9>have really held in relatively well. Maybe the CDs is

0:22:10.000 --> 0:22:11.399
<v Speaker 9>out about twenty basis points.

0:22:11.720 --> 0:22:14.760
<v Speaker 1>CDs is credit default swaps. I learned that a great

0:22:14.760 --> 0:22:16.840
<v Speaker 1>financial crisis. I didn't know that before.

0:22:16.600 --> 0:22:20.800
<v Speaker 9>You're on point again. So they've held in pretty well

0:22:21.560 --> 0:22:25.000
<v Speaker 9>relative to you know, where the stocks are at. And

0:22:25.040 --> 0:22:27.479
<v Speaker 9>I think that's large largely because if you look at

0:22:27.480 --> 0:22:29.159
<v Speaker 9>what the raiders have said. They've said, you know, if

0:22:29.200 --> 0:22:32.520
<v Speaker 9>you go back to twenty nineteen, when the last agreement

0:22:32.560 --> 0:22:34.840
<v Speaker 9>came out and there was a six week strikeover at

0:22:34.840 --> 0:22:38.679
<v Speaker 9>General Motors, they've already said like, hey, a situation like

0:22:38.720 --> 0:22:41.359
<v Speaker 9>that would not lead us to change our ratings. And

0:22:41.440 --> 0:22:45.480
<v Speaker 9>so that's a pretty fair and long kind of expectation

0:22:45.600 --> 0:22:48.720
<v Speaker 9>to have in that case. Back in twenty nineteen, it

0:22:48.760 --> 0:22:50.879
<v Speaker 9>costs GM a little over four billion dollars, just to

0:22:50.960 --> 0:22:51.480
<v Speaker 9>kind of put.

0:22:51.359 --> 0:22:52.159
<v Speaker 1>That in perspective.

0:22:52.880 --> 0:22:55.800
<v Speaker 5>Well, Elon Musk finds himself constantly sort of embroiled in

0:22:55.840 --> 0:23:01.080
<v Speaker 5>these scandals, whether it's something he tweets or most recently,

0:23:01.880 --> 0:23:06.879
<v Speaker 5>a probe, a reported probe into a secret glass house

0:23:07.320 --> 0:23:11.240
<v Speaker 5>that he may or may not have been building. How

0:23:11.280 --> 0:23:14.280
<v Speaker 5>do you think of headlines like this when you're evaluating

0:23:14.440 --> 0:23:16.359
<v Speaker 5>credit risk, because this is something the market can just

0:23:16.440 --> 0:23:19.080
<v Speaker 5>kind of like look past and wait to see where

0:23:19.080 --> 0:23:19.560
<v Speaker 5>things go.

0:23:19.960 --> 0:23:22.520
<v Speaker 9>Yeah, well, with Tesla, there's always event risk just in

0:23:22.640 --> 0:23:25.399
<v Speaker 9>headlines that you get. At least what I've seen on

0:23:25.440 --> 0:23:28.720
<v Speaker 9>the credit side is that when he is quiet and

0:23:28.800 --> 0:23:33.199
<v Speaker 9>the company is just working, their stock or their CDs

0:23:33.240 --> 0:23:36.280
<v Speaker 9>and their bonds tend to perform better. So a lot

0:23:36.320 --> 0:23:38.400
<v Speaker 9>of cases it would just be better if things were

0:23:38.440 --> 0:23:40.320
<v Speaker 9>quiet and you can kind of just move on and

0:23:40.440 --> 0:23:42.960
<v Speaker 9>focus on your operating acumen, in which they have a lot.

0:23:42.760 --> 0:23:46.560
<v Speaker 5>Of what's the magnitude of some of these reactions to you?

0:23:47.200 --> 0:23:49.119
<v Speaker 5>I don't know if the glass house was truly like

0:23:49.200 --> 0:23:50.920
<v Speaker 5>that big of a probe, but.

0:23:51.080 --> 0:23:53.480
<v Speaker 9>Yeah, for credit, I don't think that really means very much.

0:23:53.520 --> 0:23:58.720
<v Speaker 9>But certainly, it's just unnecessary waste use of time that

0:23:59.000 --> 0:24:01.600
<v Speaker 9>could be spent better in terms of improving your products.

0:24:01.760 --> 0:24:03.440
<v Speaker 1>Which Tesla going to hit the bond market?

0:24:04.600 --> 0:24:06.560
<v Speaker 9>You know, that's a great question, Paul, and I think

0:24:06.640 --> 0:24:09.639
<v Speaker 9>really the answer is once they're done cutting prices. And

0:24:09.720 --> 0:24:11.399
<v Speaker 9>the reason for that is one of the reasons that

0:24:11.440 --> 0:24:13.280
<v Speaker 9>they can do as much as they've done this year.

0:24:13.359 --> 0:24:15.760
<v Speaker 9>You know, if you're talking about a thirty four percent

0:24:15.800 --> 0:24:18.920
<v Speaker 9>or thirty five percent cut in your prices, you've never

0:24:18.960 --> 0:24:20.359
<v Speaker 9>heard of that in autos before.

0:24:20.440 --> 0:24:20.600
<v Speaker 6>Right.

0:24:20.600 --> 0:24:23.840
<v Speaker 9>You have to kind of go back to you, Henry

0:24:23.880 --> 0:24:27.399
<v Speaker 9>Ford to get that kind of level of price cutting.

0:24:27.680 --> 0:24:29.359
<v Speaker 9>And the reason for that is because most of the

0:24:29.400 --> 0:24:32.440
<v Speaker 9>auto companies have captive finance units. Right, So when you're

0:24:32.640 --> 0:24:35.399
<v Speaker 9>taking a loan out or a lease on one of

0:24:35.440 --> 0:24:38.399
<v Speaker 9>these cars, those cars wind up coming back, or a

0:24:38.520 --> 0:24:40.880
<v Speaker 9>high percentage of them come back to the auto company.

0:24:41.240 --> 0:24:44.359
<v Speaker 9>So they've financed that residual value at a certain level.

0:24:44.680 --> 0:24:46.840
<v Speaker 9>So you can go out and cut down the pricing

0:24:46.840 --> 0:24:49.199
<v Speaker 9>by thirty or thirty five percent, Otherwise you're going to

0:24:49.200 --> 0:24:52.159
<v Speaker 9>get destroyed in your finance company. Tesla doesn't really have

0:24:52.280 --> 0:24:56.040
<v Speaker 9>that issue, and so they're able to be much more

0:24:56.040 --> 0:24:59.480
<v Speaker 9>aggressive with their pricing and not impact their overall performance,

0:24:59.520 --> 0:25:03.080
<v Speaker 9>whereas the old line companies can't do that. Once they're

0:25:03.160 --> 0:25:05.280
<v Speaker 9>done with that, I think it's really you know, if

0:25:05.280 --> 0:25:08.720
<v Speaker 9>you think about their strategy of growing production fifty percent

0:25:08.760 --> 0:25:11.560
<v Speaker 9>a year for several years, they're gonna have to have

0:25:12.280 --> 0:25:14.680
<v Speaker 9>loans and leases become a bigger part of their business,

0:25:14.720 --> 0:25:18.520
<v Speaker 9>and so that'll be the impetus for seeing much more

0:25:18.600 --> 0:25:20.800
<v Speaker 9>debt coming out of the Tesla company.

