WEBVTT - Bank Stock Weakness Is Signalling Upcoming Downturn: Peabody

0:00:05.800 --> 0:00:08.720
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to the Bloomberg p m L Podcast. I'm pim Fox.

0:00:08.760 --> 0:00:11.520
<v Speaker 1>Along with my co host Lisa Abramowitz. Each day we

0:00:11.640 --> 0:00:15.120
<v Speaker 1>bring you the most important, noteworthy, and useful interviews for

0:00:15.200 --> 0:00:17.840
<v Speaker 1>you and your money, whether you're at the grocery store

0:00:17.960 --> 0:00:20.720
<v Speaker 1>or the trading floor. Find the Bloomberg p m L

0:00:20.840 --> 0:00:34.280
<v Speaker 1>Podcast on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, and Bloomberg dot com. Bank earnings,

0:00:34.360 --> 0:00:38.280
<v Speaker 1>JP Morgan, Chase City Group, they top estimates, Wells Fargo

0:00:38.479 --> 0:00:41.479
<v Speaker 1>misses here to tell us everything about them, as Charles Peabody,

0:00:41.680 --> 0:00:44.920
<v Speaker 1>he is the president of Portalis Partners. Charles, a pleasure

0:00:44.960 --> 0:00:47.800
<v Speaker 1>to hear your voice, tell us your impression about the

0:00:47.800 --> 0:00:50.360
<v Speaker 1>results of three of these three banks, and then maybe

0:00:50.440 --> 0:00:53.640
<v Speaker 1>extrapolate into some of the other earnings that we're going

0:00:53.680 --> 0:00:57.760
<v Speaker 1>to receive. Sure, I mean there's a wide dispersion in

0:00:57.760 --> 0:01:00.240
<v Speaker 1>the results. I mean JP Morgan had a very at

0:01:00.320 --> 0:01:04.320
<v Speaker 1>very robust quarter, UM City was sort of weak, and

0:01:05.160 --> 0:01:10.160
<v Speaker 1>Wells Fargo was disappointing. UM but on average, what you're

0:01:10.160 --> 0:01:13.679
<v Speaker 1>getting out of this quarter is maybe two revenue growth

0:01:13.760 --> 0:01:17.319
<v Speaker 1>year over year, which is I think pretty anemic given

0:01:17.920 --> 0:01:22.600
<v Speaker 1>you know, higher interest rates, deregulation, tax cuts, four GDP etcetera.

0:01:22.920 --> 0:01:27.440
<v Speaker 1>And I think that's the disappointment here. Okay, so what

0:01:27.840 --> 0:01:30.400
<v Speaker 1>could they have done to show and what does this mean?

0:01:31.920 --> 0:01:33.840
<v Speaker 1>I'm sorry to say that again. What does this mean

0:01:33.920 --> 0:01:35.520
<v Speaker 1>for it to be for for for grows to be

0:01:35.560 --> 0:01:39.959
<v Speaker 1>more nic given all of the positive headwear, positive tail wins.

0:01:39.959 --> 0:01:42.400
<v Speaker 1>I mean, what does that mean to you? I think

0:01:42.440 --> 0:01:46.440
<v Speaker 1>that's why we've had multiple compression over the last six months.

0:01:46.440 --> 0:01:49.040
<v Speaker 1>In other ways, we had this multiple expansion last year

0:01:49.080 --> 0:01:52.920
<v Speaker 1>when earings really weren't that robust. We're getting, you know,

0:01:53.360 --> 0:01:57.600
<v Speaker 1>a better bottom line earrings, but not a better revenue picture.

0:01:58.240 --> 0:02:01.000
<v Speaker 1>So the formula that the bank industry is using is

0:02:01.040 --> 0:02:04.840
<v Speaker 1>taking low single digit revenue growth, turning it into mid

0:02:04.920 --> 0:02:08.600
<v Speaker 1>single digit pretext income growth through positive operating leverage and

0:02:08.639 --> 0:02:12.040
<v Speaker 1>benign credit costs, and then taking that mid single digit

0:02:12.080 --> 0:02:15.680
<v Speaker 1>pretext income growth and turning into double digit net income

0:02:15.760 --> 0:02:18.800
<v Speaker 1>from tax cuts and share buy backs. But the latter

0:02:18.880 --> 0:02:22.960
<v Speaker 1>two items are financial engineering techniques, and no one's going

0:02:23.000 --> 0:02:25.400
<v Speaker 1>to pay a premium for that. You need better revenue growth.

0:02:26.200 --> 0:02:28.640
<v Speaker 1>How are they expected to do that? Charles? Is the

0:02:28.680 --> 0:02:32.600
<v Speaker 1>business of banking changed and are these bankings for banks

0:02:32.639 --> 0:02:37.640
<v Speaker 1>responding to it? Well? I think revenue growth is going

0:02:37.680 --> 0:02:40.240
<v Speaker 1>to continue to disappoint and and so we're in what

0:02:40.320 --> 0:02:43.880
<v Speaker 1>I call end of cycle economic dynamics, and that means

0:02:43.880 --> 0:02:46.440
<v Speaker 1>you started to look at the second derivative, and the

0:02:46.480 --> 0:02:48.760
<v Speaker 1>second river means what's happening to the rate of growth

0:02:48.800 --> 0:02:53.360
<v Speaker 1>of the key line items. So revenues probably are going

0:02:53.400 --> 0:02:56.200
<v Speaker 1>to slow, credit costs are going to pick up, and

0:02:56.280 --> 0:03:00.000
<v Speaker 1>expenses can't be cut anymore. They're being well, you know, maintained,

0:03:00.040 --> 0:03:02.560
<v Speaker 1>but it can't be cut. So I think you're at

0:03:02.600 --> 0:03:06.320
<v Speaker 1>peak profitability. Well, Charles, just follow up on this then

0:03:06.680 --> 0:03:09.280
<v Speaker 1>you know you've I'm sure you have seen and read

0:03:09.320 --> 0:03:13.080
<v Speaker 1>about all of the different financial technology companies that have

0:03:13.160 --> 0:03:17.680
<v Speaker 1>either raised money or have really created a whole another

0:03:17.840 --> 0:03:22.360
<v Speaker 1>financial system in parallel to the traditional banking system. Is

0:03:22.440 --> 0:03:26.680
<v Speaker 1>all of that market value value that the banks could

0:03:27.160 --> 0:03:32.080
<v Speaker 1>have taken for themselves if they had been more entrepreneurial. Well,

0:03:32.120 --> 0:03:35.520
<v Speaker 1>they are making a push. If you're talking about digital banking,

0:03:35.600 --> 0:03:37.480
<v Speaker 1>they are making and that's where a lot of the

0:03:37.560 --> 0:03:43.760
<v Speaker 1>expense growth is related to UM is their technological investments UM.

