Speaker 1: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keene, along
Speaker 1: with Jonathan Farrell and Lisa A. Bramowitz. Join us each
Speaker 1: day for insight from the best and economics, geopolitics, finance
Speaker 1: and investment. Subscribe to Bloomberg Surveillance on demand on Apple,
Speaker 1: Spotify and anywhere you get your podcasts, and always I'm
Speaker 1: Bloomberg dot Com, the Bloomberg Terminal, and the Bloomberg Business app.
Speaker 1: Lord Calvastina joins us. Now, heady, you say, could he
Speaker 1: strategy OBC Capital Markets? Let me, let's just start with
Speaker 1: a job support on Friday. It follows through into Monday
Speaker 1: at Kurticlowa. What did that change for you? If anything?
Speaker 1: It's ill. So look, I think it's one data point,
Speaker 1: you know. I think there was a view that emerged
Speaker 1: over the weekend in Friday trading um that the Fed
Speaker 1: may have to stay higher for longer. We may not
Speaker 1: get the pause, we may not get the cuts. I'm
Speaker 1: still in the camp that thinks we are closer to
Speaker 1: the end of this hiking cycle and we're going to
Speaker 1: get the pause. And for me, it really underscores the
Speaker 1: idea that this economy is very resilient Um, I think
Speaker 1: there could have been some labor hoarding. UM. You know,
Speaker 1: I think that there are things that could explain that
Speaker 1: hot number. But I think we just see this time
Speaker 1: and time again, just evidence that the labor market is
Speaker 1: tight and that we are seeing, you know, if you
Speaker 1: look at some other reports, we're seeing some indications that
Speaker 1: wage growth is slowing. I think that's probably enough to
Speaker 1: help inflation come down. So I'm not overreacting to Friday's report.
Speaker 1: For me, the broader thesis is still intact for now. Laurie,
Speaker 1: when I find fascinating, I thought of you this weekend
Speaker 1: Bloomberg reporting that danaher is looking at a service company
Speaker 1: in the medical field. It's a MidCap, smaller cap kind
Speaker 1: of thing, not a zombie roll up. But are we
Speaker 1: just going to see a roll up in years small
Speaker 1: MidCap space because money finally costs something. I think it's
Speaker 1: a potential catalyst for markets going forward, in the small
Speaker 1: MidCap space in particular. So one of the things we
Speaker 1: know about small cap companies is the hot quality is
Speaker 1: higher than it used to be. Um. What we also
Speaker 1: know is that the price we're gonna pay for, you know,
Speaker 1: either skirting the recession or a short shallow recession or
Speaker 1: a growth scare, or whatever we end up calling. This
Speaker 1: is probably going to be that economic growth is subpar
Speaker 1: for a little bit in percentage terms. And I think
Speaker 1: that incense companies who have a lot of cash still
Speaker 1: sitting on their balance sheets, who have very good, you know,
Speaker 1: structures in terms of their debt profiles, I think this
Speaker 1: is going to incent them to go out and buy
Speaker 1: some growth. And when you're looking at historically cheap valuations
Speaker 1: in small relative to large, it's something that simply makes sense.
Speaker 1: So I think it's you know, it's something that we
Speaker 1: have to watch going forward, and I think it argues
Speaker 1: against a deeply barished narrative in markets. At the same time,
Speaker 1: if you talk about tourists and slots narrative about no landing.
Speaker 1: Is that positive for equity valuations if that means higher
Speaker 1: rates for longer and companies having to justify their capital
Speaker 1: structures in a much higher rate regime. I think it
Speaker 1: depends on exactly what you mean by higher rates. Now,
Speaker 1: if we're going back to something that we saw in
Speaker 1: the seventies, of course that's gonna slaughter pe multiples. Um
Speaker 1: we actually have a model where we make in inflation,
Speaker 1: FED funds and also the ten year yield, and we
Speaker 1: published an update on that this morning. We do have
Speaker 1: a couple of cuts baked in for the FED at
Speaker 1: year end, and it gets us to a twenty two
Speaker 1: times multiple. We also have, you know, the ten year
Speaker 1: treasury at around three point four percent in inflation moderating
Speaker 1: to around three percent. But let's say I just go
Speaker 1: and Lisa and flex those interest rate assumptions and kind
Speaker 1: of take the FED number up and just leave it there,
Speaker 1: so don't bake any cuts and keep that higher for longer.