0:25:20.920 --> 0:25:23.520
<v Speaker 1>I'm sure, I'm sure the bankers are pitching it. Joel Levinton,

0:25:23.560 --> 0:25:26.640
<v Speaker 1>he's the director of credit research at Bloomberg Intelligence, joining

0:25:26.720 --> 0:25:28.720
<v Speaker 1>us live here in our Bloomberg Interactive Broker Studio. We

0:25:28.800 --> 0:25:30.280
<v Speaker 1>appreciate getting your time there, Joel.

0:25:31.280 --> 0:25:34.720
<v Speaker 6>You're listening to the team. Ken's are Live program Bloomberg

0:25:34.760 --> 0:25:38.119
<v Speaker 6>Markets weekdays at ten am Eastern on Bloomberg dot Com,

0:25:38.200 --> 0:25:41.359
<v Speaker 6>the iHeartRadio app and the Bloomberg Business App, or listen

0:25:41.400 --> 0:25:43.520
<v Speaker 6>on demand wherever you get your podcasts.

0:25:45.400 --> 0:25:50.200
<v Speaker 1>Let's talk to streaming Biz, Netflix, Clear Winner, everybody else.

0:25:50.359 --> 0:25:52.560
<v Speaker 1>I have no idea so and I used to do

0:25:52.600 --> 0:25:55.040
<v Speaker 1>this stuff for a living. Mark Douglas knows. He's a

0:25:55.080 --> 0:25:57.040
<v Speaker 1>president's CEO of Mountain. He joins us live here in

0:25:57.080 --> 0:26:00.360
<v Speaker 1>our Bloomberg Interactive Broker Studio. So Mark, I mean again,

0:26:00.440 --> 0:26:01.920
<v Speaker 1>I think one of the questions people had at the

0:26:01.920 --> 0:26:05.000
<v Speaker 1>beginning of this evolution to streaming was, Okay, I get

0:26:05.160 --> 0:26:08.880
<v Speaker 1>Netflix is gonna winyah, how about everybody else? We're now

0:26:09.040 --> 0:26:12.080
<v Speaker 1>two three four years into this thing. We've got every

0:26:12.119 --> 0:26:15.239
<v Speaker 1>media company is into the streaming business. Are we what

0:26:15.280 --> 0:26:16.760
<v Speaker 1>are we learning here? Well?

0:26:16.880 --> 0:26:20.520
<v Speaker 4>I think what we're saying the reason Netflix continues to

0:26:20.560 --> 0:26:25.439
<v Speaker 4>win is because they have all the content to watch

0:26:25.640 --> 0:26:29.399
<v Speaker 4>when there's no other major show on the watch, and

0:26:29.440 --> 0:26:31.840
<v Speaker 4>then they also have some of the major shows, so

0:26:32.400 --> 0:26:35.199
<v Speaker 4>they I think just about everyone. When you turn on

0:26:35.240 --> 0:26:37.400
<v Speaker 4>the TV, the first thing you do is go see

0:26:37.400 --> 0:26:40.480
<v Speaker 4>what's on Netflix, right, and then so that puts them

0:26:40.480 --> 0:26:43.520
<v Speaker 4>in the first spot no matter what. And then after

0:26:43.560 --> 0:26:46.879
<v Speaker 4>that the second spot is live television, which is like

0:26:47.000 --> 0:26:51.440
<v Speaker 4>Hulu YouTube TV. And then what Disney was pretty lined

0:26:51.520 --> 0:26:54.119
<v Speaker 4>up to do was to really take that third slot

0:26:54.600 --> 0:26:58.879
<v Speaker 4>family programming, sports programming. But they seem to keep Star

0:26:58.920 --> 0:27:04.080
<v Speaker 4>Wars programming, but they keep seeming to stumble and and

0:27:04.119 --> 0:27:05.639
<v Speaker 4>so that's been the big challenge for that, and it

0:27:05.720 --> 0:27:08.320
<v Speaker 4>leaves that third slot open. Max is trying to be there,

0:27:08.520 --> 0:27:11.560
<v Speaker 4>Discoveries trying to be there, but I think most consumers

0:27:11.600 --> 0:27:14.439
<v Speaker 4>are like, Okay, I'm gonna do Disney for three months,

0:27:14.520 --> 0:27:17.879
<v Speaker 4>binge on that. Then I'll switch over the Showtime and

0:27:17.920 --> 0:27:21.000
<v Speaker 4>watch the like the current season of Billions. But I'm

0:27:21.000 --> 0:27:24.000
<v Speaker 4>gonna binge that. I'm going to cancel that, And that's

0:27:24.040 --> 0:27:28.920
<v Speaker 4>not really healthy if you're Showtime or or Max or

0:27:28.960 --> 0:27:29.760
<v Speaker 4>anyone like that.

0:27:29.880 --> 0:27:33.080
<v Speaker 5>So how are those folks trying to change their behavior

0:27:33.080 --> 0:27:38.040
<v Speaker 5>that you know behavior and make their service a mainstay?

0:27:38.960 --> 0:27:43.199
<v Speaker 4>I think what what you see is them trying to

0:27:43.200 --> 0:27:46.680
<v Speaker 4>go back to sports programming, but then that costs billions

0:27:46.680 --> 0:27:50.640
<v Speaker 4>of dollars in fees, so that's kind of like Amazon strategy.

0:27:51.440 --> 0:27:55.440
<v Speaker 4>And outside of that, I think they're like on a treadmill,

0:27:55.640 --> 0:27:58.960
<v Speaker 4>and they they really, quite frankly, don't know how to

0:27:59.000 --> 0:28:02.040
<v Speaker 4>get off of that tradmill unless they're going to try

0:28:02.040 --> 0:28:05.680
<v Speaker 4>to match the library of content that Netflix has. And

0:28:05.800 --> 0:28:09.000
<v Speaker 4>but Netflix is already occupied in that spot. So what

0:28:09.080 --> 0:28:11.360
<v Speaker 4>you're probably going to see is just a lot of consolidation.

0:28:11.720 --> 0:28:13.920
<v Speaker 4>That's really where that number three player is going to

0:28:13.960 --> 0:28:14.560
<v Speaker 4>come from.

0:28:14.440 --> 0:28:16.600
<v Speaker 1>Is well, I mean, who can consolidate Disney can't buy

0:28:16.640 --> 0:28:20.600
<v Speaker 1>Warner Brothers, Discovery or Fox or I mean, I mean

0:28:20.600 --> 0:28:23.960
<v Speaker 1>it they consolidated. It seems like they already did consolidated

0:28:23.960 --> 0:28:25.479
<v Speaker 1>as much as they possibly could in terms of the

0:28:25.520 --> 0:28:28.440
<v Speaker 1>big traditional media companies. I'm not sure any more deals

0:28:28.440 --> 0:28:29.000
<v Speaker 1>can get done.

0:28:29.160 --> 0:28:31.679
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, I mean people say, of course Apple can. I

0:28:31.720 --> 0:28:33.879
<v Speaker 4>mean they have like more money on hand than the

0:28:33.960 --> 0:28:35.000
<v Speaker 4>US government.

