Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keane Jay Ley.
Speaker 1: We bring you insight from the best in economics, finance, investment,
Speaker 1: and international relations. Find Bloomberg Surveillance on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,
Speaker 1: Bloomberg dot Com, and of course on the Bloomberg. Right now,
Speaker 1: thom Ma's take a look at an interesting story. I
Speaker 1: guess some former chiefs of the Homeland Security suggesting that
Speaker 1: some of the use of the Homeland Security UH Department
Speaker 1: for border politics is creating some issues. To give us
Speaker 1: a sense of what's going on there, we welcome Michael Ross.
Speaker 1: Michaelis Bloomberg Government Homeland Security reporters. So Mchael give us
Speaker 1: a sense of kind of some of the issues srolling
Speaker 1: around the Homeland Security Department. Absolutely, good morning to you both,
Speaker 1: and I join you actually just a few yards from
Speaker 1: the Pentagon this morning at the T s A headquarters
Speaker 1: where we are also commemorating these moments of nine allove
Speaker 1: input is a very somber moment here that I'm joining
Speaker 1: you from. And but earlier this week I was in
Speaker 1: New York. We were at the nine eleven Memorial and
Speaker 1: Museum with some of the former heads the former secretaries
Speaker 1: of the the department that launched because of this day.
Speaker 1: The Department of Coman Security UM is definitely the startup
Speaker 1: out of this and UH, they were several of them
Speaker 1: expressed concerns, deep concerns that eighteen years after the fact,
Speaker 1: that there is more issues that are dividing the department
Speaker 1: politically and making it more difficult for the department to
Speaker 1: function in the private sector. Mc Garrett Graff who had
Speaker 1: my book of the Year a few years ago in
Speaker 1: the FBI, and Mr Mueller has a wonderful new book out.
Speaker 1: It is a visceral book of interviews of September eleven
Speaker 1: and permean permeating that is somewhat the cacophony in Washington.
Speaker 1: Jonathan Bernstein and Bloomberg Opinion calls it the pure chaos
Speaker 1: off of Mr Bolton's resignation. And within all of this,
Speaker 1: the periphery is Homeland Security. What's the state of the
Speaker 1: department right now? How would you frame that? What's the
Speaker 1: concern is that we're hearing from ammakers on both sides
Speaker 1: of the aisle as well as UH former officials, is
Speaker 1: that it is getting more difficult for the department to
Speaker 1: accomplish his goals in some ways, or I should say
Speaker 1: that such such a such a focus on immigration enforcement,
Speaker 1: they fear is making taking resources away from a lot
Speaker 1: of the other missions. Again, the Department was formed out
Speaker 1: of this terrorist attack. It was formed to try to
Speaker 1: try to keep the homeland safe. It has so many
Speaker 1: missions between t s A and SEMA and the Secret
Speaker 1: Service and the Coast Guard and cybersecurity, and yet the
Speaker 1: bulk of that of the bulk of its energy right
Speaker 1: now is in those immigration enforcement agencies. And there's worried
Speaker 1: that UM there might be other threats that aren't getting
Speaker 1: as much attention. There's where the resources might not be
Speaker 1: getting to what they need to be, and there's word
Speaker 1: that there's is causing division. So MICHAELA. As the Department
Speaker 1: makes its concerns known, what has been the response so
Speaker 1: far from Congress? UH and Congresses? We were just with
Speaker 1: several of the House Homeland Security Committee yesterday. They are
Speaker 1: the different very upset. Actually, in a separate incident, some
Speaker 1: of the top officials and the Trump administration UM at
Speaker 1: first refused and then delayed an hearing about global threats
Speaker 1: that the committee has ever year to try to hear about.