0:03:43.800 --> 0:03:47.640
<v Speaker 1>So banks are trying to UM keep up with the

0:03:47.720 --> 0:03:51.160
<v Speaker 1>non banks. I think over a full business cycle, you're

0:03:51.200 --> 0:03:53.200
<v Speaker 1>going to see a greater fallout in the non banks

0:03:53.200 --> 0:03:55.960
<v Speaker 1>than you will in the banking industry, and that's maybe

0:03:55.960 --> 0:03:58.120
<v Speaker 1>where they start to regain some of the market where

0:03:58.160 --> 0:04:01.280
<v Speaker 1>they've lost in the non banks. That's fascinating, by the way,

0:04:01.360 --> 0:04:02.760
<v Speaker 1>because a lot of people have said that the risk

0:04:03.120 --> 0:04:05.839
<v Speaker 1>has moved to the shadow banking systems. So perhaps when

0:04:05.880 --> 0:04:09.280
<v Speaker 1>that risks manifests itself and the shadow banking system ends

0:04:09.360 --> 0:04:11.480
<v Speaker 1>up getting a little bit more afraid than the big

0:04:11.480 --> 0:04:13.840
<v Speaker 1>banks can come back in and take market share. I'm

0:04:13.880 --> 0:04:15.280
<v Speaker 1>just worrying. I want to dig a little bit more

0:04:15.400 --> 0:04:18.600
<v Speaker 1>into the nitty gritty, particularly with Wells Fargo, because it's

0:04:18.640 --> 0:04:23.160
<v Speaker 1>shares are getting penalized more than others. Down actually up

0:04:23.160 --> 0:04:28.080
<v Speaker 1>from the earlier losses, about down nearly two percent. Now, Um,

0:04:28.720 --> 0:04:31.640
<v Speaker 1>do you think that we're seeing a bottom for this

0:04:32.120 --> 0:04:34.960
<v Speaker 1>bank or is this sort of a signal of more

0:04:35.040 --> 0:04:39.960
<v Speaker 1>pain ahead. Well, from a fundamental point of view, I don't.

0:04:40.760 --> 0:04:43.039
<v Speaker 1>I've been on the side of the equation that the

0:04:43.160 --> 0:04:45.839
<v Speaker 1>revenues are going to be the big disappointment, and revenues

0:04:45.920 --> 0:04:48.480
<v Speaker 1>this quarter, you back out some non recurring items were

0:04:48.480 --> 0:04:52.359
<v Speaker 1>down four and a half percent. Every year. Um, you

0:04:52.400 --> 0:04:56.120
<v Speaker 1>know they'll execute on their expenses. Credit costs will creep up,

0:04:56.160 --> 0:04:59.360
<v Speaker 1>but the revenue is where they're going to disappoint. Um.

0:04:59.400 --> 0:05:03.559
<v Speaker 1>Now that said, one thing, I want to differentiate between

0:05:03.600 --> 0:05:06.839
<v Speaker 1>the fundamentals of these banks and the stocks. The stocks

0:05:06.839 --> 0:05:10.400
<v Speaker 1>have undergone tremendous multiple compression over the last six months.

0:05:10.839 --> 0:05:13.200
<v Speaker 1>I think there's going to be a summer bounce, but

0:05:13.600 --> 0:05:17.080
<v Speaker 1>that bounce is probably within a developing bear market, where

0:05:17.080 --> 0:05:21.160
<v Speaker 1>the January highs were the highs. When you say developing

0:05:21.160 --> 0:05:25.159
<v Speaker 1>bear market, developing bear market in all stocks are financial stocks, well,

0:05:25.279 --> 0:05:29.919
<v Speaker 1>financials specifically, they tend to underperform in the last twelve

0:05:29.960 --> 0:05:32.400
<v Speaker 1>months of a bowl market, and I think that's kind

0:05:32.400 --> 0:05:34.520
<v Speaker 1>of where we are in the economic cycle. Last twelve

0:05:34.520 --> 0:05:37.920
<v Speaker 1>months of a bowl market. Bank stocks have always underperformed

0:05:38.160 --> 0:05:40.480
<v Speaker 1>in that period of time, Right, Are there any specific

0:05:40.520 --> 0:05:45.360
<v Speaker 1>bank stocks that you believe will perform better than others

0:05:45.560 --> 0:05:50.200
<v Speaker 1>in this perhaps relief rally that you describe. Yeah, I

0:05:50.240 --> 0:05:54.480
<v Speaker 1>think JP Morgan had a very solid result, and you know,

0:05:54.640 --> 0:05:57.880
<v Speaker 1>the fund a line fundamentals can be bought. I think

0:05:58.040 --> 0:06:00.560
<v Speaker 1>the poor tends well and I've been wrecked coming on

0:06:00.560 --> 0:06:04.080
<v Speaker 1>a trading basis buying Goldman sachs um So. I think

0:06:04.080 --> 0:06:05.919
<v Speaker 1>you're going to get some kind of rebound in the

0:06:05.960 --> 0:06:09.400
<v Speaker 1>capital markets part of the business over the summer. I mean,

0:06:09.440 --> 0:06:12.360
<v Speaker 1>if you look at the pipeline for um M and

0:06:12.400 --> 0:06:15.479
<v Speaker 1>A activity and for underwriting, it's very strong and and

0:06:15.520 --> 0:06:18.280
<v Speaker 1>that's where you saw the big beat this quarter UM

0:06:18.400 --> 0:06:21.440
<v Speaker 1>was on investment banking. Are you saying that you think

0:06:21.440 --> 0:06:25.400
<v Speaker 1>that there's going to be an economic downturn downturn within

0:06:25.440 --> 0:06:29.599
<v Speaker 1>the next twelve months. I think that's what the stocks

0:06:29.600 --> 0:06:32.040
<v Speaker 1>are telling you. Um I mean, if you look at

0:06:32.040 --> 0:06:36.040
<v Speaker 1>the bank stocks, they've underperformed. I'm talking about the large

0:06:36.080 --> 0:06:39.440
<v Speaker 1>cap money center and even the g said regional banks

0:06:39.480 --> 0:06:41.880
<v Speaker 1>like P and C and U, S, Bann Corporatewell Spargo

0:06:42.400 --> 0:06:46.200
<v Speaker 1>that they've underperformed the last six and twelve and eighteen months. Now.

