Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Jonathan Ferrow, along
Speaker 2: with Lisa Bromwitz and Amrie Hordern. Join us each day
Speaker 2: for insight from the best in markets, economics, and geopolitics
Speaker 2: from our global headquarters in New York City. We are
Speaker 2: live on Bloomberg Television weekday mornings from six to nine
Speaker 2: am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or
Speaker 2: anywhere else you listen, and as always on the Bloomberg
Speaker 2: Terminal and the Bloomberg Business app. So here's the laces.
Speaker 2: This morning, the US of around exchanging fresh strikes with
Speaker 2: the White House, saying little progress has been made towards
Speaker 2: a deal. General Karen Gibson of Academy Securities, writing, I
Speaker 2: suspect and hope negotiations may be more advanced than either
Speaker 2: side is letting gone, at least publicly, despite the rhetoric
Speaker 2: and in many ways the action too. General Gibson joins
Speaker 2: us now for more. General, welcome to the program. Where
Speaker 2: do you suspect we have made some progress?
Speaker 3: Well?
Speaker 4: I think that if we had a complete lack of progress,
Speaker 4: we would be seeing more aggressive actions on the part
Speaker 4: of the United States, whether that was additional significant sanctions
Speaker 4: or strikes beyond the ones we've been doing. I maintain
Speaker 4: that the ceasefire, while fragile, is still holding despite the
Speaker 4: strikes that we've had over the last three days. What
Speaker 4: characterizes these strikes is that they are very narrowly specific
Speaker 4: to aggressive actions that Iran was alleged to be making
Speaker 4: in and around the Strait of Hormuz buonder a boss,
Speaker 4: whether that was vessels laying minds that would potentially constrain
Speaker 4: navigation and traffic, or one way drones. And it's important
Speaker 4: to remember that even under a ceasefire, you do not
Speaker 4: lose the inherent right of self defense. So if we
Speaker 4: were not making progress in negotiations, we might see broader
Speaker 4: strikes further somewhere else in Iran that more clearly violated
Speaker 4: the ceasefire. But I think these are very defense related,
Speaker 4: self defense related, and within the balance of the ceasefire.
Speaker 5: If these are defense related, then is the United States
Speaker 5: doing anything in terms of deterrence when it comes to Ron.
Speaker 4: Well, I think our presence acts as a deterrent as well.
Speaker 4: I mean the fact that if Iran were to out
Speaker 4: of the blues strike some kind of golf infrastructure or
Speaker 4: civilian targets or something else that was in the broader
Speaker 4: golf region against one of our partners. I think it
Speaker 4: would be certainly I would expect the United States to
Speaker 4: take some broad action, probably additional punishing air strikes. And
Speaker 4: Iran knows that we can do that and that we're
Speaker 4: prepared to do that, won't hesitate to do that, and
Speaker 4: that in itself is a form of deterrence.
Speaker 5: Given these recent clashes, do you understand where the red
Speaker 5: lines are in terms of kinetic warfare between Iran and
Speaker 5: the United States.
Speaker 4: Yeah, so, again, you'd never give up the right of
Speaker 4: self defense, even under a ceasefire. And so these were
Speaker 4: activities that were identified that looked as though they would
Speaker 4: threaten navigation or directly threaten our naval assets and air
Speaker 4: assets that are there right off the Strait of Hormus.
Speaker 3: That's permitted.
Speaker 4: I think that's an important distinction. And even Iran's counter
Speaker 4: strike in which they launched assets towards Kuwait, they claim
Speaker 4: to have shot down one of our predators. I don't
Speaker 4: believe it. It's always kind of a given that they're going
Speaker 4: to exaggerate for their own domestic audiences, those are I
Speaker 4: think probably within the bounds of the seasfire. I'd make
Speaker 4: two more points there. One, if we were striking dual
Speaker 4: use military civil infrastructure elsewhere in Iran that wasn't directly
Speaker 4: related to the navigation in the straits, that's probably not
Speaker 4: within the bounds of the ceasfire. Again back to if
Speaker 4: Iran were to strike say Fugyra again in the Emirates
Speaker 4: their port outside the Strait of Hormus, that would probably
Speaker 4: not be within the bounds of the seasfire. But the
Speaker 4: last point I'd make is that a ceasefire is not
Speaker 4: a real physical thing. It's a construct that's developed between
Speaker 4: the two negotiating sides by policymakers or leaders, and it's
Speaker 4: really up to them to decide that a ceasefire is
Speaker 4: no longer holding, whether it's because of a single shot
Speaker 4: across the bow or something far more extensive.
