Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keane. Along
Speaker 1: with Jonathan Ferrell and Lisa Brawmowitz Jay Ley, we bring
Speaker 1: you insight from the best and economics, finance, investment, and
Speaker 1: international relations. Find Bloomberg Surveillance on Apple podcast, SoundCloud, Bloomberg
Speaker 1: dot Com, and of course on the Bloomberg Terminal. John A.
Speaker 1: Guess nats Brian Weinstein that had a fixed income at
Speaker 1: Morgan Standing Investment Management. Brian, I want to start with
Speaker 1: the events, the unrest in China of it the weekend
Speaker 1: and walk me through how even the team of thinking
Speaker 1: about it this Monday morning, we think it's just part
Speaker 1: of the broader story of of more economic turmoil, uncertain
Speaker 1: teams slowdown, and at least so we hear you that
Speaker 1: it's certainly possible that the zero COVID ends early and
Speaker 1: that would would be a game changer, which just as
Speaker 1: possible that the clampdown comes, uncertainty stays, supply line problems,
Speaker 1: you know, rebuild uh and it just causes more economic
Speaker 1: slowdown out there. So it's a tough one to figure
Speaker 1: out on admitted by minute basis, But for now, the
Speaker 1: zero COVID seems to be here, and it seems to
Speaker 1: be part of you look at yields, right, deals are
Speaker 1: falling um, economic growth is slowing around the world. But Brian,
Speaker 1: on the flip side, either way, whether they keep COVID
Speaker 1: zero and it causes supply chain kinks to last for longer,
Speaker 1: or they release it and it causes demand to go up.
Speaker 1: Either way, it's inflationary now. It does seem so. Again
Speaker 1: if you look at if you if you look at
Speaker 1: where we price inflation to go to, back to the twos,
Speaker 1: it's very optimistic. Right, There's many reasons to believe inflation
Speaker 1: will stay stickier, makes the Fed's job harder, makes the
Speaker 1: curve stay unbelievably flat and maybe get flatter. Um. Yes,
Speaker 1: we we would agree with that. It's hard to see
Speaker 1: inflation pressures easing off completely, though I do think the
Speaker 1: direction will travel. The next three or six months will
Speaker 1: be will be lower. But to that point, Brian, the
Speaker 1: moving ten year yields has been notable. Long term yields
Speaker 1: have been bid dramatically over the past couple of weeks.
Speaker 1: This has been the one consensus trade and perhaps people
Speaker 1: getting ahead of the first half of next year and
Speaker 1: doing it all now has it gotten over its skis
Speaker 1: considering how long inflation could remain higher, how determined central
Speaker 1: banks around the world are to be restrictive for a
Speaker 1: sustained period of time. Maybe I've been impressed with how
Speaker 1: far we've come. And we went from a period when
Speaker 1: tenure notes were four fifty where it felt like nobody
Speaker 1: would ever want duration again, and here we are at
Speaker 1: three seventy and we feel we feel okay. I think
Speaker 1: this is the stage where we got a little bit
Speaker 1: of weak economic data. You could have another leg to
Speaker 1: this rally called tenure notes. Get the curve really inverted?
Speaker 1: Mind's a hundred, maybe a little bit more um long term?
Speaker 1: Do I think we're having a big fixed income rally?
Speaker 1: Knowing the income is great, you don't want to chase
Speaker 1: too much. But I do think you could have another
Speaker 1: leg here, given that data could get weaker. If you
Speaker 1: think we could get another leg lower in yew, does
Speaker 1: that made you think maybe the risk is ever done
Speaker 1: it here? Brian? I think so. I think that's the
Speaker 1: trade here. I think we all year we had duration
Speaker 1: leading risk assid's lower um. This rally, duration did better,
Speaker 1: but risk asses did well too. If we rally again
Speaker 1: I think it's because risk comes off. We accept the
Speaker 1: fact that next year is not going to be easy,
Speaker 1: that that earnings could be worse than we think, that
Speaker 1: uncertainty is high, and that duration actually is still cheap
Speaker 1: relative to risk given what happened this year. I'm looking
Speaker 1: right now at hil bond spreads just to build on
Speaker 1: what job I was talking about. They're the lowest going
Speaker 1: back to August, and we talk about the rally that
Speaker 1: we've seen is people pour into risk, even though the
Speaker 1: lower leg in yields that you talk about, Brian really
Speaker 1: has to do with weakness. Could we see a material
Speaker 1: pickup in default or is it just a positioning Is
Speaker 1: it just a technical widening and spreads that you're looking for.