Speaker 1: I'm still looking at a twenty plus pe multiple on
Speaker 1: a trailing basis on this year's earnings. So it hurts
Speaker 1: a little bit, but it doesn't hurt as much as
Speaker 1: people think. If you go in and do the map, Laurie,
Speaker 1: I just want to finish on the rest of the world.
Speaker 1: China has gone from uninvestable to unavoidable and then seemingly
Speaker 1: in the last forty hours that swung back to something
Speaker 1: in between. Laurie. How much interest is there from your
Speaker 1: clients to invest abroad this year? So it's been huge, John,
Speaker 1: and we've talked about this in the past, but I
Speaker 1: think investors came into three just wanting to do something new,
Speaker 1: and one of the new things that people wanted to
Speaker 1: do was play the China reopening thesis. And I think
Speaker 1: raising the geopolitical angst and talking about worsening relations between
Speaker 1: China and in the US, I think it complicates the
Speaker 1: ability to play that trade. So as we sit here
Speaker 1: and think about things that could push markets down in
Speaker 1: the short term or cause you know, things to just
Speaker 1: lose a little bit momentum. To me, frankly, that's you know,
Speaker 1: a more legitimate downside catalyst than say, oh, earnings need
Speaker 1: to come down a little bit more. I think the
Speaker 1: market understands the ladder. I think the China issue is
Speaker 1: it's challenging something that had gotten people very excited coming
Speaker 1: into this year. Laurie wonderful as elwise, it's going to
Speaker 1: catch up and kick off to try and with you,
Speaker 1: Laurie campus that if i'll b C Capital Markets right now.
Speaker 1: Michael Shall joins US chief executive Officer market Field Asset
Speaker 1: Management with a very very nuanced note there, How did
Speaker 1: your view change the market field view after five seventeen
Speaker 1: thousand plus fifty four thousand revisions? How did the labor
Speaker 1: economy of the United States. Adjust your view. I mean
Speaker 1: I thought it was strong, and Friday's numbers told you
Speaker 1: it was strong. I do think it's one of those
Speaker 1: reports for it looks like a bit of a statistical aberration.
Speaker 1: It's sort of strong across the board. It's a weird
Speaker 1: time a year, and you had all of the two
Speaker 1: adjustments phone into that. So you know, I think probably
Speaker 1: we're still creating about two hundred thousand jobs a month.
Speaker 1: All of the labor metrics look okay, and in Friday's number,
Speaker 1: particularly in the household serve a you know, you discovered
Speaker 1: a bunch of a missing jobs that j Pale have
Speaker 1: been talking about, which it's it's not shocking the labor
Speaker 1: data strong. The market field view is a is a
Speaker 1: more long term view. We're now backed where money costs something? Yes,
Speaker 1: how much? Speak to people that have never enjoyed with
Speaker 1: Michael Shore and enjoyed hers. Speak to how we're back
Speaker 1: to now where money costs something? How does my life change? Well,
Speaker 1: I mean the question is are you operating in a
Speaker 1: kind of business that can generate enough cash flow? But
Speaker 1: money at five is unimportant. I think for a lot
Speaker 1: of the economy. You know, it's it's really still okay.
Speaker 1: I don't think the sort of what we would call
Speaker 1: the sort of old economy has really been devastated by
Speaker 1: interest rates. Um. I think the problem is much more
Speaker 1: in people who have been very, very creative with financial
Speaker 1: engineering attached to a business and and there, you know,
Speaker 1: which is a lot of a sort of PEVC portion
Speaker 1: of the economy there. I think five percent is gonna matter.
Speaker 1: I think we're going to be added around five for
Speaker 1: a while. Thank that we're going to be added around
Speaker 1: five pc until things start to fall apart. This talk,
Speaker 1: of course of going abroad. Only a year or so
Speaker 1: ago China was totally uninvestable. We start and I'm told
Speaker 1: repeatedly it's unavoidable. The events of Friday and over the
Speaker 1: weekend does it change how we want to be invested
Speaker 1: in the China story. Look, I think there's two big issues.
Speaker 1: One is that the Chinese have switched from you know,
Speaker 1: really a very bad COVID policy to a more manageable
Speaker 1: COVID policy. And monetarily they've gone from tight to loose.
Speaker 1: So that's really really positive. I think that hasn't changed.
Speaker 1: It's been true really since two thousand and eighteen is
Speaker 1: the sort of geopolitical geopolitical aggravation of investing in China.