Speaker 1: You know what they need to do to try to
Speaker 1: make the department better and what they needed to do
Speaker 1: to try to address some of those threats. So UM,
Speaker 1: both types of the aisle again very concerned UM that
Speaker 1: some top Trump officials, including the Acting Secretary of Homeland Security. UM,
Speaker 1: we're not able to satisfy the time UM now that
Speaker 1: has been rescheduled of course, UM to try to talk
Speaker 1: about some of these threats with the homeland So it's
Speaker 1: interesting the is there a sense what is kind of
Speaker 1: the gas concern on the part of the Department of
Speaker 1: Homeland Security about what they're being test to do an
Speaker 1: immigration is that manpower? Is it other resources that are
Speaker 1: being diverted? What's really the big issue for them? The
Speaker 1: big issue on immigration enforcement coming into the fall, of course,
Speaker 1: is going to be the refocus on the border wall,
Speaker 1: which is definitely a top priority of the Trump administration.
Speaker 1: But that is going to be another issue that's really
Speaker 1: going to divide Congress because we're looking at all of
Speaker 1: the spending bills that need to be passed within the
Speaker 1: next UM well a few weeks to try to try
Speaker 1: to get it in on time, but this fall, UM
Speaker 1: to avoid a shutdown, and at the heart of that
Speaker 1: is going to be this issue of trying to stem
Speaker 1: the flow of immigrants coming from the Southwest border. McKenna ross,
Speaker 1: thank you so much. Border politics hurting homeland security to
Speaker 1: say the least, as well. Good to hear from her
Speaker 1: from t s A near the Pentagon on this September
Speaker 1: ele Right now, we're gonna she's not an intensive care
Speaker 1: She's been working through the morning from London on the
Speaker 1: London perspective of the Hong Kong Stock Exchange effort, a
Speaker 1: shock effort to purchase the LSE, and she is Sarah said, Sarah,
Speaker 1: Let's look at the stock price up x percent, double
Speaker 1: digit and it's given it back with a vengeance in
Speaker 1: the last hour. Why is that? Well, I think there's
Speaker 1: a certainly an interesting offer that's been been put on
Speaker 1: the table. I mean, you know, the ELSE had given
Speaker 1: anyone that was interested in acquiring the business a short
Speaker 1: window to make an offer after it had made the
Speaker 1: announcement that it was looking to tie up with the
Speaker 1: filmer Thompson Royds's business um Refinitive. Now you know, after
Speaker 1: you know, if a deal with Refinitive would have gone through,
Speaker 1: it would make the l SE almost unaffordable. So you know,
Speaker 1: the else had ultimately it's become open, is not Elsie,
Speaker 1: but they'd give you a bit as a short window
Speaker 1: to come in and try and make that offer, which
Speaker 1: which you know Hong Kong has coming down right. And
Speaker 1: then it's cultural as well. This is a Mary Poppins.
Speaker 1: It's not railways to India, it's the Chinese are coming
Speaker 1: into buy London. I mean, that's a blunt way to
Speaker 1: put it. I don't mean any aspersion there, but Sarah,
Speaker 1: there's a whole cultural and political overlay to this transaction,
Speaker 1: this proposed transaction. I mean, there'd be an under understatement
Speaker 1: to say that that, you know, the deal is super
Speaker 1: politically sensitive. That's what it is at the moment. You know,
Speaker 1: you have the Hong Kong protests um, you know, going
Speaker 1: on and and continue, and then of course you've got
Speaker 1: breaks it and and the falling the drop in in
Speaker 1: in Sterling, so you know, there are a lot of
Speaker 1: politically sensitive issues. The we had Andrea Ledson this morning,
Speaker 1: you know, whilst we while Francine was interviewing her her
Speaker 1: this morning and the announcement came, she said that they
Speaker 1: would look at any deal, but there would s may
Speaker 1: be close scrutiny from the UK government on on any
Speaker 1: deal of this scale, certainly from the Chinese. So Sarah,
Speaker 1: what is just the status of the definitive deal that
Speaker 1: was announced recently. Well, it's it's been announced but certainly
Speaker 1: not closed UM, and and that process is still ongoing.
Speaker 1: So you know, this is where other bidders are interested in.