Speaker 1: Don't know. You said something there that I thought was
Speaker 1: really important that Iran it obviously exaggerates for its audience.
Speaker 1: The US also trying to job oon markets, and this
Speaker 1: is one reason why markets.
Speaker 6: Have tuned out.
Speaker 1: Who are the respective parties trying to speak to and
Speaker 1: how is that muddying the message.
Speaker 4: That's a terrific point. I think, you know, both in
Speaker 4: both sides in probably any conflict, I think the leaders
Speaker 4: are speaking, particularly in Iran, to their own domestic audience.
Speaker 4: They need to appear strong. They need to make the
Speaker 4: United States look weak. They want to make it look
Speaker 4: as though we are the ones that are about to
Speaker 4: give an and concede something. You know, that strategic narrative
Speaker 4: is actually also an area where we're competing. They are
Speaker 4: speaking directly to their domestic audience. Our president is speaking
Speaker 4: to our domestic audience. But there are also broader market
Speaker 4: audiences that both are speaking to. And I think we
Speaker 4: have to be really careful about taking literally everything that's
Speaker 4: said by a spokesperson from either government. There's often truth
Speaker 4: within it, but then there will be other things that
Speaker 4: are said that are hyperbolic or again intended to calm
Speaker 4: or influence markets, to shape public opinion, and to influence
Speaker 4: the other side.
Speaker 3: Stay with us. More Bloomberg surveillance coming up after.
Speaker 2: This Across Some cool news for you, the Treasury Department
Speaker 2: launching the Trump account app today in collaboration with b
Speaker 2: NY and Robin Hood. The partnership between the public and
Speaker 2: private sector, aiming to expand access to long term investing
Speaker 2: for American families. Robin Vinz, the BNY CEO, writing, we're
Speaker 2: bringing together the Administration's vision and leadership, Robin Hood's digital accessibility,
Speaker 2: and bn wise infrastructure. Robin and place to say, joined
Speaker 2: the SIN Studio for more, Robin and Monarch, It's great
Speaker 2: to be with you. This is a very cool day.
Speaker 2: So let's spend some time on this. So you do
Speaker 2: the back end and Robin Hood does the front end.
Speaker 7: Yeah, with a financial manager, and Robinhood is bringing all
Speaker 7: of their expertise in the front end as you point
Speaker 7: out the app. And don't forget the National Design Studio
Speaker 7: as well, because they've partnered with the Treasury Department, with BNY,
Speaker 7: with Robinhood to make sure as part of the administration's
Speaker 7: push to make services more accessible and easier to use
Speaker 7: in the US.
Speaker 3: What are sign up's like right now? Ahead of this?
Speaker 7: So five million accounts people indicated interest in the IRS
Speaker 7: form forty five forty seven, So that was the first
Speaker 7: step you had to actually register interest. And once you've
Speaker 7: done that, you can go to trumpaccount dot com, which
Speaker 7: will actually then take you to the app Store, and
Speaker 7: then as the app store rankings grow, you'll see it
Speaker 7: easily pop up on the app stores, and then you
Speaker 7: can download the app, and then you can actually register
Speaker 7: and actually put the rest of the information get up
Speaker 7: and going. Now, the actual program for investing the money
Speaker 7: does actually launch until July fourth, So these are ready
Speaker 7: set moves ahead of the full go of July fourth.
Speaker 5: What does this mean for the future of B and Y.
Speaker 5: Will you make money off of this or this is
Speaker 5: solely for the public good?
Speaker 6: Well, we believe in the program.
Speaker 7: I think that's really if you step back from this
Speaker 7: whole thing, what is the public policy? So the administration
Speaker 7: really deserves a lot of credit President Trump, Secretary Bust
Speaker 7: in particular the leadership of the Treasury Department in driving
Speaker 7: this forward. That actually creates the framework to be able
Speaker 7: to have everyone in America be able to participate in growth.
Speaker 7: And so we provide as a company a bunch of
Speaker 7: different services to the US government. We do it at
Speaker 7: the state level, the local level, and at the federal level.