Speaker 1: I think the defaults are coming. I don't know that
Speaker 1: we're going to see that into the next two or
Speaker 1: three months. It takes a little bit longer, right. We
Speaker 1: haven't seen the impact of higher mortgage rates. We haven't
Speaker 1: seen people have to refinance you know, a lot of
Speaker 1: debt yet. So I think defaults are coming, but I
Speaker 1: think it's a bit more technical. I just think how
Speaker 1: you'll lose, how you'll look great with a nine return
Speaker 1: handle on it when you lower buying, you know, a
Speaker 1: good hundred basis points, two hundred paces points. The higher
Speaker 1: quality assets just looked better. So I think the default
Speaker 1: stories out there, I think the oarning stories out there,
Speaker 1: but I think it's a bit more technical. In the
Speaker 1: next couple of months, the weaker growth risk is done
Speaker 1: too well. People have chased it um and we have
Speaker 1: to reset. You said defaults are coming, Brian, but this
Speaker 1: is one big question mark. How much are we going
Speaker 1: to sort of a pretty high default cycle or is
Speaker 1: it really the consensus that you buy into as well,
Speaker 1: that it's gonna be a relatively low kind of level
Speaker 1: of default for a longer period of time. I think
Speaker 1: there lends people always jumped to is oh eight. I
Speaker 1: don't think that's the story here. I do think balance
Speaker 1: sheets are okay. I do think there are you know,
Speaker 1: there are certainly buckets of consumers that are doing well
Speaker 1: or baskets of consumers that are doing well um And
Speaker 1: so I think we're gonna go back up and probably
Speaker 1: scare the market a bit, go higher than than than
Speaker 1: maybe average. But I don't think this is It may
Speaker 1: be a longer drawn out default cycle, but I don't
Speaker 1: think we have massive default spikes and armageddon. That that's
Speaker 1: not what woods in play here. I've gotta put you
Speaker 1: on the spot for twenty three. Is your working assumption
Speaker 1: COVID zero in Shinaree Bryant. Such a good question. Um,
Speaker 1: my working assumption had been before the weekend. Yes, and
Speaker 1: I haven't maybe got enough information to to redo it. Uh.
Speaker 1: They definitely want to stick with it. I'm a little
Speaker 1: less certain now, but I'd still stick with yes. From
Speaker 1: White Stain of Morgan standy, thank you sir. As a
Speaker 1: white you're the only just some with the indoor shoes,
Speaker 1: which you mean you don't have shoes just for the gym,
Speaker 1: just indoor shoes just for the gym. I run outside. Yeah,
Speaker 1: but if you were, let's say they were just for
Speaker 1: the gym, you'd wear them outside too. I take my
Speaker 1: shoes off when I come in. I'm one of those
Speaker 1: people anyway you make other people take their shoes off. No,
Speaker 1: I don't make other people take good That's good to
Speaker 1: know those people you don't like a lot to say
Speaker 1: about the Otherwise we might have an issue. Got a
Speaker 1: good friend who turned up to a party over the
Speaker 1: last couple of weeks. Walding got to the door and
Speaker 1: he got the shoes off memo from the people at
Speaker 1: the party, and you know what he did, No, turned
Speaker 1: back around and left the party. But I would do
Speaker 1: the same thing. You take your shoes off when your part. Sure,
Speaker 1: but I don't force other people too. And I wouldn't
Speaker 1: either gotten with those people. But but but if you
Speaker 1: actually cared about it, and you had a close friend,
Speaker 1: they're not coming in the bedroom, are they again in
Speaker 1: the living room? I don't know. I think it's a
Speaker 1: sign of respect. I usually take my shoes off. I
Speaker 1: would for them, I would offer exactly. I just wouldn't insist.
Speaker 1: I think it's strange. I think it's strange to insist.