Speaker 1: The LSE had this short window to come in and
Speaker 1: try and scumper that, and the Hong Kong Stock Exchange
Speaker 1: has said that any deal UM with Hong Kong Stock
Speaker 1: Exchange and l s UM is premised on the refinitive
Speaker 1: transaction not proceeding, and that I would guess mainly has
Speaker 1: to do with the fact that the Hong Kong Stock
Speaker 1: Exchange would not be able to afford the LSU should
Speaker 1: the refinitive transaction go through. Sarah, thank you so much,
Speaker 1: particularly through the morning here, Sarah said, with us in
Speaker 1: London on this proposed transaction, Hong Kong to buy London,
Speaker 1: we can go to LuSE Group and there Doug Ramsey,
Speaker 1: Handsome Doug Ramsey with us this morning. Doug, I love
Speaker 1: your note. We're all economists now. Is that really what
Speaker 1: your world has come down to? It seems like it.
Speaker 1: I mean, it seems like the uh, the economic bulls
Speaker 1: and the stock market bulls are now one and the same,
Speaker 1: and uh, you know, we continue to cause investors they're
Speaker 1: they're not always the same. I mean, think back to
Speaker 1: that great top of March of two thousand. We put
Speaker 1: in a market top that led to a forty nine
Speaker 1: and a half percent decline in the SMP five and
Speaker 1: the economy did not sink into recession until eleven months later.
Speaker 1: So it's certainly possible that something like that could happen again.
Speaker 1: But you know, the two can can disconnect. This areods, Doug?
Speaker 1: Is this the time to uh for the Tom and
Speaker 1: I we talked about we're value stock investors. This the
Speaker 1: time for value stocks to shine. Here the ones in
Speaker 1: a decade opportunity. I don't know if this is the turn.
Speaker 1: I mean, it seems, uh, it seems unlikely to mean
Speaker 1: it wasn't. Remember it's not just you know, growth versus
Speaker 1: value and momentum versus value. It it's everything that was
Speaker 1: working versus everything that was not. And I mean from
Speaker 1: low voll versus high beta, commodity versus consumer, that sort
Speaker 1: of thing. And I just find it hard to believe
Speaker 1: you're gonna have a watershed day where all of those
Speaker 1: relationships where one week ago, I mean, the fundamental conviction
Speaker 1: that nearly every strategist had for those trends to remain
Speaker 1: in place. Uh, it's amazing how the narrative has flipped
Speaker 1: with just two days action. So I don't think it's
Speaker 1: going to be a turn in all of those binary
Speaker 1: relations Can I just point evaluations that could, Paul? Can
Speaker 1: I just point out the Dow closed at twenty six thousand,
Speaker 1: nine nine. I mean, if this is this is a
Speaker 1: Ramsey correction, this is a Ramsey crac So again, as
Speaker 1: Tom mentioned here, you know we're at our very near
Speaker 1: these all time highs, despite trade, despite all the geopolitical
Speaker 1: issues in the world equity wise, what is your view
Speaker 1: of the market right here? Well, our view is that
Speaker 1: the last nineteen months have been a a broad uh
Speaker 1: global topping process. And remember, on the basis of the ACQUI,
Speaker 1: we are not the all country world index. We are
Speaker 1: not back two new highs. And if you look at
Speaker 1: sort of the average stock whether globally or within the US,
Speaker 1: on the basis of like the value line arithmetic index,
Speaker 1: excellent measure that's basically, the average performance of the U
Speaker 1: S stock nowhere near a new high. So it's been
Speaker 1: in our minds, this broad distribution process that started remember
Speaker 1: when the economy was red hot and right before those
Speaker 1: first terra were fired. This is great, Paul to have
Speaker 1: dog Doug. We're gonna keep it short today just because
Speaker 1: of all the breaking news. But the only reason Paul,
Speaker 1: we have Doug Ramsey on is because he brings up
Speaker 1: the value line, arithmetic and geometric indexes which are which
Speaker 1: are just fabulous. Do you know Ramsey still has on
Speaker 1: his floor the old value line. He trips over it
Speaker 1: like once a week as well. Doug Ramsey, thank you
Speaker 1: so much. With LUTH group, it is a joy always
Speaker 1: to speak with. Eileen Bourbage coming to us today from
Speaker 1: Tel Aviv with Passion Capital. She is outstanding and folding
Speaker 1: in the digital theology of the moment into our daily lives. Eileen,
Speaker 1: I know you've never done this. It's beneath you, but
Speaker 1: the truth is right now. I'm all over the Tied
Speaker 1: Original Scent Liquid laundry detergent, thirty two loads, fifty fluid
Speaker 1: ounces Amazon Choice with a hundred and eleven customer reviews.