0:28:34.800 --> 0:28:38.880
<v Speaker 1>Or Dan Eyes and Red Bush Securities made a call

0:28:38.920 --> 0:28:42.480
<v Speaker 1>a few weeks ago that he believes that Apple will

0:28:42.480 --> 0:28:46.200
<v Speaker 1>buy ESPN, which kind of made some sense to me,

0:28:46.560 --> 0:28:50.160
<v Speaker 1>because boy, that would be a I think Disney surprisingly

0:28:50.560 --> 0:28:52.960
<v Speaker 1>wouldn't mind getting rid of Summer all of that, given

0:28:53.040 --> 0:28:56.280
<v Speaker 1>the decline, and uh, you know with the cord cutting issues,

0:28:56.760 --> 0:28:58.040
<v Speaker 1>is that something you think is reasonable?

0:28:58.080 --> 0:29:00.280
<v Speaker 4>Well, so, the thing I think that's miss Senders the

0:29:00.280 --> 0:29:03.920
<v Speaker 4>bad Apple is that Apple really wants to get a bundle.

0:29:04.440 --> 0:29:07.760
<v Speaker 4>So if you watch something, you listen to something, Apple Music,

0:29:07.840 --> 0:29:10.840
<v Speaker 4>you play it, Apple Games, you read it, Apple News.

0:29:11.160 --> 0:29:15.080
<v Speaker 4>They want twenty dollars a month from every iPhone user

0:29:15.080 --> 0:29:19.200
<v Speaker 4>on the planet, and they only do TV to finish

0:29:19.280 --> 0:29:23.440
<v Speaker 4>out that bundle. And the other things like Apple Music,

0:29:23.440 --> 0:29:26.360
<v Speaker 4>they have no production costs whatsoever. They don't make the music,

0:29:26.400 --> 0:29:29.400
<v Speaker 4>they don't make the games. They don't make the news articles,

0:29:29.840 --> 0:29:32.600
<v Speaker 4>and so the economics on that is, they just give

0:29:32.640 --> 0:29:35.760
<v Speaker 4>you enough TV content so you'll pay the nineteen ninety

0:29:35.840 --> 0:29:38.000
<v Speaker 4>nine a month or whatever the current price point is.

0:29:38.440 --> 0:29:40.720
<v Speaker 4>So I don't know that they have the incentive to

0:29:41.040 --> 0:29:44.280
<v Speaker 4>expand their footprint on TV given that the real money

0:29:44.320 --> 0:29:47.320
<v Speaker 4>comes from the eras, where they have no production costs whatsoever.

0:29:47.440 --> 0:29:49.520
<v Speaker 1>And I pitched them on every media company on the

0:29:49.560 --> 0:29:51.200
<v Speaker 1>planet for twenty years and got nowhere.

0:29:51.280 --> 0:29:54.240
<v Speaker 5>Yeah met them, yeah, yeah, And notably, I mean you

0:29:54.520 --> 0:29:58.440
<v Speaker 5>point out this Danives commentary, but our davely And, an

0:29:58.520 --> 0:30:04.959
<v Speaker 5>opinion columnist for bloomber says Apple doesn't need to buy ESPN.

0:30:04.800 --> 0:30:05.640
<v Speaker 8>To win in sports.

0:30:05.640 --> 0:30:08.320
<v Speaker 5>His argument is that they'd be better striking a partnership

0:30:08.360 --> 0:30:13.360
<v Speaker 5>that would showcase the ESPN channel within the Apple TV Plus.

0:30:13.560 --> 0:30:17.400
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, I think that makes sense. Also, Disney's like, this

0:30:17.520 --> 0:30:20.000
<v Speaker 4>is the thing about Disney right now, everyone on what

0:30:20.280 --> 0:30:24.160
<v Speaker 4>if you have a restaurant, great restaurant and people don't

0:30:24.200 --> 0:30:26.400
<v Speaker 4>seem to be showing up as much, You don't call

0:30:26.440 --> 0:30:29.640
<v Speaker 4>your accountant, You call the chef right and say what

0:30:29.680 --> 0:30:32.040
<v Speaker 4>are we doing wrong in the kitchen? And so you

0:30:32.120 --> 0:30:36.080
<v Speaker 4>see Disney and people like well, the company's not doing well,

0:30:36.080 --> 0:30:39.239
<v Speaker 4>and everyone wants to call the finance department and it

0:30:39.280 --> 0:30:40.880
<v Speaker 4>makes absolutely absolutely no sense.

0:30:40.960 --> 0:30:43.560
<v Speaker 1>Get the get the dishes right. They're like, get the

0:30:43.600 --> 0:30:46.120
<v Speaker 1>food right there, consumers. What do you think Disney needs

0:30:46.120 --> 0:30:46.920
<v Speaker 1>to do then they?

0:30:47.240 --> 0:30:49.640
<v Speaker 4>I think, I think when you look at the numbers

0:30:49.840 --> 0:30:53.600
<v Speaker 4>that Disney, their revenue has grown over it they doubled

0:30:53.600 --> 0:30:55.800
<v Speaker 4>in size of the last two years. The revenue has grown,

0:30:56.160 --> 0:30:58.960
<v Speaker 4>but if you look at their profitability that is tanked.

0:30:59.000 --> 0:31:03.120
<v Speaker 4>I mean they were doing like operating income like in

0:31:03.120 --> 0:31:06.240
<v Speaker 4>twenty nineteen, I think it was like fourteen eleven to

0:31:06.320 --> 0:31:09.480
<v Speaker 4>fourteen billion, and now it's like three billion. So I

0:31:09.480 --> 0:31:12.960
<v Speaker 4>think it's a plastic story of you got everyone needs

0:31:12.960 --> 0:31:16.160
<v Speaker 4>to get ten percent better at what they do and

0:31:16.200 --> 0:31:19.080
<v Speaker 4>they while doing it for ten percent less.

0:31:19.440 --> 0:31:23.000
<v Speaker 8>Is AI the future there? Like AI generated content?

0:31:23.280 --> 0:31:26.760
<v Speaker 4>I mean, I personally think that it literally goes back

0:31:26.800 --> 0:31:31.240
<v Speaker 4>to Disney, that the Disney brands the you know that people,

0:31:31.760 --> 0:31:34.480
<v Speaker 4>especially in the United States where it got controversial the

0:31:34.600 --> 0:31:38.000
<v Speaker 4>last couple of years, that people have to relove the

0:31:38.040 --> 0:31:41.240
<v Speaker 4>Disney brand. They have to relove the Star Wars brands,

0:31:41.480 --> 0:31:44.920
<v Speaker 4>the ESPN brand for sports, and that is not about

0:31:45.040 --> 0:31:47.640
<v Speaker 4>deals on you know on Wall Street that is about

0:31:47.880 --> 0:31:51.720
<v Speaker 4>who are leading these organizations under Bob Biger and where

0:31:51.760 --> 0:31:55.120
<v Speaker 4>is Bob Biger leading them. It's a very solvable problem.

0:31:55.200 --> 0:31:57.800
<v Speaker 4>It's not going to be solved. I mean doing deals

0:31:57.840 --> 0:32:00.960
<v Speaker 4>to get more consumers watching content, right, do that deal

0:32:01.080 --> 0:32:04.520
<v Speaker 4>with Apple? But that but like financial I say in

0:32:04.600 --> 0:32:06.840
<v Speaker 4>my company, the only type of engineering we're going to

0:32:06.920 --> 0:32:10.400
<v Speaker 4>do at Mountain is software engineering. We're not doing financial

0:32:10.440 --> 0:32:13.480
<v Speaker 4>engineering yet. We're going to grow through products people love,

0:32:13.560 --> 0:32:16.880
<v Speaker 4>and I think that is ultimately back to basics what

0:32:17.320 --> 0:32:19.120
<v Speaker 4>is needed at Disney speaking.

