WEBVTT - Daybreak Weekend: U.S CPI Data, ECB Meeting, China Inflation

0:00:02.920 --> 0:00:08.280
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news.

0:00:11.400 --> 0:00:13.880
<v Speaker 2>This is Bloomberg day Break Weekend, our global look at

0:00:13.920 --> 0:00:15.880
<v Speaker 2>the top stories in the coming week from our day

0:00:15.920 --> 0:00:18.800
<v Speaker 2>Break anchors all around the world. Straight ahead on the program,

0:00:18.920 --> 0:00:22.119
<v Speaker 2>Inflation and what it could mean for the Fed plus

0:00:22.120 --> 0:00:25.160
<v Speaker 2>earning season is right around the corner. We'll get a preview.

0:00:25.360 --> 0:00:28.600
<v Speaker 2>I'm Tom Busby in New York. I'm Stephen Carolyn London.

0:00:28.640 --> 0:00:32.200
<v Speaker 2>For We're looking ahead and beyond the upcoming European Central

0:00:32.240 --> 0:00:36.640
<v Speaker 2>Bank meeting, when and how fast interest rates may come down.

0:00:37.040 --> 0:00:40.159
<v Speaker 3>I'm Doug Krisner looking at whether China's economy is bottomed

0:00:40.240 --> 0:00:41.879
<v Speaker 3>and if it's beginning to inflate.

0:00:43.880 --> 0:00:47.840
<v Speaker 4>That's all straight ahead on Bloomberg Daybreak Weekend on Bloomberg

0:00:47.840 --> 0:00:50.360
<v Speaker 4>Ey look them free own New York, Bloomberg ninety nine

0:00:50.400 --> 0:00:53.760
<v Speaker 4>to one, Washington, DC, Bloomberg one O six one, Boston,

0:00:53.840 --> 0:00:58.680
<v Speaker 4>Bloomberg nine sixty, San Francisco, DAB Digital Radio, London, Sirius

0:00:58.840 --> 0:01:02.040
<v Speaker 4>XM one nineteen and around the world on Bloomberg Radio

0:01:02.160 --> 0:01:04.400
<v Speaker 4>dot Com and via the Bloomberg Business App.

0:01:08.520 --> 0:01:10.560
<v Speaker 2>Good day to you. I'm Tom Busby, and we begin

0:01:10.640 --> 0:01:14.640
<v Speaker 2>today's program with inflation and the March consumer Price Index

0:01:14.760 --> 0:01:17.720
<v Speaker 2>coming out this Wednesday. With the fed's next policy meeting

0:01:17.800 --> 0:01:20.600
<v Speaker 2>kicking off later this month, what could that mean for

0:01:20.680 --> 0:01:23.399
<v Speaker 2>the central banks direction moving forward? And for more we're

0:01:23.440 --> 0:01:29.720
<v Speaker 2>joined by Edward Harrison, Bloomberg, team leader America's FX and Rates. Edward,

0:01:30.120 --> 0:01:33.000
<v Speaker 2>Thanks for being here. What are you expecting to see

0:01:33.040 --> 0:01:34.199
<v Speaker 2>in that CPI report?

0:01:34.480 --> 0:01:37.959
<v Speaker 5>Hey, great to talk to you, Tom. The question really

0:01:38.319 --> 0:01:40.640
<v Speaker 5>is wide open in terms of what we can see.

0:01:41.120 --> 0:01:42.400
<v Speaker 5>There are a lot of things, and I think that

0:01:42.560 --> 0:01:45.880
<v Speaker 5>the way to think about this is that we had

0:01:45.920 --> 0:01:49.120
<v Speaker 5>a very high level of inflation as we came out

0:01:49.320 --> 0:01:54.840
<v Speaker 5>of the pandemic, and that's come down considerably, but we've

0:01:54.920 --> 0:01:58.680
<v Speaker 5>stalled at a level that is above the Fed's target.

0:01:58.960 --> 0:02:02.480
<v Speaker 5>And recently what we've seen is prices moving up in

0:02:02.720 --> 0:02:07.560
<v Speaker 5>places that people are sensitive to, you know, things like cocoa,

0:02:07.840 --> 0:02:12.079
<v Speaker 5>you know, for chocolate, things like oil, which affects your

0:02:12.280 --> 0:02:15.440
<v Speaker 5>gasoline prices in the US. And so, as a result,

0:02:15.880 --> 0:02:19.800
<v Speaker 5>after two readings in a row that were relatively high

0:02:20.360 --> 0:02:24.040
<v Speaker 5>above expectations, there's a lot of anticipation about this number,

0:02:24.520 --> 0:02:29.359
<v Speaker 5>and really it could be higher than expected given some

0:02:29.520 --> 0:02:30.840
<v Speaker 5>of those recent trends.

0:02:31.280 --> 0:02:33.560
<v Speaker 2>Still a long way to go, though, to the fed's

0:02:33.560 --> 0:02:35.919
<v Speaker 2>two percent target, but like you said, not the nine

0:02:35.960 --> 0:02:38.840
<v Speaker 2>point one percent we saw just two summers ago. But

0:02:39.320 --> 0:02:41.679
<v Speaker 2>we had been heading in the right direction. Is this

0:02:42.000 --> 0:02:45.400
<v Speaker 2>recent pickup just an aberration you think, or are we

0:02:45.520 --> 0:02:46.960
<v Speaker 2>onto something more troubling.

0:02:47.240 --> 0:02:49.760
<v Speaker 5>Well, you know, the FED really wants to get their

0:02:50.080 --> 0:02:53.679
<v Speaker 5>hands around that to figure out what's going on. And

0:02:53.919 --> 0:02:57.280
<v Speaker 5>that's why when you heard Jerome Powell talking last week,

0:02:57.720 --> 0:03:01.079
<v Speaker 5>he was talking about patients. And that's because of this

0:03:01.240 --> 0:03:05.720
<v Speaker 5>number in particular, and also the number that's embedded in

0:03:05.880 --> 0:03:09.520
<v Speaker 5>the Personal Consumption Expenditures Report, which is what the FED

0:03:09.680 --> 0:03:13.120
<v Speaker 5>looks at even more closely. When you look at this number,

0:03:13.880 --> 0:03:16.960
<v Speaker 5>you know, the last number without food and energy, which

0:03:17.000 --> 0:03:19.560
<v Speaker 5>are very viable. When you strip that out, you still

0:03:20.120 --> 0:03:23.640
<v Speaker 5>had three point eight percent. They're expecting three point seven percent,

0:03:23.960 --> 0:03:28.440
<v Speaker 5>which is almost double the fed's level now. Luckily, because

0:03:28.520 --> 0:03:33.040
<v Speaker 5>food and energy have been relatively benign of late. The

0:03:33.160 --> 0:03:36.080
<v Speaker 5>number was three point two percent last time, and we're

0:03:36.120 --> 0:03:40.800
<v Speaker 5>expecting three point five percent this time. So that gives

0:03:40.840 --> 0:03:43.560
<v Speaker 5>you an indication that there's a lot of work to

0:03:43.600 --> 0:03:46.440
<v Speaker 5>be done. And this is why j Powell last week

0:03:46.560 --> 0:03:47.600
<v Speaker 5>was talking about patients.

0:03:47.840 --> 0:03:49.960
<v Speaker 2>Well, let's talk about some of those big drivers here.

0:03:50.200 --> 0:03:53.680
<v Speaker 2>You mentioned oil right now hovering around a five month high,

0:03:54.120 --> 0:03:58.240
<v Speaker 2>always very volucile, but we are seeing expectations gas is

0:03:58.280 --> 0:04:00.720
<v Speaker 2>going to hit four bucks a gallon here in the US,

0:04:00.840 --> 0:04:03.680
<v Speaker 2>that's for regular by the summer. I mean, that is

0:04:03.880 --> 0:04:06.840
<v Speaker 2>a real wildcard. Oil and gas prices.

0:04:07.080 --> 0:04:09.080
<v Speaker 5>Without a doubt. And you know, as I was saying,

0:04:09.360 --> 0:04:11.920
<v Speaker 5>they had been positive in terms of the numbers food

0:04:11.920 --> 0:04:17.160
<v Speaker 5>and energy because the headline number is lower than the

0:04:17.320 --> 0:04:19.440
<v Speaker 5>number when you strip out food and energy. But now

0:04:19.560 --> 0:04:22.160
<v Speaker 5>that we have these prices going back up, then you

0:04:22.279 --> 0:04:26.920
<v Speaker 5>can expect them to have a negative contribution. They're sending

0:04:27.000 --> 0:04:30.440
<v Speaker 5>the CPI up higher. And there's nothing that people think

0:04:30.480 --> 0:04:35.560
<v Speaker 5>about more than gasoline prices. It has that anchor effect

0:04:36.520 --> 0:04:38.840
<v Speaker 5>in terms of how people think about inflation and where

0:04:38.880 --> 0:04:41.600
<v Speaker 5>it's headed. And so this is not what people want.

0:04:42.040 --> 0:04:45.560
<v Speaker 5>And I would add that, you know OPEK their meeting,

0:04:46.240 --> 0:04:49.479
<v Speaker 5>it will be interesting to see what kind of level

0:04:49.560 --> 0:04:53.119
<v Speaker 5>they're targeting for oil prices. If we're looking at ninety

0:04:53.160 --> 0:04:56.560
<v Speaker 5>dollars a barrel, then that's not a level that is

0:04:56.680 --> 0:05:00.080
<v Speaker 5>going to be pleasant for the inflation numbers.

0:05:00.000 --> 0:05:03.880
<v Speaker 2>You know, food, oil, gasoline, housing. But there are some

0:05:04.360 --> 0:05:07.440
<v Speaker 2>green shoots, some glimmers of hope. Used car prices have

0:05:07.560 --> 0:05:09.720
<v Speaker 2>moved lower, new car prices have moved lower.

