Bloomberg Businessweek Weekend - February 28th, 2025

Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news.

This is Bloomberg Business Week, Insight from the reporters and editors that bring you America's most trusted business magazine, plus.

Global business, finance and tech news.

The Bloomberg Business Week Podcast with Carol Masser and Tim Stenoveek on Bloomberg Radio.

Hi, everyone, Welcome to the weekend edition of Bloomberg Business Week. A flurry of news this past week and video dropped earnings, US consumer confidence is souring. The FEDS preferred inflation gauge came in exactly as economists forecast. President Trump held his first cabinet meeting with Elon Musk in attendance, defending doge's attempts to fire federal employees. And then there was the heated exchange at the White House that led to a

One of the books is from a former State Department sanctions official on the choke points in global American power. The other book, Timely Considering the latest with Russia and Ukraine, from a retired lieutenant Colonel. It highlights American mistakes in Eastern Europe that led to a return of Russian imperialism.

By the way, he served in President Trump's first administration. We are talking about retired Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vinman. We're also going to dig into the details of those earth minerals from Ukraine, what you really need to know with a global investor in the space. We are talking about the CEO of Orion Resource Partners, and we get an update on state cases against Doze with the Attorney General of Connecticut, And.

A little later on in our second hour, autonomous dump trucks, a boom in medical spas, Rome's legendary loss marbles, and the CEO behind the reboot of the world's largest retailer, Walmart.

All of that to come. We begin with geopolitical impacts and Trumpet administration policies. There's a lot going on again this week. In fact, we did get a report that President Trump is planning to expand US semiconductor curbs at China, and that Trump administration officials have already met with key allies, including Japan and the Netherlands, to escalate their restrictions on China's chip industry.

Edward Fishman has a lot of experience with sanctions as a former State Department sanctions official. Today he's senior research scholar and professor at Columbia University School of International and Public Affairs. He joined us to talk about his brand new book, Choke Points, American Power in the Age of Economic Warfare. We should note that we spoke to him before Friday's news on Ukraine.

Sometimes people ask me do sanctions work? And my response is often, have you ever asked a general or an admiral does a bomb work?

Well?

A bomb is very effective at blowing things up, but it doesn't always get us what we want politically. Because of the choke points that I mentioned in my book, such as the US dollar, advanced semiconductor technology, oil supply chains, the government has tremendous power to impose economic harm on foreign countries. What we're less good at is taking that harm and translating it into the political outcome we want.

Well, I remember three years ago we were sitting in this studio and we were going through all the companies that had just announced they would stop doing business in Russia as a result of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. No more McDonald's, no more Coca Cola. I mean, the list goes on and on, and people were theorizing, oh, as soon as you know Russians can't get their iPhones or their eye cloud doesn't work or whatever, then it's going

I would disagree with that.

I think that if you look back at the very beginning of the invasion, clearly Biden's goal was to deter Putin from invading in the first place through the threat, the threat of swift and severe consequences.

That failed.

Right then there was a big hit on Russia. They kind of adapted. But where are we now. You've got interest rates over twenty percent, you can't get a home mortgage in Russia anything less than thirty percent. You've got sky high inflation. The Central Bank of Russia projects zero growth basically this year. So what that means for those of us who interpret Kremlin stuff probably a recession. So I think that sanctions can take time to work, the same way that you know wars take long to be fought.

Tell us about the history of choke points and how they've evolved into what the US considers choke points or what the US has as choke points today.

Yeah, thanks for asking that, because you know, historically choke points are geographic features. So if anyone who's traveled to Turkey or Istanbul, the Bosphorus is a classic choke point where you have three million barrels of oil passing through a narrow strait every single day. And so throughout history, stats have used these choke points to put pressure on other countries, for instance, by parking a ship right in front of that choke point and saying vow shot not pass.

And really that is how choke points were.

Weaponized all the way up until the turn of the twenty first century, going back to the famous embargo on Iraq that the UN Security Council did in the nineteen nineties that was implemented by warships patrolling the Persian Gulf twenty four to seven for thirteen straight years. But the choke points that I described earlier, such as the US dollar and these integrated financial systems and supply chains which really come out of the hyperglobalization of the nineteen nineties.

So you said, I think before, and forgive me if I'm miss quoting, that the US maybe hasn't been so good about using their choke points to get maybe their desired outcome. But as President Trump, somebody who maybe understands the use of these choke points to maybe get to a desired income.

So President Trump certainly likes using economic warfare. And during his first term he imposed twice as many sanctions as the previous record holder, Barack Obama. So he loves sanctions. He says, he's a tariff man. The thing I'm a little bit skeptical of, though, when it comes to Trump's use of economic warfare is his love for tariffs. Tariffs are a much weaker tool, frankly than sanctions. What a tariff is is a tax on importers, right, So for instance,

Today, possibly possibly doing an investigation and there.

Yeah, so that's possible.

What that would mean is a US importer of copper from a foreign country would have to pay a tax on that. It doesn't actually block things from coming into the United States. To really weaponize a choke point, you have to cut it off entirely. So actually, these tariffs are a fairly weak instrument, and I think that's why they haven't been particularly effective at getting anything that Donald Trump wants.

So far, would you say that tariffs are part of economic warfare or would you not go that far?

Yeah, this is a really important question because historically the answer is no. Tariffs have been used primarily for or economic reasons, such as protecting domestic industries from foreign competition or to use in trade negotiations. What they haven't been used as is a national security tool to try to get a deal, for instance, over the war in Ukraine, or to try to bludgeon Iran's economy. And the reason they haven't been used for that is because they're a

How effective are sanctions in a world where a country like China can come in and help other economies get around sanctions that are imposed by the rest of the world.

So China certainly does play a white night role, and they've played that role for Russia right in particular, you know, when Russia was cut off from components, for instance, like semiconductors from the West, China has been a lifeline and really, you know, that's why I've seen Russia China trade double

Well, that's where I want to go, because the ultimate tool weapon is the US dollar, is it not?

Indeed it is so tell us about.

As long as the US dollar rain supreme. You know, we go day to day, week to week, month to month talking geopolitics and what seems to be these new stress points and push back against globalization. But as long as the US dollar rain supreme, does the US kind of reign supreme?

Yes, I think the dollar is the most impactful and important choke point in economic warfare, and that's why China, Russia, other countries are investing heavily in trying to figure out a way around this choke point. I think the thing that people misunderstand, though, is they say, oh, well, the dollar is still the world's reserve currency, so it's secure. The thing is, the way that the US weaponizes the dollar is really less as a reserve currency and more

These things could.

Develop in parallel to the dollar based system and ultimately erode US financial power.

So what you're saying, and this is kind of my world when it comes to crypto, the Crypto Show here every Tuesday at noon. If is there a chance that the rise of digital currencies, the rise of bitcoin, the rise of central bank digital currencies, will decrease the power that countries have when it comes to sanctions.

The answer is no. But it could do, though, is redistribute the power. Because if you think about it. There's no reason that a digital currency couldn't be weaponized, right if the digital R and B becomes sort of the main currency for cross border settlement, which, by the way, it could because China's got one hundred and twenty countries where it's number who are who considered China?

That's a centralized digital currency. What about a decentralized digital currency like bitcoin?