0:06:46.839 --> 0:06:49.080
<v Speaker 1>If you if you were to do on Bloomberg, you

0:06:49.120 --> 0:06:54.080
<v Speaker 1>know that comp function equity, you City Group Equity Camp,

0:06:55.480 --> 0:06:58.320
<v Speaker 1>and look at how it's performed. It's been an eighteen

0:06:58.360 --> 0:07:02.640
<v Speaker 1>months underperformance now. So I'm wondering just whether this is

0:07:02.760 --> 0:07:05.760
<v Speaker 1>using financials is another proxy for the yield curve, Whether

0:07:05.760 --> 0:07:07.560
<v Speaker 1>people are looking at the fact that the yield curve

0:07:07.600 --> 0:07:10.840
<v Speaker 1>is compressing and that's what's driving bank stocks down. And

0:07:10.880 --> 0:07:12.880
<v Speaker 1>both of those things are taken as the same sign.

0:07:12.880 --> 0:07:16.040
<v Speaker 1>I mean, is that is that kind of what you're

0:07:16.040 --> 0:07:19.840
<v Speaker 1>seeing right now? Yeah, But you know, everyone seems to

0:07:19.880 --> 0:07:22.280
<v Speaker 1>be fascinated with the two tens part of the yield curve.

0:07:22.560 --> 0:07:25.240
<v Speaker 1>I think the short end is the more important. Fundamentally.

0:07:25.280 --> 0:07:28.640
<v Speaker 1>I can understand twos tends being a psychological and importance

0:07:28.720 --> 0:07:32.440
<v Speaker 1>because of the implication of a recession, but fundamentally the

0:07:32.520 --> 0:07:35.600
<v Speaker 1>short end is more important. And and towards that end,

0:07:36.080 --> 0:07:39.520
<v Speaker 1>you know, Bank of Ozarks had a very interesting UM

0:07:39.680 --> 0:07:43.080
<v Speaker 1>conference called yesterday and which they talked about how the

0:07:43.240 --> 0:07:47.760
<v Speaker 1>deposit beta was now rising faster than the loan beta.

0:07:48.200 --> 0:07:51.679
<v Speaker 1>That means deposit rates aretin rising faster than loan yields

0:07:51.680 --> 0:07:54.480
<v Speaker 1>are rising, and that's squeezing the NIM. And that's what

0:07:54.600 --> 0:07:58.080
<v Speaker 1>usually happens at end of cycle periods. The NIM the

0:07:58.120 --> 0:08:01.840
<v Speaker 1>net interest margin correc So when I talk about rate

0:08:01.840 --> 0:08:04.720
<v Speaker 1>of growth this quarter, as I said, you're gonna get

0:08:04.720 --> 0:08:08.200
<v Speaker 1>maybe two revenue growth on average, but that's going to

0:08:08.280 --> 0:08:11.720
<v Speaker 1>be composed of mid single digit net interest income growth

0:08:12.080 --> 0:08:15.800
<v Speaker 1>but flat the income. And so it's that net interest

0:08:15.840 --> 0:08:19.400
<v Speaker 1>income that's driving total revenues. But the signs are there

0:08:19.520 --> 0:08:21.800
<v Speaker 1>that that net interest income growth is going to slow

0:08:21.880 --> 0:08:27.000
<v Speaker 1>in future quarters as the deposit data picks up. Charles Peabody,

0:08:27.040 --> 0:08:29.440
<v Speaker 1>thank you so much for being with us. Charles Peabody,

0:08:29.480 --> 0:08:48.120
<v Speaker 1>president of Portala's Partners in New York. President Trump is

0:08:48.320 --> 0:08:50.560
<v Speaker 1>gearing up to head over to Helsinki, where he is

0:08:50.559 --> 0:08:55.000
<v Speaker 1>going to be meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. What's

0:08:55.040 --> 0:08:57.600
<v Speaker 1>he got to talk about? Let's ask that's somebody who

0:08:57.679 --> 0:09:00.360
<v Speaker 1>might have some ideas. Ariel Cohen, Senior Fellow at the

0:09:00.400 --> 0:09:03.960
<v Speaker 1>Atlantic Council in Washington, d C. Joining us. Now, so, Aria,

0:09:04.000 --> 0:09:06.320
<v Speaker 1>what do you think he's going to talk about? Well,

0:09:06.400 --> 0:09:10.959
<v Speaker 1>there are three or four key subjects to discuss. Uh.

0:09:11.040 --> 0:09:14.960
<v Speaker 1>The United States and Russia came to blows in Syria. Actually,

0:09:15.040 --> 0:09:20.120
<v Speaker 1>the United States troops killed up to two hundred Russian

0:09:21.160 --> 0:09:26.360
<v Speaker 1>mercenaries in Syria that crossed the red lines. This is

0:09:26.440 --> 0:09:31.199
<v Speaker 1>unprecedented since the worst days of the Cold War. Uh. Secondly,

0:09:31.679 --> 0:09:34.040
<v Speaker 1>we need to understand other Russians going to play ball

0:09:34.080 --> 0:09:37.600
<v Speaker 1>on getting the Iranians out of Syria. This is what

0:09:37.720 --> 0:09:41.720
<v Speaker 1>both the United States and our allies Saudi Arabia and

0:09:41.840 --> 0:09:47.120
<v Speaker 1>Israel really want to accomplish. Furthermore, going into the former

0:09:47.200 --> 0:09:52.160
<v Speaker 1>Soviet Union. UM, we have deep disagreements with Russia about

0:09:52.320 --> 0:09:56.040
<v Speaker 1>Ukraine and the annexation of the part of Ukraine which

0:09:56.080 --> 0:09:59.839
<v Speaker 1>is called the Crimea, the Crimean Peninsula in the Black Sea. U.

0:10:00.160 --> 0:10:04.520
<v Speaker 1>Mr Trump said that Crimea is Russian because they speak Russian. Well,

0:10:04.600 --> 0:10:07.720
<v Speaker 1>in fact, they speak Russian because the Russian Empire and

0:10:07.800 --> 0:10:12.720
<v Speaker 1>the Soviet Union ethnically cleansed the Crimea from its indigenous population,

0:10:12.760 --> 0:10:18.040
<v Speaker 1>the Crimean Tatars, and now are pouring in resources to

0:10:18.080 --> 0:10:22.520
<v Speaker 1>an exit. Uh. Finally, there's plenty of issues to talk

0:10:22.520 --> 0:10:26.480
<v Speaker 1>about energy and arms control. So if both leaders have

0:10:27.160 --> 0:10:30.360
<v Speaker 1>the bandwidth and come to serious agreements, I will be

0:10:30.400 --> 0:10:35.520
<v Speaker 1>the first one to applaud. Unfortunately, judging by previous interactions

0:10:35.559 --> 0:10:40.000
<v Speaker 1>of Mr Trump with other world leaders, I'm not so optimistic. Ariel.