Speaker 1: You know, it's not a lot of fun um. I mean,
Speaker 1: we we found that out in Russia last year, where
Speaker 1: where everything we had there, which wasn't much, you know,
Speaker 1: was wiped over a weekend. I don't think China itself
Speaker 1: is that attractive for those reasons, but that whole region
Speaker 1: is now much much more attractive. I think some of
Speaker 1: the markets surrounding China are investable. Um. I think the
Speaker 1: Japanese as a as a byproduct of yield curve control,
Speaker 1: have also sort of involuntary switched to a very loose
Speaker 1: you know, to a very loose monetary monetary policy. So
Speaker 1: I think Asia and the portions of the US market
Speaker 1: that feed into that, you know, are suddenly doing quite
Speaker 1: a lot better. Does this extend to Europe? To London
Speaker 1: minus listed on the foot seat, does extend to them?
Speaker 1: You know? The foot see made an all time high
Speaker 1: on Friday record no one's talking about, yeah time high, um,
Speaker 1: and it's been struggling, you know, struggling with this level
Speaker 1: force you know, since and so it does for that
Speaker 1: portion of the London market I think it does for
Speaker 1: the German economy, which is still tied you know, which
Speaker 1: is still tied into that. So I think for you know,
Speaker 1: a portion of global economically sensitive equities, the news has
Speaker 1: got materially better in the last four months. How do
Speaker 1: you decipher the signal from the noise at a time
Speaker 1: of such noise, particularly short covering. It's some of the
Speaker 1: volatility that we saw last week. I think it's really hard.
Speaker 1: You know, my my phone didn't stop bringing like Thursday
Speaker 1: and thirty last week from people trying to work out
Speaker 1: what what what one on earth is really going on. Look,
Speaker 1: some of the technicians I respect, I think they've seen
Speaker 1: enough to call this a new bull market. I don't,
Speaker 1: um you know, I think that the change of monetary
Speaker 1: policy last year still matters. Um you know. I think
Speaker 1: that that we might be in this really weird situation
Speaker 1: that an index light V some P equal weight might
Speaker 1: have finished its bare market last year, but the index
Speaker 1: we actually follow, which is the headline index, which is
Speaker 1: dominated by large cap tech, I think it is still
Speaker 1: is still in the bare market. I want to build
Speaker 1: on that, and just to give this color that Thursday's
Speaker 1: short covering with the largest is November fift according to
Speaker 1: Goldman's Trading tak to give you a sense of just
Speaker 1: how violent it really was in a historical perspective, Big Tech,
Speaker 1: You don't think it can recover from here, even with
Speaker 1: all of the job cuts. Is that what you're saying? Yeah,
Speaker 1: I don't think Manasa one hundred is going to make
Speaker 1: a new high. I'd be shocked if it did. Why
Speaker 1: Because I think it was grotesquely overvalued when it did
Speaker 1: make it's all time high. Um, And I think the
Speaker 1: sort of tenure bull markets when they end take a
Speaker 1: long time to give you a new high. But it
Speaker 1: doesn't happen in ten months. You studied commodity cycles. You
Speaker 1: mentioned some optimism Pacific remix, China. Yeah, this is how
Speaker 1: I put it. Is that enough to get oil above
Speaker 1: a hundred dollar brand? Is that something that's more probable
Speaker 1: than many would think? Yeah, I mean I think it's
Speaker 1: got a much better chance of being a hundred and
Speaker 1: sixty at eighty dollars today. I mean, I'm conciding, do
Speaker 1: I need two barrels in my living room? Like Lisa Ahead, No,
Speaker 1: I don't think it's crazy, but I think you have
Speaker 1: to realize that the weakness in crude oil prices since
Speaker 1: last summer was caused partly by what was going on
Speaker 1: in China, which we assume is getting better, but it
Speaker 1: was also caused by massive releases from the strategic portroleums
Speaker 1: of And I think one thing is for sure, we're
Speaker 1: not going to see that happen again. They can't repeat
Speaker 1: the act that's for sure. No, we can't of market
Speaker 1: field acid management, how can you repeat the acts on?
Speaker 1: They're looking to rebuild the thing right now? This is
Speaker 1: a joy. And Lisa is gonna launch on other broader
Speaker 1: US political affairs. But with Julie Norman, who is co
Speaker 1: director of the Unit Versity College of London Center on
Speaker 1: US Politics, I have to go to her younger academic
Speaker 1: years of trapes sitting around the Levan. You have not been, Julie,
Speaker 1: in the earthquake region directly above Damascus, directly above Lebanon,
Speaker 1: in that northeast corner of the Mediterranean. But you have
Speaker 1: been northeast of there as well. It's pretty remote, isn't it.