0:05:09.839 --> 0:05:15.400
<v Speaker 5>Right, what we're looking for in particular is not just

0:05:15.560 --> 0:05:20.360
<v Speaker 5>in goods and things that were inflated coming down, but

0:05:21.120 --> 0:05:27.239
<v Speaker 5>that core beyond even goods in services, you know, takeout housing,

0:05:27.320 --> 0:05:31.600
<v Speaker 5>even looking at you know, the services sector and the

0:05:31.880 --> 0:05:35.359
<v Speaker 5>core within the services sector of minus housing to see

0:05:35.480 --> 0:05:38.160
<v Speaker 5>what the overall trend is. I think that that is

0:05:38.360 --> 0:05:40.400
<v Speaker 5>going to be the place that people are going to

0:05:40.480 --> 0:05:42.279
<v Speaker 5>be looking as they look at the CPI.

0:05:42.600 --> 0:05:44.640
<v Speaker 2>Now, one last question. We're going to talk about the

0:05:44.800 --> 0:05:47.880
<v Speaker 2>fed's meeting, which is April thirtieth May. First, that's the

0:05:47.960 --> 0:05:50.360
<v Speaker 2>next one. A non starter for a rate cut, but

0:05:50.600 --> 0:05:53.880
<v Speaker 2>everybody's still thinking about that mid June meeting, and between

0:05:54.000 --> 0:05:56.279
<v Speaker 2>now and then, the FED is going to have three

0:05:56.440 --> 0:06:01.080
<v Speaker 2>CPI reports, two PCE reports, and that for a data

0:06:01.120 --> 0:06:03.880
<v Speaker 2>dependent FED is a lot to consider. Is there any

0:06:03.960 --> 0:06:06.799
<v Speaker 2>feeling that by then, by the June eleventh and twelfth

0:06:06.880 --> 0:06:10.040
<v Speaker 2>meeting we are going to see maybe some hope of

0:06:10.160 --> 0:06:10.720
<v Speaker 2>a rate cut.

0:06:11.040 --> 0:06:13.800
<v Speaker 5>I think that these next ones are going to be

0:06:14.000 --> 0:06:18.000
<v Speaker 5>very important, because you know, the FED is looking for

0:06:18.080 --> 0:06:20.800
<v Speaker 5>a trend, and that trend needs to be lower. To

0:06:20.920 --> 0:06:23.160
<v Speaker 5>the degree that the next one or two of these

0:06:23.640 --> 0:06:28.760
<v Speaker 5>CPIPCE reports are not lower, it makes it more difficult

0:06:28.800 --> 0:06:30.880
<v Speaker 5>for the FED to cut in June. When we look

0:06:30.960 --> 0:06:34.160
<v Speaker 5>at some of the people at the FED, Atlanta FED

0:06:34.240 --> 0:06:39.360
<v Speaker 5>President raphae Albostik, he's been an individual who's at the

0:06:39.440 --> 0:06:43.159
<v Speaker 5>leading edge of where the Fed's going. He's actually talking

0:06:43.240 --> 0:06:46.360
<v Speaker 5>about waiting all the way into the fourth quarter. So

0:06:46.800 --> 0:06:50.320
<v Speaker 5>that's an indication of sort of the angst of the

0:06:50.400 --> 0:06:53.080
<v Speaker 5>Fed about how sticky inflation has been.

0:06:53.360 --> 0:06:53.600
<v Speaker 4>Wow.

0:06:53.800 --> 0:06:57.000
<v Speaker 2>Well, the next reading the March CPI data out there Wednesday,

0:06:57.200 --> 0:07:00.040
<v Speaker 2>and our thanks to Edward Harrison, Bloomberg team leader for

0:07:00.080 --> 0:07:03.840
<v Speaker 2>Americas FX and Rates. Well, we turn now to the

0:07:03.880 --> 0:07:05.920
<v Speaker 2>start of the new earning season on Wall Street. It

0:07:06.000 --> 0:07:09.200
<v Speaker 2>kicks off this Friday. We get the latest quarterly reports

0:07:09.400 --> 0:07:12.880
<v Speaker 2>from JP Morgan, Chase, Wells, Fargo, and City Group, some

0:07:12.960 --> 0:07:15.600
<v Speaker 2>of the biggest banks in the US. What will they

0:07:15.680 --> 0:07:18.200
<v Speaker 2>reveal about the health of the banking sector. Well for more,

0:07:18.360 --> 0:07:22.400
<v Speaker 2>We're joined by Alison Williams, Bloomberg Intelligence Senior Analyst, Global

0:07:22.480 --> 0:07:25.960
<v Speaker 2>Banks and Asset Managers. Now, Allison, I want to start

0:07:26.080 --> 0:07:28.880
<v Speaker 2>with where the US banking sector is right now compared

0:07:28.880 --> 0:07:31.040
<v Speaker 2>to the turmoil a year ago. We saw the failure

0:07:31.120 --> 0:07:34.600
<v Speaker 2>of Silicon Valley Bank in March of twenty three, Signature

0:07:34.640 --> 0:07:37.160
<v Speaker 2>Bank in April of that year, First Republic. Where are

0:07:37.200 --> 0:07:37.520
<v Speaker 2>we now?

0:07:37.880 --> 0:07:41.680
<v Speaker 6>So, I think for the banks, that really kicked off

0:07:41.720 --> 0:07:45.760
<v Speaker 6>a lot of concerns about the higher interest rate environment,

0:07:46.680 --> 0:07:50.200
<v Speaker 6>and we saw a lot of deposit outflows and that

0:07:50.360 --> 0:07:53.720
<v Speaker 6>really has been a big focus for investors in terms

0:07:53.760 --> 0:07:57.320
<v Speaker 6>of the impact on net interest income. But for this quarter,

0:07:57.720 --> 0:08:01.080
<v Speaker 6>investors are really going to be focusing on the change

0:08:01.360 --> 0:08:05.360
<v Speaker 6>in interest rate expectations versus the last time we heard

0:08:05.400 --> 0:08:08.600
<v Speaker 6>from the banks, which was in January, and so at

0:08:08.640 --> 0:08:11.600
<v Speaker 6>that point in time, most of the banks gave their

0:08:11.640 --> 0:08:17.040
<v Speaker 6>guidance for net interest income looking for six rate cuts.

0:08:17.080 --> 0:08:21.040
<v Speaker 6>City Group more in the three to six cut region,

0:08:21.480 --> 0:08:24.960
<v Speaker 6>but the market implied rates at this point in time

0:08:25.040 --> 0:08:27.880
<v Speaker 6>are closer to three, and so we do expect that

0:08:28.000 --> 0:08:29.880
<v Speaker 6>there could be some change in the net interest income

0:08:29.920 --> 0:08:32.559
<v Speaker 6>outlook that really affects more of the back half and

0:08:32.640 --> 0:08:38.040
<v Speaker 6>the twenty twenty five expectations. But circling back to deposits again,

0:08:38.120 --> 0:08:40.079
<v Speaker 6>that was the sort of one of the big concerns

0:08:40.720 --> 0:08:45.720
<v Speaker 6>a year ago, deposit pricing. We have seen those deposit

0:08:45.920 --> 0:08:50.080
<v Speaker 6>prices increase, but we do think that this quarter they

0:08:50.160 --> 0:08:54.079
<v Speaker 6>could come in a little bit more muted than perhaps

0:08:54.160 --> 0:08:57.680
<v Speaker 6>had fears. We got some color around that from Bank

0:08:57.760 --> 0:09:00.600
<v Speaker 6>of America who said that they think that they're an

0:09:00.720 --> 0:09:04.160
<v Speaker 6>interestingcome guidance could come in a bit at the higher

0:09:04.280 --> 0:09:07.240
<v Speaker 6>end of their guidance because those costs have not been

0:09:07.520 --> 0:09:08.160
<v Speaker 6>as bad as.

0:09:08.160 --> 0:09:08.920
<v Speaker 7>They had expected.

0:09:09.160 --> 0:09:12.800
<v Speaker 6>What were they expecting, Well, deposit prices are increasing, right,

0:09:13.080 --> 0:09:16.959
<v Speaker 6>so as rates have come up, banks sort of got

0:09:17.040 --> 0:09:19.319
<v Speaker 6>an early benefit in terms of the repricing of their

0:09:19.440 --> 0:09:21.959
<v Speaker 6>loan books, but they held off a little bit in

0:09:22.120 --> 0:09:27.560
<v Speaker 6>terms of passing on those price increases to customers because

0:09:27.600 --> 0:09:31.520
<v Speaker 6>we were coming off of those zero percent levels. So

0:09:31.640 --> 0:09:34.760
<v Speaker 6>I think as things sort of adjusted to a normalized environment,

0:09:35.320 --> 0:09:37.240
<v Speaker 6>they were a bit slower to pass on some of

0:09:37.320 --> 0:09:42.280
<v Speaker 6>that benefit. But now that is happening, and so consumers

0:09:42.440 --> 0:09:45.959
<v Speaker 6>are demanding a little bit more yield. They're switching their

0:09:46.120 --> 0:09:49.720
<v Speaker 6>deposits into products that offer a higher yield, and that's

0:09:49.720 --> 0:09:53.120
<v Speaker 6>been happening over the past year. But perhaps that pace

0:09:53.240 --> 0:09:54.679
<v Speaker 6>is starting to slow down a bit.

0:09:54.840 --> 0:09:55.040
<v Speaker 4>Yeah.

0:09:55.640 --> 0:09:58.200
<v Speaker 2>Well, one thing that hasn't slowed down for banks trading.

0:09:58.520 --> 0:10:02.680
<v Speaker 2>We've seen IPO a little growth there, we've seen record

0:10:02.840 --> 0:10:05.320
<v Speaker 2>levels for all the major averages. What does that mean

0:10:05.400 --> 0:10:06.000
<v Speaker 2>for these banks?

0:10:06.280 --> 0:10:11.160
<v Speaker 6>So healthier markets are definitely a boon to the asset

0:10:11.200 --> 0:10:15.600
<v Speaker 6>and wealth management businesses for all these big banks. They

0:10:15.679 --> 0:10:18.840
<v Speaker 6>are diversified banks, and so they are benefiting just from

0:10:18.960 --> 0:10:22.960
<v Speaker 6>the fees, just from the asset levels, but also they'll

0:10:22.960 --> 0:10:25.920
<v Speaker 6>be looking for better flows. That is a key measure

0:10:25.960 --> 0:10:27.959
<v Speaker 6>of health of the businesses. But on the trading and

0:10:28.080 --> 0:10:33.520
<v Speaker 6>fee outlook, trading continues to be relatively resilient, and so

0:10:34.200 --> 0:10:37.559
<v Speaker 6>that fixed income trading does face tougher comparisons, So it

0:10:37.640 --> 0:10:40.320
<v Speaker 6>could be a little bit down, especially for the rates

0:10:40.320 --> 0:10:44.480
<v Speaker 6>and currencies business for someone like City Group, but still

0:10:44.760 --> 0:10:50.079
<v Speaker 6>very healthy historically high levels. Equity trading getting some benefit.