Yeah, I think it depends. Look, ultimately, bitcoin does live on servers. There are companies that have to hold the wallets, and so there are ability to weaponize that. We've seen the US Treasury Department add bitcoin wallets to the sanctions list, and we also I mean, you know, famously, the most significant sanctions violation settlement of the last several years was against finance with when they were fined four billion dollars. So I do not think that cryptocurrencies or central bank

Well, that's what I was going to ask you. Is this then the argument for the US government creating some kind of digital currency for transactional purposes, yes, like government, Yes.

Yes, definitely.

I think that it is a pity that the United States does not have a central bank digital currency. I have no idea why the Trump administration and seems hostile to that and that that dates back to their previous administration. But while we linger, China moves ahead.

But would there be the same pushback against other nations who don't like the dominance of the US dollar to push back once again against the dominance of a US central bank currency.

Sure, but worth the incumbent right, So if the if you, if the FED were to launch a central bank digital currency that was considered effectively the same as dollars, then all it would do is cut off at the knees things like the Chinese digital remnant BEU, which right now is running ahead in the race as we're kind of just sitting at the starting line doing nothing. And this is a really important point. I'm making choke points because

AI. Is that a choke point?

Well, yes, certainly, what I will say though, it's really it's really the computing power under undergirding AI. So the semi can components, Yazacly.

Look, have you sent the book to members of the Trump administration? The crypto and AIS are David Sachs.

I have not sent the book to David Sachs. I would welcome a conversation with David Sachs about the book. I think it would be great to talk to them about I am what I will say. You know, in touch with folks at the National Security Council, and I know that they're very interested in the book and we'll be talking to them about soon.

Do they understand the need for central bank digital currency?

I don't know, Honestly, I haven't talked to I haven't talked to people about that. I do not know David Sachs. I can't say where he stands. What I do know is that Trump himself has been hostile to this idea.

We've talked more about war in the last couple of years around the globe, but is it economic warfare that is really the bigger challenges? Going forward and forgive me just about thirty seconds.

Yes, it is.

The reason is we have great power competition between the US, China, and Russia. We all got nuclear weapons. We're going to avoid fighting at all costs. So what's that mean? We are going to compete in the economic space, economic warfare. We're living in an age of economic warfare.

Fascinating conversation. Do come back soon. Love to tone this. Edward Fishman, Senior research scholar and professor at Columbia University School of International and Public Affairs. We used to call it SIA when I was up there.

They call it SIPA now.

Right, zepa now.

Yes.

His new book took points American power in the age of economic warfare. Thank you so much, really enjoyed it.

You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Week podcast. Catch us live weekday afternoons from two to five pm Eastern Listen on Apple CarPlay and the Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app, or watch us live on YouTube.

As we've noted, a meeting between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodimir Zelenski ended in a fiery exchange on Friday, canceling a planned signing ceremony and press conference for a critical minerals agreement between the two countries.

The day before that, we spoke to US Army Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vinmanh. He was the Director for European Affairs in the White House's National Security Council, former Political Military Affairs Officer for Russia and diplomatic the American embassies in Moscow in Kiev, the.

Senior fellow at the Foreign Policy Institute, and the author of the new book that is out now. It's entitled The Folly of Realism, How the West Deceived Itself about Russia and Betrayed Ukraine.

Lovely launched so far, just lots of attention. I think the fact is the book subtitle says it all. It couldn't possibly be more timely. How the US deceived itself about Russia and betrayed Ukraine. We see that playing out in real life over the past couple of days.

We want to get into that. What we want to ask you, is President trum Trump at least to start. President Trump said in his press conference with the UK Prime Minister at the White House about the moves being taken to quote lay the groundwork for a long term peace agreement, the President saying this, do you believe there is a long term peace agreement that can be made between Russia and Ukraine?

Eventually there can be. I'm going to go ahead and say that it's that the prediction that it's not going to end at all is wrong, and that it's going

There doesn't seem to necessarily be the appetite for a lot of folks in Washington to continue to support Ukraine. We actually saw this play out over the last couple of years. Every time a funding bill would come up, or the idea of providing aid or money to Ukraine would come up. In your view, make the case to us, to our viewers, to our listeners about why the US should support Ukraine.

So, first of all, we.

Should grant the fact that the Biden administration didn't do enough to make the case to the American public. And at the same time, Trump, as the de facto leader of the Republican Party, even before he ran for office, was making the case that Ukraine was a bad guy, corrupt Russia was the good guy. That is not a recipe to sustain resolve behind Ukraine. The merits of the

You know, some might suggest that the policies of both democratic and Republican presidencies, you know, have been to really push back on Russia right for a long time and kind of keep them at bay. And so that's saying of like keep your friends your enemies even closer, that maybe it is time for a different strategy with Russia between the United States.

So that's I think contrary to the research in this new book. I look at six different administrations thirty plus years, and what I see is a consistent vein of Russia. First why because we succumbed to hopes that we could accomplish more with Russia. They dangled bright shiny objects, whether that's arms control a valiant thing for US to pursue, or climate change security or cooperation to root out transnational terror.

So you would just say that President Trump's relationship with Vladimir Putin is just a continuation of what we've seen over the last three decades.

It is a doubling down and probably the most extreme example of the mistakes that we've made over the past thirty plus years. My research is clear and concise clear on this point. I've interviewed the presidents involved, on both the US side and the Ukrainian side, European leaders, and what I've seen is a consistent vein of deep flexibility.

Not with nuclear weapons, were they not on some level.

On some level they I think the fact is we made a valiant effort in the nineteen nineties to bring him on sides. We made huge investments to try to bring him into the democratic world. Those countless meetings that Clinton had with his counterpart Yelson, But those didn't materialize. Right, Russia was just biding its time, letting its economy regain strength.

Do you remember back in twenty twelve when during that debate between Mitt Romney and President Obama, when Mitt Romney said that the US's number one geopolitical foe was Russia, and he was kind of laughed out of the room, right at that point? Was he right?

He was absolutely right.

It looked like a distant prospect because we were in the midst of wars in the Middle East. It looked like it was a bygone error. But if you were paying attention, you saw the telltale signs in the two thousands, really years just into Putins or Rain. You saw this effort to coerce neighbors, muck around in Ukraine's election that

All right, so how are you What are the optics that you are seeing in terms of what kind of deal might ultimately bring this war to an end and what are the implications of that in your view and how you think it might play out.

So, first of all, I want to give credit to both the Zelinsky administration and the Trump administration. They rationalize these this crazy five hundred billion dollar effort to draw funds out of Ukraine into something that makes sense. This deal that looks to be signed is a good deal. It's something that I talked about when I was in the White House. I was talking about the fact that we could cooperate with Ukraine on rare earths. We need them, we need them to drive our economy. They have them,

We're speaking with the retired US Army Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vinmann. He's got a brand new book out it's called The Folly of Realism, How the West deceived itself about Russia and betrayed Ukraine. Given your time studying both the governments of Ukraine and Russia, what would you say Vladimir Putin's ultimate goal is.

He's empire building, he's building his legacy or what he wants. What I think Russian elites have wanted really across generations is they want Russia to be strong, and in order to be strong, that means Ukraine has to be in the fold. It's a central notion to them that great Russia could only be great if it has little Russia. That's what they refer to Ukraine, as and Belarus. Those are the three kind of the trinity of Russian identity. So it wants to fold these these countries and regions

Neighbors, Alexandrew. Does that mean then a US backstock of some sort for peacekeeping, you know, means we need to see forces there to US forces to backstop Ukraine. Is there some other kind of security guarantee that needs to be part of this.