Speaker 1: Wanted Today order within four hours eleven minutes it Amazon,
Speaker 1: Why should that be regulated that I want to get
Speaker 1: my tied in four hours eleven minutes same day delivery.
Speaker 1: Nothing's beneath me. I'm willing to roll up my sleeve,
Speaker 1: you know that song Um. I don't know that that
Speaker 1: has to be regulated, but I do think what the
Speaker 1: regulators are looking at is to make sure that Amazon
Speaker 1: isn't sort of inappropriately exerting its influence on smaller merchants.
Speaker 1: So Tied or P and G. I mean, they're probably
Speaker 1: gonna be okay. They can kind of hold their own.
Speaker 1: They can negotiate what will be I guess business, you know,
Speaker 1: standard terms, market practice, market rates. But if you're a
Speaker 1: sort of up and coming independent retailer you've got you know,
Speaker 1: a new sort of bio friendly laundry churchent laundry soap,
Speaker 1: and you want to be on the Amazon marketplace too,
Speaker 1: who's to say that you're going to be able to
Speaker 1: get the same terms that P and G can get.
Speaker 1: And I think that's what the regulators are taking a
Speaker 1: look at. So, Eileen, we've certainly I think seen heard
Speaker 1: felt over the last year year and a half, the
Speaker 1: US regulators US Congression congressional leaders taking maybe a harder
Speaker 1: look at some of the big US tech companies. How
Speaker 1: concerned are you that the tide may be changing and
Speaker 1: that the US may be taking a heavier regulatory hand
Speaker 1: to Silk and Valley. Yeah, I'm not too concerned. I
Speaker 1: think actually this is to be expected. I think of
Speaker 1: the tech companies, but also a lot of sectors that
Speaker 1: are influenced by innovation and by data probably had a
Speaker 1: little bit of a slacker food right for maybe a
Speaker 1: bit too long as the regulators caught up to sort
Speaker 1: of understand some of these implications and why they might
Speaker 1: need to look at protecting consumers interests a little bit
Speaker 1: more ardently. I think there were a lot of companies
Speaker 1: that probably also figured, you know, with the president that
Speaker 1: we've got in the White House, perhaps regulation wasn't going
Speaker 1: to be as much of a problem or much of
Speaker 1: a burden for them. And I think it's about time
Speaker 1: there's been a little bit of scrutiny. The question is
Speaker 1: how far the pendulum is going to swing, and whether
Speaker 1: or not they're going to take actions that are just
Speaker 1: for perception or signaling and not actually practically beneficial to
Speaker 1: anybody that would be a problem, right, So, Eileen, it
Speaker 1: was another busy day in Cooper Tino yesterday, Tim Cook
Speaker 1: and others on stage at trotting out some of the
Speaker 1: newer products and services. What was your takeaway from kind
Speaker 1: of what you saw and and heard from the good
Speaker 1: folks at Apple. Um. I've got a few takeaways. One
Speaker 1: of them was that, you know, it's really interesting that
Speaker 1: they're they're finally coming down a bit on price point,
Speaker 1: and they're probably acknowledging that maybe being at the highest end,
Speaker 1: i mean extreme high end of the market isn't maybe
Speaker 1: going to help them continue to grow their market share.