0:10:40.120 --> 0:10:42.240
<v Speaker 1>I wonder if you could speak a little bit about

0:10:42.280 --> 0:10:46.400
<v Speaker 1>the politics of energy inasmuch as Ukraine is the big

0:10:46.440 --> 0:10:51.840
<v Speaker 1>transit point for European imports of Russian gas and oil,

0:10:52.480 --> 0:10:56.520
<v Speaker 1>and also maybe speak about the relationship between Turkey and

0:10:56.559 --> 0:11:01.680
<v Speaker 1>its energy needs. Well, you're hitting all the all the

0:11:01.760 --> 0:11:05.240
<v Speaker 1>nails on their heads in two short questions. Uh, let's

0:11:05.240 --> 0:11:08.880
<v Speaker 1>go north to south the Russians are constructing a pipeline

0:11:08.920 --> 0:11:14.080
<v Speaker 1>called North Stream too, which will boost its exports of

0:11:14.400 --> 0:11:17.760
<v Speaker 1>natural gas to Germany and other countries in Europe, like

0:11:17.920 --> 0:11:23.880
<v Speaker 1>Polland by fifty five billion cubic meters a year. That's

0:11:24.000 --> 0:11:28.800
<v Speaker 1>a huge amount. Currently Europe is importing hundred and sixty

0:11:28.840 --> 0:11:31.920
<v Speaker 1>billion cubic meters, so this is an increase by over

0:11:32.320 --> 0:11:38.440
<v Speaker 1>putting Germany at of its natural gas coming Trump Russia

0:11:38.760 --> 0:11:42.760
<v Speaker 1>if and when this pipeline is UH finished. So Mr

0:11:42.800 --> 0:11:47.760
<v Speaker 1>Trump told the Germans that they'll be better off um

0:11:47.800 --> 0:11:51.120
<v Speaker 1>importing liquid liquid fied initial guests from the United States.

0:11:51.880 --> 0:11:55.720
<v Speaker 1>Theoretically he is right. L n G is more expensive,

0:11:56.240 --> 0:12:01.000
<v Speaker 1>and the German business is pushing to expand their dependence

0:12:01.040 --> 0:12:05.320
<v Speaker 1>on Russia and uh frour Merkel is rolling with the

0:12:05.360 --> 0:12:11.240
<v Speaker 1>blows and she is dependent on the German business. Uh. Furthermore, Ukraine,

0:12:11.679 --> 0:12:14.440
<v Speaker 1>the Russians are trying to bypass it all together and

0:12:14.559 --> 0:12:17.760
<v Speaker 1>stop pumping gas through the Ukrainian system. This is a

0:12:17.800 --> 0:12:20.920
<v Speaker 1>system that was built during the Soviet days and for

0:12:20.960 --> 0:12:25.320
<v Speaker 1>that purpose, they're also building a massive pipeline into Turkey.

0:12:25.400 --> 0:12:29.680
<v Speaker 1>This is for Turkish internal consumption as well as for

0:12:30.840 --> 0:12:35.720
<v Speaker 1>re export to Europe. They're also maybe building one pipeline

0:12:36.280 --> 0:12:39.800
<v Speaker 1>under the Black Sea, on the bottom of the Black

0:12:39.840 --> 0:12:43.120
<v Speaker 1>Sea to Bulgaria, and that's also for exporting to Europe.

0:12:43.240 --> 0:12:46.040
<v Speaker 1>So there's a lot of commerce issues here. I think

0:12:46.080 --> 0:12:50.400
<v Speaker 1>probably the most salicious point is will President Trump speak

0:12:50.520 --> 0:12:55.800
<v Speaker 1>with Vladimir Putin about meddling in US elections, especially heading

0:12:55.840 --> 0:12:58.640
<v Speaker 1>into the mid terms here? Do you think that's going

0:12:58.679 --> 0:13:01.920
<v Speaker 1>to come up and pass? Believe more importantly, who's going

0:13:01.960 --> 0:13:10.080
<v Speaker 1>to be in there with him? That's question? Uh. Mr

0:13:10.120 --> 0:13:14.440
<v Speaker 1>Trump already made it known that he wants a he

0:13:14.480 --> 0:13:18.640
<v Speaker 1>wants uh, four eyes only in the room, maybe with

0:13:18.720 --> 0:13:21.079
<v Speaker 1>a translator. And then the question, of course is it

0:13:21.120 --> 0:13:24.800
<v Speaker 1>going to be our translator or a Russian translator? If

0:13:24.800 --> 0:13:27.920
<v Speaker 1>it's going to be only uh, putting Trump and the

0:13:27.960 --> 0:13:31.080
<v Speaker 1>Russian translator, I would be very nervous, and we would

0:13:31.160 --> 0:13:35.360
<v Speaker 1>need a record. Where did a tape of that? Trump?

0:13:35.440 --> 0:13:38.800
<v Speaker 1>Isn't the tape? Isn't it? But this all right? I'm

0:13:38.840 --> 0:13:40.959
<v Speaker 1>gonna leave that that comment there, But but I do

0:13:41.040 --> 0:13:44.920
<v Speaker 1>if this sort of raises a bigger issue, which is, um,

0:13:44.960 --> 0:13:48.520
<v Speaker 1>what sort of precedent is there for a US president

0:13:48.600 --> 0:13:52.480
<v Speaker 1>to meet with the Russian leader who is heading a

0:13:52.520 --> 0:13:54.760
<v Speaker 1>country that has had been our adversary for a while

0:13:55.120 --> 0:13:59.360
<v Speaker 1>without sort of some kind of concrete security plan that

0:13:59.400 --> 0:14:01.800
<v Speaker 1>we know of. I mean, how much how much of

0:14:01.920 --> 0:14:06.240
<v Speaker 1>a national security concern could this pay? UM? I am

0:14:06.280 --> 0:14:11.640
<v Speaker 1>actually reluctant to get into that um for different reasons.

0:14:11.679 --> 0:14:15.559
<v Speaker 1>But I would say that the good governance is transparent

0:14:15.679 --> 0:14:19.360
<v Speaker 1>and transparent can be transparent and classified, but it has

0:14:19.400 --> 0:14:23.080
<v Speaker 1>to be transparent on the highest level of our government.

0:14:23.160 --> 0:14:26.800
<v Speaker 1>So the National Security Advisor should be there, uh, probably

0:14:26.840 --> 0:14:30.040
<v Speaker 1>his chief of staff, maybe their Secretary of Defense, maybe

0:14:30.040 --> 0:14:33.960
<v Speaker 1>they're the Secretary of State at least just for the starters. Uh.

0:14:34.000 --> 0:14:37.000
<v Speaker 1>And probably the Special Assistant of the National Security Council,

0:14:37.600 --> 0:14:40.960
<v Speaker 1>Dr Fiona Hill should be there as well. But if

0:14:41.000 --> 0:14:44.960
<v Speaker 1>he wants UM a one on one meeting, that it's possible.