Speaker 1: So it's not it's not as super populated area tomb,
Speaker 1: but it's not. I wouldn't described it as remote either.
Speaker 1: I mean, these are still populated areas and obviously we've
Speaker 1: seen that from Uh, from the death toll that is
Speaker 1: just climbing as as we speak, at least people killed.
Speaker 1: So Um, I would say it's a ghazion Tep for example,
Speaker 1: the closest city to where the epicenter was is Um,
Speaker 1: one of the centers where many Syrian refugees were fleeing
Speaker 1: for a number of years during the core years of
Speaker 1: the Syrian crisis. So these are areas where many people
Speaker 1: have already faced extreme hardship in life, forced displacement, have
Speaker 1: been gathering and are now facing this devastating crisis as well.
Speaker 1: Aleppo directly selt and we've all seen the horror of
Speaker 1: the bomb. The leveling of Aleppo is how I would
Speaker 1: put it. How does the tension, the terrorism that you
Speaker 1: follow of the war of there of Syria in various parties,
Speaker 1: how does that obstruct earthquake relief efforts? It's on any
Speaker 1: time that you have conflict ongoing, when you have a
Speaker 1: unstable government and governing system in a place like Aleppo
Speaker 1: where there has been holed out from rebels resistance to
Speaker 1: the state taking back over for obvious reasons. Uh, it's
Speaker 1: it's very difficult to coordinate any kind of relief. It's
Speaker 1: one reason that we've seen the group called the White Helmets,
Speaker 1: which again got a lot of press during during the
Speaker 1: Syrian conflict, have been some of the responders at this.
Speaker 1: You know, they're really the first to the scene. But
Speaker 1: in terms of reconstruction, terms rebuilding after this, it's going
Speaker 1: to be tough in places like that that are, you know,
Speaker 1: be set with many other challenges even when there aren't
Speaker 1: natural disasters. Will keep giving updates throughout the morning as
Speaker 1: we get more on this developing situation, a tragedy where
Speaker 1: hundreds of people are dying. July, there is a question
Speaker 1: in the morning and the sort of mood about what
Speaker 1: the relationship between US and China really is on the
Speaker 1: heels of that balloon that got shot down, the surveillance balloon,
Speaker 1: maybe the weather balloon, that's what China is claiming. What
Speaker 1: did you make of the Chinese response to the US
Speaker 1: shooting down the balloon? Yeah, so at least it's interesting.
Speaker 1: I mean, I don't think it was a shocked to
Speaker 1: any one following US China that that there's espionage going
Speaker 1: back and forth on both ways. So the fact that
Speaker 1: there are these kinds of surveillance tools themselves was not
Speaker 1: the main story as much as it was just the
Speaker 1: brazeness of having it so visible. And I think it's
Speaker 1: still unclear with how intentional that was to have it
Speaker 1: be that visible. Was it intentional across the Chinese government,
Speaker 1: was it one part of the Chinese government, or was
Speaker 1: this just a complete um mess up on somebody's part.
Speaker 1: I do think it was interesting that China's response initially
Speaker 1: did seem to be a sort of crisis of damage control.
Speaker 1: Wasn't just sitting back with the popcorn and watching to
Speaker 1: see how the US responds to this. It really did
Speaker 1: seem alarm that this was happening and playing out as
Speaker 1: it was. Obviously, since then we've seen some of the
Speaker 1: usual rhetoric of the US is blowing us out of proportion. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, this was, you know, unnecessary to shoot down
Speaker 1: the balloon of these kinds of things. But I think
Speaker 1: the initial reaction said at all that that something did
Speaker 1: not go right here, and it put China on the
Speaker 1: back foot and on the defensive, I think more than
Speaker 1: the US. We've been talking this morning, Julia about what
Speaker 1: the mood among the populations of the US and China
Speaker 1: have in terms of an effect on the response from
Speaker 1: both President Biden and Jesan Paying in China. How much
Speaker 1: are people looking for Jijian Pink to take a hard
Speaker 1: stance against the US. Well, I think there's obviously that
Speaker 1: that look in there always has been. But at the
Speaker 1: same time, you know, China is coming out of a
Speaker 1: really unsteady period trying to come back after COVID restabilize
Speaker 1: the economy, and part of that means coordinating in some
Speaker 1: kind of way with the were So I think there
Speaker 1: were at least some in China who were seeing this,
Speaker 1: you know, the Blinken visit that got canceled. This kind
Speaker 1: of open communication is okay, let's at least stabilize things,
Speaker 1: get things back to some kind of normal, and instead,
Speaker 1: when you see a crisis like this send things into
Speaker 1: kind of unpredictable directions, that's not something that those who
Speaker 1: are just wanted to get back to stability want to see.