Speaker 7: And so for us, we're frankly just proud to be
Speaker 7: able to participate in this. Of course, as part of
Speaker 7: providing the service, we're doing a bunch of different things,
Speaker 7: So a robin hood, but it's the public policy that
Speaker 7: we are most focused on.
Speaker 2: Here.
Speaker 6: What else have we done well?
Speaker 7: We were the first financial firm to actually offer matching
Speaker 7: in to the program.
Speaker 6: So remember how it works.
Speaker 7: Everyone get who kid who's born in America, the parent
Speaker 7: or guardian get to be able to put a thousand
Speaker 7: bucks in if they want it's matching, or they can
Speaker 7: put additional money. The government's going to put a thousand
Speaker 7: bucks in. Employers can match. We've matched with the program,
Speaker 7: and then we're really leveraging the power of compounding. And
Speaker 7: this is the magic of the program. Just let's do
Speaker 7: the math for a second two thousand bucks in right
Speaker 7: at the beginning, a thousand bucks from the government, and
Speaker 7: let's take the example of a B and Y employee,
Speaker 7: a thousand bucks from us. Now you've got two thousand bucks.
Speaker 7: You compound that with the historic rate of return in
Speaker 7: the stock market over the past thirty years. Compound that
Speaker 7: for the next thirty years, and in thirty years that
Speaker 7: kid will have forty thousand bucks. Now if the parent
Speaker 7: added just another ten bucks a week into the same program,
Speaker 7: ten bucks a week that they're putting into that same account,
Speaker 7: Now you'd have one hundred and forty thousand bucks at
Speaker 7: the end of thirty years. Now that's real money. That's
Speaker 7: participation in the American Dream. And I think that's the
Speaker 7: program vision that the administration and the Treasury.
Speaker 5: Sounds like almost an incentive to have a child in
Speaker 5: America at this point. But when you think about post
Speaker 5: Trunk twenty twenty eight, does this have longevity? Will it continue?
Speaker 5: Say a democratic president won?
Speaker 6: I think great public policy.
Speaker 7: And again, stepping back from it, what is the policy
Speaker 7: the American Dream? And what a time to be thinking
Speaker 7: about this, the two hundred and fiftieth of America. The
Speaker 7: American Dream is one of the things that's fueled this
Speaker 7: country over the course of the past two hundred and
Speaker 7: fifty years. But we have a problem, which is not
Speaker 7: everyone is participating in the American Dream. And so now
Speaker 7: you're talking about taking the forty percent of people in
Speaker 7: America who have zero stake in the equity markets and
Speaker 7: actually making them stakeholders in the American Dream and doing
Speaker 7: it from birth. So the ability to do that, to
Speaker 7: be able to grow, compound, participate, learn how to invest,
Speaker 7: learn how to be part of the capital system that
Speaker 7: we actually have. That's a really important piece of public policy,
Speaker 7: and so none of us can predict the future. But
Speaker 7: this has been a bipartisan effort from the start. There
Speaker 7: have been folks on both sides of the aisle who've
Speaker 7: joined into this. There have been wealthy philanthropists like Michael
Speaker 7: and Susan Dell who said they're going to match employers
Speaker 7: like us are matching. I'd encourage all employers in America
Speaker 7: who are able to do so, to be able to
Speaker 7: offer matching to that initial seed investment, and collectively, if
Speaker 7: we can increase this participation, we're really growing participation in
Speaker 7: the American dream. And I think that is why it's
Speaker 7: a great piece of public policy, and so I really
Speaker 7: hope that to see it be able to continue.
Speaker 1: It also potentially improves the delta between people who feel
Speaker 1: really disenchanted by Wall Street and feel like Wall Street's.
Speaker 6: Really let them down.
Speaker 1: As a number of people get very wealthy and they
Speaker 1: aren't necessarily getting wealthy. I just wonder what the guardrails point. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so try to say that, well, you can participate too.
Speaker 7: Absolutely, what sort of American dream is that if we
Speaker 7: have a bunch of people who aren't participating in it.
Speaker 1: I just wonder the ideal versus the reality. When I
Speaker 1: think about a robin Hood account, and then I think
Speaker 1: about a teenager or some kid who has access to it,
Speaker 1: I think about my own experience, which is essentially it's
Speaker 1: very high end gambling, but essentially gambling, right, I mean
Speaker 1: it's essentially turning into trying to pick winners and losers.