0:14:45.040 --> 0:14:48.800
<v Speaker 1>There are presidents of such meetings with other heads of

0:14:48.880 --> 0:14:52.920
<v Speaker 1>state UM. But again we need to keep a record

0:14:52.960 --> 0:14:56.960
<v Speaker 1>of that. It goes into the archives. Uh, and it

0:14:57.080 --> 0:15:00.440
<v Speaker 1>has to be also analyzed. And I must say Mr

0:15:00.480 --> 0:15:05.120
<v Speaker 1>Putchin is always very very mediculous in preparation to this summits.

0:15:05.400 --> 0:15:08.760
<v Speaker 1>For example, I was told while visiting Russia that the

0:15:08.840 --> 0:15:13.640
<v Speaker 1>dossier on Mr Bush President Push ran hundreds of pages,

0:15:13.760 --> 0:15:18.320
<v Speaker 1>and Mr Putchin of course read all that, and then

0:15:18.480 --> 0:15:22.160
<v Speaker 1>he told the Bush the story of his secret baptism.

0:15:22.240 --> 0:15:25.880
<v Speaker 1>And then Bush came famously with this line about looking

0:15:25.880 --> 0:15:29.400
<v Speaker 1>into Putchin's size and seeing his soul. Well turns out

0:15:29.520 --> 0:15:33.600
<v Speaker 1>that that may or may not be true about the baptism.

0:15:33.640 --> 0:15:37.280
<v Speaker 1>And uh, Mr Putchin, of course, by his background is

0:15:37.400 --> 0:15:40.360
<v Speaker 1>an intelligence office. We got to leave it there. Ariel Cohen,

0:15:40.440 --> 0:15:44.000
<v Speaker 1>thanks very much, senior fellow at the Atlantic Council. Speaking

0:15:44.040 --> 0:16:02.680
<v Speaker 1>about NATO, Russia and Vladimir Putin, the President of Russia, well,

0:16:02.720 --> 0:16:06.520
<v Speaker 1>President Donald Trump and British Prime Minister Theresa May hold

0:16:06.560 --> 0:16:09.680
<v Speaker 1>a press conference that the tackles a variety of issues,

0:16:09.720 --> 0:16:14.440
<v Speaker 1>including shared security concerns and upcoming meetings with the President

0:16:14.520 --> 0:16:18.120
<v Speaker 1>of Vladimir Putin of Russia in Helsinki between the President,

0:16:18.640 --> 0:16:23.600
<v Speaker 1>between Donald Trump and the Putin. Brexit also taking up

0:16:23.800 --> 0:16:26.240
<v Speaker 1>quite a bit of everyone's time and thoughts. And Terres

0:16:26.360 --> 0:16:30.800
<v Speaker 1>Raphael is our Bloomberg opinion editor covering European politics and economics,

0:16:30.960 --> 0:16:35.680
<v Speaker 1>and you can follow Terres on Twitter at Terres Raphael one,

0:16:36.120 --> 0:16:39.560
<v Speaker 1>and she joins us now from London. Terres just to

0:16:39.600 --> 0:16:43.200
<v Speaker 1>put aside for a moment the news conference that we

0:16:43.200 --> 0:16:46.640
<v Speaker 1>were able to listen in on what is the white

0:16:46.680 --> 0:16:53.360
<v Speaker 1>paper that was published by the government of UH Theresa May.

0:16:53.360 --> 0:16:57.640
<v Speaker 1>What is the White Paper specifically mean for companies such

0:16:57.720 --> 0:17:02.920
<v Speaker 1>as air Bus or Rolls Royce international companies that do

0:17:02.960 --> 0:17:08.560
<v Speaker 1>business and our headquartered in the UK. Well, the White Paper,

0:17:08.600 --> 0:17:13.240
<v Speaker 1>as you know, is the first real detailed, uh sort

0:17:13.280 --> 0:17:17.800
<v Speaker 1>of spelling out of what Theresa May's Brexit would look like.

0:17:17.880 --> 0:17:21.920
<v Speaker 1>And for companies it comes as um I would say

0:17:21.920 --> 0:17:23.879
<v Speaker 1>a little bit of a relief because it means that

0:17:23.920 --> 0:17:27.040
<v Speaker 1>there will if it's if it's accepted by the EU

0:17:27.119 --> 0:17:29.120
<v Speaker 1>now and we have to remember this as an opening

0:17:29.160 --> 0:17:32.239
<v Speaker 1>position in a negotiation and that you might not accept it,

0:17:32.240 --> 0:17:35.960
<v Speaker 1>but it's asking for a sort of free trade agreement

0:17:36.000 --> 0:17:38.560
<v Speaker 1>in good so it would mean that manufactured projects and

0:17:38.600 --> 0:17:41.960
<v Speaker 1>the supply chains that these companies rely on so much

0:17:42.040 --> 0:17:46.080
<v Speaker 1>would be uninterrupted under the deal that Theresa May is seeking.

0:17:46.119 --> 0:17:48.080
<v Speaker 1>Now that may not be the deal that she gets.

0:17:48.440 --> 0:17:51.800
<v Speaker 1>It also doesn't apply to services and financial services. There's

0:17:51.800 --> 0:17:56.240
<v Speaker 1>a whole sort of other level of uh you know,

0:17:56.359 --> 0:17:59.359
<v Speaker 1>detail and complexity to this. But though a lot of

0:17:59.359 --> 0:18:02.040
<v Speaker 1>companies i've it gets if if they were to get

0:18:02.040 --> 0:18:04.879
<v Speaker 1>a Brexit on those terms. Um, I think they would

0:18:05.080 --> 0:18:08.080
<v Speaker 1>at least feel that, you know, that that things would

0:18:08.640 --> 0:18:11.480
<v Speaker 1>uh maybe be not as they were, but they would

0:18:11.480 --> 0:18:15.800
<v Speaker 1>not be as catastrophically, um, you know different, and you

0:18:15.800 --> 0:18:19.200
<v Speaker 1>would you find businesses at least happy to accept that.

