Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keene along
Speaker 2: with Paul Sweeney. Join us each day for insight from
Speaker 2: the best in economics, finance, investment, and international relations. You
Speaker 2: can also watch the show live on YouTube. Visit the
Speaker 2: Bloomberg Podcast channel on YouTube to see the show weekday
Speaker 2: mornings from seven to ten am Eastern from our global
Speaker 2: headquarters in New York City. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify,
Speaker 2: or anywhere else you listen and always I'm Bloomberg Radio,
Speaker 2: the Bloomberg Terminal, and the Bloomberg Business app. If you
Speaker 2: have a tour duty at the Feller Reserve Bank of Richmond,
Speaker 2: that means you have a certain cast.
Speaker 3: It's called fresh Water.
Speaker 2: Or title Economics, and it goes really interesting theories dot
Speaker 2: and they're the late Marvin good Friend was one of
Speaker 2: the academics that led so much of that. And you
Speaker 2: you know, you get the fed Richmond with all of
Speaker 2: its history, it's heritage. You can do that out of
Speaker 2: Washington and Lee University, which is you know, it's a
Speaker 2: short drive. You know, you get the carriage, you know,
Speaker 2: the two horse carriage and yep, you go up there,
Speaker 2: and of course you do it with some hard nosed
Speaker 2: University of Chicago economic Stephen Stanley joins us now right
Speaker 2: now with cent Tender.
Speaker 3: What was it like at the Richmond Fed.
Speaker 2: I've done so much work with them, including visiting, and
Speaker 2: you know their history. They used to write these the
Speaker 2: Edgeworth Box, forty two pages on the Edgeworth Box. What
Speaker 2: was it like walking in to the Federal Reserve Bank
Speaker 2: of Richmond out of Washington Lee in Chicago.
Speaker 4: Well, well, first of all, I have to say, I
Speaker 4: feel like I'm on this is your life, this is
Speaker 4: this is a great but yeah, it was great. It
Speaker 4: was a fantastic place to start my career. Marvin was
Speaker 4: was one of my mentors, and I learned so much,
Speaker 4: you know, it was Yeah, it was fantas.
Speaker 2: Is there underlying real economy theory valid? Or is there
Speaker 2: something to the saltwater economics of the Charles River?
Speaker 3: Well? I think so.
Speaker 4: Back in the day, you know, going back decades, the
Speaker 4: Richmond FED was definitely one of the monitorists banks, and
Speaker 4: that of course, you know, the theories there have evolved,
Speaker 4: but I certainly think that the framework that I got
Speaker 4: has helped me a lot So does.
Speaker 3: The FRED have a framework? Now?
Speaker 2: I don't if it's neo Monitorist, neo Kayesian, neo Stanley,
Speaker 2: I don't care. But all of our you know, Paul
Speaker 2: and I get mail on this every least it gets
Speaker 2: mail on this. The bottom line is is there a plan?
Speaker 2: Is there a framework? Well?
Speaker 4: I think the closest thing they have to that would
Speaker 4: be the board staff in their models, which I mean,
Speaker 4: broadly speaking, I would say, are kind of, as you say,
Speaker 4: neo Kayesian. I think the Phillips curve gets a lot
Speaker 4: of weight at the FED, even though publicly the FED
Speaker 4: will kind of itself from that. That has always been
Speaker 4: a load star for the FED. But I think there's
Speaker 4: also a lot of pragmatism now, which you know is
Speaker 4: good and bad. I think it's good that people are flexible,
Speaker 4: but at the same time, it sometimes does feel like
Speaker 4: there isn't really a strong framework from which to through
Speaker 4: which to interpret the data.
Speaker 5: So how do you think the FED is interpreting that
Speaker 5: data these days? I mean they say they're data dependent,
Speaker 5: and the data, particularly the inflation data will wapstick at
Speaker 5: the PCE on Friday, But it's kind of reared its
Speaker 5: head a little bit more over the last few months.
Speaker 5: Do you think it's enough for the FED that you say,
Speaker 5: I think we're just going to sit on the sidelines
Speaker 5: and see what happens.