Speaker 1: So they've come down on price point. Buying a brand
Speaker 1: new iPhone eleven is going to be cheaper than when
Speaker 1: you you know, had to buy the iPhone X or
Speaker 1: the x are. They still have a premium for customers
Speaker 1: like myself that'll be buying in the UK or anyone
Speaker 1: in China, for example. So that will be interesting to
Speaker 1: watch because I do think they heavily rely on what's
Speaker 1: happening in China. Similarly, I saw the emphasis on services,
Speaker 1: and I think continued push on recurring revenue is really
Speaker 1: really key. You know, I'll be honest folks. I did
Speaker 1: this experiment with Paul today. I did the thing where
Speaker 1: you signed up to get ready for September. And I
Speaker 1: want to thank can. I thank McKinnon and Millanoch at
Speaker 1: Maine listening on Bloomberg one. How does she get Bloomberg
Speaker 1: one of six one FM in Boston from Millanoch at Maine.
Speaker 1: She's like totally touchy Earth green, and she said go
Speaker 1: with the midnight green. So I went with the midnight
Speaker 1: green color. Eileen, this is the most brilliant pricing I've
Speaker 1: ever seen. There's this delusion in your world that Apple's
Speaker 1: a luxury evil brand because it's eleven under bucks a month.
Speaker 1: That's bologny. We're buying this like we buy a cable
Speaker 1: TV subscription. Well, you're buying You're gonna buy Apple TV
Speaker 1: Plus like you're buying cable TV now. And that's actually
Speaker 1: what's effect being Netflix, Disney and Roku. The phone steps
Speaker 1: are a different matter. I think there is this diconomy
Speaker 1: between people who appreciate function and probably have had these
Speaker 1: camera features, the extended battery not even extended, but you know,
Speaker 1: reasonable battery life and Android phones for months, if not longer.
Speaker 1: And Apple decides to roll them out in charge, I
Speaker 1: don't know, two or three times as much, and they're
Speaker 1: gonna still in a whole bunch. Yeah, but they're they're
Speaker 1: they're doing this at forty bucks a month, fifty bucks
Speaker 1: a month, maybe seventy five bucks a month tops. That's
Speaker 1: not an eleven purchase psychologically, is it. No, it's not.
Speaker 1: And that's what they're gambling on. And then what they're
Speaker 1: going to try and tack on or oh you get
Speaker 1: a free year of Apple TV plus where you're gonna
Speaker 1: have a free year of Apple Arcade, and they're really
Speaker 1: trying to get you hooked on those services that you're
Speaker 1: gonna pay for beyond. We're gonna stop the show right now,
Speaker 1: Sweeney's expert on this. What in God's name is Apple Arcade?
Speaker 1: You're not a gamer, Tom, I'm not a gamer. But
Speaker 1: how are they going to compete with the adults of
Speaker 1: gamers because they have billions of devices out there and
Speaker 1: they feel like they can just go out and get
Speaker 1: the con and so, you know, I lean Tom brings
Speaker 1: up a good point. I mean, you know the Apple TV.
Speaker 1: You know I thought was interesting about that was the
Speaker 1: price point for undercutting everybody. Um, do you think Apple
Speaker 1: is really serious about the content but the video content
Speaker 1: business UM going forward. I think they're serious. I think
Speaker 1: this is a pretty serious opening for them. I think
Speaker 1: the question is how much they're going to back it up.
Speaker 1: So obviously their catalog or their content materially not you know,
Speaker 1: at all similar to the volume that's on any of
Speaker 1: the other services. So the question will be if they're
Speaker 1: going to continue to invest in original programming, or if
Speaker 1: they're going to start to syndicate other people's programs, and
Speaker 1: if they're going to try and develop the volume that
Speaker 1: other people have UM and the sort of other companies
Speaker 1: of who stuff they affected yesterday. Eileen, you're a great
Speaker 1: student of London. The time we've got left, I really
Speaker 1: want to talk about the future of the city. You've
Speaker 1: been a follower of Brexit and all that, but also
Speaker 1: a follower of the data investment, the staffing in the
Speaker 1: back office. Do you still presume that the city will
Speaker 1: mike great services and staff functions over to continental europe cities.
Speaker 1: I think that some are looking at that and probably
Speaker 1: thinking about contingency planning, but I actually don't believe it's
Speaker 1: going to happen on mass I really don't I think
Speaker 1: that the city of London is going to continue to thrive.