0:18:19.760 --> 0:18:22.639
<v Speaker 1>Terry's one thing that struck a lot of people is

0:18:22.720 --> 0:18:26.160
<v Speaker 1>that as the UK goes through with these Brexit negotiations,

0:18:26.200 --> 0:18:31.240
<v Speaker 1>President Trump has inserted himself into this and clearly tried

0:18:31.320 --> 0:18:33.960
<v Speaker 1>to endure himself to Boris. Johnson had some harsh words

0:18:34.240 --> 0:18:37.600
<v Speaker 1>for UK Prime Minister Theresa May and I'm just wondering

0:18:37.800 --> 0:18:41.880
<v Speaker 1>you were to call him talking about why President Trump

0:18:41.960 --> 0:18:44.240
<v Speaker 1>has sort of a vested interest in this? Can you

0:18:44.240 --> 0:18:46.440
<v Speaker 1>give us a sense of that? Yeah, I mean, it's

0:18:46.440 --> 0:18:49.120
<v Speaker 1>just been the most amazing drama because Trump has come

0:18:49.160 --> 0:18:51.600
<v Speaker 1>to Britain. Even before he came here, he was sort

0:18:51.640 --> 0:18:55.800
<v Speaker 1>of describing Britain is in turmoil. His ambassador has been

0:18:55.800 --> 0:18:58.919
<v Speaker 1>giving interviews saying he's, you know, really disappointed in the

0:18:58.920 --> 0:19:02.120
<v Speaker 1>defeatist attitude of the Brits towards Brexit and why don't

0:19:02.119 --> 0:19:05.360
<v Speaker 1>they take inspiration from Trump? And you know, as an American,

0:19:05.400 --> 0:19:08.120
<v Speaker 1>you might say, well, why does Trump care so much

0:19:08.160 --> 0:19:11.480
<v Speaker 1>about Brexit. What's in it for him? Um? Is it?

0:19:11.560 --> 0:19:13.760
<v Speaker 1>Is it a trade deal? Well, you know, the trade

0:19:13.800 --> 0:19:18.399
<v Speaker 1>deal it's much more important to Britain and to the Brexitters,

0:19:18.400 --> 0:19:21.520
<v Speaker 1>and it is to the United States. Britain, um, you know,

0:19:21.560 --> 0:19:24.320
<v Speaker 1>only accounts for a small share of America's trade. But

0:19:24.440 --> 0:19:26.640
<v Speaker 1>Trump does have an interest in Brexit, and he's had

0:19:26.640 --> 0:19:29.920
<v Speaker 1>that interest from from the time of the campaign, where

0:19:29.960 --> 0:19:33.520
<v Speaker 1>he followed it closely. When the Brits did vote against

0:19:33.520 --> 0:19:36.280
<v Speaker 1>all odds, against all predictions, to lead the European Union,

0:19:36.440 --> 0:19:41.080
<v Speaker 1>Trump immediately, uh latched onto that as a you know,

0:19:41.240 --> 0:19:44.320
<v Speaker 1>vindication of his own populist policies, as a sign that,

0:19:44.680 --> 0:19:46.560
<v Speaker 1>you know, things were going to go well in his campaign,

0:19:46.560 --> 0:19:48.399
<v Speaker 1>and he was proved right. And he said in the

0:19:48.400 --> 0:19:51.760
<v Speaker 1>press conference very interestingly he said, I think Brexit happened

0:19:51.800 --> 0:19:53.760
<v Speaker 1>because of immigration, and that was one of the big

0:19:53.760 --> 0:19:57.360
<v Speaker 1>reasons I got elected as well. And uh so, Trump

0:19:57.440 --> 0:20:00.719
<v Speaker 1>I think identifies with the Brexit movement. Brexit is not

0:20:00.800 --> 0:20:02.879
<v Speaker 1>going well, and the question is whether that sort of

0:20:02.880 --> 0:20:06.800
<v Speaker 1>pre figures, um, you know, some some shakier times for

0:20:06.840 --> 0:20:11.080
<v Speaker 1>Trump at home. That's that's fascinating analysis, but sort of

0:20:11.119 --> 0:20:16.639
<v Speaker 1>counterintuitively Alex Wayne, who is a Bloomberg News reporter and editor.

0:20:17.359 --> 0:20:20.200
<v Speaker 1>White House team leader, also came on radio earlier today

0:20:20.200 --> 0:20:24.120
<v Speaker 1>and said that actually, in a sort of counterintuitive result,

0:20:24.359 --> 0:20:27.639
<v Speaker 1>the more that President Trump beats up on Theresa May,

0:20:27.720 --> 0:20:31.560
<v Speaker 1>the more she gained support because people in the UK

0:20:31.840 --> 0:20:34.520
<v Speaker 1>really don't like President Trump. Do you see it the

0:20:34.520 --> 0:20:36.840
<v Speaker 1>same way? Well, I think that's partly too. I mean

0:20:36.840 --> 0:20:41.160
<v Speaker 1>there is a huge he's hugely unpopular here. However, it's

0:20:41.200 --> 0:20:44.639
<v Speaker 1>it's interesting because the Brexitters are really hard Brexitters. You know,

0:20:44.680 --> 0:20:47.200
<v Speaker 1>they don't really care who's saying it, but they take

0:20:47.240 --> 0:20:49.359
<v Speaker 1>a lot of heart in what he said when he says,

0:20:49.680 --> 0:20:51.399
<v Speaker 1>you know, you've got to close the borders. This is

0:20:51.400 --> 0:20:53.679
<v Speaker 1>a really simple deal. You just say no to the

0:20:53.680 --> 0:20:56.280
<v Speaker 1>EU and you walk away and you know, you take

0:20:56.320 --> 0:20:59.639
<v Speaker 1>back control. That is you know, that is that's the

0:20:59.680 --> 0:21:02.840
<v Speaker 1>song sheet they've been singing from. So they're very happy to,

0:21:03.280 --> 0:21:05.359
<v Speaker 1>you know, have him come and say that. The Sun

0:21:05.440 --> 0:21:08.879
<v Speaker 1>had this huge which is a tabloid newspaper here with

0:21:08.920 --> 0:21:10.920
<v Speaker 1>a lot of a lot of readers, had a big

0:21:10.960 --> 0:21:15.400
<v Speaker 1>headline you know, um May has wrecked Brexit. US deal

0:21:15.520 --> 0:21:18.000
<v Speaker 1>is off and Trump then walked it back in the

0:21:18.000 --> 0:21:20.800
<v Speaker 1>news conference and said no, no, you know, Theresa May

0:21:20.920 --> 0:21:23.320
<v Speaker 1>is a great leader, and um so I think it

0:21:23.359 --> 0:21:25.960
<v Speaker 1>could cut both ways. Um, I think it could. It

0:21:26.040 --> 0:21:28.639
<v Speaker 1>could read down to maze benefit. But at the same time,

0:21:29.160 --> 0:21:31.879
<v Speaker 1>you know, Brexitters like that he's saying the same kinds

0:21:31.880 --> 0:21:34.919
<v Speaker 1>of things. They're saying, this is easy, we can do

0:21:34.960 --> 0:21:39.040
<v Speaker 1>it clean. May's messing it up, so they like that message. Terres,

0:21:39.160 --> 0:21:43.040
<v Speaker 1>just in about thirty seconds are assets in Britain on sale.