0:32:18.760 --> 0:32:23.720
<v Speaker 5>Of controversial products, CNN naming a former New York Times

0:32:23.800 --> 0:32:26.320
<v Speaker 5>head Mark Thompson as its next CEO.

0:32:27.320 --> 0:32:31.760
<v Speaker 8>What's your take as we bring in a newcomer to

0:32:31.920 --> 0:32:33.280
<v Speaker 8>try and turn the ship around.

0:32:33.480 --> 0:32:36.680
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, well, you know, the folks at CNN kind of

0:32:36.760 --> 0:32:40.000
<v Speaker 4>there was a rebellion, right and they literally, I mean

0:32:40.040 --> 0:32:44.320
<v Speaker 4>they tied the former guy, you know, and they wrapped

0:32:44.400 --> 0:32:46.360
<v Speaker 4>him in ropes and like pushed him off the ship

0:32:47.560 --> 0:32:52.680
<v Speaker 4>so metaphorically. And so I think the new person that

0:32:52.680 --> 0:32:56.320
<v Speaker 4>we're talking about, he definitely, you know, is someone that understands,

0:32:57.080 --> 0:33:00.160
<v Speaker 4>you know, this staff, and I think is going to

0:33:00.200 --> 0:33:02.400
<v Speaker 4>fit more there. The bigger news I think is making

0:33:02.680 --> 0:33:06.480
<v Speaker 4>more part of MAX because I think people just consume

0:33:06.520 --> 0:33:09.840
<v Speaker 4>their news while they're consuming other things. Like people don't

0:33:09.840 --> 0:33:11.840
<v Speaker 4>wake up as much and go I want to watch

0:33:11.920 --> 0:33:15.640
<v Speaker 4>the news. They more say I want to be entertained,

0:33:15.720 --> 0:33:19.240
<v Speaker 4>And wow, the news is very entertaining today in terms

0:33:19.320 --> 0:33:22.440
<v Speaker 4>of new you know, kind of the CNN and MSNBC

0:33:23.120 --> 0:33:26.120
<v Speaker 4>style news. We're sitting down in front of the television.

0:33:26.160 --> 0:33:28.560
<v Speaker 4>So making that part of MAX, I think is a

0:33:28.600 --> 0:33:31.560
<v Speaker 4>big deal. Gives them an audience to promote to gets

0:33:31.640 --> 0:33:35.080
<v Speaker 4>more people just knowing this is an option when you

0:33:35.120 --> 0:33:37.640
<v Speaker 4>go looking for content to watch. And I think that's

0:33:37.680 --> 0:33:38.640
<v Speaker 4>the biggest move there.

0:33:38.800 --> 0:33:41.400
<v Speaker 1>Hey, market based down in Miami. Your company's based in Miami.

0:33:41.640 --> 0:33:45.000
<v Speaker 1>How big is this Lionel messy thing? Yeah?

0:33:45.000 --> 0:33:48.480
<v Speaker 4>So Miami loves sports. I mean like like it has

0:33:48.560 --> 0:33:50.880
<v Speaker 4>become I used to go to Miami a few years

0:33:50.880 --> 0:33:52.960
<v Speaker 4>ago and be what, what what the hell do people

0:33:53.000 --> 0:33:57.000
<v Speaker 4>do for a living here? And now it's like become

0:33:57.120 --> 0:34:01.440
<v Speaker 4>so diverse, not but in every way possible. And they

0:34:01.480 --> 0:34:05.960
<v Speaker 4>love Formula one. They're loving you know, soccer or football

0:34:06.000 --> 0:34:08.759
<v Speaker 4>as the rest of the world calls it. And you

0:34:08.800 --> 0:34:12.759
<v Speaker 4>see messy posters all over the place, so I think

0:34:12.800 --> 0:34:14.480
<v Speaker 4>it is a big deal. I think it was a

0:34:14.520 --> 0:34:18.439
<v Speaker 4>perfect city for him. You know, I'm not out that much,

0:34:18.440 --> 0:34:20.960
<v Speaker 4>but apparently you can see him out a lot, and

0:34:21.000 --> 0:34:25.280
<v Speaker 4>I think he's doing a lot for Major League Soccer.

0:34:25.400 --> 0:34:28.759
<v Speaker 4>So I think it's a huge deal and he was.

0:34:28.680 --> 0:34:29.520
<v Speaker 1>A perfect person.

0:34:29.560 --> 0:34:32.800
<v Speaker 4>I mean the World Cup, I think you can almost

0:34:32.840 --> 0:34:36.560
<v Speaker 4>think Salt Bay because Salt Bay made the end of

0:34:36.600 --> 0:34:40.200
<v Speaker 4>the World Cup about Messi, not just his play on

0:34:40.239 --> 0:34:41.120
<v Speaker 4>the field.

0:34:40.920 --> 0:34:41.160
<v Speaker 1>But.

0:34:43.200 --> 0:34:46.200
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, it was like, why are you messing around with Messi?

0:34:46.480 --> 0:34:48.320
<v Speaker 1>It kind of like he became.

0:34:48.080 --> 0:34:50.400
<v Speaker 4>A martyr at the end of the you know, in

0:34:50.920 --> 0:34:52.839
<v Speaker 4>a couple of seconds at the end of the World Cup.

0:34:52.880 --> 0:34:54.440
<v Speaker 4>I think it's been great for him and great for

0:34:54.520 --> 0:34:57.480
<v Speaker 4>the sport. Obviously he was a phenomenal player before that.

0:34:57.920 --> 0:35:00.440
<v Speaker 1>Great for great for Miami, and maybe a good Apple

0:35:00.480 --> 0:35:03.360
<v Speaker 1>who is kind of part of this whole deal there.

0:35:03.400 --> 0:35:05.920
<v Speaker 1>So Apple putting some dipping their toe again into the

0:35:05.920 --> 0:35:08.279
<v Speaker 1>sports business. So we'll see, all right, right, Mark, thanks

0:35:08.280 --> 0:35:10.920
<v Speaker 1>so much for stopping by. Mark dougas he's a president,

0:35:11.160 --> 0:35:14.400
<v Speaker 1>he's the CEO of Mountain really knows what's happening in

0:35:14.400 --> 0:35:18.280
<v Speaker 1>the confluence of the media and technology. The whole streaming business,

0:35:18.280 --> 0:35:19.160
<v Speaker 1>all that good stuff.

0:35:19.360 --> 0:35:23.000
<v Speaker 6>You're listening to the tape cansur live program Bloomberg Markets

0:35:23.040 --> 0:35:26.439
<v Speaker 6>weekdays at ten am Eastern on Bloomberg Radio, the tune

0:35:26.480 --> 0:35:29.439
<v Speaker 6>in app, Bloomberg dot Com, and the Bloomberg Business App.

0:35:29.480 --> 0:35:32.279
<v Speaker 6>You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our

0:35:32.280 --> 0:35:37.360
<v Speaker 6>flagship New York station, Just say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.