I think that we don't have to put this question of troops on the table inside Ukraine anytime soon. The Ukrainians are capable of defending on their own with adequate support from the West.

Would US workers working in the mineral space and the critic like that are on the ground in Ukraine? Is that could that be part of the about it?

In a peace time context, when there's a ceasefire, I think there's room for troops, peacekeepers to come in, there's room for workers to come in to cooperate on rarest. I think the ultimate security guarantee is that Ukraine does join NATO, but out in a ceasefire context somewhere after this war ends, and that prevents Russia from engaging in aggression down the road.

I think it's hard.

It's beyond the belief that we would do that right now when there's a hot war going on.

Do you think that's a realistic possibility, given that this administration, including recently the President, said that Trump will never become part of NATO.

I think in this administration there's no chance. But this administration has a clock. Also, we're talking about my time horizons beyond twenty twenty eight, when we return back to our pledges of two thousand and eight. That's a long time now, right, twenty years back to bring you can into NATO.

Do you think that this war will continue until then.

I'm not sure if it continues until then, because the Russians don't have the staying power to continue until then. I think the fact is that the both sides will probably reassess deeper into twenty twenty five, maybe a start at twenty twenty six. If the Russians are not able to get favorable conditions on the ground, then they'll look for some sort of off ramp.

It's surprising to hear that just because it really truly does seem like President Trump wants to end this war. He talks almost every time we hear him, We hear the President speaking a lot. He speaks to the press a lot. He always talks about the young people who are being killed in this conflict. It really seems to affect him. It really seems to motivate him to want to end this war.

I think that might be true, but he's going about it repeating the mistakes of the past. I think the fact is what's clear to me. If he wants to bring peace to the region, he should recognize that it's not the Ukrainians that are in the pediment to piece. They're going to have to do what they absolutely must to preserve their sovereignty and territorial integrity, maybe giving up some territory in the short term, but it's the Russians

What can you tell us about you were in the first Trump White House, first administration, and as we are now seeing the beginning of the second term play out, what insight can you give us about how the president thinks about issues and how things operate, and how maybe different it is this time around. If you think it is different, again, you're looking from the outside.

I think from my perspective what you have and you could still see the tension between the policy pros that try to rationalize these decrees that Ukraine has to give five hundred billion dollars and come up with this pretty sophisticated, interesting deal on rarets. We had a lot more of those folks in the cabinet back then. You had you know what we're called adults from the room. These are accepted foreign policy professionals. Right now you have a lot

We can't maxinate the balance of every administration because there are deals all the time, whether it's a Democrat or Republican right of deals being made to benefit citizens countries. But there's always kind of a give and take.

But you want the but you want the buffet deal. You want the buffet deal. That's long term, longsighted, and that's where the growth is over the course of you know, not just a psych but over a long term. And what I'm prescribing here is that we don't we're not so transactional. We start thinking about the things that really matter to us. Democracies are the bedrock of both our

You, I think it's fair to say much of your career was not political in the sense of partisan politics.

None of it was until the very end.

It's so not none of it, But until the very end you became certainly a lightning rod for politics. And you know, there are a lot of folks on the right who don't necessarily agree with you, especially after you testified in twenty nineteen and the impeachment hearing that said, do you still have the ear of people in the government right now? Do you have communications with them? Do you feel like you can talk to them?

So I feel like I could talk to them because I understand the terms in which we talk to him about. You know that Trump wants to be the winner and how to get a deal or something like that. So I could talk to him understanding the Trump White House and a little bit about a state of mind. But I have to contend with the proclivity is he likes Russia and he dislikes Ukraine. He likes strong men, he doesn't like our democratic allies. So there's only so much

But it wasn't.

It was a duty as a as a somebody that's wore notes to the Constitution and then called by Congress to testify about what I witnessed. But I feel like there's not that much opportunity for the sides to talk together at all. It's not just me, it's you know, the communications between the folks that are perceived to be on the left and the folks that are perceived to

So it is, it's just.

A moment where we're very, very tribal, and we were not communicating with each other, even if it's on the merits.

Any regret in the action that you did in terms of testifying before Congress, I know you were subpoenaed, but we've seen subpoenas be issued and not everybody kind of testifies.

So absolutely not. I felt I feel like those people that skirted their responsibilities for whatever personal I mean, they did it for personal reasons. They did it because they didn't want to be the lightning rod or subject to criticism. That wasn't my job. My job was as a military officer. I was obligated by a law to up here and testify.

One thing I want to ask you, as a member of the military retired, We've seen the firing of the Joint chiefs of Staff, We've seen other military leaders being let go, also the top lawyers, which is considered so important in terms of military actions and making sure that there is kind of a level of security safety. If you will help us understand the military within a second Trump White House, and I do wonder about the independence

So the military is non political. It serves at the pleasure of the president. Everybody I swear as an oath to the Constitution, and officers in that chain of command, commander in chief being the president of the United States. The thing is, this is not about these folks being disloyal. It's about the ability to ensure that when the president directs any element of the executive branch, that he has absolute loyalists that don't question anything. That was the reason

Lawful order, lawful awful, they'll follow.

The instructions because he's the commander chief. But what they won't do is they won't follow illegal orders. And I think this effort to sideline these three stars is to make sure that nobody interprets that any instructions that come from the president, not that anything has happened yet, but at any point in the future, that everything is interpreted

Does it worry you that this guardrail has been removed?

I think it it's it's a it's a warning sign, and it's it's something that we should be mindful and cautious about. But we need to understand that the military is at large institution. These four stars have deputies that are four stars also, and the three stars that were removed to have deputy two stars. So there are plenty of layers of folks that are going to hold the line. It just has gotten a little bit harder than it was before.

Well, you know, you talk about levels, right in terms of holding everybody to the true in military, what about someone like Secretary of the State Department Mark Rubio, Like, what are your thoughts about him and dealing with global diplomacy and talking with leaders directly, and yet obviously they're at the grace of the president.

So I've had plenty of criticism of excusing of Mark Ruby in the past on policy differences. But he is a policy hand. He's been in the Senate for a while. He under he's been on Intel committees. He understands the state of play in the world, the seriousness of these negotiations with Russia, how that might implicate Russia Chinese aggression in the Pacific. Uh, he is going to try to do the best he can. I think I'm comfortent well. I think he's going to try to do the best

Uh.

They're never going to criticize the president directly because they know what happens. That's you know, the lessons have been learned in the first Trump administration, and I think they're going to try to probably do the best they can to rationalize some of the things that have been directed into into policy that could that could advance US national

What do you say to people who say, Alexander Vintman has got an ax to grind against the president. You testified against him, You suit some allies of the president for legendimidation of impeachment hearing. So what do you say to those? Because you've got this book out, it is very timely considering the geopolitics that consume much of what we talk about, what do you say to that?

My axe is sharp, actually, and I'm prepared to wield it in order to advance US national security. And that's what my life has been about, a life of service to defend the nation. And if I feel like there needs to be something called out or criticism on the merits of national security and the dangerous country faces, I will wield that axe. But it's and I, frankly do

Just taking a hard turn in the last thirty six.

We all need to lighten up a little bit.

I've had this book on my desk and whenever someone walks by, they say, I loved Viman in Curb Your Enthusiasm, the penultimate season you and Larry David. How was it?