Speaker 1: How do you know that that's not going to be
Speaker 1: leading to people going and saying we're going all in
Speaker 1: on gamestap here's your future.
Speaker 7: Well, I think this is the key to the design
Speaker 7: if you step back and think about what is it
Speaker 7: the Secretary Berston and the Treasury Department. When you actually
Speaker 7: get into the brass tax of how it works. You're
Speaker 7: talking about custodial account. So for the right to start with,
Speaker 7: the kid can't touch it until after they turn eighteen,
Speaker 7: so there's no opportunity to be able to take the
Speaker 7: money out and go and spend recklessly.
Speaker 6: Not once they become eighteen.
Speaker 7: As the law of the land, they become they own
Speaker 7: their own future to some extent. Gives up by the way,
Speaker 7: but up until then it's primarily about index funds. So
Speaker 7: that initial investment will be index funds only, so people
Speaker 7: aren't having to make choice about individual stocks. They're participating
Speaker 7: in the US stock market, They're participating in the growth
Speaker 7: of the economy.
Speaker 6: And that's actually the design principle at work here.
Speaker 2: You've got to acknowledge where the yellow trade comes from.
Speaker 2: The yellow trade comes from this idea that they're not participating,
Speaker 2: that the only way to benefit from this economy because
Speaker 2: they feel frozen out from the gains, is to take
Speaker 2: these high stakes risks. So in some ways, this is
Speaker 2: a long term goal to do something about the kind
Speaker 2: of thing that you're complaining.
Speaker 1: About and potentially equalize people who feel completely less about
Speaker 1: and are earning minimum wage as other people do nothing
Speaker 1: and watch their money grow and create income. And this
Speaker 1: is sort of the gap that you need to bridge
Speaker 1: in order to create a little bit more of you know,
Speaker 1: the market and the economy can move a little more together.
Speaker 2: Rob and I just feel like we're losing the argument
Speaker 2: at the moment. The arguments on the left and the
Speaker 2: more populist argument seem to be winning this moment. We
Speaker 2: see this in our UK, the shift towards the left
Speaker 2: and the politics of labor. More recently, we see it
Speaker 2: here in New York City, the heart of capitalism, and
Speaker 2: a socialist mayor got elected in this city. What else
Speaker 2: needs to be done to counter some of that, to
Speaker 2: make sure that people recognize the benefit of free markets
Speaker 2: and capitalism. The very idea that we've seen this mass
Speaker 2: affluence in this country's free because of those things.
Speaker 7: Well, I think it is about inclusion ultimately and having
Speaker 7: people be able to participate. So let's go back for
Speaker 7: a second to this concept of the American dream and
Speaker 7: let's define it. What actually makes up the American dream.
Speaker 7: I'm an immigrant into the US. I've lived here for
Speaker 7: twenty five years and like very excited to be able
Speaker 7: to be part of this. And if you think about
Speaker 7: folks here in the US, what do they aspire to.
Speaker 7: They aspire for a great life for their family. They
Speaker 7: want to be able to have a great education, they
Speaker 7: want to be able to grow, they want to be
Speaker 7: able to have their own home. And so what I
Speaker 7: think Trump accounts represent is one piece of the American dream,
Speaker 7: which is the ability to have a stake in the country,
Speaker 7: a stake in the capitalist system. And so to your point,
Speaker 7: it helps to include that forty percent of people who
Speaker 7: today don't but there are more things. It's not by
Speaker 7: itself the solution. Financial education matters a lot. That is
Speaker 7: actually part of the app if you actually look at
Speaker 7: the Trump account app financial education, because we've got to
Speaker 7: recognize that saving investing, starting.
Speaker 6: Early, compounding.
Speaker 7: You were just having that conversation the value of money
Speaker 7: over time and the value of what it means if
Speaker 7: you start early does make a difference.
Speaker 6: But housing matters as well.