0:35:38.400 --> 0:35:40.839
<v Speaker 1>Let's check out with Anna Wong. She's a chief US

0:35:40.880 --> 0:35:43.640
<v Speaker 1>economist with Bloomberg Economics. She joins us here and we

0:35:43.680 --> 0:35:47.239
<v Speaker 1>had a lot of economic data this morning. What did

0:35:47.280 --> 0:35:51.719
<v Speaker 1>you take on the inflation picture here in the United States?

0:35:52.160 --> 0:35:52.359
<v Speaker 7>Right?

0:35:52.440 --> 0:35:56.279
<v Speaker 10>And the inflation is still I think the story of

0:35:56.320 --> 0:36:00.880
<v Speaker 10>this inflation is still the dominant story. We saw the supercore,

0:36:00.960 --> 0:36:06.520
<v Speaker 10>which is core services excluding housing UH surged in July,

0:36:06.640 --> 0:36:12.040
<v Speaker 10>but that's driven by a very volatile category named financial management,

0:36:12.480 --> 0:36:15.680
<v Speaker 10>and that's related to the stock rally in July, so

0:36:16.160 --> 0:36:18.839
<v Speaker 10>I think, but all in all, for the real economy,

0:36:18.880 --> 0:36:22.440
<v Speaker 10>what matters are the other supercore categories, and those are

0:36:22.520 --> 0:36:26.799
<v Speaker 10>still showing some signs of disinflation. On the other hand,

0:36:27.320 --> 0:36:31.719
<v Speaker 10>consumption was has seen a burst in July, and we

0:36:32.480 --> 0:36:36.600
<v Speaker 10>traced that first to the Barbenheimer and Taylor Swift and

0:36:36.600 --> 0:36:41.200
<v Speaker 10>beyond effect. Yes, it's it's wait, let's come back to that.

0:36:41.360 --> 0:36:44.640
<v Speaker 1>What are we ascribing to Barbie and Oppenheimer?

0:36:45.800 --> 0:36:50.960
<v Speaker 10>Uh, this burst in consumption in July. Yeah, and and uh,

0:36:51.200 --> 0:36:55.680
<v Speaker 10>you know, the the biggest dulling concert last year in

0:36:55.719 --> 0:36:59.120
<v Speaker 10>North America is by a band called Bad Bunny. I

0:36:59.160 --> 0:37:01.560
<v Speaker 10>don't know you, but I don't know Bad Buddy, but

0:37:01.640 --> 0:37:05.000
<v Speaker 10>I do know Taylor Swift and Yonte and so together

0:37:05.400 --> 0:37:09.840
<v Speaker 10>they make for kind of like an Olympic event in July.

0:37:10.040 --> 0:37:13.920
<v Speaker 10>And that's why we see this unsustainable burst of consumption.

0:37:14.280 --> 0:37:18.240
<v Speaker 5>Yeah, that's real personal spending up zero point six percent

0:37:18.640 --> 0:37:22.200
<v Speaker 5>in July. That's the strongest advance since the start of

0:37:22.200 --> 0:37:23.800
<v Speaker 5>the year. So you're saying, and I use that, you

0:37:23.840 --> 0:37:29.560
<v Speaker 5>don't think we'll see another number on this caliber because no, Barbenheimer.

0:37:30.200 --> 0:37:32.000
<v Speaker 8>Well, Taylor Swift's continuing.

0:37:31.520 --> 0:37:34.760
<v Speaker 5>But I guess people bought tickets already, so we should

0:37:34.760 --> 0:37:36.440
<v Speaker 5>look for that number to come down from now on.

0:37:37.080 --> 0:37:40.880
<v Speaker 10>Well, so Taylor swift a tour in North America ends

0:37:41.280 --> 0:37:47.440
<v Speaker 10>after August, and so is Beyonce's tour. So in the

0:37:47.520 --> 0:37:50.440
<v Speaker 10>fourth quarter there will be you know, just think about

0:37:50.560 --> 0:37:53.600
<v Speaker 10>the fact that you don't even have a super pop

0:37:53.640 --> 0:37:56.879
<v Speaker 10>star to maintain the same level of spending. That will

0:37:56.920 --> 0:38:02.120
<v Speaker 10>be an automatic negative monthly growth go into September. And

0:38:02.160 --> 0:38:05.240
<v Speaker 10>then on top of that, you have the underlying force

0:38:05.320 --> 0:38:09.279
<v Speaker 10>of consumer balance sheets worsening as they have to pay

0:38:09.320 --> 0:38:12.360
<v Speaker 10>back student loans, and we're seeing an uptick in delinquent

0:38:12.440 --> 0:38:15.120
<v Speaker 10>these credit cards and auto loans. So yeah, I don't

0:38:15.120 --> 0:38:18.480
<v Speaker 10>think it is sustainable. We likely will be seeing some

0:38:18.560 --> 0:38:22.200
<v Speaker 10>negative prints in consumption going into a fall.

0:38:22.719 --> 0:38:26.759
<v Speaker 5>I wonder if this is a new lever of FED policy.

0:38:26.880 --> 0:38:30.560
<v Speaker 5>Have J Powell call up Taylor Swift, call up Beyonce,

0:38:31.239 --> 0:38:35.640
<v Speaker 5>tell them when to schedule their their tours to adjust

0:38:36.000 --> 0:38:38.840
<v Speaker 5>to as a new lever of monetary policy.

0:38:39.400 --> 0:38:41.560
<v Speaker 1>So I mean, and I'm guessing at the univers University

0:38:41.600 --> 0:38:43.960
<v Speaker 1>of Chicago where you got your PhD in economics, they

0:38:43.960 --> 0:38:46.440
<v Speaker 1>didn't give you. There wasn't a class on like t

0:38:46.680 --> 0:38:50.840
<v Speaker 1>Swift or the Concert impact on GDP and inflation.

0:38:50.840 --> 0:38:54.120
<v Speaker 5>Studying the Beatles and all that they do teach us

0:38:54.160 --> 0:38:57.359
<v Speaker 5>that people are rational, But the fact that consumers are

0:38:57.400 --> 0:38:59.080
<v Speaker 5>spending money that they don't.

0:38:58.880 --> 0:39:01.400
<v Speaker 10>Have seems to me that in fact, they give too

0:39:01.480 --> 0:39:04.640
<v Speaker 10>much credit to the median American consumer Bright.

0:39:04.840 --> 0:39:07.759
<v Speaker 1>All right, so can we take Anna, Can we take

0:39:07.920 --> 0:39:10.239
<v Speaker 1>recession talk off the table once and for all here?

0:39:11.160 --> 0:39:11.920
<v Speaker 10>Definitely not.

0:39:13.360 --> 0:39:15.000
<v Speaker 1>That's just your model speaking, Anna.

0:39:15.360 --> 0:39:15.440
<v Speaker 11>No.