It was lots of fun. And I did that season and actually the final episode, and it was it was a joy to do that. It was way outside of my comfort zone, being dragged into the public eye. But you know, open to these new experiences, all sorts of different friends that I never had before, being able to, you know, maybe leverage my voice in the way I didn't before. So it's a mixed It was a it's a blessing in that regard that I could, you know, lighten people's lives on Curb or give people some hope

Well, if you talk to Larry, tell him we need another season even though there's a finale. Hey, I really appreciate you taking the time. We've been speaking with retired US Army Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vinman. It's a brand new book out. It's out now. It's called The Folly of Realism, How the West Deceived itself about Russia and Betraying Crane.

This is the Bloomberg Business Week Podcast. Listen live each weekday starting at two pm Eastern on Applecarplay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just Say Alexa Play Bloomberg eleven thirty.

On Friday, a critical minerals deal between the United States and Ukraine was scrapped after President Trump's heated exchange with Ukrainian President Volodomir Zelenski in the Oval Office. We've been talking about this now. The fate of the natural resources deal and a peace deal overall remains up in the air.

On top of that, the world's top commodity traders are rushing to ship copper to the US from as far as Asia as Donald Trump's threat of import tariffs on the metal creates a huge opportunity for profit. Yet the question remains just how valuable are these metals and minerals.

Someone who does know a thing or two about metals and the mining sector, In fact, he knows a lot is Scerlanowski. He is founder and group CEO at Oriyan Resource Partners. We note again that we spoke with him before the US Ukraine talks broke down.

Copper is an imported material buy and large in the United States. Some domestic production exists, of course, but it is a big It is a big export from South America, particularly Chile, into the United States. Tariffs will depending on what shape they take, and obviously the devil is in the details, will certainly impact the price of landed material in the United States. I believe that there is probably an investigation now at the heart of this as to

Right, and it's an investor right. It's the section two thirty two of the Trade Expansion Act. I'm reading from our reporting it could lead mainly to terrorists on copper imports, which we know. If indeed that would raise costs for things, you know, it is interesting that's going on a headline crossing the Bloomberg coming from Reuters about Ukrainian President Zelensky

It's actually a fairly interesting dilemma for the Ukraine. They do have a fair degree of iron ore, they do have tungsten, they have titanium on sites. There are at least four mining companies that we know of that are developing or looking at. It's you know, increased refining capacity in that country to shift metal.

Some of the best resources, though.

Are really in this sort of ray zone where it's territory that's currently occupied by Russia or very close to the territory occupied by Russia. And the question will be how much of that material will stay with the Ukraine

So it's a rich area. It sounds like it might be some questions about who actually has access to that territory, right either Ukraine or Russia. But it's is it a rich area. We did some reporting that said the president was looking for the equivalent of about half a trillion dollars from rare earths, mainly used in high strength magnets. Despite reports of ten trillion dollars in mineral deposits, Ukraine has no major rare earth reserves that are internationally recognized

That is correct.

You have to, of course assume certain price parameters when you make something economic or non economic. I think the more important question then whether not the reserves or resources, should they be economic or not at this point is what processing capability can be put to work on this. I mean, the rare earths themselves are not particularly rare.

Well like bingo, right, like, it doesn't matter who has access. But ultimately then you've got to have a relationship with China in order to process.

So well, why can't the US or why can't Ukraine process these?

Like?

Is it as difficult as making advanced semiconductors?

It is incredibly difficult processes about a nineteen step chemical toxic process that needs as much art as science to be successful economically, and the US and the West have some capability in that area, but the real stars.

Are the Chinese.

So I am curious, we are curious. You're at this Global Metals Conference BMO. Global Metals Conference BMO. What is it that everybody's talking about? What's top of mind?

I think there's two main topics. Obviously, the resiliency of the gold price. It's you know, we find ourselves in unusual circumstances, and that the goal price is stable to rising and the dollar hasn't exactly been a poor performer. That's that's atypical Historically. Usually the gold price is seen as the hedge against the US dollar, and so they

Do we do we want to be processing copper in the United States?

Absolutely we do. Yes.

It is it's called doctor copper for a reason. It is in central metal in many parts of the US economy and the US military. And having that onshore and being able to make sure that you have access to that vital raw material on your own terms is really essential to you.

How did it move out of the US? Was it like everything else? It was just cheaper to process out of the US.

It was cheaper to process outside of the United States. As part of, you know, the sort of trend of globalization. The lowest best cost center for processing was not the United States, and so therefore processing solely moved out of the country. And we find ourselves in a place now where we want to we want to balance that out a little bit, and we want to make sure that for national security and other reasons, we.

Have access to vital raw materials. And I think just.

Help us understand, because this is this I'm out of my element pun intended. Sure, but just in twenty seconds, do we need to have the copper in the ground here to process it? Or do we import the raw material and then process it just twenty seconds?

Both are possible.

Obviously, an integrated supply chain in the United States is the most favorable option, but certainly raw material concentrate form copper and then processing it here as a second alternative as also very possible.

Either way process material Copper is.

God to we get to run come back soon. This was fascinating. Oscar, thank you so much. He's the founder and group CEO of Orion Resource Partners.

This is the Bloomberg Business Week podcast. Listen live each weekday starting at two pm e stern up on Applecar Play and the Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station Just say Alexa Play Bloomberg eleven thirty.

We go now from access and control of the world's materials and minerals to the control over changes to the US federal government made by Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency. We were talking about.

DOJE earlier this month. Nineteen mostly democratic controlled states sued to blo Elon Musk's DOSEE team from accessing confidential records, citing potential overreach and data privacy violations. One of those states, Connecticut.

William Tong is the state attorney general for Connecticut. He joined us to talk about Elon and doge's ability to access sensitive government data.

What's most important is that democratic state attorneys general are taking action to protect our states. You know, no matter who the president is, it's my job to protect Connecticut families, and right now they're exposed.

You know, all about money that essentially should come to the states or what in.

Particular money are social security numbers, banking information, important private information that's not just in the US Treasury that may be at the Department of Education, that may be at the IRS. Right an unelected billionaire and his army of hackers and want to be stormtroopers are now tearing up the federal government. Nobody elected them. There's no authority or statutory basis to give them this power to.

Go in and tear up the federal government.

It's as if I said to you, Carol, you know what's Donald Trump came down here and said, Carol, you're great. I'm going to put you in the most secure and nuclear weapons facility in the US Armed Forces. I'm going to give you the password, just log in and have at it. Would anybody have a problem with that?

Is it, what's being done, who's doing it, or that there is no transparency to it.

It's all of that, and it's the damage right now. You know, when he gained access to Treasury's central payment system, the Bureau of Fiscal Services. He had control one guy and again his army of hackers to cut off Social Security payments, veterans benefits. Right, they're already canceling contracts at the Department of Education. It's real world impact right now.

General Elon Musk did speak during a cabinet meeting or ahead of a cabinet meeting. He said that does is helping fix government computer systems. Overall, DOGE goal is to address the deficit. What would you say the folks out there listening who said, this is what Americans voted for. They voted for more efficiency, They voted for spending government spending to go to be reduced and as the President says, a reduction and again his words, waste, fraud, and abuse.

Yeah, they didn't vote for mass unemployment, they didn't vote for mass layoffs. They didn't vote for an unelected billionaire to wreck families in Connecticut and across this country. You know, it's not just a federal employee in Alexander or Virginia. And by the way, that's important too. If mom or Dad gets fired tomorrow, many families, even families that do well and listen to this sho you know, they live thirty days out or check to check, and that family

Do you have specific examples of how many workers have been affected in Connecticut, how families have been hurt in Connecticut? What can you point to as sort of real world effects?