0:10:50.280 --> 0:10:52.400
<v Speaker 6>As you pointed out that we have seen a little

0:10:52.440 --> 0:10:56.480
<v Speaker 6>bit more activity on the IPO front, perhaps not as

0:10:56.559 --> 0:10:59.640
<v Speaker 6>strong as some of the banks would expect, but definitely

0:10:59.760 --> 0:11:03.400
<v Speaker 6>in the US, the US underwriting business is going to

0:11:03.480 --> 0:11:07.360
<v Speaker 6>be helping those fees, the debt underwriting business helping those fees.

0:11:07.679 --> 0:11:10.160
<v Speaker 6>M and A announcements looking a little bit better, but

0:11:10.280 --> 0:11:12.280
<v Speaker 6>it'll take a little while for those fees to kick in.

0:11:12.400 --> 0:11:14.400
<v Speaker 6>But I think the highlight for this quarter for trading

0:11:14.440 --> 0:11:17.600
<v Speaker 6>and fees will be that investment banking feed growth both

0:11:17.800 --> 0:11:20.000
<v Speaker 6>versus a year ago and the fourth quarter.

0:11:20.360 --> 0:11:22.959
<v Speaker 2>But let's talk about now the challenges, and probably the

0:11:23.000 --> 0:11:25.680
<v Speaker 2>biggest one we spoke about this is commercial real estate.

0:11:26.080 --> 0:11:28.560
<v Speaker 2>We just had a vacancy rate of offices last quarter

0:11:28.679 --> 0:11:31.600
<v Speaker 2>twenty percent, just under twenty percent across the US. That's

0:11:31.640 --> 0:11:32.480
<v Speaker 2>got to be devastated.

0:11:32.640 --> 0:11:36.960
<v Speaker 6>And the office business is definitely something that investors are

0:11:36.960 --> 0:11:41.160
<v Speaker 6>focused on. It's something that we're focusing on. But Wells Fargo,

0:11:41.640 --> 0:11:44.360
<v Speaker 6>you know, for example, who has one of the biggest

0:11:44.440 --> 0:11:48.240
<v Speaker 6>exposures among our banks. At least they've already put up

0:11:48.240 --> 0:11:51.160
<v Speaker 6>a pretty healthy reserve against that business, so they've been

0:11:51.240 --> 0:11:55.600
<v Speaker 6>watching it as those trends have been deteriorating. And commercial

0:11:55.640 --> 0:11:57.559
<v Speaker 6>real estate, while it's a big thing I think to

0:11:57.640 --> 0:12:00.480
<v Speaker 6>focus on for the industry, it does tend to be

0:12:00.960 --> 0:12:04.240
<v Speaker 6>a relatively lower exposure across the banks. So even though

0:12:04.320 --> 0:12:07.560
<v Speaker 6>Wells Fargo and now JP Morgan two of the biggest

0:12:07.640 --> 0:12:11.800
<v Speaker 6>lenders out there to commercial real estate, Bank of America

0:12:11.840 --> 0:12:14.880
<v Speaker 6>as well, it is not as big of a share

0:12:15.000 --> 0:12:16.839
<v Speaker 6>of their loan book as it is perhaps for the

0:12:16.880 --> 0:12:20.040
<v Speaker 6>smaller banks. And so what we're really focusing on is

0:12:20.160 --> 0:12:22.520
<v Speaker 6>the credit card business, where we think that is going

0:12:22.559 --> 0:12:26.440
<v Speaker 6>to be the driver of provisions for the largest banks

0:12:26.520 --> 0:12:29.599
<v Speaker 6>because there is loan growth in that business, and that

0:12:29.679 --> 0:12:31.959
<v Speaker 6>loan growth does tend to have higher loss rates. So

0:12:32.559 --> 0:12:35.360
<v Speaker 6>we will see provisions increase because of the growth, because

0:12:35.480 --> 0:12:38.280
<v Speaker 6>credit is normalizing, and because this does tend to be

0:12:38.360 --> 0:12:41.280
<v Speaker 6>a seasonally higher quarter for those types of losses.

0:12:41.960 --> 0:12:43.719
<v Speaker 2>Well, a lot to look forward to this week and

0:12:43.760 --> 0:12:47.880
<v Speaker 2>our thanks to Alison Williams, Bloomberg Intelligence Senior Analyst, Global

0:12:47.920 --> 0:12:51.480
<v Speaker 2>Banks and Asset Managers. And coming up on Bloomberg Daybreak weekend,

0:12:52.040 --> 0:12:56.160
<v Speaker 2>when will European policy makers start to ease monetary policy?

0:12:56.520 --> 0:12:59.000
<v Speaker 2>We look ahead to the next European Central Bank meeting.

0:12:59.440 --> 0:13:13.760
<v Speaker 2>I'm Tom Buzby and this is Bloomberg. This is Bloomberg

0:13:13.840 --> 0:13:15.880
<v Speaker 2>Day Break weekend, our global look ahead at the top

0:13:15.920 --> 0:13:18.840
<v Speaker 2>stories for investors in the coming week. I'm Tom Busby

0:13:18.920 --> 0:13:22.240
<v Speaker 2>in New York. Up later in our program. Has China's

0:13:22.240 --> 0:13:26.280
<v Speaker 2>economy bottomed out? We look ahead to China inflation data.

0:13:26.559 --> 0:13:29.679
<v Speaker 2>But first in the global interest rate race, investors have

0:13:29.800 --> 0:13:32.360
<v Speaker 2>been working on the assumption that the Federal Reserve will

0:13:32.400 --> 0:13:35.200
<v Speaker 2>be the first to make a raid cut, but after

0:13:35.280 --> 0:13:38.280
<v Speaker 2>some encouraging economic data from the Eurozone, could the European

0:13:38.360 --> 0:13:41.319
<v Speaker 2>Central Bank beat the Fed to the punch with a

0:13:41.400 --> 0:13:43.920
<v Speaker 2>surprise cut as early as later this month. For more,

0:13:44.320 --> 0:13:46.720
<v Speaker 2>Let's go to London and bring in Bloomberg Daybreak anchor

0:13:46.920 --> 0:13:48.160
<v Speaker 2>Stephen Carroll.

0:13:48.360 --> 0:13:50.960
<v Speaker 1>Tom Inflation in the euro Area may not be slowing

0:13:51.040 --> 0:13:53.559
<v Speaker 1>down as quickly as it was last year, but it's

0:13:53.559 --> 0:13:56.040
<v Speaker 1>still moving in the right direction for the ECB. The

0:13:56.120 --> 0:13:59.360
<v Speaker 1>latest reading shows consumer prices rising in March by two

0:13:59.400 --> 0:14:02.120
<v Speaker 1>point four percent year on year. That's down from a

0:14:02.160 --> 0:14:05.360
<v Speaker 1>pace of two point six percent in February. Spanish Governing

0:14:05.400 --> 0:14:07.880
<v Speaker 1>Council member Pablo Hernandez de cass is among the most

0:14:07.960 --> 0:14:11.280
<v Speaker 1>recent to earmark the June meeting as likely being for

0:14:11.360 --> 0:14:14.520
<v Speaker 1>the first cut in interest rates. Even the most hawkish

0:14:14.600 --> 0:14:17.880
<v Speaker 1>member of the Governing Council, Austria's Robert Holtzman, is warning

0:14:17.920 --> 0:14:20.400
<v Speaker 1>of the perils of holding rates at their current level

0:14:20.480 --> 0:14:24.080
<v Speaker 1>for too long, but could waiting until June risk harming

0:14:24.120 --> 0:14:27.440
<v Speaker 1>the economy. Boomberg opinion columnist Marcus Ashworth has joined those

0:14:27.520 --> 0:14:31.080
<v Speaker 1>calling instead for an April move at this upcoming meeting.

0:14:31.360 --> 0:14:34.120
<v Speaker 1>He points to Bank of France President Fransouovievoia the gallow

0:14:34.120 --> 0:14:37.520
<v Speaker 1>who's often the bell weather for ECB policy changes. De

0:14:37.640 --> 0:14:41.040
<v Speaker 1>Gallo says that a further slow down in growth means

0:14:41.080 --> 0:14:43.800
<v Speaker 1>that the time has come to take out an insurance

0:14:44.120 --> 0:14:47.720
<v Speaker 1>against this second risk by beginning rate cuts. But going

0:14:47.840 --> 0:14:50.600
<v Speaker 1>before the FED doesn't come without its risks, both in

0:14:50.680 --> 0:14:54.160
<v Speaker 1>Europe and globally. It's something we've been discussing with Aaron Captain,

0:14:54.160 --> 0:14:56.520
<v Speaker 1>who's chief economists at UBS Investment Bank.

0:14:57.080 --> 0:14:59.480
<v Speaker 8>So if the FED doesn't cut in June, right, so

0:14:59.600 --> 0:15:02.960
<v Speaker 8>we basically then have less cuts for the FED, so

0:15:03.000 --> 0:15:05.600
<v Speaker 8>a bit more appreciation of the dollar, a bit more

0:15:05.640 --> 0:15:08.680
<v Speaker 8>euro depreciation. So at the margin it's going to add

0:15:08.680 --> 0:15:12.160
<v Speaker 8>a little bit to Eurozone inflation, but really not very much.

0:15:12.360 --> 0:15:14.320
<v Speaker 8>If all that we're doing is sort of a time

0:15:14.400 --> 0:15:16.520
<v Speaker 8>shift of the FED cuts, right, if they just go

0:15:16.600 --> 0:15:20.320
<v Speaker 8>a bit later and they catch up next year, then

0:15:20.560 --> 0:15:23.320
<v Speaker 8>you know, the overall rate differentials don't really move that much,

0:15:23.760 --> 0:15:25.720
<v Speaker 8>and it doesn't fundamentally I think alter sort of the

0:15:25.760 --> 0:15:27.160
<v Speaker 8>inflation outlook in the euro Zone.