0:39:15.680 --> 0:39:20.560
<v Speaker 10>If anything, this is this uh temporary boom in consumption

0:39:20.800 --> 0:39:25.520
<v Speaker 10>is actually increasing the possibility that in the next couple

0:39:25.480 --> 0:39:29.720
<v Speaker 10>of months we are going to see a negative PCE

0:39:29.960 --> 0:39:32.880
<v Speaker 10>in consumption and that's one of the indicators that go

0:39:33.000 --> 0:39:37.359
<v Speaker 10>into the NBR recession dating. And also on top of that,

0:39:37.400 --> 0:39:39.319
<v Speaker 10>going into the fall, we are we're going to have

0:39:39.440 --> 0:39:42.919
<v Speaker 10>a likely going to have a government shut down as

0:39:43.000 --> 0:39:46.600
<v Speaker 10>well as a ua W auto strike, and that could

0:39:46.680 --> 0:39:50.120
<v Speaker 10>both of them together could potentially turn the non farm

0:39:50.120 --> 0:39:53.359
<v Speaker 10>payroll report for October negative. So there you have it.

0:39:53.560 --> 0:39:57.640
<v Speaker 10>You know, the two remaining NBR indicators that was in

0:39:57.760 --> 0:40:01.720
<v Speaker 10>positive territory that kept a recession way, those are turning

0:40:01.760 --> 0:40:03.280
<v Speaker 10>around likely in the fall.

0:40:05.040 --> 0:40:09.640
<v Speaker 5>I want to address another somewhat cynical story that we

0:40:09.719 --> 0:40:13.080
<v Speaker 5>had out yesterday, poor Americans tap debt, buy less food

0:40:13.120 --> 0:40:16.960
<v Speaker 5>as consumer cracks widen. Essentially, this was a survey of

0:40:17.120 --> 0:40:21.280
<v Speaker 5>people on SNAP assistance programs, so people who with incomes

0:40:22.040 --> 0:40:25.239
<v Speaker 5>at or below up the poverty line, saying forty two

0:40:25.280 --> 0:40:28.879
<v Speaker 5>percent skip meals in August and fifty five percent eight

0:40:29.000 --> 0:40:32.120
<v Speaker 5>less because they couldn't afford food. That's more than double

0:40:32.160 --> 0:40:37.560
<v Speaker 5>than last year's shares. Talk to me about how the Fed,

0:40:37.760 --> 0:40:41.120
<v Speaker 5>how the federal government addresses what seems to be a

0:40:41.120 --> 0:40:46.600
<v Speaker 5>clear divide between higher income consumers and lower income consumers,

0:40:46.640 --> 0:40:52.440
<v Speaker 5>if they're trying to cool off inflation but without hurting

0:40:52.600 --> 0:40:53.440
<v Speaker 5>the bottom half.

0:40:54.760 --> 0:40:59.600
<v Speaker 10>Yeah, you're absolutely right, And it's an impossible balance to

0:40:59.640 --> 0:41:03.839
<v Speaker 10>strike because monetary policy is a very blunt instrument. It

0:41:03.880 --> 0:41:08.480
<v Speaker 10>does not differentiate between lower income and higher income. And

0:41:08.520 --> 0:41:12.440
<v Speaker 10>this is why inflation high inflation. You know, running the

0:41:12.520 --> 0:41:16.160
<v Speaker 10>economy hot in order to boost unemployment and on the

0:41:16.200 --> 0:41:18.840
<v Speaker 10>you know lower that that was the motivation for running

0:41:18.880 --> 0:41:23.000
<v Speaker 10>the economy hot, right, But ultimately inflation hurts the bottom

0:41:23.800 --> 0:41:27.160
<v Speaker 10>percentile of the household more than the upper half. So

0:41:27.280 --> 0:41:31.520
<v Speaker 10>it is, it is, it's just the impossible balance to strike.

0:41:32.040 --> 0:41:33.800
<v Speaker 1>All right. So, and I'm looking at the w I

0:41:34.120 --> 0:41:38.479
<v Speaker 1>RP function on the Bloomberg Terminal interest rate forecast. Lots

0:41:38.480 --> 0:41:41.560
<v Speaker 1>of rate cuts. Kind of is what the markets suggesting

0:41:41.680 --> 0:41:44.560
<v Speaker 1>for twenty twenty four. Yet it's I don't know, it's

0:41:44.600 --> 0:41:47.960
<v Speaker 1>been hugely wrong for a long time. Kind of what

0:41:47.960 --> 0:41:49.720
<v Speaker 1>the market's looking for. What do you think the Fed's

0:41:49.719 --> 0:41:51.120
<v Speaker 1>going to do in twenty twenty four?

0:41:51.920 --> 0:41:55.160
<v Speaker 10>Yeah, I actually thought that the the what the market

0:41:55.200 --> 0:41:57.960
<v Speaker 10>priced in so far about you know, one hundred BIPs

0:41:57.960 --> 0:42:05.279
<v Speaker 10>of rate cuts is reasonable by our model, because so

0:42:05.560 --> 0:42:07.359
<v Speaker 10>I think that that's a reasonable thing.

0:42:07.440 --> 0:42:11.480
<v Speaker 5>Toper, Yeah, I wonder you know, the FED says, well,

0:42:11.520 --> 0:42:13.920
<v Speaker 5>don't think about j PELI says, don't think about cuts.

0:42:13.960 --> 0:42:17.800
<v Speaker 5>And yet, and yet it seems like the market certainly

0:42:17.840 --> 0:42:22.760
<v Speaker 5>pricing in looks like four cuts by the December meeting

0:42:22.880 --> 0:42:26.879
<v Speaker 5>next year. Really quickly, we only have about thirty seconds here.

0:42:27.200 --> 0:42:29.600
<v Speaker 5>What are you looking for from the all important jobs

0:42:29.640 --> 0:42:30.680
<v Speaker 5>report tomorrow?

0:42:33.920 --> 0:42:37.400
<v Speaker 10>We're expecting one n eighty five K change in non

0:42:37.480 --> 0:42:39.839
<v Speaker 10>farm payroll and an unemployment rate of three.

0:42:41.640 --> 0:42:43.239
<v Speaker 1>You're not going to get a recession with three point

0:42:43.239 --> 0:42:47.239
<v Speaker 1>five percent unemployment, Anna, So I'm just telling you right now.

0:42:47.239 --> 0:42:49.640
<v Speaker 1>I know you've got a PhD in economics from the

0:42:49.719 --> 0:42:53.360
<v Speaker 1>near Chicago, undergraduate degree in economics and statistics from this

0:42:53.400 --> 0:42:58.040
<v Speaker 1>little place called Berkeley. I took two economics classes at

0:42:58.080 --> 0:43:00.439
<v Speaker 1>business School, so I think I know what I'm talking

0:43:00.480 --> 0:43:03.160
<v Speaker 1>about here despite your PhD. But we'll see how it

0:43:03.160 --> 0:43:05.760
<v Speaker 1>plays out. I'm in the no recession camp at Analog

0:43:05.880 --> 0:43:09.000
<v Speaker 1>is so much better than this than the rest of us,

0:43:09.000 --> 0:43:11.359
<v Speaker 1>and all this stuff. We appreciate getting some time there.

0:43:11.600 --> 0:43:14.640
<v Speaker 6>You're listening to the tape cans are live program Bloomberg

0:43:14.760 --> 0:43:18.360
<v Speaker 6>Markets weekdays at ten am Eastern on Bloomberg Radio, the

0:43:18.400 --> 0:43:21.640
<v Speaker 6>tune in app, Bloomberg dot Com, and the Bloomberg Business App.