Speaker 1: I also think it's strange if somebody doesn't take their
Speaker 1: shoes off, if it's clear that you know how much
Speaker 1: that we're gonna get on this, I think it's very
Speaker 1: odd to make guests type the shoes off. I think
Speaker 1: it's I agree, but I think it's odd for a
Speaker 1: guest to not see all the shoes at the front
Speaker 1: door and automatically. This is why we go to Clara Ranked,
Speaker 1: the chief US economist that effects investments that she joins
Speaker 1: US now Laura great to catch up with you. It's
Speaker 1: a bizarre moment in this equity market because we seem
Speaker 1: to be pricing in a recovery to recession we haven't
Speaker 1: had yet, Laura, Can you run me through the potential
Speaker 1: for this downturn in America? Yeah? You know, markets are
Speaker 1: so forward looking. I think they've really gotten over their
Speaker 1: skis in terms of seeing this reduction in the pace
Speaker 1: of Federate hikes and automatically assuming that there's light at
Speaker 1: the end of the tunnel and easing is really on
Speaker 1: the near term horizon. To me, I look at what's
Speaker 1: happening in the bond market and the very clear expectation
Speaker 1: or the probability of recession that the bond markets pricing in,
Speaker 1: and the fact that forward earnings estimates on the equity
Speaker 1: side are higher for next year. When we have a recession,
Speaker 1: we usually get a d op in earnings of ten
Speaker 1: that's what we've had historically, So we're really seeing this
Speaker 1: divergence and recession expectations in the financial markets. Laura. You
Speaker 1: also think that it is potentially not right that inflation
Speaker 1: is going to fall so significantly next year. That is
Speaker 1: completely not consensus. Can you explain, Yeah, so you know,
Speaker 1: I do think that inflation has seen its peak in
Speaker 1: June of this year, so I do expect inflation to fall,
Speaker 1: but I am an outlier in that. UM I don't
Speaker 1: think we're going to see inflation neatly fitting back into
Speaker 1: this two percent box anytime soon. I think we're going
Speaker 1: to need to differentiate between inflation coming down. You know,
Speaker 1: we see oil off so significantly this morning. Some of
Speaker 1: these base effects are going to drag headline inflation lower.
Speaker 1: But there's a real difference between that and a world
Speaker 1: where inflation is reliably and persistently low. That is the
Speaker 1: backdrop again to which we've had the FED, you know,
Speaker 1: keep interest rates at the zero lower bound, cut interest
Speaker 1: rates aggressively over five basis points if the economy slows.
Speaker 1: I think we're in a world now where we can't
Speaker 1: just assume that we're going to mean revert back to
Speaker 1: the world you know what we've had for twenty years
Speaker 1: before the pandemic. Look at what's happening in China right now.
Speaker 1: We need to really resist the urge that our quantitative
Speaker 1: models are telling us to mean revert. That to me
Speaker 1: is the biggest concern going into People would disagree Laura.
Speaker 1: They would say, well, we still have an older population,
Speaker 1: we still have a lot of doubt, we still have
Speaker 1: all of the ingredients of low inflation, and that in
Speaker 1: five years time, this fedual Reserve will be trying to
Speaker 1: get inflation up, not to get it down and keep
Speaker 1: it at two percent. Why do you push back against that?
Speaker 1: You know, I think that what we're seeing right now,
Speaker 1: look at the tenuere treasury we have. If I if
Speaker 1: I had told you that we would have inflation of
Speaker 1: seven percent, a tenure treasury was still only three and
Speaker 1: three quarters. That is a world where demographic pressure is
Speaker 1: keeping the tenure treasury lower. We have quantitative titan, we
Speaker 1: have the FED selling treasuries or at least not buying them,
Speaker 1: and we still and we have really really high inflation,
Speaker 1: and the tenure is still well below where inflation is.
Speaker 1: So I think it is a world where we're seeing
Speaker 1: demographic pressure UM applied to the long end. I just
Speaker 1: think that it's um. It's still a world where you know,
Speaker 1: we're seeing look at food prices. I think the expectation
Speaker 1: that supply chain disruptions are going to magically evaporate is
Speaker 1: being disproven this morning. This is still um we're seeing
Speaker 1: the echo chamber of COVID disruption, and I think really
Speaker 1: the genies out of the bottle when it comes to inflation,
Speaker 1: durable goods price deflation is a necessary portion of seeing
Speaker 1: um US inflation at two percent, and we're just not
Speaker 1: going to go back to that world. In Andrew Hollen
Speaker 1: host The City, published just months ago, he said the
Speaker 1: jobs numbers may serve to emphasize his hawk is focus
Speaker 1: on a tight labor market. He's talking about Chairman pou La.
Speaker 1: Do you think that's important too. I think this is critical.