Speaker 4: Well, here's how I would frame it up. So for
Speaker 4: about eighteen months, roughly the end of last year, you
Speaker 4: heard Terman Powell over and over again saying, we think
Speaker 4: we're going to need to see a period of subpar growth,
Speaker 4: slackening in the labor market if we're going to get
Speaker 4: inflation where we want it down to two percent on
Speaker 4: a sustainable basis. And then you had that period in
Speaker 4: the second half of last year when growth was really strong,
Speaker 4: but the inflation numbers were still coming down, and I
Speaker 4: think they got a little bit enamored by that, and
Speaker 4: all of a sudden in January you heard Powell essentially say,
Speaker 4: we think maybe we can have our cake and eat
Speaker 4: it too.
Speaker 3: Here.
Speaker 4: We think the economy can just rip along and inflation
Speaker 4: is magically going to make its way to two percent.
Speaker 4: And I think the data so far this year has
Speaker 4: been a bit of a slap in the face to
Speaker 4: that optimism.
Speaker 5: Are you concerned that this economy? I mean, it seems
Speaker 5: like again I took a couple of business classes at
Speaker 5: the University Richmond. I feel like i'm economics classes. I
Speaker 5: feel like i'm you know, I can stayed in opinion
Speaker 5: on economics. Is this soft landing? Have they landed this
Speaker 5: soft landing? Or do you think there's a risk that
Speaker 5: maybe it's gonna a little bit bumpier maybe?
Speaker 4: Well, I mean we've certainly made good progress on that front,
Speaker 4: but I don't think you can declare victory until inflation
Speaker 4: is actually back to two percent.
Speaker 5: Now, what's the two percent number? When did that come about?
Speaker 5: I never heard about that until like a couple of
Speaker 5: years ago. Yeah, and then people started talking about two
Speaker 5: what's wrong with two?
Speaker 3: When I had for three percent?
Speaker 4: So, you know, the the in theory price stability you
Speaker 4: would think would bean zero insplation.
Speaker 5: Okay, but there are two issues.
Speaker 4: One is the the there's you know, economists will tell
Speaker 4: you that there the inflation data are biased, so the
Speaker 4: true price stability number is probably somewhere between a half
Speaker 4: percent and one percent. And secondly, and more importantly, I
Speaker 4: think the FED has been spooked over the last several
Speaker 4: cycles by getting captured in the zero bound, and they
Speaker 4: want to stay away from that as much as they can.
Speaker 4: And so a little higher inflation takes them further.
Speaker 3: Away from the zero bound on average Earth.
Speaker 2: Thing the last two days has been the stimulus.
Speaker 3: How does it unwine?
Speaker 2: Ruscher Shearmer with a brilliant piece in the ft today,
Speaker 2: iconic at Morgan Stanley and his work at the Rockefeller Foundation.
Speaker 2: Now just just wonderful trying to figure out this mystery
Speaker 2: of the glide path of what I'm going to invent
Speaker 2: this word this morning. You could steal it, Steve stimulus.
Speaker 2: What's your framework for how many quarters we need to
Speaker 2: migrate out to de stimulize from the pandemic?
Speaker 4: Yeah, well, I think for me it's at this point
Speaker 4: it's not as much the pandemic anymore in the sense
Speaker 4: that the the you know, I think there's still a
Speaker 4: lot of fiscal stimulus in the system, but the bulk
Speaker 4: of it is not coming from the pandemic programs. It's
Speaker 4: coming from the things that were passed afterward, the infrastructure agreed.
Speaker 3: Agree.
Speaker 2: Blanchard has talked about the three levels of stimulus. Yeah, okay,
Speaker 2: so what's your timeline on this?
Speaker 3: Wow?
Speaker 4: I mean these programs that we just ticked off have
Speaker 4: multi year spending paths, So I think it's a while.
Speaker 4: I mean, what I would really like to see is
Speaker 4: I'd like to see some fiscal discipline. I mean, we're
Speaker 4: running two trillion dollars a year budget.
Speaker 2: Depth there there's the Richmond.
Speaker 3: That's it. We need to We got to end the interview.
Speaker 2: But it's good with the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond,
Speaker 2: Steve's family with us.
Speaker 3: What we're gonna do here, folks, is there's usual.
Speaker 2: Blah blah blah blah, like where are we in, what's
Speaker 2: housing inflation going to do? And maybe what the international
Speaker 2: thing is? And then there's a memo that just stops you.
Speaker 3: In your tracks.
Speaker 2: Terry Weissman with us right now to say he's had
Speaker 2: a global currency.