Speaker 7: Owning your own home over the past fifty years has
Speaker 7: really become part of what a lot of people define
Speaker 7: as owning the America, being part of the American dream,
Speaker 7: and being able to enjoy that. So as a company,
Speaker 7: we've taken a step in that direction. About a month ago,
Speaker 7: we announced a new program at BNY which is to
Speaker 7: help people get that first step on the ladder. If
Speaker 7: you work for us and you earn less than one
Speaker 7: hundred thousand bucks, we will actually give and you're buying
Speaker 7: your home, first home, we will give you the equivalent
Speaker 7: of five thousand bucks after tax to be able to
Speaker 7: help you with your down payment. The average home in
Speaker 7: America median price about four hundred thousand bucks. Our largest
Speaker 7: office is actually in Pittsburgh. The median price is about
Speaker 7: two hundred and fifty three hundred thousand bucks. We've got
Speaker 7: a huge at one of our largest growing offices is
Speaker 7: down in Florida. There the medium price about four hundred
Speaker 7: thousand bucks. The average down payment for that type of
Speaker 7: home call it about thirty thousand bucks. Now, are there
Speaker 7: government assistance programs for first time owners that are available?
Speaker 7: And so depending on where you are, that might be teny, fifteen,
Speaker 7: even twenty thousand bucks assistance, but you're still left with
Speaker 7: a gap ten fifteen thousand bucks. So for us, that
Speaker 7: five thousand dollars is bridging either fifty percent or a
Speaker 7: third of their gap for the prospective homeowner, so they
Speaker 7: can get their step on the property journey of the
Speaker 7: American dream. So those things really matter. Now we're doing
Speaker 7: that with Bank of America, who's our partner. They're providing
Speaker 7: subsidized mortgages to our own employees.
Speaker 3: He's figure on this, I know he is.
Speaker 7: And he's also leading on this point, which is leaning
Speaker 7: into the topic how can we actually help financial education?
Speaker 7: So if you can give people through the Trump accounts
Speaker 7: a staking capitalism over time so that they're part of
Speaker 7: it and don't want to have to throw stones at
Speaker 7: it and you give people a leg up on the
Speaker 7: property dream. Now that's include and bringing people along the journey.
Speaker 7: And I think again back to America two fifty, What
Speaker 7: a time to be focusing on this.
Speaker 3: Stay with us. More Bloomberg surveillance coming up after this.
Speaker 2: We begin this hour stocks edging lower as investors grow
Speaker 2: cautious over and enter the war. Kady commits give out
Speaker 2: for simplex writing. Despite the recent rally inequity markets, there
Speaker 2: is clear fatigue over the continued conflict in the Middle East.
Speaker 2: Katie joins us. Now for more, Katie, welcome to the program.
Speaker 2: Let's just dissect the bond market sell off, the individual
Speaker 2: drivers of it. What's been driving your tire?
Speaker 8: Well, this is a good question because what we have
Speaker 8: really seen, and I want to point this out, and
Speaker 8: I really liked what Lisa said, is that you've seen
Speaker 8: the bond market get ahead. So the bond market has
Speaker 8: been selling off pretty aggressively since the geopolitical risk sort
Speaker 8: of got into the market. We have seen some retracement
Speaker 8: more recent in terms of yields coming back down. So
Speaker 8: people thinking that some of this inflation uncertainty is going away.
Speaker 8: But today just sort of reiterates that it's not gone yet,
Speaker 8: so we're kind of seeing that come back again today.
Speaker 8: So you can see that right in the chart that
Speaker 8: you yields have gone up substantially on inflation concerns, but
Speaker 8: that hasn't dissipated yet.
Speaker 2: Do you think we're overestimating the potential for yields to
Speaker 2: fall on a resolution in Iran? Is there more to
Speaker 2: this move up than just the Middle East?
Speaker 3: That's a good question.
Speaker 8: I think the positioning of the FED relative to other
Speaker 8: central banks is also important. So if you look at
Speaker 8: where the US is sitting and how much higher US
Speaker 8: rates are, that matters.
Speaker 6: But also the fact.
Speaker 8: That other markets outside the United States is pricing in
Speaker 8: things like hikes that does complicate sort of the relative
Speaker 8: positioning of the US FED and sort of add on
Speaker 8: top of that sort of a.
Speaker 3: Changing FED dynamic.
Speaker 8: So I do think it's not just inflation, it's also
Speaker 8: figuring out how monetary policy is going to be set
Speaker 8: in a new FMC.
Speaker 1: This is a great point, Katie. How much is a
Speaker 1: move that we're seeing in bonds in the United States
Speaker 1: have more to do with Japan and Europe frankly than
Speaker 1: it does the United States.