Speaker 1: You know, wage growth of four percent is inherently inconsistent
Speaker 1: with inflation of two We have had a lot of
Speaker 1: different recessions where we see very little change in output
Speaker 1: but a massive decline in employment. This time around, you
Speaker 1: could get the other story. You could get company is
Speaker 1: really actually holding onto labor. That's part of the demographic story,
Speaker 1: and I think it's a reason why wage inflation is
Speaker 1: going to be much stickier. On the decline. We've seen
Speaker 1: companies now have to continue to compete for workers, and
Speaker 1: I think that also is going to be a story
Speaker 1: for the wage numbers may become more important than CPI numbers.
Speaker 1: Especially in the beginning of next year. Interesting up black
Speaker 1: rocket down like a feather. I think it was Patrick
Speaker 1: Harker if the Philadelphia Fed a number of weeks ago. Laura,
Speaker 1: thank you, Laura reun of FS Investments, And I'm well
Speaker 1: joined us now sending a fellow at the Atlantic Council
Speaker 1: and I'd love to start there. Just the latest move
Speaker 1: from this administration for chef on around the story in Venezuela,
Speaker 1: what are your thoughts on that we still too light
Speaker 1: on detail for you to draw too many conclusions. You know,
Speaker 1: I do think that we're we're shorter on detail here
Speaker 1: in terms of the Chevron story. So, for example, is
Speaker 1: this oil oil that's already on the market just on
Speaker 1: the black market, or is production actually going to increase
Speaker 1: in Venezuela, in which he is that could be meaningful
Speaker 1: for the market, but probably is going to take quite
Speaker 1: a long time to actually get get going because their
Speaker 1: oil facilities have been an incredible disrepair. I mean, this
Speaker 1: has been a very very long um problem for them. Um.
Speaker 1: The interesting thing though, is is say that, um, you
Speaker 1: know where they're looking for for oil producers that are
Speaker 1: less bad. You know, there are a lot of less
Speaker 1: bad oil producers in the United States, UH, that have
Speaker 1: the ability to produce more, just they aren't producing more
Speaker 1: because they don't think that the atmosphere is conducive towards it,
Speaker 1: and also that they're facing a lot of headwinds from
Speaker 1: inflation and having trouble getting parts and getting labor and
Speaker 1: getting equipment, and costs are very high. But there are
Speaker 1: definitely things that Biden administration could do to encourage those
Speaker 1: less bad oil producers in our own country. Oh and
Speaker 1: then why are oil prices so low? Is this something
Speaker 1: that completely is a demand side story that we're seeing
Speaker 1: play out or is it just the imagination of a
Speaker 1: demand side story that is yet to play out. So
Speaker 1: I do think that it's it is somewhat of an
Speaker 1: imagination of a demand side story, because you do have
Speaker 1: a situation where I think futures trading is impacting the
Speaker 1: prices now, and the the future of oil is very,
Speaker 1: very hazy right now. What's interesting, though, is that the
Speaker 1: fact that prices are kind of low now could actually
Speaker 1: spur more European utilities to switch from natural gas to oil,
Speaker 1: and that could then later kind of send a bump
Speaker 1: into oil prices. So I think that just because we're
Speaker 1: seeing kind of a lull or a period of lower
Speaker 1: prices now, we shouldn't expect that that's necessarily going to continue.
Speaker 1: There's always a tendency to think that what's happening now
Speaker 1: is what's going to happen for the rest of the winter.
Speaker 1: And I think that with what we've seen certainly in
Speaker 1: the past, with the incredible volatility here, is that we
Speaker 1: cannot underestimate the effect uh and we could see a
Speaker 1: very very quick rebound if if we're not careful and
Speaker 1: paying attention. On the big news over the weekend was
Speaker 1: the social interest in China, the possibility of perhaps a
Speaker 1: quicker exit to zero COVID on the heels of protests
Speaker 1: around the nation. Do you view with the unrest that
Speaker 1: we're seeing over in China as being potentially a logical
Speaker 1: reason for oil prices to be lower or would you
Speaker 1: expect that to actually send oil prices higher because of
Speaker 1: what it might mean for zero COVID Exactly. So, I
Speaker 1: do think that um earlier in the week that China's
Speaker 1: COVID policies continued, lockdowns things like that definitely helped send
Speaker 1: oil prices lower. So if we we're talking about say
Speaker 1: the beginning of last week, And the question is what
Speaker 1: do these protests actually mean. I'm not a China expert,
Speaker 1: but if you do look at China's history, the regime
Speaker 1: there has not been particularly responsive to protests. They also
Speaker 1: don't seem to really have a problem with lots of
Speaker 1: people dying in pursuit of their policies. So just the
Speaker 1: fact that there are protests in China, I think it
Speaker 1: means we should pay attention to it, but I wouldn't
Speaker 1: necessarily put my money on it having a widespread impact
Speaker 1: or a big change or shift in the Chinese regime's
Speaker 1: policy U particularly quickly. You are an opaque expert, so
Speaker 1: let's build on some of that knowledge if we can.