Speaker 1: It's got a huge, huge talent pool. People have been
Speaker 1: here for decades and for years, and we've got great,
Speaker 1: great centralized support from the regulators and so on and
Speaker 1: so forth. So I do think they're going to get
Speaker 1: regulatory equivalent. I think it'd be stilly for boards and
Speaker 1: for corporate governance for people not to look at contingency planning.
Speaker 1: But I don't think it's going to be a total exist.
Speaker 1: Eileen Bourbage, thank you so much. Greatly appreciated on technology,
Speaker 1: but with a really different tist twist cheests with Passion
Speaker 1: Capital Partners. Eileen Bourbage from London usually and from Tel Aviv. Today.
Speaker 1: Right now we're gonna go to Chris Hughes, who wrote
Speaker 1: a durable and wonderful essay off of the shock of
Speaker 1: the Hong Kong Stock exchange going after the London Stock exchanged. Chris,
Speaker 1: I'm going to suggest r S a move the market
Speaker 1: today as we saw a huge jump in LSE shares
Speaker 1: and they've really come back for a number of different reasons.
Speaker 1: And I'm not going to give you all the credit,
Speaker 1: but you really set the tone how critical is it
Speaker 1: did the Hong Kong Stock Change go after this refinitive,
Speaker 1: the Thompson Reuters data package that LCS trying to acquire. Well,
Speaker 1: I think the Hong Kong Exchange is trying to essentially
Speaker 1: stop the NFC getting refinitive. It's trying to get the
Speaker 1: NFC and it's only got a few months in which
Speaker 1: to do this. The NFC shareholders have got a vote
Speaker 1: on that definitive transaction quite soon, so it's now or never.
Speaker 1: So the criticality is sort of in the in this
Speaker 1: opportunity to get this historic exchange and bust up it's
Speaker 1: deal with Definitive, and it's you know, it's it's it's
Speaker 1: wasted no time. I mean that deal was only inked
Speaker 1: a few weeks ago and here it is. You wonder
Speaker 1: if actually they were thinking about doing this with sometime
Speaker 1: and Definitive kind of forced it. But this is fine,
Speaker 1: And folks, we should mention that Refinitive and the Old
Speaker 1: Times and Right Reuters in their icon terminal as a
Speaker 1: direct competitor of BLOOMBERGILP and or acclaimed terminals as well.
Speaker 1: Everybody's saying the right things, the posturing what would you
Speaker 1: expect will be next? I mean, do you have any idea,
Speaker 1: Chris Hughes, of what happens into this week, through the
Speaker 1: weekend and in the next week. Yeah, it's a really
Speaker 1: interesting question because this negotiation here is playing out quite oddly.
Speaker 1: You know, when you're trying to buy a national stock exchange,
Speaker 1: you really want to get everything lined up, you want
Speaker 1: to get the board on side, you want to get
Speaker 1: tea off all of the political side of it. And
Speaker 1: what Hong Kong Exchange has done is it's gone public
Speaker 1: with this actually quite tend toive proposal that's sort of
Speaker 1: firm offer him. It's just gone public with this, and
Speaker 1: it's really put the NSSE board on the spot. You know,
Speaker 1: it's kind of came as a big surprise to the market.
Speaker 1: That's not normally how you go about buying a you know,
Speaker 1: a sort of national asset like the stock exchange. So
Speaker 1: over the coming days, Hong Kong Exchange has really got
Speaker 1: to kind of flesh out kind of why this makes
Speaker 1: sense and try to keep the atmosphere sort of friendly,
Speaker 1: even though I think going public with a unsolicited offer
Speaker 1: is kind of not the most friendly thing to do.
Speaker 1: So Chris, give us a sense of kind of the
Speaker 1: political overtones here Hong Kong Exchange, London Exchange, Hong Kong
Speaker 1: UK give us kind of the sense you're you're hearing
Speaker 1: over there. Yeah, that's a really good question. Um. I
Speaker 1: suppose the first question is does the UK want any
Speaker 1: foreign acquire acquirer to to buy the London Stock Exchange?
Speaker 1: Not really. The London Stock Exchange is a quoted company.