0:43:21.680 --> 0:43:24.480
<v Speaker 6>You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our

0:43:24.520 --> 0:43:29.560
<v Speaker 6>flagship New York station. Just say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.

0:43:30.040 --> 0:43:33.120
<v Speaker 1>I buy my securities app. I hold them. I'm not trading,

0:43:33.560 --> 0:43:36.359
<v Speaker 1>but a lot of folks do buy and sell, buy

0:43:36.360 --> 0:43:39.359
<v Speaker 1>and sell, buy and sell, and oftentimes the timing there

0:43:39.440 --> 0:43:43.360
<v Speaker 1>isn't ideal, and that in fact really impacts their returns.

0:43:43.880 --> 0:43:46.400
<v Speaker 1>Kind of what have you experienced in your career?

0:43:47.600 --> 0:43:50.040
<v Speaker 11>So so a lot of this just traces back to

0:43:50.200 --> 0:43:54.840
<v Speaker 11>the emotionality of having capital at risk.

0:43:55.080 --> 0:43:55.319
<v Speaker 6>You know.

0:43:55.440 --> 0:43:58.920
<v Speaker 11>The upside is, hey, everybody, We're all going to be wealthy,

0:43:58.960 --> 0:44:02.000
<v Speaker 11>Isn't this fantastic? And everybody is always happy when the

0:44:02.040 --> 0:44:05.560
<v Speaker 11>markets are trending up like they've been for the past week,

0:44:05.640 --> 0:44:09.040
<v Speaker 11>in fact, back to October twenty twenty two.

0:44:09.520 --> 0:44:11.320
<v Speaker 1>But when you go through a full.

0:44:11.160 --> 0:44:16.200
<v Speaker 11>Year like twenty twenty two, people get very uncomfortable. Your

0:44:16.200 --> 0:44:20.120
<v Speaker 11>emotion gets in your way. And lots of studies have

0:44:20.239 --> 0:44:23.840
<v Speaker 11>been done on this. There's the dal Bar study, there's

0:44:24.360 --> 0:44:28.680
<v Speaker 11>countless academic studies. The one that intrigue me most recently

0:44:29.480 --> 0:44:32.480
<v Speaker 11>came from Morning Stars kind of snuck out in the

0:44:32.520 --> 0:44:35.560
<v Speaker 11>middle of the summer, called Mind the Gap, and it's

0:44:35.600 --> 0:44:37.840
<v Speaker 11>really fascinating and.

0:44:38.280 --> 0:44:39.520
<v Speaker 1>What does it kind of show us?

0:44:40.360 --> 0:44:45.480
<v Speaker 11>So when you look at the traditional studies of underperformance

0:44:46.160 --> 0:44:51.160
<v Speaker 11>of investors, they tend to say, hey, your stock selection,

0:44:51.400 --> 0:44:54.839
<v Speaker 11>or your market timing, or your use of leverage has

0:44:54.920 --> 0:44:58.360
<v Speaker 11>led you to underperform the benchmark. And everybody kind of

0:44:58.920 --> 0:45:02.960
<v Speaker 11>understands that. What's really shocking, and this is what the

0:45:03.000 --> 0:45:07.719
<v Speaker 11>morning Star study called Mind the Gap showed, is not

0:45:07.800 --> 0:45:14.919
<v Speaker 11>only do investors underperform a benchmark, they actually underperform their

0:45:14.960 --> 0:45:19.600
<v Speaker 11>own holdings. Meaning if you own ETF one and mutual

0:45:19.640 --> 0:45:23.160
<v Speaker 11>fund two, you would expect that you should get as

0:45:23.280 --> 0:45:28.440
<v Speaker 11>much returns as those products create, but the average investor

0:45:28.840 --> 0:45:33.440
<v Speaker 11>underperforms those holdings by about twenty two percent. And the

0:45:33.560 --> 0:45:37.640
<v Speaker 11>reason is what you alluded to before, timing. They tend

0:45:37.680 --> 0:45:43.040
<v Speaker 11>to chase products up or panic sell on the way down,

0:45:43.280 --> 0:45:47.240
<v Speaker 11>and that always leads to not just bad performance against

0:45:47.280 --> 0:45:50.560
<v Speaker 11>the benchmark, but you literally are doing worse than the

0:45:50.600 --> 0:45:54.520
<v Speaker 11>products that you own. It's quite fascinating interesting.

0:45:54.719 --> 0:46:01.000
<v Speaker 5>Well interpret for us the confounding mix of data that

0:46:01.040 --> 0:46:05.479
<v Speaker 5>we're seeing right now. I believe ubs Jason Draho termed

0:46:05.520 --> 0:46:11.920
<v Speaker 5>it a Markettheimer effect in congruous data and differing opinions

0:46:11.960 --> 0:46:14.960
<v Speaker 5>of or different different opinions of where the FED is

0:46:15.040 --> 0:46:15.799
<v Speaker 5>going to go.

0:46:17.200 --> 0:46:20.839
<v Speaker 8>How do you play this at this moment? What are

0:46:20.960 --> 0:46:24.440
<v Speaker 8>what are the salient points that you've been following?

0:46:25.120 --> 0:46:28.880
<v Speaker 11>So first, all economists suffer physics envy. You know, you

0:46:28.920 --> 0:46:36.319
<v Speaker 11>can land you know, physicists can land a craft on

0:46:36.440 --> 0:46:40.920
<v Speaker 11>an asteroid going fifty thousand miles away, fifty thousand miles

0:46:40.920 --> 0:46:44.840
<v Speaker 11>an hour, ten million miles away. So economists are jealous

0:46:44.840 --> 0:46:48.279
<v Speaker 11>of that, mostly because they can even tell you in

0:46:48.320 --> 0:46:50.279
<v Speaker 11>real time if we're in a recession or not.

0:46:50.920 --> 0:46:51.120
<v Speaker 6>Right.

0:46:51.239 --> 0:46:54.040
<v Speaker 11>So, when you compare the two sciences, and I use

0:46:54.080 --> 0:46:57.160
<v Speaker 11>that term loosely, one is a very precise science that

0:46:57.200 --> 0:47:00.480
<v Speaker 11>does unbelievable things, and the other are a bunch of

0:47:00.520 --> 0:47:05.000
<v Speaker 11>sociologists pretending to have a math background and pretending that

0:47:05.080 --> 0:47:08.920
<v Speaker 11>they're physicists, So start with that bit of bias on

0:47:09.000 --> 0:47:14.000
<v Speaker 11>my part. And then second, remember what the statistician George

0:47:14.040 --> 0:47:17.880
<v Speaker 11>Box said. All models are wrong, but some are useful,

0:47:18.040 --> 0:47:23.760
<v Speaker 11>and all of us, investors', strategists, but especially economists, tend

0:47:23.800 --> 0:47:26.440
<v Speaker 11>to forget that when we have a model of inflation,

0:47:26.960 --> 0:47:31.160
<v Speaker 11>when we have a model of GDP, we think somehow

0:47:31.160 --> 0:47:34.560
<v Speaker 11>that these models are you know, the Delphi of oracle,

0:47:34.560 --> 0:47:37.080
<v Speaker 11>and they're telling us the truth. What they are is

0:47:37.160 --> 0:47:42.080
<v Speaker 11>taking a super complicated world with a million moving parts

0:47:42.120 --> 0:47:46.839
<v Speaker 11>and thousands and thousands of data points and saying two

0:47:46.840 --> 0:47:49.680
<v Speaker 11>point two percent. You know, the old joke is, and

0:47:49.719 --> 0:47:51.760
<v Speaker 11>I don't want to just beat up on economists because

0:47:52.120 --> 0:47:55.799
<v Speaker 11>investors and strategists, all of us engage in this foolishness.