0:15:28.120 --> 0:15:30.360
<v Speaker 1>Is there any chance you think of fifty basis points

0:15:30.400 --> 0:15:31.720
<v Speaker 1>cuts from the ECB this year?

0:15:32.480 --> 0:15:32.840
<v Speaker 7>Not now?

0:15:33.200 --> 0:15:36.560
<v Speaker 8>It's difficult to see why. So I think the debates more,

0:15:36.640 --> 0:15:38.120
<v Speaker 8>you know, do you go once a quarter at the

0:15:38.160 --> 0:15:40.800
<v Speaker 8>forecast meetings or do you go every meeting. It looks

0:15:40.920 --> 0:15:43.120
<v Speaker 8>like they want to go once a quarter, although they

0:15:43.160 --> 0:15:46.200
<v Speaker 8>have been a little vague about sort of what the

0:15:46.320 --> 0:15:49.920
<v Speaker 8>speed of the sequences that they have in mind. In

0:15:50.000 --> 0:15:52.200
<v Speaker 8>my mind, you know, the easy bit is the first

0:15:52.240 --> 0:15:55.520
<v Speaker 8>one hundred and fifty basis points, and there's no real

0:15:55.600 --> 0:15:57.680
<v Speaker 8>reason why you want to sort of race through that

0:15:58.360 --> 0:16:01.000
<v Speaker 8>if there's uncertainty about the landing zone. Right, So the

0:16:01.080 --> 0:16:03.360
<v Speaker 8>way I think they think about it is that you know,

0:16:03.440 --> 0:16:06.160
<v Speaker 8>you're at four, you can probably safely cut to about

0:16:06.200 --> 0:16:07.640
<v Speaker 8>two and a half, and then once you get there,

0:16:07.680 --> 0:16:10.000
<v Speaker 8>you got to look around to see whether you're still

0:16:10.080 --> 0:16:13.680
<v Speaker 8>on track, and if, you know, if things are accelerating

0:16:13.800 --> 0:16:15.840
<v Speaker 8>too fast and profits are going up too fast, then

0:16:15.880 --> 0:16:18.600
<v Speaker 8>you stop cutting at that stage. So given sort of

0:16:18.720 --> 0:16:21.640
<v Speaker 8>that type of uncertainty, you don't need to go in fifties.

0:16:21.680 --> 0:16:24.680
<v Speaker 8>I think the debates really do you go in twenty fives?

0:16:24.760 --> 0:16:26.480
<v Speaker 8>And then you know, do you skip meetings or not?

0:16:26.760 --> 0:16:26.960
<v Speaker 4>Yeah?

0:16:27.600 --> 0:16:30.440
<v Speaker 1>I wonder you know, Kasina Guard and others have points

0:16:30.440 --> 0:16:32.840
<v Speaker 1>as the importance of wage data when it comes to

0:16:33.040 --> 0:16:37.160
<v Speaker 1>their decision making process at the ECB. Two is the

0:16:37.240 --> 0:16:39.920
<v Speaker 1>wage days is something that's a big concern for you

0:16:40.080 --> 0:16:41.960
<v Speaker 1>when you're thinking about the broader outlook for the year

0:16:42.000 --> 0:16:42.560
<v Speaker 1>Zone economy.

0:16:42.800 --> 0:16:44.840
<v Speaker 8>No, so based on what we've there's not a lot

0:16:44.920 --> 0:16:47.040
<v Speaker 8>of year to date wage data out yet. But if

0:16:47.200 --> 0:16:49.800
<v Speaker 8>Italy doesn't repeat the big one off that they had

0:16:49.920 --> 0:16:53.040
<v Speaker 8>in December, then our current tracking of negotiated wages is

0:16:53.120 --> 0:16:55.480
<v Speaker 8>that it'll slip below four percent for the first time

0:16:55.560 --> 0:16:58.720
<v Speaker 8>in January. And so it really looks like, you know,

0:16:58.800 --> 0:17:01.480
<v Speaker 8>the negotiated wage track, which is going to be most inertial,

0:17:02.000 --> 0:17:04.040
<v Speaker 8>had been sort of going sideways, is now starting to

0:17:04.080 --> 0:17:07.200
<v Speaker 8>trend lower. The indeed wage tracker, which is sort of

0:17:07.280 --> 0:17:11.119
<v Speaker 8>temp marginal wages of temp agencies, that's already been heading lower.

0:17:11.280 --> 0:17:13.439
<v Speaker 8>And then they have a phone survey which they don't publish,

0:17:14.359 --> 0:17:17.080
<v Speaker 8>and so all indications really are that wages are moving

0:17:17.560 --> 0:17:19.760
<v Speaker 8>in line with their forecast and at this stage are

0:17:19.800 --> 0:17:20.400
<v Speaker 8>not concerning.

0:17:21.000 --> 0:17:23.680
<v Speaker 1>That was Aaron Captain, chief economist at UBS Investment Bank,

0:17:23.720 --> 0:17:26.800
<v Speaker 1>speaking to us on Bloomberg Daybreak Europe. Now, the ECB

0:17:26.920 --> 0:17:29.919
<v Speaker 1>expects CPI to fall to two point two percent by August,

0:17:30.119 --> 0:17:32.159
<v Speaker 1>but it could happen as soon as this month, according

0:17:32.160 --> 0:17:35.639
<v Speaker 1>to estimates by Bloomberg Economics. Kicking off rate trimming is

0:17:35.720 --> 0:17:38.480
<v Speaker 1>one thing, but questions still remain about what comes next

0:17:38.560 --> 0:17:41.720
<v Speaker 1>for the ECB after the first cut, whether it comes

0:17:41.800 --> 0:17:45.000
<v Speaker 1>in April or in June. At the moment, money markets

0:17:45.000 --> 0:17:48.120
<v Speaker 1>are pricing in three quarter point reductions starting in June.

0:17:48.440 --> 0:17:51.120
<v Speaker 1>I've been discussing the path ahead with senior Euro Area

0:17:51.160 --> 0:17:55.200
<v Speaker 1>economist for Bloomberg Economics David Powell. Just how surprising would

0:17:55.200 --> 0:17:57.359
<v Speaker 1>an April cut be or how likely is it?

0:17:58.000 --> 0:18:01.640
<v Speaker 7>An April cut is very unlikely at this stage. For example,

0:18:01.720 --> 0:18:04.560
<v Speaker 7>there's almost no probability of that being priced into the

0:18:04.640 --> 0:18:08.760
<v Speaker 7>markets right now. Some time ago, there was a debate

0:18:08.920 --> 0:18:12.160
<v Speaker 7>whether this was going to happen in April or in June.

0:18:12.200 --> 0:18:13.399
<v Speaker 7>That was back at the beginning of the year, and

0:18:13.440 --> 0:18:16.439
<v Speaker 7>that was fully priced in that April cuts. There has

0:18:16.480 --> 0:18:19.080
<v Speaker 7>been a big shift in market pricing we've seen, and

0:18:19.160 --> 0:18:22.000
<v Speaker 7>that's really been thanks to the communication we've seen from

0:18:22.040 --> 0:18:25.080
<v Speaker 7>the ECB who have started to rule out some time

0:18:25.160 --> 0:18:30.159
<v Speaker 7>ago the possibility of an April cut, Although there have

0:18:30.359 --> 0:18:33.600
<v Speaker 7>been some doves in the Governing Council who've continued to

0:18:33.720 --> 0:18:36.520
<v Speaker 7>speak about it from time to time. It's not of

0:18:36.640 --> 0:18:38.439
<v Speaker 7>you held by the consensus at all.

0:18:38.640 --> 0:18:42.600
<v Speaker 1>Just mischievously hinting that perhaps there's something could happen, even

0:18:42.640 --> 0:18:45.159
<v Speaker 1>though there's no likelihood of it as you see it

0:18:45.200 --> 0:18:48.359
<v Speaker 1>as well. So what's the risk of waiting longer for

0:18:48.640 --> 0:18:51.600
<v Speaker 1>Christine Legard and colleagues or is there a risk in

0:18:51.680 --> 0:18:53.160
<v Speaker 1>them waiting to June.

0:18:53.720 --> 0:18:56.920
<v Speaker 7>Well, the difference between April and June is not that huge.

0:18:57.240 --> 0:19:01.280
<v Speaker 7>Although the ECB cannot wait until is actually down to

0:19:01.359 --> 0:19:04.399
<v Speaker 7>two percent to start cutting because monetary policy works with

0:19:04.480 --> 0:19:06.600
<v Speaker 7>a lag somewhere between a year and a year and

0:19:06.680 --> 0:19:09.240
<v Speaker 7>a half. So if they don't, if they don't actually

0:19:09.400 --> 0:19:14.080
<v Speaker 7>cut until inflation is back to target, the full impact

0:19:14.119 --> 0:19:15.960
<v Speaker 7>of that cut won't be felt for some time later,

0:19:16.000 --> 0:19:19.879
<v Speaker 7>and the economy could already have suffered some significant damage

0:19:19.920 --> 0:19:22.400
<v Speaker 7>by them at a time when the economy has hardly grown.

0:19:22.440 --> 0:19:25.800
<v Speaker 7>In fact, the UR economy is not expanded at all

0:19:25.920 --> 0:19:27.720
<v Speaker 7>for nearly a year and a half, and if we

0:19:27.840 --> 0:19:31.320
<v Speaker 7>compare that flatlining that we saw last year in the

0:19:31.440 --> 0:19:34.399
<v Speaker 7>UR area, that's very different from the US where it

0:19:34.440 --> 0:19:38.360
<v Speaker 7>expanded by three percent. So they can't wait forever to cut,

0:19:38.520 --> 0:19:42.080
<v Speaker 7>but probably the difference between April and June is not huge,

0:19:42.280 --> 0:19:43.840
<v Speaker 7>and it looks like it's coming in June.