Speaker 1: It's got shares that trade on the London Stock Exchange.
Speaker 1: So in that sense, you know anyone can come along
Speaker 1: and buy it. But we all know that stock exchanges
Speaker 1: are quite sensitive assets. I mean, when these itself agreed
Speaker 1: a deal with Deutsche Borsa that fell apart, and that
Speaker 1: was with both managements initial support. So the first thing
Speaker 1: to observe is that any cross border deal for an
Speaker 1: exchange is just really really hard. Then you layer on
Speaker 1: the complication of this being China into the UK. I mean,
Speaker 1: clearly there aren't close links between the UK and China
Speaker 1: and in many respects, but that's going to cause you
Speaker 1: some heightened scrutiny. So there are a lot of questions
Speaker 1: on on all levels about the political back drop. And
Speaker 1: then of course I have to mention Brexit. Now, this
Speaker 1: wouldn't be a cheap deal by any means. It's not
Speaker 1: as if the LC is trading super cheap because of
Speaker 1: because of of brexits. I mean, the the valuation multiple
Speaker 1: put on this possible action with the Hong Kong Exchange
Speaker 1: is pretty racy, so it wouldn't necessarily be cheap. But
Speaker 1: I think a lot of people in the UK would
Speaker 1: nevertheless question whether, you know, a prize national asset was
Speaker 1: being bought at you know, opportunistic moment. It's also raises
Speaker 1: the question, you know, of the definitive deal because what
Speaker 1: was the feeling amongst LSE investors about that deal? Is
Speaker 1: that considered to be something that was strategically wise for
Speaker 1: the London Exchange to pursue. I think the reality is
Speaker 1: there no doubt that it was very warmly received. The
Speaker 1: NC share price rose considerably on the on the possibility
Speaker 1: of that deal, and even more when it was confirmed,
Speaker 1: quite an astonishing jump about that's a sort of that's
Speaker 1: on an acquisition. That's a sort of rise you get
Speaker 1: when a company is being taken over normally, so this
Speaker 1: was this was very warmly received. Now some of that
Speaker 1: may have actually been some specular of a of a
Speaker 1: of a bid like the one we've seen today. But
Speaker 1: you know, NC shareholders do like what that does to
Speaker 1: the LSE investment story X refinitive What are you actually
Speaker 1: buying at the London Stock Exchange? I mean they're not
Speaker 1: standing around in tuxedos anymore. What do you what do
Speaker 1: you buy? What are you buying? What's the the income
Speaker 1: stream anybody trades of you know, uh, sir Howard Davies
Speaker 1: RBS or what are you buying? Well some of a
Speaker 1: really good question, and yeah, the NC. What you're driving
Speaker 1: at quite rightly is that you know, one may think
Speaker 1: of the LC as a sort of platform for trading
Speaker 1: stocks and shares, but actually that business has evolved considerably
Speaker 1: kind of away from just what we would think of
Speaker 1: a classic SHA trading for quite a while, mainly actually
Speaker 1: through doing acquisitions. So the LYSE now is is very
Speaker 1: big in indices. So they've got a very big platform
Speaker 1: of of of indicries and they are seeking to grow that.
Speaker 1: You will say that you know that big in dates
Speaker 1: are clearly the idea of the definitive deal was kind
Speaker 1: of kind of to dilute that old old fashioned chat
Speaker 1: writing even more. Chris Hughs thank you so much too,
Speaker 1: short to visit Chris Hughes and I'll get I think
Speaker 1: I've got it out on Twitter. If not, I'll do
Speaker 1: it again. Chris Hughes of Bloomberg Opinion. It's open season
Speaker 1: on the London Stock Exchange. Just the first definitive read
Speaker 1: on this. Uh, the shock and that's the right word, Paul.
Speaker 1: The London media was on fire with this announcement. Thanks
Speaker 1: for listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. Subscribe and listen
Speaker 1: to interviews on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, or whichever podcast platform
Speaker 1: you prefer. I'm on Twitter at Tom Keane before the podcast.
Speaker 1: You can always catch us worldwide. I'm Bloomberg Radio