0:21:43.080 --> 0:21:45.480
<v Speaker 1>The pound sterling has lost eight and a half percent

0:21:45.520 --> 0:21:51.320
<v Speaker 1>against the dollar since April. I mean the uncertainty is

0:21:51.320 --> 0:21:55.800
<v Speaker 1>is clearly weighing on investors minds, and I think that's

0:21:55.800 --> 0:21:59.520
<v Speaker 1>going to continue for time. I would say that what

0:21:59.640 --> 0:22:02.280
<v Speaker 1>we're waiting for now is what the EU responses to

0:22:02.320 --> 0:22:06.040
<v Speaker 1>that white paper, and if the response is very negative,

0:22:06.359 --> 0:22:08.800
<v Speaker 1>then yes, I think assets will be on sale and

0:22:08.840 --> 0:22:10.880
<v Speaker 1>they'll go cheaper. I want to thank you very much

0:22:11.040 --> 0:22:13.960
<v Speaker 1>for being with us. Terres Raphael is Bloomberg opinion editor

0:22:14.040 --> 0:22:17.960
<v Speaker 1>covering European politics and economics, joining us from London. You

0:22:17.960 --> 0:22:36.360
<v Speaker 1>can follow Terres on Twitter at Terres Raphael One. Well,

0:22:36.400 --> 0:22:39.000
<v Speaker 1>it was supposed to be a done deal, a T

0:22:39.240 --> 0:22:43.000
<v Speaker 1>and T, and it's a purchase of Time Warner for

0:22:43.240 --> 0:22:47.040
<v Speaker 1>more than a hundred and seven billion dollars. UH. The

0:22:47.119 --> 0:22:51.040
<v Speaker 1>deal was actually completed in June, but the Department of

0:22:51.119 --> 0:22:53.760
<v Speaker 1>Justice may have other thoughts. Here to tell us more

0:22:54.119 --> 0:22:58.160
<v Speaker 1>is Marianne Halford, a global media and entertainment strategist at

0:22:58.240 --> 0:23:01.720
<v Speaker 1>O C and C stred A G Consultants. Marianne, thank

0:23:01.720 --> 0:23:03.800
<v Speaker 1>you very much for being with us. Can you just

0:23:03.880 --> 0:23:05.639
<v Speaker 1>explain to people? I mean, you know, you try to

0:23:05.640 --> 0:23:08.600
<v Speaker 1>look up what Time Warner shares are doing and you

0:23:08.680 --> 0:23:11.520
<v Speaker 1>note that, of course they don't exist anymore because the

0:23:11.600 --> 0:23:15.439
<v Speaker 1>deal has already closed. Is this unprecedented? Why would they

0:23:15.480 --> 0:23:20.760
<v Speaker 1>do this? Good question? Um, I think this is a

0:23:20.800 --> 0:23:26.199
<v Speaker 1>long shot. I think this, though, bespeaks uh an attitude

0:23:26.320 --> 0:23:29.119
<v Speaker 1>or a new attitude towards vertical mergers coming out of

0:23:29.160 --> 0:23:34.120
<v Speaker 1>the Trump Justice Department. And UM, clearly they don't want

0:23:34.160 --> 0:23:36.359
<v Speaker 1>to give up a fight here, even though it is

0:23:36.400 --> 0:23:40.080
<v Speaker 1>a major long shot. I think it's highly unlikely that

0:23:40.119 --> 0:23:43.680
<v Speaker 1>they'll be able to prevail here. I point to the

0:23:43.800 --> 0:23:47.480
<v Speaker 1>General Council statement yesterday. The court's decision could hardly have

0:23:47.560 --> 0:23:52.000
<v Speaker 1>been more thorough, fact based and well reasoned UM, even

0:23:52.040 --> 0:23:55.280
<v Speaker 1>in an appeals court. Although I guess um they're hoping

0:23:55.320 --> 0:23:57.560
<v Speaker 1>that some of the liberal judges that may be ruling

0:23:57.600 --> 0:24:02.640
<v Speaker 1>on this uh might given to some UH concerns about

0:24:02.720 --> 0:24:05.080
<v Speaker 1>higher prices. I still think it's going to be a

0:24:05.080 --> 0:24:08.400
<v Speaker 1>long shot. I think this has more to do with

0:24:08.760 --> 0:24:11.919
<v Speaker 1>UM Comcast at the end of the day in a

0:24:11.960 --> 0:24:15.680
<v Speaker 1>certain way. UM. We know Mr Trump is or President

0:24:15.680 --> 0:24:19.760
<v Speaker 1>Trump that is, is uh UM a good uh friend

0:24:19.880 --> 0:24:23.280
<v Speaker 1>of Mr Murdoch's. We know Mr Murdoch would very much

0:24:23.359 --> 0:24:27.360
<v Speaker 1>like to be acquired by Disney, not Comcast. UM. This

0:24:27.440 --> 0:24:31.320
<v Speaker 1>is definitely a warning bell, if you will, to Comcast

0:24:32.119 --> 0:24:37.760
<v Speaker 1>um about them continuing their fight to try to pursue Fox. UM.

0:24:37.800 --> 0:24:42.520
<v Speaker 1>That's one of the things I'm musing this morning. Okay, well, so, Marian,

0:24:42.560 --> 0:24:44.720
<v Speaker 1>there there two sides to this. There's the legal case

0:24:45.160 --> 0:24:48.000
<v Speaker 1>and then there's sort of who is sort of calling

0:24:48.040 --> 0:24:51.880
<v Speaker 1>the shots with respect to the Justice Department's decisions here. UH.

0:24:51.920 --> 0:24:55.480
<v Speaker 1>There was some kind of conspiracy talk that perhaps the

0:24:55.560 --> 0:24:59.160
<v Speaker 1>appeal was done specifically to get to the Appeals Court

0:24:59.240 --> 0:25:02.280
<v Speaker 1>in Washington. You see where Brett Kavanaugh, the nominee for

0:25:02.320 --> 0:25:06.280
<v Speaker 1>the Supreme Court, sits Um, do you do you buy

0:25:06.320 --> 0:25:08.760
<v Speaker 1>any of these arguments or do you think that the

0:25:08.760 --> 0:25:11.639
<v Speaker 1>President is personally involved or do you think that this

0:25:11.720 --> 0:25:14.960
<v Speaker 1>is just purely a sort of issue with vertical mergers.

0:25:17.200 --> 0:25:21.879
<v Speaker 1>You know, in this administration, one never really knows. Um.

0:25:21.960 --> 0:25:26.520
<v Speaker 1>I can't imagine that the President wasn't involved in this decision. Um.