Speaker 1: So obviously there's some support for that tough talk, but
Speaker 1: at the same time, the sense of we don't want
Speaker 1: things going off the rails more than necessary either. Julie,
Speaker 1: the team here at Blimberg did a great right up
Speaker 1: over at the weekend if the F twenty two. This
Speaker 1: was Damon Shepherd and Toni Capacho the F twenty two
Speaker 1: raptive fighter. They indicated this was the first heir to
Speaker 1: wear kill by that Yet Julia made me wonder, what
Speaker 1: do you think the Chinese learned from how the US
Speaker 1: responded to this event. Yeah, so obviously there was going
Speaker 1: to be watching of that. But I do think it's
Speaker 1: important that the US is also learning from the technology
Speaker 1: that they will get from this as well. And that
Speaker 1: was part of the administration's calculation. You know, we've known
Speaker 1: from before that China has been able to UM to
Speaker 1: learn from our aircraft UM. That was one of the
Speaker 1: reverse technologies that was was seen as a real win
Speaker 1: for China, and I think the US is trying to
Speaker 1: see if they can do the same thing with unpacking
Speaker 1: some of these intelligence UM apparatus is that they do
Speaker 1: now have hands on. But but you're right, both sides
Speaker 1: are always I think watching the other to see what
Speaker 1: are they using, how are they using it, and what
Speaker 1: can we learn from it to adapt on our own systems.
Speaker 1: Judy Gray as a wise thanks with him, and this
Speaker 1: just perfect time. Jenny Norman that if you see how
Speaker 1: Sarah Human is one of the most interesting people in
Speaker 1: the economics racket. She's out of Joan Robinson's College gertn
Speaker 1: at Cambridge, which is truly one of the toughest admits
Speaker 1: in the world. She's with Standard Charter head of Europe
Speaker 1: and America's research. Sarah, what was your first completely overwhelming
Speaker 1: day like at the University of Cambridge. The heritage of
Speaker 1: that program is stunning. What was it like your first
Speaker 1: day in the classroom? It was fantastic, but I was
Speaker 1: amazed at how many men were in the lecture hall.
Speaker 1: To be honest, when I've been at school it had
Speaker 1: been equal women men, and economics were still very much
Speaker 1: a male type of subject at that time. Things have changed,
Speaker 1: of course, things have changed a lot, and you've been
Speaker 1: a real leader on that with your coverage here of
Speaker 1: Europe and now of essentially the Western hemisphere of Standard Charter.
Speaker 1: What is your theme taking Standard Charters expertise in the
Speaker 1: Pacific of a China recovery and how will that affect
Speaker 1: the Sarah Human world? Well, I think it's I think
Speaker 1: it's pretty hopeful. Really, we're looking for growth of five
Speaker 1: point eight percent this year in China and that's above consensus,
Speaker 1: but we're pretty confident that we're going to see a
Speaker 1: real surgeon consumer spending. And if we look back at
Speaker 1: what happened in the US and what happened in Europe
Speaker 1: in the immediate aftermath of the first pandemic wave, helped
Speaker 1: of course by a lot of government spending, particularly in
Speaker 1: the US, there was a huge search real terms increase
Speaker 1: in consumer spending from trough to peak in the first
Speaker 1: twelve months after that first pandemic wave in the US
Speaker 1: around fifteen percent in Europe, and I think we're going
Speaker 1: to see similarly large increases in spending that's going to
Speaker 1: drive the Chinese economy forward UM. In terms of what
Speaker 1: it means for our part of the world, it's great
Speaker 1: for exporters. It's been a sort of difficult year trade wise,
Speaker 1: and we think that there's a lot of opportunities in
Speaker 1: China this year. UM. Question is what happens to inflation.