Speaker 3: He's interest rate.
Speaker 2: Strategy at Macquarie barely describes decades of experience. Back to
Speaker 2: Fortress Schwartz at bear Stearns a few years ago. I
Speaker 2: was stopped and I was thinking of David folkerts Lando
Speaker 2: of Deutsche Bank the day after Putin invaded Ukraine. And
Speaker 2: here you are with a definitive, piercing note. Let's repeat
Speaker 2: what we've already said. Wars are inflationary? Are we missing
Speaker 2: the forest from somewhere out there? The trees. Is all
Speaker 2: of this inflation we're talking about. Maybe we had a
Speaker 2: war in a pandemic, but these wars are inflationary full stop.
Speaker 1: Yeah, this is not the shouldn't be a mystery to
Speaker 1: most people, Tom. I think if you look at the
Speaker 1: history of inflations in the US and where we've had
Speaker 1: big spikes, it was during Korea, right. We had a
Speaker 1: demobilization after World War Two and inflation fell. But when
Speaker 1: Korea started, we had a big inflation in the US.
Speaker 1: And then we had an inflation again in the intensification
Speaker 1: of the Vietnam War in the late sixties. And then
Speaker 1: we had an inflation again in nineteen seventy three, which
Speaker 1: coincided with the Arab Azareeli war of the time. And
Speaker 1: we had an inflation again with the First Gulf War, right,
Speaker 1: and we had an inflation again with Russia and Ukraine.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is this Optically, you look at these
Speaker 1: charts and you look at what coincides with these wars,
Speaker 1: it has to be it is these spikes and inflation.
Speaker 1: You have to conclude that there has something to do.
Speaker 1: There's something to do with the idea that wars cause inflation.
Speaker 1: I think, you know, you can talk about what the
Speaker 1: channels are, but supply side disruptions, right, So an important
Speaker 1: aspect of that.
Speaker 5: I mean, you know, I'm still going at WT crude oil,
Speaker 5: you know, or actually Brent crude were down to bad
Speaker 5: eighty six. We were up to close over ninety here,
Speaker 5: So how do you factor that? And what's happening in Ukraine,
Speaker 5: what's happening in the Middle East. We passed another bill
Speaker 5: for also to fund some issues in Taiwan. How does
Speaker 5: that factor into your research and kind of how you
Speaker 5: view kind of rates, how you view currencies.
Speaker 1: Yeah, let me say that a lot of economists tend
Speaker 1: to discount the importance of oil prices in the overall
Speaker 1: inflation picture and in respect to the Fed's policy outlook.
Speaker 1: And the reason for that is also simple. It's not
Speaker 1: part of core inflation. We like to think of energy
Speaker 1: and the energy complex sitting outside of core, and we
Speaker 1: like to think that when oil prices go up, it's
Speaker 1: going to be temporary, in part because it is a
Speaker 1: supply side shock that drives these prices from time to time.
Speaker 1: I tend to fight against that view. And here's the reason.
Speaker 1: If you are a labor union and you're sitting in
Speaker 1: front of your employer and you're demanding higher wages. You're
Speaker 1: not going to say I don't eat food and I
Speaker 1: don't consume energy. You're going to say, I want my
Speaker 1: wage increase based on the basket that I consume in
Speaker 1: that basket very much. For the average work in the
Speaker 1: United States is energy intensive and is food intensive. So
Speaker 1: even though core may be a better reflection of underlying inflation,
Speaker 1: when headline goes up, you have to imagine that workers
Speaker 1: are going to pressure their employers for higher wages, and
Speaker 1: to the extent that wages cause inflation, that in itself
Speaker 1: becomes inflation.
Speaker 2: They in herited you. What you're hearing there, folks, this
Speaker 2: is critical the path here. There was a guy named
Speaker 2: Lawrence Kudlow million years ago before he was a ginormous
Speaker 2: TV star. I love busting Larry's jobs. And he held
Speaker 2: courted Bear Stearns and people threw apples and rocks at
Speaker 2: him because he was working in the nominal space. And
Speaker 2: then malpass In writing in Weissman, they were working in
Speaker 2: the nominal. They had respect for the nominal space besides
Speaker 2: a convenience and crutch of real Right now, do we
Speaker 2: under emphasize the nominal space and the persistency of a
Speaker 2: higher ne nominal GDP.