So, for example, there are highway programs right now that aren't proceeding, that aren't going forward because funding from the Department of Transportation is not flowing. Remember, government isn't just a big employer, it's one of the biggest employers. It's also one of the biggest investors, spenders, and customers. And if the federal government is not there to buy, I

Some would argue, though, just because it's the biggest doesn't mean it's the best or being run the most efficiently. So what do you say to that.

Yeah, so everybody, not just at the federal level, but at the state level, should be working on making government more efficient. And I don't disagree with that. I don't think anybody does. But number one, you got to do it in compliance with the law. You have to do it in a way that's safe, that maintains the safety,

What would you propose is the right way to do it?

That Congress exercises its power to do that. The Constitution is very clear, under the spending Clause of the US Constitution, it's Congress's prerogative to decide how the nation's resources get spent. Congress needs to do its job.

And it is Congress not doing its job right now? Or do you feel like it's certainly not along party lines?

Congress in many respects feels broken. But you know, one good example of how broken it is is that Congress, it seems, in this budget proposal, proposes to cut Medicare for the states. Are you kidding You're going to go after medicare healthcare children? You know, I said when the federal funding freeze was announced that this is a war

All levels of education.

If you can't meet their standards on what's acceptable not acceptable in terms of your curriculum and your programs, this attacks kids, children, families. What is the point of that.

You've been in this position since twenty nineteen, that was a few years into the first Trump administration. You were active in big legal suits against the Trump administration during that time as well. We've talked a little bit about over the last few months how this administration feels a little different because of the people they've brought in. How would you say the legal aspect of this has been different. Do you think the Trump administration was much more prepared this time around.

No, it's more lawless and more unconstitutional. And yes, it feels like they were more prepared to do the wrong thing. They were more prepared to break the law. They were more ready to break the law. You look at what are some examples of break and dan Bonjiorno, Well, first of all, the very first thing they did and we sued on, which is to abrogate birthright citizenship and to eliminate birthright citizenship. That is utterly unlawful and constitutional, unconstitutional.

Jerial Ton, what do you think will happen to Trump's Birthright Citizenship executive Order and his plan to also ban transgender people from the military.

I think his effort will fail, and I think the Supreme Court will do the right thing and that it will read the fourteenth Amendment to say and mean what it says, which is that if you're born in America, you're an American.

Is that the ultimate test of the president's policies? Do we continue to see legal challenges to the extent that pretty much everything just goes to the Supreme Court.

Look, we every middle schooler in America knows that we have a system of checks and balances. Without checks and balances, there's no America right there. If the president has unchecked power, then Congress becomes optional, our rights become optional, States become optional, and so checks and balances. These lawsuits are about checks and balances. Congress right now isn't a very effective check,

You know, it's interesting there definitely have been some protests at you know, community meetings with members of Congress. But going back to that, as you say, Congress is there to enact the law right and help make decisions. But people in general, the president is still popular. People agree with what he's doing. So I go back to kind of Tim's question. If you look at Americans, put this president in the popular vote. This time he won the

I guess I don't want to quibble with, you know, whether he's popular or not. I think he's underwater. According to most polls, meaning less than fifty percent. I think it's pretty clear that this country has split pretty evenly fifty to fifty. It was a very close presidential election. I don't think most Americans who voted for Donald Trump, I think I don't think most Americans expect him to break the law and to take the Constitution and set

No, it's a really good point we got to leave with there. General Tom, thank you so much. This is Bloomberg Business Week.

You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Week podcast. Catch us live weekday afternons from two to five pm Eastern. Listen on Applecarplay and the Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app, or watch us live on YouTube.

Plenty Ahead in our second hour of the weekend edition at Bloomberg Business Week, including how Walmart's CEO is navigating a second Trump presidency all while going after Amazon's e commerce crown.

Plus the business of Botox, so called medspas, and a first glimpse of Rome's legendary Los Marbles.

First up this hour, he is a former Google engineer that helped launch the company's self driving car program that we now know today as Wai Moo. Today he is the CEO of Pronto. It's an autonomous vehicle company for the mining and trucking industries.

We're talking about Anthony Lewandowski, and now a new deal is poised to make him one of the biggest operators of an autonomous truck fleet. Writing all about Anthony Lewandowski is Bloomberg BusinessWeek columnist and co host of the Elinink podcast, Max Chafkin.

Anthony Lewandowski is really the single person most responsible for creating driverless cars, as like an industry. He created a He was involved in the original DARPA Grand Challenge, which was this thing in the early two thousands where the military had a bunch of technologists try to make self driving cars. He built a prototype self driving Prius that was sold to Google and played a really important role at Google for years, and then left to join Uber's

He was actually sentenced to a.

Prison term, but was pardoned by Donald Trump, and he kind of emerged from this experience as a.

Critic of the driverless car industry.

Basically, Anthony Lewandowski's position is that these robotaxi services so Waimo, Tesla is trying to come up with one, as we just heard, and also GM Cruse which just folded theirs, that these businesses are basically much further away than most people realize, in fact, further away than the companies themselves are willing to admit.

He's been talking about.

This for years and he is offering kind of a different approach, which is bringing these technologies to essentially industrial sites where they are still essentially driverless cars. They're just driverless dump trucks, but they're not on city streets. They're on private land, and they're monitored more aggressively because they're.

Essentially heavy duty construction equipment.

So instead of having to worry about cyclists and potentially causing traffic jams and the interaction between customers and so on, all these problems have really been deviled the robotaxi industry and continue to bi devil the robotaxi industry. And one of the reasons these companies have been able to turn profit they basically take all that out of the equation and we're just talking about a dump truck moving some very heavy rocks from like one corner of a rock

So it's so these are expensive, right, yeah, exactly, And that's one of the reasons.

Why inexpensive I was being sarcastic.

Yeah, yeah, no, I know, is they are very expensive. These are expensive items. And one of the reasons this is an appealing area for this technology is because of the expense. Like then, adding the sensors isn't such a big cost.

So we don't know exactly how much the sensor kit in a way more.

Costs, but it very likely costs more than the cost of the car itself.

You know, people have asked stimated in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. So you're talking.

About really expensive technology and then a lot of expensive technology to support that. So whereas in the dump truck, it's the sensor kit is a smaller percentage of the total.

But Kamatsu and Caterpillar, as you point out in the piece, already have this TECHNI I don't want to say this technology, but they already have drivelogy.

I'd say this is an area while yeah, they have been really successful and This is the point that Lewandowski makes a lot that you know, as much as we've seen a lot of headlines about driverless robotaxes, when you really get down to it, it's we're not talking about that many cars, you know. I haven't looked at the Waimo numbers lately, but my guess is in the hundreds, maybe maybe around one thousand. I mean, that's kind of

I mean, obviously, the hope with.

Weimo and Tesla is that you're going to make it up on volume. You're going to find ways to do this more inexpensively. Once it's deployed in a mass scale, then it's going to change everything. The economics are gonna get a lot better. But we haven't seen any of that yet.

Remote controlled versus driver lists, like, what's the kind of nuances here?

So these are these are autonomous in the sense that like the computers are making the decisions very very similar to what's happening in a WEIMO or something like that.