Speaker 1: I'm interested in the working assumptions for next year's open
Speaker 1: looking at three where COVID zero is still implemented by
Speaker 1: the Chinese government, is that the working underlying assumption of
Speaker 1: that organization. That's a really good question, and I think
Speaker 1: that they. I do think that if anyone is going
Speaker 1: to know first, it's probably going to be Saudi Arabia
Speaker 1: because they've got a very close relationship with China, with
Speaker 1: the Chinese government, They've got lots of oil investments there
Speaker 1: A Ramco has tons of refineries, They've got long term
Speaker 1: contracts for crude. And if anyone is going to have
Speaker 1: a sense of when China is going to need more
Speaker 1: crude oil, I do think it would be Saudi Arabia.
Speaker 1: So if Saudi Arabia is sending signals that they don't
Speaker 1: think oil demand is going to increase very much over
Speaker 1: the course of the winter, then that could be an
Speaker 1: indication of China's COVID policy. And well, thank you of
Speaker 1: the Atlantic Council and the latest in the crude market
Speaker 1: from Venezuela to China. Done joins us now seeing the
Speaker 1: equity analyst that Webbush Securities don't want to stop with
Speaker 1: the Apple story and understand it from your perspective, do
Speaker 1: you see that as profit, revenue lost or just deferred
Speaker 1: pushed out to the next quarter. Look, I mean it's
Speaker 1: been a gut punch in the most important quarter, the
Speaker 1: most important period for cooking cupputino going into howidays. I
Speaker 1: believe it is deferred and they ultimately demand right now
Speaker 1: is that stripping supply by about three to one? But
Speaker 1: I think really, look there the clock struck midnight. Finally,
Speaker 1: Apple is seeing, you know what, what's really the hurt
Speaker 1: in terms of production in China? We think it could
Speaker 1: be sixty eight million units. So what does this mean
Speaker 1: in terms of Apple's share price, in terms of the
Speaker 1: earnings that they're going to see, even if it's deferred,
Speaker 1: What does that mean for the upcoming quarter? I think
Speaker 1: in the New York term, Streets factoring in that that
Speaker 1: you're quickly going to see misses on iPhone production as
Speaker 1: well as what we're gonna see on deliveries. I think
Speaker 1: we should issue is that even going to Black Friday
Speaker 1: and we're seeing a five potentially shortages and Apple stores,
Speaker 1: if that continues to increase, depending what happens on production,
Speaker 1: then this could be some darker days ahead in terms
Speaker 1: of the coming weeks going into how it is, I
Speaker 1: think right now Streets starting a factor that in. But
Speaker 1: let's just be clear, it's it's the Grinch that stole Christmas,
Speaker 1: you know, really for Apple, and it's been a frustrating
Speaker 1: time for Cook and Cupertina. This isn't a surprise though, Dan,
Speaker 1: I mean, this is ultimately Apple's China problem, that their
Speaker 1: dependents on China, both from a demand side as well
Speaker 1: as the supply side really ties their hands to policy
Speaker 1: that's highly unpredictable. How much is there a push internally
Speaker 1: to move away from production in China to increase perhaps
Speaker 1: demand and production elsewhere. Yeah, and and in terms of
Speaker 1: what we've seen you with the last year and a half,
Speaker 1: Apple has been able to navigate basically better than any
Speaker 1: other company within China. The problem is is that now
Speaker 1: at the most important time, between the protests you're of COVID,
Speaker 1: what we're seeing a fox kind it's really been a
Speaker 1: train wreck. I think for Apple now they could talk
Speaker 1: about diversifying, but realistically probably best keys they can move
Speaker 1: five sambers and production out of China about two So
Speaker 1: I think they're really handred tied here. And that's sort
Speaker 1: of the frustrating situation because they are ultimately the mercy
Speaker 1: of the zero COVID policy in China. Well down, let's
Speaker 1: build on that a little bit more on asked the
Speaker 1: question whether it's profit or revenue lost or just delay
Speaker 1: defer to another quarter, think overwhelming. The response from bulls
Speaker 1: like you is that it's deferred, just delayed until the
Speaker 1: next quarter. But dan underlying that assumption is that these
Speaker 1: difficulties in production go away over the next three months.