Speaker 1: No, I actually don't think we do to the extent
Speaker 1: that we are that the world central banks are inflation targeters,
Speaker 1: it implies that they are very much looking at the
Speaker 1: nominal space. Now, if nominal GDP were to rally a
Speaker 1: lot and real GDP were not to rally a lot,
Speaker 1: you'd effectively have what is called an inflation problem, presumably
Speaker 1: driven by a supply side shock. You could make a
Speaker 1: case that the central banks should not respond to a
Speaker 1: supply side driven increase in inflation to the same extent that
Speaker 1: they would a real demand positive demand shock increase that
Speaker 1: that causes inflation. But that's exactly the point that I
Speaker 1: was trying to contest earlier, And the reason is because
Speaker 1: inflation expectations matter. At least the conventional wisdom is that
Speaker 1: they do. Banks believe that they do.
Speaker 2: What does inflation expectations The synthesis of.
Speaker 1: That tell you right now that they're not high enough
Speaker 1: to cause panic at the FED. But there is this
Speaker 1: risk that if oil prices stay high indefinitely because of
Speaker 1: these issues regarding supply side chalks, the war, climate change, demography,
Speaker 1: et cetera, even deglobalization that they may at some point
Speaker 1: start to drift higher.
Speaker 5: I could be a currency trader. I'm just long the dollar.
Speaker 5: Give me a bare case for the dollar. I mean,
Speaker 5: I could do this for a living.
Speaker 1: So the bare case for the dollar, if there's a
Speaker 1: structural one, is that the dollar will no longer be
Speaker 1: at some point, and no one knows when the world's
Speaker 1: reserve currency. Now we are already seeing signs that this
Speaker 1: is manifest. We see, of course, we see China accumulating gold. Well,
Speaker 1: that's telling you that they may not like the dollar anymore.
Speaker 1: We certainly see the Russians moving away from dollar reserves.
Speaker 1: We've seen the Venezuelans do that. Now the bold case
Speaker 1: for the dollar as well. You can dismiss these countries
Speaker 1: because they're, you know, part of this I don't want
Speaker 1: to say access of evil obviously, but they're not on
Speaker 1: the same side of the fence as the US. But
Speaker 1: to the extent that we get a bipolarity in this world,
Speaker 1: that we really get a true a new Berlin Wall
Speaker 1: that goes up between the West and the rest, you
Speaker 1: have to imagine that that's going to be bad for
Speaker 1: the dollar, because the dollar has benefited in this era
Speaker 1: of globalization. Anything that tends to reduce the amount of
Speaker 1: globalization tends to be bad for the dollar. And that
Speaker 1: new Berlin Wall would be bad for the dollar.
Speaker 2: What are we gonna see in GDP here in a
Speaker 2: couple of days?
Speaker 3: Does a quarry of a view.
Speaker 1: On usgd Yeah, it's going to stay robust, does it?
Speaker 1: Do we have a pinpoint view on quarter ones?
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 1: On quarter one's results, I think we're at about two
Speaker 1: point five percent, if not my sake, in two point
Speaker 1: four two point five annualized robust.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and that's very close to consensus. If you look
Speaker 1: at some of these GDP now estimates that come out
Speaker 1: of some of the reserve banks are fed, they're a
Speaker 1: little bit higher.
Speaker 3: Uh.
Speaker 1: And again if they are, if it is going to
Speaker 1: be strong, it's going to be driven by consumption.
Speaker 2: This is fab as Terry Weiss would thank you so
Speaker 2: much and congratulations on a really thought provoking note in
Speaker 2: your team. It's just blunt, folks, Wars lead to inflation.
Speaker 2: If you're seeing your consultant at Deloitte, yep, that gives
Speaker 2: you a twisted perspective. I mean, it's not like you know,
Speaker 2: complains a lot's CFA combine. It's not like you know,
Speaker 2: you know, you come out of King's College, you get
Speaker 2: some parchment modern history in Oxford that sets you up
Speaker 2: for this, the streaming wars.
Speaker 3: Why don't you bring in our.
Speaker 5: Next victim, I'll tell you. One of the top media
Speaker 5: analysts in the city of London, covering all the European
Speaker 5: media sector for many years as Ian Whittaker, Managing director
Speaker 5: and owner of Liberty Sky Advisors. He's based in London,
Speaker 5: joining us here in New York City doing a little
Speaker 5: tour here in the US. Ian, thanks so much for
Speaker 5: coming into our studio. We appreciate it. We have some
Speaker 5: really good numbers that blew Tom keenan I away from Netflix.