With with with Waymo's.

And with some of these other robotaxi solutions, you do have some remote support. Now some people would call that teleoperation. The companies, you know, there's a lot of back and forth about how.

Much remote support are they actually doing.

Part of the the discussions that happened in the wake of Cruises collapse where there were reports showing that these these people and call centers were intervening very very often.

So you're talking about a huge amount of support.

Now on an industrial site, you also have some support, right there is somebody monitoring the overall site, and the tasks that are being done are incredibly repetitive. So basically, and I've been to some of these sites, it sounds kind of cool, but then when you experience it, it just it's it's very competitive. The truck like starts at a rock crusher, it drives to a mining pit, picks up some very large rocks and does the same route back and forth.

And the whole point is again the same route back and forth.

There's no risk of a police car coming in, there's no risk of a little dog running out there, are pedestrians, are people, but all those people are wearing you know, bright orange vests, and those people have a lot of experience dealing with heavy machinery, whereas when you're talking about on a city street, you know, none of that's true.

You're not going to be hailing a huge dump truck or rock crusher on the side of the road to drive you somewhere hopefully hopefully not. You know, these jobs that typically are the ones who that you're talking about that these replaced. Those are pretty high paying jobs, require a lot of training. In some cases, they can be unionized. Are those impediments to scaling this well?

And I mean part of the appeal here, frankly, is that the operators who operate these dumb trucks are a lot harder to find than uber drivers. And one of the reasons why Crews and Waimo have lost so much money on these robotaxi businesses is that you put a ruber.

Driver in a Corolla and that is a very low cost.

Solution, whereas the kind of people who operate these this heavy machinery, uh, these are much higher paying jobs that require a lot of experience. The response from Anthony Lewandowski you talk to other people in the industry is basically number one, Look, these.

Industries have a labor problem.

This is not it's not like there's a surplus of construction workers. Actually, they they're they're struggling to find people can operate these dumb trucks and that at these sites.

It's not like they're losing staff.

What they're doing is taking somebody who would have been driving a dump truck and putting them you know, operating.

An excavator or something a sort of higher difficulty job.

You know, even in these loops that are automated, right, there's a lot of automation. The crusher, of course, is doing its thing without people. Aren't literally crushing the rocks. The dump truck is being driven, you know in some case by a computer. But the person who's like deciding what to put in the back of the dump truck, that's a.

Person operating an excavator.

So what they're saying is like, yes, this frees up humans to work on tests that are like more difficult, but maybe also less unpleasant, not.

Just this repetitive back and forth.

I think in the long run, of course, as these technology you know, like the idea here is to replace human labor. For sure, there's a question of if you replace one specific job, what does that do? Does that actually does that require make mean fewer people on the job site or just way more productivity? And I think that the truth is we don't know the answer to that question yet.

Is this it or does he see something else down the road?

Yeah, I mean he says we're gonna everything with four wheels is gonna be automated. It's just a question of when,

Yeah. One of those companies, Tesla, of course, headed by none other than Elon Q, is spending a lot of time in the Capitol. Your story ends in a really in a really notable way. It discusses this idea that wait a second, is the idea of regulation what's holding this technology back? Or is the technology holding us back? He argues, it's the tech. It's just not there yet.

Yeah.

And Musk has said and has said on these earnings calls that oh, he's going to try to figure out a way to get the Trump administration to ease the regulatory burden. He's implied in all sorts of ways that all Tesla needs is the regulatory Okay, that the tech is there, And Lewandowski says, listen, if we're talking about regulations, that's a distraction. The truth is, and I've heard this.

Now we'll see. I mean, you know, Elon Musk has tried very bold things in the past.

He says he's going to launch a robotaxi service in Austin this summer.

See how quickly that.

Goes He's I mean, he's been saying that for years.

Yes, every year since pretty much twenty sixteen, but he has said that this will be the time.

Hey listen before we go, because you know, Peter til and Pallenteer and we're gonna do a big discussion in just a moment. But I mean, there are some concerns about his exposure to Pentagon cuts. How do you see it the relationship between he and Trump that we've seen in the past. Do you think he needs to be worried where his company needs.

To be I think that Palenteer stock.

You know, I'm not an equities analyst, but but if you look at what equities analysts are saying, I mean, it's very highly valued relative to its actual business, So I mean, I'm not sure that. I mean, obviously, if you're a defense contractor and there are potential defense cuts, that is a potential warning sign. It's also a potential reminder to investors that hey, it's possible that we've gotten over our skis. I do think Palenteer, you know, obviously,

Hey Max, thank you so much. Max chaff and columnist of Bloomberg BusinessWeek, joining us here. He's also co host of the Elon Inc Podcast and author of The Contrarian.

This is the Bloomberg Business Week Podcast. Listen live each weekday starting a two pm Eastern on Applecarplay and the Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just Say Alexa played Bloomberg eleven thirty.

Doug McMillan has been running Walmart since twenty fourteen. He's been now at the company for a long long time. He is credited with pushing Walmart into the digital age and successfully steering it through the COVID nineteen pandemic. Now he's turning his attention to the company's next chapter and new challenges ahead.

He's doing it not in Silicon Valley or Austins, but in Bettonville, Arkansas. That's the location of Walmart's new three hundred and fifty acre campus that's meant to lure talent as the company takes on Amazon.

This story is the cover of the upcoming new issue of Bloomberg Business Week. It is now on the Bloomberg terminal and also can be found at Bloomberg dot com slash BusinessWeek. Writing about it Devin Leonard. He is senior Global business writer for Bloomberg BusinessWeek, and Devin traveled down to Bettonville for a sit down with the Walmart CEO.

He's sort of taken them in his first decade. He's sort of turned them from you this internet clueless kind of you know dinosaur into this you know, possible Amazon killer, you know, with a real like online business all but then kind of what do you do and what do you do is try to do some of this other stuff that you've tried before, you know, and he failed, but you didn't have the digital component, which is like

So they're in a.

Position to do that. They're kind of rebooting a lot of stores. But I think the idea is like, look, there's people who would never go to a Walmart even now, and a lot of them have been going during during because you know, high inflation. Yeah, you know, and they do well in bad times. But you don't have to go. You can order online and they have a pretty good delivery service. So so that now is the time to make that big push.

What's been so interesting too write that we've talked about it's not just folks that are looking to save some money in terms of shopping. Walmart has talked pretty openly about the wealthier consumer and customer.

Well, so there's I.

Mean, the big question is are they there because of because of inflation? I mean, I mean, you know, the part of their business that's doing really well is the so called uh, non discretionary side, which is like the food side you know and think you know and things

So you know, Walmart's tried to do this in the past. With Jet dot Com, Mark Laurie came in. I think you point out in the story that he was actually paid high paid, more than Doug McMillan at the time. That wasn't exactly a resounding success. They had this Jet Black membership and I didn't know this, but even earlier in his tenure, they tried to bring on sort of like higher end consumers. What's different about this time?

Well, I mean Jet itself, you know, didn't turn out to be you know, Walmart's e commerce brand. But I think what did work was basically bringing all these people in here and you know, you know and and and you know, being in there and out of here, you know, you know, shaking things up and basically demonstrating kind of to the rest of the world, you know, we're willing to do this, and historically it's been you know a lot of lifers and people who've been to sort of

I think what's interesting is, you know, who is Doug McMillan and what he has done at this company, and he is someone who's been there for a long long time, not just a CEO, but a long long time, you know, and really kind of transformed to some extent how people look at this retailer.