0:19:44.480 --> 0:19:48.320
<v Speaker 1>The process of deflation has been reasonably steady in the

0:19:48.440 --> 0:19:52.840
<v Speaker 1>Euro Area. Are there worrying aspects within that? Are there

0:19:53.040 --> 0:19:56.800
<v Speaker 1>risk zones within the members of the Euro Area that

0:19:56.960 --> 0:20:00.440
<v Speaker 1>could actually bump inflation up in the wrong direction before

0:20:00.480 --> 0:20:01.440
<v Speaker 1>we get to right cuts?

0:20:01.800 --> 0:20:05.160
<v Speaker 7>Yeah, well, inflation has come down, as you said, considerably

0:20:05.400 --> 0:20:08.080
<v Speaker 7>from where it was at its peak. In fact, it's

0:20:08.119 --> 0:20:11.359
<v Speaker 7>not very far from the target now, and we expect

0:20:11.440 --> 0:20:14.680
<v Speaker 7>headline inflation to actually drop below target this summer. But

0:20:14.760 --> 0:20:17.160
<v Speaker 7>there are still some bits of worry when you look

0:20:17.200 --> 0:20:19.280
<v Speaker 7>at the details of the report. In fact, we just

0:20:19.359 --> 0:20:22.400
<v Speaker 7>had the inflation report for March and both the headline

0:20:22.400 --> 0:20:25.520
<v Speaker 7>and core continue to come down. But services inflation, which

0:20:25.520 --> 0:20:28.480
<v Speaker 7>the ECB is watching very closely, has been sticky at

0:20:28.560 --> 0:20:32.640
<v Speaker 7>four percent for months now. That will probably come down

0:20:32.720 --> 0:20:35.920
<v Speaker 7>in the months ahead as wage growth decelerates, but that's

0:20:36.000 --> 0:20:39.000
<v Speaker 7>keeping the ECB worried and as part of the reason

0:20:39.040 --> 0:20:42.359
<v Speaker 7>they're moving cautiously delaying the first cut to June. They'll

0:20:42.400 --> 0:20:45.320
<v Speaker 7>probably pause after that and not cut again until September,

0:20:45.840 --> 0:20:47.680
<v Speaker 7>and they would like to see that come down before

0:20:47.720 --> 0:20:48.879
<v Speaker 7>they move more aggressively.

0:20:49.640 --> 0:20:51.560
<v Speaker 1>And of course the flip side of they say is

0:20:51.720 --> 0:20:53.880
<v Speaker 1>and those who do want to see right cuts come

0:20:53.960 --> 0:20:56.840
<v Speaker 1>faster is the weakness in the euro Area economy. Late

0:20:56.880 --> 0:20:59.600
<v Speaker 1>interesting to see the latest round of pm I numbers

0:20:59.640 --> 0:21:02.800
<v Speaker 1>showing a little bit of strength returning the Eurozone composite

0:21:02.800 --> 0:21:05.520
<v Speaker 1>pi I number the final reading for March, seeing it

0:21:05.680 --> 0:21:09.800
<v Speaker 1>nudge back into expansion territory. How weak is the euros

0:21:09.880 --> 0:21:12.320
<v Speaker 1>and economy at this point, Well, the your area is

0:21:12.440 --> 0:21:12.960
<v Speaker 1>pretty weak.

0:21:13.040 --> 0:21:15.240
<v Speaker 7>Like I said, it hasn't expanded for nearly a year

0:21:15.280 --> 0:21:18.119
<v Speaker 7>and a half. That stands in very stark contrast the

0:21:18.240 --> 0:21:21.480
<v Speaker 7>United States, which, as I already said, spend the three

0:21:21.520 --> 0:21:23.960
<v Speaker 7>percent last year. It just gives you a sense of

0:21:24.040 --> 0:21:26.880
<v Speaker 7>how weak it is in Europe. However, the economy will

0:21:26.960 --> 0:21:31.160
<v Speaker 7>probably gain some momentum this year is inflation comes down.

0:21:31.280 --> 0:21:34.639
<v Speaker 7>Real incomes are being boosted and that allows real consumption

0:21:35.520 --> 0:21:38.159
<v Speaker 7>to rise, so people have a bit more money to

0:21:38.240 --> 0:21:40.880
<v Speaker 7>spend with inflation coming in. We're seeing that in the numbers.

0:21:41.240 --> 0:21:45.680
<v Speaker 7>The services sector is once again recovering in Europe, but

0:21:45.760 --> 0:21:48.000
<v Speaker 7>that'll probably continue throughout the course of the year and

0:21:48.080 --> 0:21:50.560
<v Speaker 7>the economy will gain some momentum, but nothing like we're

0:21:50.560 --> 0:21:52.520
<v Speaker 7>seeing across the Atlantic.

0:21:52.800 --> 0:21:54.680
<v Speaker 1>What about the question of wage data. This is something

0:21:54.720 --> 0:21:57.360
<v Speaker 1>that Christine Lagart has signaled and repeated occasions as being

0:21:57.520 --> 0:22:00.840
<v Speaker 1>absolutely key for the European Center Bank decision making. Do

0:22:00.960 --> 0:22:04.359
<v Speaker 1>we have any early indications of what the wage picture is?

0:22:05.200 --> 0:22:10.080
<v Speaker 7>Well, wage growth has probably peaked the most comprehensive set

0:22:10.119 --> 0:22:12.520
<v Speaker 7>of data WEEGN, and that comes with the national accounts.

0:22:12.680 --> 0:22:14.560
<v Speaker 7>I mean know a couple of quarters ago that peaked

0:22:14.960 --> 0:22:18.439
<v Speaker 7>wage growth and is coming down. Specifically, it's the compensation

0:22:18.600 --> 0:22:21.040
<v Speaker 7>per employee they look at, and we'll get another round

0:22:21.119 --> 0:22:24.159
<v Speaker 7>of that in the early part of June and that

0:22:24.240 --> 0:22:26.400
<v Speaker 7>will cover the first quarter, and that's what the ECB

0:22:26.600 --> 0:22:30.400
<v Speaker 7>is waiting for to cut to confirm that wage growth

0:22:30.440 --> 0:22:33.359
<v Speaker 7>continues to come down, although before that we'll get some

0:22:33.520 --> 0:22:37.360
<v Speaker 7>data un negotiated wages towards the end of May. Christine

0:22:37.400 --> 0:22:40.680
<v Speaker 7>Legarda already has highlighted that in his speech in Frankfurt

0:22:40.680 --> 0:22:42.800
<v Speaker 7>a couple of weeks ago, that they'll be looking very

0:22:42.840 --> 0:22:46.080
<v Speaker 7>closely at that for some initial signs of wage growth

0:22:46.240 --> 0:22:47.640
<v Speaker 7>continuing to decelerate.

0:22:47.920 --> 0:22:50.399
<v Speaker 1>So let's talk us through your expectations then for the

0:22:50.480 --> 0:22:53.560
<v Speaker 1>rest of the year. So no cut at the upcoming meeting.

0:22:53.720 --> 0:22:56.040
<v Speaker 1>We're looking towards the start of summer for things like

0:22:56.080 --> 0:22:57.840
<v Speaker 1>that to start moving. What does the rest of the

0:22:57.920 --> 0:22:59.919
<v Speaker 1>year look like for the EACYB from this point of view?

0:23:00.160 --> 0:23:03.960
<v Speaker 7>Well, as I mentioned, the ECB is really focused on

0:23:04.080 --> 0:23:07.040
<v Speaker 7>this wage data and that comes in the national accounts,

0:23:07.040 --> 0:23:08.919
<v Speaker 7>so it only comes once a quarter. So we get

0:23:09.080 --> 0:23:11.399
<v Speaker 7>kind of batch of that for the first quarter in

0:23:11.560 --> 0:23:13.880
<v Speaker 7>the beginning of June, and then we have to wait

0:23:13.920 --> 0:23:16.360
<v Speaker 7>another three months of beinning of September until we get

0:23:16.480 --> 0:23:18.680
<v Speaker 7>data on that again. That'll be for the second quarter.

0:23:18.960 --> 0:23:22.760
<v Speaker 7>Conveniently for the ECB, that also aligns with their forecast months,

0:23:23.080 --> 0:23:26.000
<v Speaker 7>so they'll have fresh inflation forecasts and they own staff

0:23:26.080 --> 0:23:30.240
<v Speaker 7>economists in June as well as September. And if both

0:23:30.320 --> 0:23:33.119
<v Speaker 7>of those are going in the right direction, meaning of

0:23:33.200 --> 0:23:37.480
<v Speaker 7>that the staff forecast are inflation continuing to decelerate as

0:23:37.520 --> 0:23:40.320
<v Speaker 7>they have been forecasting for a while, that will allow

0:23:40.400 --> 0:23:44.280
<v Speaker 7>them to cut in June, probably pause in July as

0:23:44.320 --> 0:23:47.280
<v Speaker 7>they wait for that quarterly data again in September, and

0:23:47.359 --> 0:23:50.760
<v Speaker 7>then cut again in September. By then, headline inflation is

0:23:51.040 --> 0:23:54.399
<v Speaker 7>likely to be below target. In core inflation is not

0:23:54.480 --> 0:23:56.159
<v Speaker 7>going to be far behind it's going to be a

0:23:56.240 --> 0:24:00.480
<v Speaker 7>lot more difficult to justify restrictive policy stands when inflation

0:24:00.600 --> 0:24:03.800
<v Speaker 7>is actually below target. So from September we think that

0:24:03.920 --> 0:24:07.040
<v Speaker 7>they will cut it at each of the remaining meetings

0:24:07.119 --> 0:24:09.680
<v Speaker 7>of the year, and that equates to about one hundred

0:24:09.720 --> 0:24:12.560
<v Speaker 7>basis points and easing throughout the course of this year.

0:24:12.880 --> 0:24:13.480
<v Speaker 7>How much of a.

0:24:13.520 --> 0:24:17.280
<v Speaker 1>Dilemma is it for the ECB to go before the FED.

0:24:17.359 --> 0:24:18.920
<v Speaker 1>I know the ECB of course will tell you that

0:24:18.960 --> 0:24:21.480
<v Speaker 1>they make their own decisions and they're not that conscious

0:24:21.520 --> 0:24:24.080
<v Speaker 1>of it, but surely one is reliant on the other.