Speaker 5: I mean, is this streaming business? Netflix can certainly make
Speaker 5: a lot of money. How about the other media companies,
Speaker 5: the Disney's, the Paramounts, the Tom's favorite, Warner Brothers, Discovery.
Speaker 5: What's happening in the streaming business?
Speaker 6: So thanks very much too for having the Thanks very
Speaker 6: much Tom as well. I think if you look at streaming,
Speaker 6: if you look at long term view, it's absolutely right.
Speaker 6: Netflix is numbers on a Q one basis absolutely fantastic.
Speaker 6: Really hard to disagree where anything they did.
Speaker 3: I think if you actually look at.
Speaker 6: Sort of some of the underlying things sort of within
Speaker 6: there and some of the details and some of the
Speaker 6: things they didn't mention, big question marks. You take away,
Speaker 6: as been mentioned, information on subscriber growth in twenty twenty
Speaker 6: five Honors. What does that say games that had been
Speaker 6: talked about as a big strategy sort of for them
Speaker 6: to grow revenues. Nothing on the call whatsoever in terms
Speaker 6: of that, And the games games industry is quite tough
Speaker 6: at the moment.
Speaker 3: Sports.
Speaker 6: You listen to what they're saying at the moment, definitely
Speaker 6: sounds as though there is a shift in terms of
Speaker 6: their strategy in sports, but they're going to have to
Speaker 6: spend big ye if they're going to do this. So
Speaker 6: there's a range of different questions. I think the fundamental
Speaker 6: issue for the streaming business is this what the big
Speaker 6: media companies have done. I think they've be placed a
Speaker 6: model that we're extremely well with it for them for
Speaker 6: the number of years, and they sort of jumped into
Speaker 6: streaming into a business model that quite frankly is not
Speaker 6: sort of not great longer term, and I think we'll
Speaker 6: look back in probably five to ten years time. I
Speaker 6: would say, this'll be one of those business case studies
Speaker 6: where people would say, why didn't the major media companies,
Speaker 6: the business warns, et cetera, taken a little bit more
Speaker 6: time before they jumped on the streaming bandwagon, because if
Speaker 6: you look at it, streaming penetration is flatlining in many countries. Yeah,
Speaker 6: I think fundamental mistake that the streaming executives made, particularly
Speaker 6: big media companies, was to treat the rest of the
Speaker 6: world as though it was the US in terms of
Speaker 6: the same dynamics. Absolutely not the case whatsoever, even in
Speaker 6: the market like Curek, which is quite similar and so forth.
Speaker 6: And now you see all of them, what are they
Speaker 6: focusing on trying to reduce losses? Yep, Okay, well that's great,
Speaker 6: but that's not a growth strategy moving forward. So I
Speaker 6: think if I look on a longer term basis, sure
Speaker 6: there's a little bit of confidence for streaming, but longer term,
Speaker 6: I think it's the dynamics still difficult.
Speaker 5: So you look at a company like Paramount, for example,
Speaker 5: which back in the day you and I recall when
Speaker 5: Paramount was a slash Viacom slash CBS was a great company,
Speaker 5: was a blue chip media company. They can't give themselves
Speaker 5: away these days. I mean, what happens to a company
Speaker 5: like a paramount as they try to navigate to this
Speaker 5: streaming world.
Speaker 6: Well, I think again it sort of comes back to
Speaker 6: this point that for many of these companies, what they
Speaker 6: did was pushed in. What they didn't think about was
Speaker 6: what exactly was the long game here. The smartest one
Speaker 6: and this is not this is something that's been said
Speaker 6: by others as well, but the smartest sort of company
Speaker 6: on the entertainment space was solely because what I said was,
Speaker 6: you know what, we cannot compete in terms of being
Speaker 6: a mass market streaming player. It actually makes sense for
Speaker 6: us to sell our content to other players the arms
Speaker 6: dealer in that that has been used multiple times as well.
Speaker 6: You look at someone like a paramount, that's exactly what
Speaker 6: the strategy for somebody like a parent should be. Free
Speaker 6: cash flow generation.