0:47:55.800 --> 0:47:59.560
<v Speaker 11>But the old joke is, what why do economists, you know,

0:47:59.680 --> 0:48:02.720
<v Speaker 11>show data to the second decimal point? And the answer

0:48:02.840 --> 0:48:05.240
<v Speaker 11>is to demonstrate they have a sense of humor.

0:48:07.040 --> 0:48:09.799
<v Speaker 1>Interesting, hey, Barry, you know one of the one of

0:48:09.840 --> 0:48:13.040
<v Speaker 1>the drivers of their stock market performance this year has

0:48:13.120 --> 0:48:15.759
<v Speaker 1>been a I and a lot of skeptics are out

0:48:15.760 --> 0:48:18.360
<v Speaker 1>there saying, boy this, I'm not sure if this is

0:48:18.840 --> 0:48:22.120
<v Speaker 1>real or if this should be really driving the markets here,

0:48:22.160 --> 0:48:24.640
<v Speaker 1>the AI may be overplayed. Do you have an opinion

0:48:24.719 --> 0:48:24.960
<v Speaker 1>on that?

0:48:27.040 --> 0:48:29.200
<v Speaker 11>Yeah, And I think it's when you go back and

0:48:29.200 --> 0:48:32.920
<v Speaker 11>look at history. No matter what the new technology is,

0:48:33.440 --> 0:48:36.480
<v Speaker 11>the cycle is kind of similar. Some people have called

0:48:36.520 --> 0:48:41.000
<v Speaker 11>this the Gartner hype cycle. But think back to internet

0:48:41.040 --> 0:48:43.880
<v Speaker 11>stocks or biotech stocks, or if you really want to

0:48:44.520 --> 0:48:48.520
<v Speaker 11>dust off the history books, railroad and steal stocks. A

0:48:48.600 --> 0:48:54.440
<v Speaker 11>new technology comes along, it changes everything. And while that's true,

0:48:54.840 --> 0:48:57.560
<v Speaker 11>nobody knows who the winners of that are going to be,

0:48:58.040 --> 0:49:01.239
<v Speaker 11>And so you have this land rush out who's left

0:49:01.280 --> 0:49:04.560
<v Speaker 11>standing in the world of personal computers. I mean, at

0:49:04.560 --> 0:49:07.040
<v Speaker 11>this point it's Apple and Dell and not a whole

0:49:07.120 --> 0:49:10.400
<v Speaker 11>lot of other people. But at the time there was

0:49:10.440 --> 0:49:13.640
<v Speaker 11>a giant land rush, there were hundreds of companies, most

0:49:13.640 --> 0:49:19.120
<v Speaker 11>of them fall by the wayside, radio, television, automobiles, pick

0:49:19.160 --> 0:49:22.840
<v Speaker 11>it to fiber optic, pick a technology, and it's the

0:49:22.880 --> 0:49:27.040
<v Speaker 11>same thing. So AI is probably going to be a

0:49:27.080 --> 0:49:31.040
<v Speaker 11>big thing at some point in the future. Figuring out

0:49:31.200 --> 0:49:34.080
<v Speaker 11>which company is going to be the winner, I don't

0:49:34.080 --> 0:49:38.200
<v Speaker 11>know if it's Microsoft or in Vidia. History has shown

0:49:38.280 --> 0:49:41.480
<v Speaker 11>us that very often there's a surprise winner. And at

0:49:41.480 --> 0:49:43.480
<v Speaker 11>the fact that we're talking about in Vidia for a

0:49:43.520 --> 0:49:46.560
<v Speaker 11>long time. Hey, they weren't also ran in the chip world.

0:49:46.880 --> 0:49:49.879
<v Speaker 11>Maybe they have this floating GPU thing that we could

0:49:49.960 --> 0:49:55.040
<v Speaker 11>use for gaming. Think about how rapidly things shay. But

0:49:55.200 --> 0:49:58.000
<v Speaker 11>by the way, not too long ago. I love finding

0:49:58.040 --> 0:50:02.520
<v Speaker 11>these old magazine articles. There was one about the BlackBerry

0:50:02.600 --> 0:50:06.400
<v Speaker 11>versus iPhone and you know this was about twenty plus

0:50:06.480 --> 0:50:10.000
<v Speaker 11>years ago. And I'm sorry about fifteen years ago, in

0:50:10.080 --> 0:50:13.879
<v Speaker 11>the late twenty two thousand's, like nine twenty ten.

0:50:14.320 --> 0:50:15.040
<v Speaker 1>And here's why.

0:50:15.080 --> 0:50:17.319
<v Speaker 11>The BlackBerry, you know, has a lot of fighting in it.

0:50:17.440 --> 0:50:21.320
<v Speaker 11>And you know this interloper from Apple. They're a computer company,

0:50:21.320 --> 0:50:23.799
<v Speaker 11>what do they know about phones? So our ability to

0:50:23.880 --> 0:50:29.319
<v Speaker 11>forecast the future, especially with technology, it's pretty mediocre. We

0:50:29.360 --> 0:50:33.439
<v Speaker 11>don't do a great job. AI is great. Your guest

0:50:33.520 --> 0:50:35.359
<v Speaker 11>is as good as mine as to which company ends

0:50:35.440 --> 0:50:36.160
<v Speaker 11>up being the winner.

0:50:36.880 --> 0:50:38.800
<v Speaker 1>Hey, Barry, thanks so much for joining us. As always,

0:50:38.800 --> 0:50:42.520
<v Speaker 1>always appreciate getting your unique perspective. Barry Ridholts. He's the

0:50:42.560 --> 0:50:46.280
<v Speaker 1>host of Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. Great podcast.

0:50:46.320 --> 0:50:48.600
<v Speaker 1>I recommend checking that out. Is also the chairman and

0:50:48.640 --> 0:50:52.120
<v Speaker 1>chief investment officer Rit Holt's Wealth Management and when Matt

0:50:52.160 --> 0:50:53.719
<v Speaker 1>Miller's in the studio. They tend to go off the

0:50:53.760 --> 0:50:54.960
<v Speaker 1>rails and talk about cars.

0:50:56.640 --> 0:51:00.520
<v Speaker 2>Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg Markets podcast. Caribe and

0:51:00.560 --> 0:51:04.680
<v Speaker 2>listen to interviews on Apple Podcasts or whatever podcast platform

0:51:04.719 --> 0:51:08.040
<v Speaker 2>you prefer. I'm Matt Miller. I'm on Twitter at Matt

0:51:08.080 --> 0:51:09.480
<v Speaker 2>Miller nineteen seventy three.

0:51:09.960 --> 0:51:12.400
<v Speaker 1>And I'm Paul Sweeney. I'm on Twitter at pt Sweeney.

0:51:12.440 --> 0:51:15.080
<v Speaker 1>Before the podcast, you can always catch us worldwide at

0:51:15.120 --> 0:51:16.879
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Radio