0:24:24.680 --> 0:24:28.520
<v Speaker 7>If we look back at this tightening cycle it's taken place,

0:24:28.960 --> 0:24:30.920
<v Speaker 7>the FED has kind of taken the lead on it,

0:24:31.280 --> 0:24:36.000
<v Speaker 7>the ECB followed, and the ECB probably wouldn't mind if

0:24:36.040 --> 0:24:40.159
<v Speaker 7>the FED took the lead again on cutting. And they

0:24:40.240 --> 0:24:42.520
<v Speaker 7>may not have that luxury though, of just kind of

0:24:42.600 --> 0:24:45.240
<v Speaker 7>following the FED, because, like I said, the UR economy

0:24:45.320 --> 0:24:48.880
<v Speaker 7>is much weaker than the US economy. So if things

0:24:49.000 --> 0:24:51.639
<v Speaker 7>remain strong, and most of the data coming out of

0:24:51.680 --> 0:24:54.480
<v Speaker 7>the US suggest they will, the FED may be able

0:24:54.520 --> 0:24:57.320
<v Speaker 7>to put off monetary easing, and that's not a luxury

0:24:57.359 --> 0:24:59.520
<v Speaker 7>that the ECB has at this stage. So it may

0:24:59.600 --> 0:25:02.160
<v Speaker 7>not have choice. It may have to go on its

0:25:02.200 --> 0:25:04.880
<v Speaker 7>own and then allow the FED to go later.

0:25:05.160 --> 0:25:07.320
<v Speaker 1>How much of a risk would a weaker euro though

0:25:07.359 --> 0:25:10.040
<v Speaker 1>be to the inflation outlook if they we do If

0:25:10.119 --> 0:25:11.920
<v Speaker 1>as expected, the ECB does go before the Fed.

0:25:12.280 --> 0:25:15.800
<v Speaker 7>Obviously the ECB is so he is looking at the

0:25:17.000 --> 0:25:20.440
<v Speaker 7>exchange rate, what it does to inflation, in growth and

0:25:20.520 --> 0:25:23.720
<v Speaker 7>other things. However, it's not really on the ECB's radar

0:25:23.800 --> 0:25:27.879
<v Speaker 7>at this stage. They're not talking about exchange rate volatility

0:25:28.040 --> 0:25:30.240
<v Speaker 7>or a weekier or strong or anything like that. So

0:25:31.359 --> 0:25:33.959
<v Speaker 7>I suspect that that's not too important for them at

0:25:34.000 --> 0:25:38.040
<v Speaker 7>this stage when they contemplate the path of interest rates.

0:25:38.480 --> 0:25:42.000
<v Speaker 1>That was David Powell from Bloomberg Economics. I'm Stephen Carroll

0:25:42.040 --> 0:25:44.399
<v Speaker 1>in London. You can catch us every weekday morning here

0:25:44.440 --> 0:25:46.760
<v Speaker 1>for Bloomberg Daybreak. You're at beginning at six am in

0:25:46.840 --> 0:25:50.679
<v Speaker 1>London and one am on Wall Street. Tom, Thank you, Steven.

0:25:50.760 --> 0:25:54.120
<v Speaker 1>And coming up on Bloomberg Daybreak weekend. Has China's economy

0:25:54.160 --> 0:25:57.520
<v Speaker 1>bottomed out? We look ahead to China inflation data. I'm

0:25:57.600 --> 0:25:59.680
<v Speaker 1>Tom Busby and this is Bloomberg.

0:26:09.720 --> 0:26:12.160
<v Speaker 2>This is Bloomberg day Break weekend, our global look ahead

0:26:12.160 --> 0:26:14.359
<v Speaker 2>at the top stories for investors in the coming week.

0:26:14.840 --> 0:26:17.639
<v Speaker 2>I'm Tom Busby in New York. The early indicators on

0:26:17.800 --> 0:26:20.760
<v Speaker 2>China's economy show there may have been a small improvement

0:26:20.920 --> 0:26:23.719
<v Speaker 2>during the first quarter. Even so, the majority of Chinese

0:26:23.760 --> 0:26:28.240
<v Speaker 2>financial institutions surveyed by Bloomberg Economics doubt the economy has

0:26:28.320 --> 0:26:30.840
<v Speaker 2>bottomed out, and a big question is whether it's stuck

0:26:31.160 --> 0:26:33.760
<v Speaker 2>in deflation. We'll get some insight in the week ahead.

0:26:33.960 --> 0:26:36.879
<v Speaker 2>Let's get to Doug Christner, co host of Daybreak Asia

0:26:37.040 --> 0:26:37.880
<v Speaker 2>for a closer look.

0:26:38.280 --> 0:26:40.639
<v Speaker 3>Tom, I think we can say the big issue is confidence.

0:26:40.840 --> 0:26:40.959
<v Speaker 7>Now.

0:26:41.000 --> 0:26:45.119
<v Speaker 3>The latest PMI data show improvement, but so much about

0:26:45.119 --> 0:26:49.120
<v Speaker 3>the overall Chinese economy does remain fragile, especially where consumer

0:26:49.200 --> 0:26:52.560
<v Speaker 3>demand is concerned. We know that retail demand is weak.

0:26:53.040 --> 0:26:54.640
<v Speaker 3>Pricing power seems absent.

0:26:55.280 --> 0:26:55.440
<v Speaker 7>Now.

0:26:55.480 --> 0:26:58.720
<v Speaker 3>The readings on producer and consumer prices are due midweek.

0:26:59.040 --> 0:27:00.760
<v Speaker 3>We're going to preview the day and now and talk

0:27:00.800 --> 0:27:04.680
<v Speaker 3>about the current challenges for the Chinese economy with Bloomberg

0:27:04.760 --> 0:27:07.560
<v Speaker 3>reporters Jill Desis and Alan Wong. Jill is one of

0:27:07.640 --> 0:27:11.119
<v Speaker 3>our news desk editors, and Alan is an editor on

0:27:11.359 --> 0:27:14.840
<v Speaker 3>the China ECOGV team. Thanks to both of you, for

0:27:15.000 --> 0:27:17.159
<v Speaker 3>joining us, Jill, I want to begin with you when

0:27:17.240 --> 0:27:20.680
<v Speaker 3>I start with the story about prices, particularly at the

0:27:20.720 --> 0:27:23.760
<v Speaker 3>wholesale level, producer prices. I guess in China it's known

0:27:23.800 --> 0:27:27.840
<v Speaker 3>as factory gate prices. We saw numbers in February at

0:27:27.880 --> 0:27:30.960
<v Speaker 3>a decline that was pretty rapid, and that extended a

0:27:31.080 --> 0:27:35.000
<v Speaker 3>slide in kind of a deflationary trend to seventeen months.

0:27:35.240 --> 0:27:38.960
<v Speaker 3>What's the conversation like around what we might expect in

0:27:39.000 --> 0:27:39.639
<v Speaker 3>the week ahead.

0:27:40.560 --> 0:27:43.000
<v Speaker 9>Yeah, Doug, I think that at this point, really those

0:27:43.280 --> 0:27:48.240
<v Speaker 9>factory gate prices continue to remain under pressure. We're still expecting,

0:27:48.480 --> 0:27:51.639
<v Speaker 9>or at least a economists are still expecting a continued

0:27:51.760 --> 0:27:55.600
<v Speaker 9>slide once we get those numbers for March survey estimate

0:27:55.720 --> 0:27:58.919
<v Speaker 9>is below two percent declines even I mean we're approaching

0:27:58.960 --> 0:28:02.240
<v Speaker 9>three percent declines. Think, so, there doesn't really seem to

0:28:02.320 --> 0:28:04.720
<v Speaker 9>be any kind of a meaningful turnaround in terms of

0:28:04.760 --> 0:28:09.480
<v Speaker 9>getting rid of these these issues around producer price deflation.

0:28:09.800 --> 0:28:12.159
<v Speaker 9>It's interesting because I think that at this point the

0:28:12.280 --> 0:28:15.640
<v Speaker 9>deflationary pressure story in China is just so much more

0:28:15.680 --> 0:28:20.520
<v Speaker 9>centered around consumer deflation, just because you know, from a

0:28:20.640 --> 0:28:23.680
<v Speaker 9>from a demand perspective, there's not a ton of concerns

0:28:24.080 --> 0:28:26.720
<v Speaker 9>around you know, China's ability to you know, making goods

0:28:26.720 --> 0:28:28.720
<v Speaker 9>and exporting them. I think it's much more about what

0:28:28.840 --> 0:28:31.280
<v Speaker 9>the domestics demand story says about China right now.

0:28:31.480 --> 0:28:34.960
<v Speaker 3>So, Alan, assuming that the numbers do show further deflation

0:28:35.080 --> 0:28:38.080
<v Speaker 3>both at the wholesale and retail level, does that create

0:28:38.160 --> 0:28:40.959
<v Speaker 3>any kind of urgency for the government to step up support.

0:28:41.200 --> 0:28:44.480
<v Speaker 10>Yeah, the urgency has always been there, and numbers, even

0:28:44.560 --> 0:28:49.640
<v Speaker 10>if they're not positive, will just only add to the

0:28:50.120 --> 0:28:53.160
<v Speaker 10>common consensus that there is a need for China to

0:28:53.240 --> 0:28:56.240
<v Speaker 10>ramp up its fiscal measures to stimulate demand.

0:28:56.480 --> 0:28:57.920
<v Speaker 3>Jill, you were going to weigh in, Yeah.