Speaker 2: Great, So, well, sell the book, I get it, sell
Speaker 2: the catalog, I get it. But to me, there's a
Speaker 2: fundamental issue in the train wreck of Paul Sweeney's world,
Speaker 2: and that is the intangible assets and bad will and
Speaker 2: the balance sheets. These numbers are in my amateur opinion, jenormous.
Speaker 2: Is the shock that's coming that they're going to have
Speaker 2: to udjust intangibles down.
Speaker 7: Yeah.
Speaker 6: I mean that's a great question and the answer is
Speaker 6: probably yes. The point being, I think if you were
Speaker 6: to ask, if you to ask all these streaming executives,
Speaker 6: all the top CEOs of these companies that on this
Speaker 6: truth about where they think the streaming business would go,
Speaker 6: I think they fundamentally recognize that essentially the endgame is
Speaker 6: not looking good. The problem becomes for many of them
Speaker 6: in terms of a reputation. They've gone to the market
Speaker 6: and sold this sort of story for years, and I
Speaker 6: think many of them will find it very difficult to
Speaker 6: actually step out of that. That's going to be really
Speaker 6: the big issue. I think what will happen is that
Speaker 6: you'll get a continuation in the story, people saying, look,
Speaker 6: there's growth coming over the next three to five years.
Speaker 6: But at some point these pay he's going to have
Speaker 6: to buite the bubble.
Speaker 2: Are you Are you in New York on your way
Speaker 2: to LA to help close the paramount dealers?
Speaker 3: I make some news to that. I'm always available for quit.
Speaker 5: I have to go that talk to us about the
Speaker 5: global advertising business. I think you have a lot of
Speaker 5: experience with the big ad agencies in London in New York.
Speaker 5: Here is any Is the money still going to broadcast
Speaker 5: and cable television or is it just going to the
Speaker 5: Metas of the world and the Googles of the world.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I mean it's really interesting dynamics that you've got
Speaker 6: been advertising at the moment. So if you take the
Speaker 6: advertising industry generally in terms of bad spend, you know,
Speaker 6: what would say is that you've seen the advertising market
Speaker 6: perform much better than expected over the past couple of years.
Speaker 6: And I think what you've had here is a vast
Speaker 6: and planned experiment over the past two years where companies
Speaker 6: were able to pull up their prices much more aggressively
Speaker 6: to consumers than they thought. And if you listen to
Speaker 6: the conference calls from those companies, they will say probably
Speaker 6: the key reason they were able to do that was
Speaker 6: the strength of the brand. And so I think fundamentally
Speaker 6: there is a sort of realization that advertising works. Then
Speaker 6: the questionure mark becomes where exactly is that money going to?
Speaker 6: And what is interesting here when you look at the
Speaker 6: numbers in terms of each so that you look at
Speaker 6: the broadcasters had a tough twenty twenty three, twenty twenty four.
Speaker 6: You know the question marks. Actually in New Yorpe it
Speaker 6: started off well to be okay for the broadcasters and
Speaker 6: so forth. Is money going to the online platforms? You're
Speaker 6: starting to see the growth slope now. If you take
Speaker 6: Facebook Facebook last year everyone said revenue numbers absolutely fantastic,
Speaker 6: you know, great growth and so forth. That was driven
Speaker 6: by advertising revenues coming from Asia Pac advertisers. You look
Speaker 6: at it was up thirty percent sort of twenty twenty three,
Speaker 6: nearly double the revenue growth. If you look for North
Speaker 6: American advertisers, their spend on Facebook was only up single digits.
Speaker 6: So I think, you know, one of the big questions
Speaker 6: we're going to have over the next let's say, two
Speaker 6: to three four years, is you've got these platforms where
Speaker 6: there's increasingly questioned marks from the established markets as the weather,
Speaker 6: money should be going in okay, But where does that
Speaker 6: many go in future retail media? You know, does it
Speaker 6: go to some other segments that come up at the.
Speaker 2: Moment, right we're out of time, Ian don't be a stranger,
Speaker 2: Ian Whittaker, where the Liberty Sky Advisors as well?
Speaker 5: Just a few times did Jessica Cohen.
Speaker 3: Were you on the same watch with Jessica Coin Beryl.
Speaker 6: In the London team. Yeah, back in the early season.
Speaker 2: Very cool Ian, Thank you. So I'd love to get
Speaker 2: you on with Jessica ref Colin Roy your Daily look
Speaker 2: at the front pages around the World, our most popular segment.