0:25:26.800 --> 0:25:29.760
<v Speaker 1>I just can't imagine that he wasn't. Um. And you know,

0:25:30.000 --> 0:25:34.800
<v Speaker 1>it is unprecedented to see uh a Justice department going

0:25:34.840 --> 0:25:39.200
<v Speaker 1>after vertical mergers. It's very interesting that the Disney Fox

0:25:39.640 --> 0:25:44.480
<v Speaker 1>UH merger failed through the Justice Department. A horizontal merger

0:25:44.560 --> 0:25:51.880
<v Speaker 1>which is generally UM challenged. Vertical mergers are not necessarily challenged. UM.

0:25:51.960 --> 0:25:54.879
<v Speaker 1>I think you know, these are players in the media

0:25:54.920 --> 0:25:58.320
<v Speaker 1>specter and Mr Trump likes the media world and he

0:25:58.480 --> 0:26:00.920
<v Speaker 1>likes to be a big voice. So I can't imagine

0:26:00.920 --> 0:26:03.600
<v Speaker 1>that he wasn't involved in this decision. Could you just

0:26:03.680 --> 0:26:06.240
<v Speaker 1>expand a little bit more on what you mean by

0:26:06.840 --> 0:26:10.520
<v Speaker 1>this having to do with Comcast and it's bid or

0:26:10.640 --> 0:26:14.760
<v Speaker 1>the assets of Century Fox. And now we learned, of

0:26:14.800 --> 0:26:17.480
<v Speaker 1>course that they have increased their bid for a Sky

0:26:17.600 --> 0:26:24.199
<v Speaker 1>broadcasting the British PAYTB operator. Right again, I don't have

0:26:24.240 --> 0:26:27.240
<v Speaker 1>any data to support this. This is just my hunch

0:26:27.280 --> 0:26:30.000
<v Speaker 1>and my speculation. Here, and I've also talked to other

0:26:30.040 --> 0:26:33.960
<v Speaker 1>friends in the industry who also think the same. UM.

0:26:34.920 --> 0:26:38.000
<v Speaker 1>We know that the Murdoch Trust or the Murdoch family

0:26:38.119 --> 0:26:42.600
<v Speaker 1>has definitely shown a preference to the Disney merger, which

0:26:42.600 --> 0:26:47.040
<v Speaker 1>is a horizontal merger. UM. A Comcast UH Fox deal

0:26:47.119 --> 0:26:51.200
<v Speaker 1>would be a vertical merger. UM. Clearly, one of their

0:26:51.400 --> 0:26:55.560
<v Speaker 1>statements back in December UM, when the initial Disney deal

0:26:56.040 --> 0:26:59.080
<v Speaker 1>UH was done, UH, they said that they did not

0:26:59.200 --> 0:27:02.280
<v Speaker 1>favor a Comcast deal because of the concerns as it

0:27:02.359 --> 0:27:09.080
<v Speaker 1>relates to UH regulatory risk. UM. We knew that Comcast

0:27:09.160 --> 0:27:11.760
<v Speaker 1>held off making a formal bid until after the A

0:27:11.920 --> 0:27:15.919
<v Speaker 1>T and T decision came down. Within twenty four hours,

0:27:15.960 --> 0:27:19.640
<v Speaker 1>Comcast did enter into the bidding war. But Comcast would

0:27:19.640 --> 0:27:22.439
<v Speaker 1>be a vertical buyer. So I just think the timing

0:27:22.520 --> 0:27:25.960
<v Speaker 1>is interesting, UM, and particularly given that I think it's

0:27:26.000 --> 0:27:28.600
<v Speaker 1>still going to be a tough, tough fight to get

0:27:28.640 --> 0:27:33.600
<v Speaker 1>this overturned. UM. It's just so I'm really looking at

0:27:33.640 --> 0:27:36.159
<v Speaker 1>the other timing going on in the market. I do

0:27:36.280 --> 0:27:40.359
<v Speaker 1>think we'll see Comcast really fight hard to get sky UM.

0:27:40.400 --> 0:27:44.000
<v Speaker 1>I think I think Comcast needs sky UM, and that's

0:27:44.000 --> 0:27:46.320
<v Speaker 1>probably going to be where they shift their focus right

0:27:46.320 --> 0:27:49.560
<v Speaker 1>now thirty seconds. Is it common practice for the president

0:27:49.640 --> 0:27:55.520
<v Speaker 1>to insert him or herself into the anti trade decisions

0:27:55.560 --> 0:28:01.080
<v Speaker 1>of the Justice Department? Well, his name wasn't rough Fronts Tier. Um.

0:28:01.080 --> 0:28:03.800
<v Speaker 1>These are all people that report to him. But again

0:28:03.880 --> 0:28:06.840
<v Speaker 1>I'm just speculating them, you know. Probably, I'm just wondering

0:28:06.880 --> 0:28:09.520
<v Speaker 1>whether that's common for administrations to have a more very

0:28:09.520 --> 0:28:15.240
<v Speaker 1>direct role in deciding antitrust policy. Not generally. Not generally.

0:28:15.240 --> 0:28:17.880
<v Speaker 1>I mean we have seen it at certain points in history.

0:28:17.960 --> 0:28:21.440
<v Speaker 1>Certainly back in the sixties. There are a few decisions UM,

0:28:21.480 --> 0:28:25.880
<v Speaker 1>particularly think believe related to some steel mergers. UM. There

0:28:25.920 --> 0:28:29.159
<v Speaker 1>have been some as related to security concerns UM for

0:28:29.240 --> 0:28:32.160
<v Speaker 1>the United States. But I think in a case like this,

0:28:32.240 --> 0:28:35.080
<v Speaker 1>it's very unusual. Marianne Halford, thank you so much for

0:28:35.119 --> 0:28:38.280
<v Speaker 1>being with us. Marianne Halford, global Media and Entertainment strategist

0:28:38.400 --> 0:28:41.720
<v Speaker 1>for O C and C Strategy Consultants in New York,

0:28:41.760 --> 0:28:44.640
<v Speaker 1>A T and T shares responding to the Department of

0:28:44.680 --> 0:28:50.640
<v Speaker 1>Justice's decision to appeal the the the decision that they

0:28:50.680 --> 0:28:54.840
<v Speaker 1>had shares down to percent. Thanks for listening to the

0:28:54.840 --> 0:28:57.960
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg p m L podcast. You can subscribe and listen

0:28:58.000 --> 0:29:02.160
<v Speaker 1>to interviews at Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, or whatever podcast platform

0:29:02.200 --> 0:29:06.120
<v Speaker 1>you prefer. I'm pim Fox. I'm on Twitter at pim Fox.

0:29:06.440 --> 0:29:09.920
<v Speaker 1>I'm on Twitter at Lisa Abramowits one before the podcast.

0:29:09.960 --> 0:29:12.600
<v Speaker 1>You can always catch us worldwide on Bluebirg Radio