0:28:58.120 --> 0:29:02.640
<v Speaker 9>I think what's really interesting about the stimulus support story

0:29:02.720 --> 0:29:06.280
<v Speaker 9>when it comes to domestic demand is, look, we were

0:29:06.360 --> 0:29:08.840
<v Speaker 9>back at the NPC at the beginning of March really

0:29:08.960 --> 0:29:11.680
<v Speaker 9>sort of waiting on what kinds of stimulus support measures

0:29:11.720 --> 0:29:14.280
<v Speaker 9>would actually be announced, and I think, you know, economists

0:29:14.320 --> 0:29:16.360
<v Speaker 9>were generally disappointed. But I did think one thing that

0:29:16.480 --> 0:29:18.600
<v Speaker 9>was kind of interesting is that, at least when it

0:29:18.640 --> 0:29:21.160
<v Speaker 9>comes to trying to stimulate consumer demand, there's a lot

0:29:21.160 --> 0:29:23.360
<v Speaker 9>of talk about trading and old products for new ones

0:29:23.400 --> 0:29:25.479
<v Speaker 9>and stuff like that. I think what economists, you're really

0:29:25.520 --> 0:29:26.920
<v Speaker 9>waiting on is whether there's going to be a big

0:29:27.000 --> 0:29:28.600
<v Speaker 9>dollar amount put behind that in the future.

0:29:28.800 --> 0:29:32.240
<v Speaker 3>So Alan, if we're really talking about depressed sentiment, I mean,

0:29:32.320 --> 0:29:34.320
<v Speaker 3>the property market seems to be the root cause. I

0:29:34.400 --> 0:29:36.800
<v Speaker 3>think we can agree on that much. I mean, or

0:29:36.840 --> 0:29:39.240
<v Speaker 3>maybe it's just such a big part of the story.

0:29:39.320 --> 0:29:42.160
<v Speaker 3>What is your sense based on Bloomberg reporting? Where are

0:29:42.320 --> 0:29:45.160
<v Speaker 3>things right now visa VI the housing market?

0:29:45.600 --> 0:29:48.800
<v Speaker 10>Yeah, we're seeing a two track recovery in the Chinese economy.

0:29:48.920 --> 0:29:52.000
<v Speaker 10>On the industrial side, things has been we were seeing

0:29:52.040 --> 0:29:54.720
<v Speaker 10>green shoots on that front, but then in terms of

0:29:54.840 --> 0:29:59.480
<v Speaker 10>the property slum it's still very much in a sorry state.

0:30:00.560 --> 0:30:05.400
<v Speaker 10>We seeing that housing start a week, but housing completion

0:30:05.800 --> 0:30:10.040
<v Speaker 10>is stabilizing, so that means that new homes on being

0:30:10.080 --> 0:30:13.360
<v Speaker 10>built and that has some down with pressure on commodity

0:30:13.480 --> 0:30:17.520
<v Speaker 10>prices for example, and that also reflects on the weak

0:30:17.720 --> 0:30:19.000
<v Speaker 10>sentiment in China in general.

0:30:19.280 --> 0:30:21.280
<v Speaker 9>The other thing too, I think it's a really interesting

0:30:21.320 --> 0:30:23.640
<v Speaker 9>stimular story when it comes to the housing market as well,

0:30:23.760 --> 0:30:26.320
<v Speaker 9>because the government has taken several steps to try to

0:30:26.400 --> 0:30:29.719
<v Speaker 9>prop up support there. I think most recently, Chinese lenders

0:30:29.760 --> 0:30:33.960
<v Speaker 9>slashed a key rate for mortgages in February and attempt

0:30:34.000 --> 0:30:37.080
<v Speaker 9>to stimulate demand into March didn't really seem to move

0:30:37.080 --> 0:30:39.440
<v Speaker 9>the needle there much. So that's just, you know, to

0:30:39.560 --> 0:30:41.680
<v Speaker 9>kind of put this in perspective. Another thing that analysts

0:30:41.680 --> 0:30:44.280
<v Speaker 9>are looking out for is whether these continued rate cuts

0:30:44.320 --> 0:30:46.840
<v Speaker 9>are actually going to help prop up the property market

0:30:46.880 --> 0:30:48.719
<v Speaker 9>as well, because they really haven't done much so far.

0:30:49.040 --> 0:30:52.040
<v Speaker 3>And as both of you know, US Treasury Secretary Yellen

0:30:52.160 --> 0:30:53.800
<v Speaker 3>is in China. One of the things that she is

0:30:53.840 --> 0:30:57.760
<v Speaker 3>addressing is this issue of industrial overcapacity and how it's

0:30:58.040 --> 0:31:01.000
<v Speaker 3>having a negative impact not just on the Chinese economy,

0:31:01.200 --> 0:31:04.480
<v Speaker 3>but many economies around the world. I spoke earlier about

0:31:04.520 --> 0:31:08.760
<v Speaker 3>that with George Barboris, managing director at K two Asset Management.

0:31:08.840 --> 0:31:09.880
<v Speaker 3>Here's what he had to say.

0:31:10.080 --> 0:31:12.080
<v Speaker 11>Some people would say there's some cognitive dissonance with some

0:31:12.120 --> 0:31:14.480
<v Speaker 11>of the policy coming out of Beijing, but in reality,

0:31:14.600 --> 0:31:16.480
<v Speaker 11>they're taking a step back from the grand to play

0:31:16.600 --> 0:31:19.720
<v Speaker 11>the long term. They will unload cheaper products to the

0:31:19.800 --> 0:31:22.440
<v Speaker 11>rest of the world that will allow it, and North

0:31:22.440 --> 0:31:25.280
<v Speaker 11>America will maintain them. They've obviously died up those tariffs

0:31:25.280 --> 0:31:27.760
<v Speaker 11>and the current administration from the previous one, they can

0:31:27.840 --> 0:31:30.080
<v Speaker 11>allow these cheap goods to come through which they won't,

0:31:30.160 --> 0:31:33.280
<v Speaker 11>and that would be very CPI will fall very quickly.

0:31:33.640 --> 0:31:36.120
<v Speaker 11>But China's just got a different playbook at the moment

0:31:36.160 --> 0:31:38.120
<v Speaker 11>to where we're were three years ago, and the middle

0:31:38.160 --> 0:31:39.760
<v Speaker 11>class of China going to pay that price.

0:31:40.040 --> 0:31:43.760
<v Speaker 3>That is George Bevoris, they're from K two asset Management. Now,

0:31:43.840 --> 0:31:46.440
<v Speaker 3>Alan if we can agree that there is an overcapacity

0:31:46.560 --> 0:31:48.680
<v Speaker 3>problem in China, It's kind of curious, isn't it that

0:31:49.160 --> 0:31:52.480
<v Speaker 3>Beijing is still intent on using industrial policy as a

0:31:52.560 --> 0:31:54.480
<v Speaker 3>way of driving growth. What do you think?

0:31:54.680 --> 0:31:57.040
<v Speaker 10>Yeah, there is a need for it to find ways

0:31:57.080 --> 0:32:00.800
<v Speaker 10>to grow its economy because of the persistent property slum.

0:32:01.280 --> 0:32:05.560
<v Speaker 10>China is pouring money into manufacturing and has designated three

0:32:06.640 --> 0:32:11.840
<v Speaker 10>new industries as its new Big Three industries, namely evs,

0:32:11.920 --> 0:32:16.200
<v Speaker 10>electric vehicles, solar cells, and batteries. So it's trying to

0:32:16.280 --> 0:32:18.560
<v Speaker 10>ramp up production on these things and then obviously that

0:32:19.240 --> 0:32:22.520
<v Speaker 10>creates more competition in China and drive down prices. But

0:32:22.840 --> 0:32:25.480
<v Speaker 10>the US is right in thinking that what if China

0:32:25.920 --> 0:32:29.360
<v Speaker 10>exports lots of cheap cars to the US, what's going

0:32:29.400 --> 0:32:33.480
<v Speaker 10>to happen to domestic makers of cars? And this is

0:32:33.560 --> 0:32:35.560
<v Speaker 10>going to be high on the agenda of Yellen's trip

0:32:35.680 --> 0:32:36.040
<v Speaker 10>to China.

0:32:36.360 --> 0:32:38.800
<v Speaker 3>We know that the government will released the Work Report

0:32:38.880 --> 0:32:41.440
<v Speaker 3>back in March and with it this plan to unleash

0:32:41.560 --> 0:32:44.600
<v Speaker 3>new productive forces. High tech is a big part of

0:32:44.680 --> 0:32:48.360
<v Speaker 3>that story. Innovation another way of driving growth. Jill, do

0:32:48.440 --> 0:32:50.000
<v Speaker 3>you have a sense of what this may look like

0:32:50.080 --> 0:32:53.520
<v Speaker 3>if we take EV's, if we take solar panels out

0:32:53.520 --> 0:32:56.880
<v Speaker 3>of the equation, what does high tech and innovation look like?

0:32:57.040 --> 0:32:59.120
<v Speaker 9>I don't really know that you can totally take EV's

0:32:59.160 --> 0:33:02.680
<v Speaker 9>and solar panels of the equation there, Doug, because I

0:33:02.720 --> 0:33:04.960
<v Speaker 9>think that is pretty central to this idea of what

0:33:05.080 --> 0:33:06.920
<v Speaker 9>China is trying to accomplish here, right. I mean, we

0:33:07.040 --> 0:33:09.600
<v Speaker 9>know that no matter what happens with the property sector,

0:33:09.720 --> 0:33:11.840
<v Speaker 9>even if Beijing is able to put a floor under

0:33:11.880 --> 0:33:14.840
<v Speaker 9>this crisis, we are not going to see real estate

0:33:14.920 --> 0:33:17.040
<v Speaker 9>contribute to GDP in the way that we have in

0:33:17.080 --> 0:33:20.640
<v Speaker 9>the years past. That's just absolutely done. So what China

0:33:20.720 --> 0:33:22.520
<v Speaker 9>really needs to do in terms of this long term

0:33:22.560 --> 0:33:26.320
<v Speaker 9>strategy for new productive forces is find ways to replace

0:33:26.520 --> 0:33:30.200
<v Speaker 9>bits of how the property sector contributed to GDP with

0:33:30.440 --> 0:33:32.520
<v Speaker 9>some of these other sectors. And so that does mean

0:33:32.880 --> 0:33:35.960
<v Speaker 9>investing a lot more into evs and solar panels, which

0:33:36.000 --> 0:33:39.240
<v Speaker 9>is of course obviously leading to some of these overcapacity

0:33:39.320 --> 0:33:41.080
<v Speaker 9>challenges that you're seeing out of the US when it

0:33:41.120 --> 0:33:44.280
<v Speaker 9>comes to China, the fact that they're subsidizing so much.