Speaker 3: Lisa Matteo.
Speaker 8: So, we've been talking about all different things that that
Speaker 8: New Yorkers are that concern New Yorkers. Right, we talked
Speaker 8: about congestion, pricing, hot button issue. The other one, it's
Speaker 8: the one Michael Barr has been talking about a lot
Speaker 8: of the protests going on over the Israel God's Award.
Speaker 8: They're starting to ramp up. You heard him talk about
Speaker 8: Columbia University. They canceled in person classes. Police they've arrested
Speaker 8: a dozen protesters at Yale New York University, and the
Speaker 8: college leaders are in their spot. They're being called out
Speaker 8: for whether they're doing enough to protect students, faculty, staff,
Speaker 8: and at the same time they're being criticized for denying
Speaker 8: students right to speak out. So they're in this weird
Speaker 8: position already. You had more than one hundred demonstrators arrested
Speaker 8: at Columbia last night. More arrests at NYU. I mean
Speaker 8: it's spreading to different universities at Boston University, University of
Speaker 8: North Carolina, Chapel Hill, MIT, the University of California at Berkeley.
Speaker 8: So this is a growing issue.
Speaker 3: There's a lot of other schools.
Speaker 2: There's somebody out on Twitter saying yep, but then there's Chicago,
Speaker 2: or then there's Duke.
Speaker 3: Paul, you just visited Duke, And.
Speaker 2: Every school is dealing with this in original way.
Speaker 3: I find that fascinating.
Speaker 5: Yeah. I think most schools are just trying their best,
Speaker 5: I guess, to kind of protect free speed of what
Speaker 5: they're certainly all about, while also, you know, protecting their students.
Speaker 5: All I can say is that if I were paying
Speaker 5: one hundred thousand dollars to Columbia to send my kid there,
Speaker 5: I'm not sure I want them in natural classes. I
Speaker 5: don't know. That's a tough situation there.
Speaker 3: Well, I'm not going to go there. It's not our job.
Speaker 2: My job I should say, to comment on the micropolicy
Speaker 2: at a different school, I would say, Lisa, a few it's
Speaker 2: like the Fed minutes several some of us, a few
Speaker 2: of us have a nodding acquaintance with nineteen sixty eight,
Speaker 2: and then the tension was a war, Vietnam War, and
Speaker 2: it was also a huge undercurrent of a racial tension
Speaker 2: as well. And to me, and I'm speaking strictly as
Speaker 2: an amateur, to me, there's a huge distinction between what
Speaker 2: we're seeing right now and what we lived in nineteen
Speaker 2: sixty eight. I happened to be in Paris in nineteen
Speaker 2: sixty eight, and that complete ferment as a child.
Speaker 3: And I just and I really need to read on this.
Speaker 2: From experts, including from Bloomberg Opinion about the compare contrast
Speaker 2: with nineteen sixty eight, because I don't really.
Speaker 3: See it right now. I'd love to read more on that.
Speaker 3: What else do you have?
Speaker 2: Sure?
Speaker 8: But so before kids get to college, they have to
Speaker 8: get through elementary and middle school and high school. Schools
Speaker 8: are banning cell phones, but parents they're kind of getting
Speaker 8: the way of it. So this is the big battle.
Speaker 8: So moms and dads say they want the kids to
Speaker 8: keep the cell phone because they want them in case
Speaker 8: of emergency. Times are different now, I mean, kids are
Speaker 8: having you know, not shooting drills, you know, in schools.
Speaker 8: But the teachers are saying that it's taking away from
Speaker 8: focus it's taken away from their education time because that's
Speaker 8: part of their job now, so kind of monitor kids
Speaker 8: are using these cell phones. So this is becoming the issue.
Speaker 8: There was a school district in Colorado tried to ban it.
Speaker 8: Parents got on the way, so they came up with
Speaker 8: a compromise where the kids could hold it. They do
Speaker 8: this at my daughter's school. They can hold the phone,
Speaker 8: but they can't take them out until like recess or lunch.
Speaker 5: But my kids, we got my kids in their mid
Speaker 5: to late twenties, when they got the sixth grade, that
Speaker 5: was that was when we would consider it.
Speaker 2: Yes, okay, can I kind of do it attend into this, yes.