Speaker 1: There are concerns that we could see commodity prices picking
Speaker 1: up again. Our our own view is that the thought
Speaker 1: of growth we're going to see in China is not
Speaker 1: necessarily going to be driving commodity prices substantially higher. UM
Speaker 1: it's not going to be construction lead, it's not going
Speaker 1: to be investment lad, very much a consumer lead and
Speaker 1: probably consumer services lead boom. Meanwhile, people are also looking
Speaker 1: at resilient labor markets, perhaps helped out by some of
Speaker 1: the demand from China, but very much domestically driven, both
Speaker 1: in Europe as well as in the US. How much
Speaker 1: dissonance is there between the strong labor markets that we
Speaker 1: see and there's disinflationary push that a lot of people
Speaker 1: are feeling. Perhaps as a linear nature, I think there's
Speaker 1: a lot of dissonance, because it's true that typically look
Speaker 1: at the US, if we look at the euro Area,
Speaker 1: if we look at UK, we have strong labor markets everywhere,
Speaker 1: and certainly here in Europe there are real concerns about
Speaker 1: what that means for wages. We're seeing wages rising pretty rapidly.
Speaker 1: In the UK, we have strike action which is likely
Speaker 1: to further advance that, and in the euro Area no
Speaker 1: particular war signs yet of in wages becoming out of control,
Speaker 1: but some concern that with the unemployment rate as low
Speaker 1: as it is the lowest on record, that it's only
Speaker 1: amount of time before you see wages catching up. Um
Speaker 1: so that does really question what happens to inflation, particularly
Speaker 1: the services part of inflation. We know that that's a
Speaker 1: concern for the FED and that Chair Powell has talked
Speaker 1: about the imbalances in the labor market being potentially a
Speaker 1: driver of services inflation x X housing. So this there
Speaker 1: is this dissonance between what is undoubtedly a decline in
Speaker 1: headline inflation UM and certainly a decline in core inflation
Speaker 1: in the US less so in Europe, and what we
Speaker 1: see the real strength that we're seeing on the employment side.
Speaker 1: What was the big takeaway for you from what we
Speaker 1: saw on Friday from the labor market report in the
Speaker 1: US that a lot of people thought was something of
Speaker 1: a head scratcher simply because of its strength. To be fair,
Speaker 1: there was little to suggest that the labor market is
Speaker 1: weak in those data. I mean, we had had some
Speaker 1: signs earlier in the week layoffs were rising pretty rapidly
Speaker 1: UM and we know that a lot of the jobs
Speaker 1: that have been created a part time. That said, the
Speaker 1: work week was up. The employment was strong whichever measure,
Speaker 1: and even if you account for seasonal adjustments and the
Speaker 1: sort of population increase, it's difficult to poke a hole
Speaker 1: in that data well, and this was sort of the
Speaker 1: zeitgeist over the weekend, Sarah, So let's cut to the
Speaker 1: chase and be polite. How did so many people get
Speaker 1: this wrong? Have you thought about it over the weekend?
Speaker 1: I mean, it was a shark, wasn't it? It was?
Speaker 1: And I think that we have had some signs of
Speaker 1: the economy weakening. So clearly second half of last year
Speaker 1: GDP growth was strong, but if you look at the
Speaker 1: real spending data, then they were week for October, November, December,
Speaker 1: the surveys showing activity pretty sluggish, and until we had
Speaker 1: that I S M Services survey that looked to be
Speaker 1: the case across the board. So I think it was
Speaker 1: a double wammy that we had from the payrolls report
Speaker 1: on Friday and the as M services completely reversing out
Speaker 1: that pretty weak number that we've had previously. UM. The
Speaker 1: so a lot of head scratching over where is the
Speaker 1: economy going? Zarah? Do you agree with Torsten Slack over
Speaker 1: at Apollo that we could get a no landing given
Speaker 1: how strong the data has been. Um I question the
Speaker 1: strength of the data. To be honest, I think we
Speaker 1: need to see the next couple of months without wanting
Speaker 1: to sound too data dependent. There is a lot of
Speaker 1: you know, there are a lot of questions over exactly
Speaker 1: what's happening to the labor market, uncertainty that this degree
Speaker 1: of strength can persist, and we know, of course that
Speaker 1: there can be huge revisions one month to the next
Speaker 1: in the data. So I'd be tempted to sit back,
Speaker 1: let's see what happens over the next month or so
Speaker 1: before deciding that there's no landing insight. Sarah, Thank you
Speaker 1: so much, Sarah Hu and their standard Charter Bank. Subscribe
Speaker 1: to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast on Apple, Spotify and anywhere
Speaker 1: else you get your podcasts. Listen live every weekday starting
Speaker 1: at seven am Eastern. I'm Bloomberg dot Com, the I
Speaker 1: Heart Radio app, tune In, and the Bloomberg Business app.
Speaker 1: You can watch us live. I'm Bloomberg Television and always
Speaker 1: I'm the Bloomberg Terminal. Thanks for listening. I'm Tom Keane
Speaker 1: and this is Bloomberg