He's just he's some guy who you know, his family moved to Bentonville, you know, at some point and he's in high school and he got a job onloading trucks at the warehouse. I mean then he just you know, just never left. I mean he went to he went to University of Arkansas, got his undergraduate degree, went to the University of Tulsa, got his NBA, and they came

So there's a pardon your piece that talks about the tension between being located in Bentonville and the policies of the state versus the coastal folks who they are trying to attract to the state take us there and to that anti abortion rally and what was going on.

Well, I mean, that's that's been part of the issues. It's just, you know, you need to become more of a you know, an internet based company, but you know, you're not going to the talent that you need. Isn't you know, you know, isn't all sort of a Northwest Arkansas. You have to lure people, you know, to bring in people from Silicon Valley and you know, you're you're trying to talk them into they have offices in you know, in Silicon Valley too. But but but ultimately a few

I'm just missing.

I think it's always great, like when you do get out right anyway and you realize kind of what is the fabric of America?

Right?

And I think it's very easy when you live in one state or on one of the coasts that you think just one thing. And it kind of speaks to when you're such a giant in the retail space like Walmart, I guess you have to be a little bit careful, but you also have to appeal to so many different populations across the country and it's really wide and diverse.

No, And he's you know, Doug McMillan's you know mantras, you know, we want to sell to everybody and so so so I think there was this moment where CEOs were being more outspoken, and he he was one of them. And just the fact that the CEO of Walmart was doing things like lobbying the state officials in Arkansas not to pass you know, a bill that would have restrict you know, restricted LGBTQ rights. You know that that was used.

And he was at the inauguration, Yeah, on stage right.

No, it was right up there, right, But.

The whole dynamic is kind of funny, right, like who got the front row seat?

He was there, but like, you know, not necessarily hiding, but he wasn't as prominently displayed as some of the other.

And he definitely wasn't really all that. You know, we talked to him about anything, Brad asked him about that and and and he, uh, Bradstone, the editor that Business Weeek, was there with us. But but but I think he was you know, he didn't sound you know, super thrilled like he was invited and you know, maybe they'd be seeding. Maybe they wouldn't because they were moving and around. But but but anyway, I mean, you know, he was he

But it's a dance of many CEOs.

Yeah, yeah, totally, totally. But but but you know, since they're so big, the biggest retailer, I mean, you know, it's really interesting to watch. It's really important, really important to note. It's it's not something like little company or you know, you know or you know or something or something like that. They can really be affected by a Trump administration policies and stuff.

So and increasingly like Amazon, right in terms of things that maybe while it pooh pooed maybe Amazon in the early days in the digital marketplace, it's now embracing a lot whether it's membership, whether it's ads, whether it's a lot of things. Right, increasingly becoming a lot more like Amazon.

Right, No, totally, I mean they have a ways to go, but I mean, no, no, you're right, but you know, growing advertising business, growing third party party marketplace. You know, you know, they're there. Their membership Walmart Plus is still

The Trump administration question, I think is a really interesting one, Devin. It's it's sort of the role that executives such as this takes in this administration in the sense of, Okay, well, he's not on stage there necessarily, but he still wants to make sure that he's not ignoring the President of the United States. What is the tension there.

They have to worry about tariffs, obviously, and you know, you know that they could get they could get hit with that depending on lots of produce and things like that, you know, you know, and you know from from Mexico, home goods, appliances and things like that from China. They you know, they sort of downplay that and say, well, we've been dealing with tariffs since twenty seventeen.

So wow.

You know, that was that was why they were saying they're not too worried about tariffs. You know, I think any big employe have to worry about you know, you know, the immigration restrictions you know that are coming down, you know, the possiblity of work, workplace raids, and and and also just you know, it's going to make it harder him to hire people. And then there's the whole business with with you know what's gonna happen with Arcade.

Junior and and UH stamps.

Yeah yeah, yeah, I mean taking away you know, not allowing food stand payments for SODA's and juke food you know, which Walmart sews a lot of.

So I was shocked. Walmart receives an estimate twenty six percent of SNAPS Supplemental Nutrition Assistance program spending.

So yeah, Jaywon told me that I was shocked too.

Yeah, that's a lot. Hey, listen, we've only got about a minute left. And I feel like the way you begin it and kind of end this idea of McMillan. In terms of Sam Walton's office, it took him a while to even once he was, you know, right, to kind of sit there and feel like he could be there. But now he's kind of a little melancholy about leaving it.

Yeah, even the so even though you know, when you think about it, it's I mean, it's just I mean, obviously you.

Don't describe it in a really it's not an upscale corner CEO.

No, he can do better. He can be in a he can be in the higher floor and you have a little bit more light. I have a feeling that, you know, the new campus is going to suit him just fine.

So so he'll be okay, he'll eventually he'll get over the melancholy and leave it. It's an incredible deep dive about a company that we talk about so much for so many different reasons, certainly in terms of retail, but what it tells us about the consumer and what it really tells us about a slice of life in America in a big way. Thank you for sharing this check of time with us. I really appreciate it. Devin Leonard,

This is the Bloomberg Business Week podcast. Listen live each weekday starting at two pm Eastern on Applecarplay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just say Alexa Play Bloomberg eleven thirty.

Medspas short for medical.

Count me in, Count me in.

They offer let's say, let's call them aesthetic enhancements.

Sign me up.

Okay. Some of them specialize in lasers to zapp unwanted hair or resurface skin. Others offer injections of all kinds botox, lip filler, fat dissolver, butt plumper. So this is why you got to read this stuff ahead of time and say sign I.

Have not done most of those, okay, including the butt plumper okay enough.

According to data from the American Medspas Association, actually wrote, I just copied it.

That's what I guess.

How good it is. The industry expanded more than sixfold from twenty ten to twenty twenty three, from about sixteen hundred locations to more than ten thousand. Average annual revenue per spa more than double during that period, reaching almost one point four million dollars per spa as Amandimal writes, the US is in the middle of a medspa boom, and you can see it all over our faces.

That he was going to say, you could see it all over Carol's face, That's not the case. She is Bloomberg BusinessWeek senior reporter Amanda mull Is, and she does right about this and the boom and medspas for Business Week. Check out her story on the Bloomberg and at Bloomberg dot com slash BusinessWeek. She joins us from Brooklyn, where apparently it's booming and medspas. Yeah, tell us what's going on.

No matter where our listeners are, if they're in the US, they have probably noticed this. In their own town or community or neighborhood. Pretty much across the country, almost everywhere, there has been a real uptick in the opening of storefront businesses in malls and shopping centers, in strip malls.

There's one in.

My hometown outside of Atlanta, near the grocery store where I went when I when I was growing up, and there has been like just this real boom and opening these businesses. And they offered just a really wide selection of services, everything from off brand weight loss shots to botox to laser hair removal, to ivs for if you're hungover.

There's a lot of money in this stuff. Insurance doesn't really cover it. These are cash businesses. What's the training of the folks who are doing the injecting? These are not doctors we're talking about.

In most cases in medspas, they're not doctors. What the exact training is for your injector is going to vary depending on what state you're in. The licenser required is going to depend on local laws, But in most cases they are going to be nurse practitioners, physicians, assistants, registered nurses, nobody who could give you a vaccine injection at your doctor's office. Is also allowed to inject other things into you. Basically in most places.