Speaker 3: Vince Farrell, one of.
Speaker 2: The giants of equity analysis, we lost them way too young.
Speaker 2: I'm still in such sadness over the death of Vince Ferrell.
Speaker 2: He and I said in tears one day laughing in
Speaker 2: the room right next door where we invented this and.
Speaker 7: Vince ferrold I were trying to outdo each other. And
Speaker 7: when do you stop paying your kid's cell phone? Come on, Lisa,
Speaker 7: when do you stop paying the kids?
Speaker 5: To himself?
Speaker 1: Nine years old?
Speaker 5: Nine years old, twelve, This is the I've cut my kids.
Speaker 5: They're off.
Speaker 8: They are off. I was, except.
Speaker 5: Except for the phone.
Speaker 1: That's the last I said good morning to the memory
Speaker 1: of Vince Farrell.
Speaker 2: Vince Farrell went to is Greave paying.
Speaker 3: Like six kids? What do you got?
Speaker 8: That's an issue. I'm telling my sister. I think it's
Speaker 8: when she got married. My fine, my parents finally cut
Speaker 8: her off of the family plan. All right, So we're
Speaker 8: going back to this was yesterday story. I want to
Speaker 8: point it out how the FTC is suing to block
Speaker 8: that eight and a half billion dollar union of Coach Tapestry.
Speaker 8: So Tapestry trying to take over Capri Holdings eight and
Speaker 8: a half billion dollars. So it's the first time the
Speaker 8: kind of bide administration is stepping into for a deal
Speaker 8: in the fashion accessories industry. That's why makes it interesting.
Speaker 8: But you have Tapestry, okay, they own Coach, Kate Spades
Speaker 8: or Whitesmiths exactly who they have? You know, Michael Core's Verstachi,
Speaker 8: Jimmy Choo, Oh, Jimmy.
Speaker 3: They have James Chu. You noticed they just move their story.
Speaker 3: I saw you in there looking.
Speaker 8: At you can't tell my secrets. But it's the problem
Speaker 8: that the forcers are saying that it's going to deal
Speaker 8: to price rate, and they're saying the prices are going
Speaker 8: to start to rise if these two companies merger are
Speaker 8: saying workers wages are going to be affected because the
Speaker 8: companies compete, you know, for for competition for workers.
Speaker 5: I tell you this administration is tough on get into
Speaker 5: M and A. I'm an M and A lawyer. I'm like,
Speaker 5: I'm not sure I can advise you, guys, we can
Speaker 5: get anything done these days.
Speaker 3: Next.
Speaker 8: Yes, it's a tough one, all right. If you you've
Speaker 8: been online right to go shopping or whatever you do,
Speaker 8: and sometimes that that notice pops up, like okay, find
Speaker 8: out how many motorcycles or how many bridges. You know,
Speaker 8: they're called captures.
Speaker 5: I failed those quick. Quite that's the problem.
Speaker 8: Okay, they're preventing bots from you know, disrupting websites. But
Speaker 8: a lot of people are saying that they're starting to
Speaker 8: get a little bit more difficult, and they are because
Speaker 8: they're the people who make them. They're trying to have
Speaker 8: to go after these bad actors who are figuring out
Speaker 8: how to crack them. So now they're getting even tougher
Speaker 8: to do. So, I know, I feel it failed the
Speaker 8: motorcycle on. I was like, wait, that's a wait. You know,
Speaker 8: it gets a little confusing, and so they're going to
Speaker 8: be just the warning out there, they're going to be
Speaker 8: getting a little bit more difficult. So as you're thinking
Speaker 8: caps on when you go shop, on the shop anywhere else,
Speaker 8: they're going to start to get.
Speaker 5: A little bit harder.
Speaker 2: Lisa, let'll tell you thank you so much the newspapers
Speaker 2: had today. This is a Bloomberg Surveillance podcast, bringing you
Speaker 2: the best in economics, finance, investment, and international relations. You
Speaker 2: can also watch the show live on YouTube. Visit the
Speaker 2: Bloomberg Podcast channel on YouTube to see the show weekday
Speaker 2: mornings from seven to ten am Eastern from our global
Speaker 2: headquarters in New York City. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify,
Speaker 2: or anywhere else you listen, and always on Bloomberg Radio,
Speaker 2: the Bloomberg Terminal, and the Bloomberg Business app.