Speaker 3: I think there's a mix.
Speaker 8: I mean, just given how much bond moves have priced
Speaker 8: outcuts and moved towards a higher chance of hikes. If
Speaker 8: you look outside the US, for example, the ECV or Japan,
Speaker 8: even also Australia, you start to see a much bigger
Speaker 8: shift globally towards a potential for hikes. And that means
Speaker 8: that overall, across all regions, that there's more of a
Speaker 8: chance of hikes, which could put pressure on the FED.
Speaker 8: But remember US rates are higher, so that means that
Speaker 8: we have less need to move as quickly as other regions.
Speaker 1: You follow trends, and you follow some of the momentum
Speaker 1: that we're seeing in different technical readings across the market,
Speaker 1: and I wonder how much we've seen a breakdown between
Speaker 1: yields going up and stocks responding in any way, shape
Speaker 1: or form. I mean, how to course is this relative
Speaker 1: to history when the common mantra was when yields went up,
Speaker 1: stocks went down, risk assets used to wabble, especially if
Speaker 1: it was coming with some mixed readings on a consumer appetite.
Speaker 8: So I love that you asked this question, because we
Speaker 8: look at short term correlations between stocks and bonds and
Speaker 8: whenever inflation is the key driver of stock bond movements,
Speaker 8: you tend to see positive COO movement or positive correlation.
Speaker 8: And we have seen consistent positive correlation between stocks and
Speaker 8: bonds since March.
Speaker 6: It is not unprecedented.
Speaker 8: We've been seeing that since particularly twenty twenty two. And
Speaker 8: it's just the point that stocks and bonds or bonds
Speaker 8: basically do not provide a hedge during periods when inflation
Speaker 8: is a persistent risk, and geopolitical risk is a key
Speaker 8: driver of inflation uncertainty. So I think for now bonds
Speaker 8: are going to be much trickier for investors to deal with.
Speaker 8: And until we see this inflation pulse go through and
Speaker 8: we figure out how much oil pigher oil prices change.
Speaker 8: Is the inflation dynamic. You can't count on bonds when
Speaker 8: things are tough. At some point though.
Speaker 5: Well what's going on in the conflict, and the inflation
Speaker 5: driver start to hit equities at all.
Speaker 8: It should at some point, because how I see geopolitical
Speaker 8: risk is that initially it becomes an inflation impulse, which
Speaker 8: is a stressor to bonds. But at the point where
Speaker 8: we start to see that we need to have tightening,
Speaker 8: we need to have we start to see an effect
Speaker 8: on growth, that's when you start to see that the
Speaker 8: equity markets will react. We have seen the equity markets
Speaker 8: react to higher yields this month, so that might be
Speaker 8: an indication that there is starting to be some concern
Speaker 8: about higher yields actually being a negative driver for equities.
Speaker 5: At Lisa Johnathan talking about all morning, likely we're going
Speaker 5: to see the FED remove the easing bias. Would that
Speaker 5: be something that could be a catalyst for this equity
Speaker 5: market Maybe it's to go to be softer or is
Speaker 5: it already baked in?
Speaker 8: I mean, I think I would kind of assume that
Speaker 8: it's somewhat baked in at this point.
Speaker 3: I do think it is.
Speaker 8: It's very interesting that they haven't removed it, just given
Speaker 8: where we are in the current geopolitical landscape. I mean,
Speaker 8: just the idea that you could cut rates in a
Speaker 8: period where you have a huge oil spike. It just
Speaker 8: kind of already puts the FED in a neutral stance already.
Speaker 8: So I think some of it is already baked in,
Speaker 8: But there's always room for surprise where you could actually
Speaker 8: see that maybe this conflict accelerates more or you have
Speaker 8: sort of more of a chance that that could be
Speaker 8: even less of a case that you are going to
Speaker 8: have a resolution that could be more negative for bots.
Speaker 2: This is the Bloomberg Survendment's podcast, bringing you the best
Speaker 2: in markets, economics, antient politics. You can watch the show
Speaker 2: live on Bloomberg TV weekday mornings from six am to
Speaker 2: nine am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify,
Speaker 2: or anywhere else you listen, and as always, on the
Speaker 2: Bloomberg Terminal and the Bloomberg Business app.