You know what's fascinating too, Yeah, you have kind of your typical dermatology offices right where there are doctors who do this stuff to cost you. It's kind of coused you and it ain't govid. But having said that, you're right, like, I feel like I walk into all kinds of offices, dental offices everywhere, They're all offering all these kinds of services.

Right.

A lot of these businesses that are specifically medspas are going to offer things like eyelash extensions or massages or traditional services provided by estheticians like facials. So you get this mix of non medical beauty treatments and these like very medical grade, very serious things that you know, our things are being injected into you, or these very high powered lasers are being or other types of energy tools are being used on your your face or your body.

Yeah, this is so much better than a blowout. I'm just going to say in terms of, like, you know, our haircut. Hey having said that, if the botox phenomenon, like, we know that it's used for medical reasons, but it's also used for a lot of cosmetic reasons. If botax hadn't come along, might this industry not have taken off?

I think it probably still would have taken off to some extent. Okay, but botox is really the origin point for a lot of what we see today. When it was approved for esthetic use in two thousand and two, there was a huge amount of publicity around, a huge

So it didn't take long.

Before dermatologists and plastic surgery. Surgery offices were just overwhelmed by the number of people looking for you know, relative to other services, they provide something that is relatively small,

I mean, I'm just going to tell you tim is related into fillers. I'm just going to tell you that.

Well, speaking of that, I'm so afraid of needles. I assume it involves needles, right, yeah, no, way like needles. Not a fan. What's mar A Lago face?

Well, mar Alago face is.

It's like upsetting that you know what when you see it.

This is just on the Supreme Court.

Yes, this is a term that has has become popular recently to describe some of the you know, Kimberly Gilfoyle, some of the members of the Trump family Matt Getz who have sort of clearly had botox or fillers or some laser services or all of the above and have a very sort of like Real Housewives look. That is like traditionally what I think of it as because I am a you know, a Real.

Housewives fan from late two. But yeah, it is.

Really this sort of like very tweaked, very plumped, very smooth, shiny, like slightly over filled. Maybe some of the filler has migrated and you look a little doe or a little lumpy in.

The face like that.

That sort of combination of lots of lots and lots of procedures that have sort of all been sort of layered over time is mar Alago face.

Really it's big business. Though we're having fun with this, but it is huge business. And there's also, as most things do, have a little private equity component.

Yes, it is an enormous business. The the companies that make botox and fillers, Allergan, et cetera, have had a huge windfall from developing these these products that can be administered, you know, non surgically in these sort of like not quite doctors offices types of businesses, and the business itself has exploded with the you know, there's been a sixfold increase in the number of MEDSPA locations in the US since twenty ten, and naturally, like like any growing business,

I was trying to come up with some sort of joke.

Are you looking for the like a medspa near you right now?

Well, I mean I feel attacked in this story because I live in the neighborhood that she writes about, and I'm never going to be able to walk down the street from the subway to my home. You'out noticing medspas you're among friends.

It's owner speed dial. Come on, just be cool.

Yeah, yeah, I'm I'm never going to not notice.

These things now.

They are everywhere, and it's pretty well amendimal. This is such a great story. We're so glad we could get to you on it and share it with our audience. I feel like everybody needed the story to kind of wrap up the day in the week, have a great weekend, Be well, a minimal. She's Bloomberg Business Week senior reporter joining us from Brooklyn.

This is the Bloomberg Business Week Podcast. Listen live each weekday starting at two pm Eastern on applecar Play and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just Say Alexa played Bloomberg eleven thirty.

Well med spas in the US. Help us put our best face and body forward. Thousands of miles in a continent away is beauty that's been shrouded in myth and mystery for a very long time.

It's one of the greatest private troves of antiquities that has been hidden away for more than half a century. In Rome and Bloomberg BusinessWeek Arts columnist James Tarmi was one of the few allowed to peek inside.

Most even really rich people's collections don't have such incredible international importance. And this family, which was sort of a pre industrial fortune that was created just before like modernity as we think of it. So they were basically so rich that they were able to buy everything before like the Rockefellers and the Morgans and the Getty's sort of came in after them. They were there first, so they bought all of these fading aristocratic family stuff and then

I mean there are if you go online check it out of the Bloomberg there are a few pictures there. But you know, you said, it kind of like blew your mind when you walk take us there, like when he walked in, and like.

Like what was this family, which to be clear, still is very very well off, has a couple of things. One of them is a twenty acre compound in the heart of Rome behind very high walls that is not really available for the public view and you can't take photographs, and they let me inside and it is just mind boggling over twelve hundred antique statues there. They also have an indoor outdoor pavilion of Egyptian antiquities. It's really something

Why well, the sorry tim I had to ask.

The patriarch of the family, this man named Alessandra, who's the fourth prince Torlonia died and shortly before he died, he created a foundation that would manage these things. The foundation doesn't own them, it manages them, and his grandson, who's a very forward thinking guy named also named Alessandra, is basically trying to lend out works to museums around the world in exchange for those museums doing conservation.

Work actually can cost so much money, as you.

Write, over one hundred thousand dollars to conserve a single statue, and so it's amazing.

Yeah.

So basically what they're doing is they're letting people sort of in. I mean they're not actually letting them in, but they're letting people see these works sort of in exchange for restoring them to the condition that they should be in. And in the process, you know, people everywhere going to see them. They did a huge show at the Louver. It was the most visited exhibition at the Louver in all of twenty twenty four. This is not like a niche subject. This is a big deal.

I don't want to be rude, but I still hope you're going there.

Yeah.

Good, you say things can be priceless. How much is this collection worth?

So this is a subject of some debate in the Italian press. In particular, I can speculate I have no official reporting that would back this up. Italian press has speculated that it is well over a billion euros. Some have put the tune to two or three billion euros in their art collection, just in the antiquity collection, Yes, just the antiquity.

Collection, right, So help me out here?

Is that where you wanted me to go?

No?

Absolutely, but I'm so glad you went there. So wait the idea, Are they being altruistic or do they need the money to help do some of those conservation efforts or why don't they just sell off a piece? But we know it's to do some of it. So I'm just trying to understand.

Well, so the business of it, they neither need the money. They are still a very very rich family, And I also don't think it's quite altruistic. I think that there has been a lot of controversy over the years because everyone's known that they have this collection, which is again a collection of very important different collections, and a lot of people have wanted to see it. The now deceased patriarch was had a sort of antagonistic relationship with the

Do you pick up a little something something on your way?

Oh yeah, I just I flew home with a bust in my carry.

Off finger that had fallen off.

No, no, that's exactly how how we had Bloomberg.

Do things caring levity seconds.

If someone wants to see any part of the collection.

It is coming to the Art Institute of Chicago. Over fifty sculptures more than that from the collection are going to be on you.

I thought you're gonna say, if anybody wants to see the piece that James brought.

Home, that's on my desk, sid Brook friend, thanks to.

Your Bloomberg statue. Right, how many years. NA, I'm just kidding, just kidding, Little Levity. James Tarmy, we love you.

It's just needed.

On this Wednesday. He is arts communist for Bloomberg Business Week.

This is the Bloomberg Business Week podcast, available on Apple, Spotify, and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live weekday afternoons from two to five pm Eastern on Bloomberg dot com, the iHeartRadio app, tune In, and the Bloomberg Business App. You can also watch us live every weekday on YouTube and always on the Bloomberg terminal