Speaker 1: Down I've spent most of this morning asked in a
Speaker 1: question whether the working assumption is we get rid of
Speaker 1: COVID zero, whether we're stuck with it, And I can't
Speaker 1: get a definitive answer on that from anyone, And unsurprisingly
Speaker 1: that's the case. So Dan, where does your confidence come
Speaker 1: from that the issues that this companies are experiencing this
Speaker 1: quarter are temporary and nature and won't just spill over
Speaker 1: into most of the next year. Look, it's a great question.
Speaker 1: I mean, like our view is that you know, ultimately,
Speaker 1: especially from a fox con perspective, they will be able
Speaker 1: to ramp production going into the next month or two,
Speaker 1: you know, and then ultimately this will start to be
Speaker 1: more temporary. But to your point, it's an overhead and
Speaker 1: and it's really something they came to rouse for Apple
Speaker 1: at the worst time possible. And really, ultimately, right now,
Speaker 1: the street's going to assume it's temporary, transitionary. But ultimately,
Speaker 1: if this continues in two thousand twenty three, it would
Speaker 1: really sort of start to change the near term thesis.
Speaker 1: But that's the question you and I have explored a
Speaker 1: few times down. How would I know if I'm wrunk.
Speaker 1: You seem to have put a date on it there.
Speaker 1: If it spills into three, is that fair? Is that
Speaker 1: your line? If this continues for another month or so,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna have to change my mind about where I
Speaker 1: see the stasis going. Yeah. If this continues for board
Speaker 1: is six weeks, but then it starts to impact two
Speaker 1: thousand twenty three, then even I from fifteen in terms
Speaker 1: of production, I think that's where it's sort of cascades further.
Speaker 1: Right now, it's contained, you see that, even reflecting stock,
Speaker 1: But no doubt, I mean this is starting to turn
Speaker 1: into a nightmare in Elm Street for Apple in terms
Speaker 1: of what we're seeing coming down in China. It's contained,
Speaker 1: and yet we have heard about Apple potentially giving discounts
Speaker 1: to certain businesses on the margins, doing things that they
Speaker 1: have not done before because demand has so had to
Speaker 1: supply and there's always been a willingness to spend a
Speaker 1: thousand dollars on a phone and people are lining up
Speaker 1: around the block down. Is there a bigger problem for
Speaker 1: Apple that they're seeing both this issue on the supply
Speaker 1: side at the same time that demand is taking a
Speaker 1: hit in a way that perhaps they're starting to acknowledge
Speaker 1: on the edges. Yeah, man, the edges. You show that
Speaker 1: an iPhone four team plus, which is really outside of
Speaker 1: strike out in terms as an overall you know, deliveries.
Speaker 1: But if I look at iPhone Pro in terms of
Speaker 1: four team pro, it's three to one demand over supply.
Speaker 1: That continues to be a robust. That's the frustrating thing
Speaker 1: for Apple, even despite economic storm clouds. Demand strong, they
Speaker 1: can't just can't produce it. And I think that's right
Speaker 1: now what they're trying to figure out. I think this
Speaker 1: is the key. I'll call it seven to tend ds ahead,
Speaker 1: especially what we see coming out of Fox can serious question.
Speaker 1: If you were hosting a holiday party, would you insist
Speaker 1: that people come over take their shoes off? That's that's
Speaker 1: all we wanted to ever morning. Never. I believe I
Speaker 1: believe one should do that. It changes the whole dynamic.
Speaker 1: Once you say, asked someone to take their shoes off,
Speaker 1: are you setting a message to someone Dan, Look, I
Speaker 1: mean Staturday night, a good friendance to take our shoes off.
Speaker 1: It was awkward for about fifteen seconds and then it continued.
Speaker 1: I think it changes the dynamic that I was a
Speaker 1: wet first. They still mates after this. Are they watching?
Speaker 1: Maybe they are. Yeah, it's a good This is the
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Thanks for listening. Join us live weekdays
Speaker 1: from seven to ten AMI Eastern. I'm Bloomberg Radio and
Speaker 1: on Bloomberg Television each day from six to nine AM
Speaker 1: for insight from the best in economics, finance, investment, and
Speaker 1: international relations. And subscribe to the Surveillance podcast on Apple podcast, SoundCloud,
Speaker 1: Bloomberg dot com, and of course on the terminal. I'm
Speaker 1: Tom keene In. This is Bloomberg m