0:33:45.160 --> 0:33:47.480
<v Speaker 9>But I think that at this point, I mean, it's

0:33:47.520 --> 0:33:50.000
<v Speaker 9>still a fairly vague slogan, right, I mean, how else

0:33:50.040 --> 0:33:52.920
<v Speaker 9>do you really prescribe, you know, describe new productive forces?

0:33:53.080 --> 0:33:54.680
<v Speaker 10>Yeah, And I think one thing i' added is that

0:33:55.640 --> 0:34:00.440
<v Speaker 10>the idea for this new new productive forces is China

0:34:00.480 --> 0:34:04.200
<v Speaker 10>wants to climb up the value chain in areas like Ai.

0:34:04.440 --> 0:34:06.240
<v Speaker 10>China also want to make I mean, wanted to play

0:34:06.280 --> 0:34:09.279
<v Speaker 10>a much bigger role in the Chinese economy because it

0:34:09.280 --> 0:34:11.719
<v Speaker 10>will make people more productive and then the workforce will

0:34:11.760 --> 0:34:14.160
<v Speaker 10>be a lot more skilled and this will make China

0:34:14.280 --> 0:34:16.480
<v Speaker 10>a lot more competitive in the longer term.

0:34:16.600 --> 0:34:19.439
<v Speaker 3>Well, you mentioned workforce there, Alan Jill. I mean, where

0:34:19.480 --> 0:34:21.439
<v Speaker 3>are we right now when you look at the labor market,

0:34:21.520 --> 0:34:24.799
<v Speaker 3>particularly youth unemployment. Do we have a sense of where

0:34:24.840 --> 0:34:26.439
<v Speaker 3>the unemployment rate is these days?

0:34:26.640 --> 0:34:29.040
<v Speaker 9>Oh? Gosh, Doug, Well, I think that with the youth

0:34:29.120 --> 0:34:31.640
<v Speaker 9>unemployment rate, there's just been so much chatter about that

0:34:31.719 --> 0:34:33.600
<v Speaker 9>one over the last year, right, I mean, we saw

0:34:33.680 --> 0:34:36.760
<v Speaker 9>that one just removed from the official database for several

0:34:36.880 --> 0:34:39.880
<v Speaker 9>months in twenty twenty three, as policymakers said that they

0:34:39.880 --> 0:34:43.319
<v Speaker 9>were retooling it. Ultimately, now they're still putting it out,

0:34:43.360 --> 0:34:47.440
<v Speaker 9>although they've stopped highlighting it in their big regular press conferences.

0:34:47.560 --> 0:34:49.320
<v Speaker 9>It does seem like it's ticked down a bit to

0:34:49.400 --> 0:34:52.960
<v Speaker 9>around fifteen percent or so rather than the north of

0:34:53.040 --> 0:34:55.919
<v Speaker 9>twenty percent that we were seeing in twenty twenty three,

0:34:56.160 --> 0:34:59.480
<v Speaker 9>though obviously still a major issue. I mean, look, young

0:34:59.560 --> 0:35:02.319
<v Speaker 9>people in China, these recent graduates have really been hit

0:35:02.840 --> 0:35:06.239
<v Speaker 9>tremendously over the past several years, not just because of

0:35:06.239 --> 0:35:08.960
<v Speaker 9>the economic slowdown and all the pandemic controls and all

0:35:09.000 --> 0:35:12.200
<v Speaker 9>of that, but also this whole realignment within China around

0:35:12.520 --> 0:35:16.080
<v Speaker 9>how the tech sector has handled this crackdown, this austerity campaign.

0:35:16.200 --> 0:35:18.040
<v Speaker 9>All of that has led to jobs drying up, and

0:35:18.120 --> 0:35:21.320
<v Speaker 9>I think, you know, some levels of dissatisfaction still, particularly

0:35:21.400 --> 0:35:22.400
<v Speaker 9>among China's use well.

0:35:22.440 --> 0:35:25.520
<v Speaker 3>And if we can agree that consumers really have been

0:35:25.719 --> 0:35:28.759
<v Speaker 3>keeping a pretty tight leash on spending, is there a

0:35:28.880 --> 0:35:32.759
<v Speaker 3>way that the government might address this through means other

0:35:32.840 --> 0:35:36.400
<v Speaker 3>than just lowering interest rates. Are their ideas floating around,

0:35:36.880 --> 0:35:40.120
<v Speaker 3>maybe to issue some type of coupons directly that could

0:35:40.200 --> 0:35:43.520
<v Speaker 3>be used to purchase goods. Are people beginning to get

0:35:43.560 --> 0:35:44.360
<v Speaker 3>a little creative.

0:35:44.520 --> 0:35:47.800
<v Speaker 10>I think they are on the China's top economic planet

0:35:47.960 --> 0:35:50.880
<v Speaker 10>and the RC actually recently met to just talk about

0:35:51.080 --> 0:35:53.359
<v Speaker 10>how they could implement this program. And some of those

0:35:53.400 --> 0:35:57.080
<v Speaker 10>people and the companies they met are a consumer goods

0:35:57.120 --> 0:36:01.480
<v Speaker 10>company and importantly recycling companies, because they're going to encourage

0:36:01.520 --> 0:36:05.200
<v Speaker 10>consumers to replace old goods, durable goods and cars and

0:36:06.200 --> 0:36:09.000
<v Speaker 10>factories to replace the equipment. So that's going to create

0:36:09.040 --> 0:36:12.200
<v Speaker 10>a lot more demand if implemented the way it wants

0:36:12.280 --> 0:36:17.319
<v Speaker 10>to for new equipment and appliances and what's that way

0:36:17.320 --> 0:36:18.960
<v Speaker 10>it's going to go. China's going to have to deal

0:36:19.000 --> 0:36:21.520
<v Speaker 10>with that in some way. Yeah.

0:36:21.640 --> 0:36:23.920
<v Speaker 9>I think Alan did a really good job of summing

0:36:24.000 --> 0:36:28.040
<v Speaker 9>up the plans that are actually in consideration here. But

0:36:28.160 --> 0:36:30.560
<v Speaker 9>I think the really important thing to underscore is that

0:36:30.719 --> 0:36:34.719
<v Speaker 9>in terms of direct cash handouts, China's just absolutely not

0:36:34.960 --> 0:36:37.000
<v Speaker 9>going there. I think that it would take a tremendous

0:36:37.040 --> 0:36:39.520
<v Speaker 9>amount for China to actually consider something like that. They've

0:36:39.560 --> 0:36:43.520
<v Speaker 9>been incredibly critical of what Western governments in particular were

0:36:43.560 --> 0:36:45.640
<v Speaker 9>doing in terms of cash hand ats to households during

0:36:45.680 --> 0:36:48.360
<v Speaker 9>the pandemic and it seems like that's still a bridge

0:36:48.440 --> 0:36:50.840
<v Speaker 9>too far for China's government, right, But it was very interesting.

0:36:50.920 --> 0:36:53.239
<v Speaker 3>There was a report just in the last week I

0:36:53.440 --> 0:36:58.960
<v Speaker 3>published where President she was considering a US style quantitative

0:36:59.080 --> 0:37:01.680
<v Speaker 3>easing as a way of providing a little bit more

0:37:01.800 --> 0:37:04.880
<v Speaker 3>liquidity into the market and may be a little bit

0:37:04.920 --> 0:37:08.480
<v Speaker 3>more risk taking. Can you imagine a world alan where

0:37:09.120 --> 0:37:13.000
<v Speaker 3>quantitative easing shows up in part of the pboc's playbook.

0:37:13.120 --> 0:37:15.960
<v Speaker 10>I think so far talks of Chinese style q E

0:37:16.200 --> 0:37:21.120
<v Speaker 10>is still premature. The line that Cgpen said was taken

0:37:21.160 --> 0:37:25.520
<v Speaker 10>out of a new book published featuring his quotes from

0:37:25.600 --> 0:37:28.920
<v Speaker 10>months ago, and there's still no sign, no follow up

0:37:29.000 --> 0:37:32.520
<v Speaker 10>on whether the Chinese Central Bank will do something similar.

0:37:33.040 --> 0:37:36.400
<v Speaker 10>And you know, just generally speaking, China is trying to

0:37:36.840 --> 0:37:39.920
<v Speaker 10>prove that there is a way to grow its economy

0:37:40.080 --> 0:37:44.680
<v Speaker 10>without resorting to Western style stimulus measures that created problems

0:37:44.719 --> 0:37:49.320
<v Speaker 10>that we saw in the global financial crisis. So I

0:37:49.400 --> 0:37:52.520
<v Speaker 10>think it's still too early to say whether that's going

0:37:52.560 --> 0:37:52.879
<v Speaker 10>to happen.

0:37:53.239 --> 0:37:56.040
<v Speaker 3>Joe Lisis Alan Wong, thank you so much for joining

0:37:56.120 --> 0:37:58.520
<v Speaker 3>us here to help us understand what's going on in

0:37:58.600 --> 0:38:00.880
<v Speaker 3>the Chinese economy and what we may see in the

0:38:00.920 --> 0:38:03.759
<v Speaker 3>week ahead with that inflation data. I'm Doug Krisner. You

0:38:03.800 --> 0:38:06.680
<v Speaker 3>can join Brian Curtis and myself weekdays here from Bloomberg

0:38:06.719 --> 0:38:09.919
<v Speaker 3>Daybreak Asia beginning at eight am in Hong Kong eight

0:38:10.040 --> 0:38:11.400
<v Speaker 3>pm on Wall Street.

0:38:11.800 --> 0:38:13.960
<v Speaker 2>Tom, Thank you, Doug, and that does it for this

0:38:14.200 --> 0:38:16.960
<v Speaker 2>edition of Bloomberg day Break Weekend. Join us again Monday

0:38:17.000 --> 0:38:19.400
<v Speaker 2>morning at five am Wall Street time for the latest

0:38:19.480 --> 0:38:22.080
<v Speaker 2>on markets overseas and the news you need to start

0:38:22.120 --> 0:38:25.680
<v Speaker 2>your day. I'm Tom Busby. Stay with us. Top stories

0:38:25.719 --> 0:38:28.200
<v Speaker 2>and global business headlines are coming up right now.