Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, Radio News. This is Bloomberg Business Week Daily reporting from the magazine that helps global leaders stay ahead with insight on the people, companies, and trends shaping today's complex economy. Plus global business, finance and tech news as it happens. The Bloomberg Business Week Daily Podcast with Carol Masser and Tim Stenebeck On Bloomberg Radio.
Show, Here, let's get this.
We'll drive.
Do I look like I drive a Mini vans? Shut up and draft, don't drive angry, don't drive angry.
I'll dry show.
This is the drive to the clothes.
If you had access to a car like this, would you take it back right away?
On Bloomberg Radio.
All right, everybody, we've got just about eighteen nineteen minutes to go until we wrap up the trade on this Monday. As you know, we've got stocks bouncing around but really holding on to their best levels of the session, bouncing meeting. They're way off their lows today, up one point six percent on the S and P five hundred two and a quarter percent higher on the Nasdaq one hundred. So the risk on trade is certainly out there in a
big way. Let's get to our Eric Wiener, he's Bloomberg new senior editor Equities America's joining us right here in our Bloomberg Interactive Broker studio. As Bill Maloney was leaving, and we're listening to Alexis and we're all talking, and Tim think you leaned over to.
Eric, and you know, it's the end of an era.
In terms of Warren Buffett right talking at his annual shareholder meetings.
We all look to him.
Every year, and really in moments of crisis, he was the voice that really investors wanted to hear from.
Absolutely.
He also was a sort of a voice of reason on Wall Street, so he would be one who would point out that things had gotten a little bit far, you know, out over their skis. He would be the one to say that it was time to step back in.
You know.
They called him the oracle, and there was a good reason for that, you know, just we're not going to see something like that again for a very long time.
If ever, remember that two thousand and eight op ed in the New York Times by American I Am This was at the depths of the financial crisis. Everybody's freaking out, he writes, I've been buying American stocks. Why a simple rule, be fearful when others are greedy, and be greedy when others are fearful. I feel like I hear that repeated all the time.
Now it's so easy to say, it is so hard to do, and it's not that simple in the sense that, like what he saw, the way that he hedged himself. He was a very heavy user of derivatives. Nobody really points that out. He would always hedge himself. He was just really really savvy with what he could see in terms of demand and what he could see in terms
of the permanence of the American consumer. That he could tell that there was like he was in front of newspapers when that was the only way to do advertising. He was in front of Coca Cola whenever he was saying, yeah, that's not going to be the thing to buy, and he's like, yeah, but people just like a coke.
You know.
It's those kinds of really really simple Like Peter.
Lynch, right, I need to understand the company.
And then bring that in with very very sophisticated positioning within his portfolio. And you don't see that kind of thing anymore.
Yeah, is there somebody out there that you think.
I mean, I think about how much we listen to what Jamie Diamond has to say, and I do feel like he is the loan remaining big bank CEO that was there during the Great Financial Crisis. All the others are no longer in that top spot. So he has definitely seen a lot and has really created a bank that I think people turned to and respect very highly.
Buffett believed in Jamie Dine. I remember I.
Interviewed and they appeared together like off it.
Yeah.
I remember when I interviewed him from my first book, and he was he had left City Group and was debating.
Going to Bank one.
We actually talked about that, Yeah, And I just had a feeling that he was a guy who a bank could use. He was already eyeing how to put things together. He's just a really really savvy individual in terms of the way finances work. Buffett was different in that he managed portfolios, like you know, he really put his money where his mouth is. Diamond understands an industry. Buffett understood industries, and that's unique.
So I guess the question I have is like, there's not Look, he's he's still with us, yet we're talking about this.
Because we've been seeing the transition slowly happening and putting people in charge to continue Berkshire Hathaway for the next fifty one hundred years.
Whatep.
He's expected to end his role of CEO to successor Greg Abel at the end of the year. But it doesn't matter. There's no you know, when people listen to Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger who passed away just the last couple of years, at the annual shareholder meeting, there was those were like events where that people would flock too from around the world. I don't see anyone else having that same draw.
No, no, And it's also because they spoke about macro issues, They spoke about the world around them, and they addressed issues that affected you whether or not you were investing. So it was like, you know, the woodstock of capitalism they called it. But it's unlike a normal shareholder meeting where they're talking about their business, they're talking about the company. He was talking about the world and Berkshire was a
part of the world. The biggest, the most amazing thing about him was that he was a real portfolio manager. If you look at him from the sixties, the return is insane. And then he built a conglomerate and ran that successfully too. I mean, who can really do that. That's just not in the cards right now for what's available to you in this economy.
I also think, you know, when you think about something like Rahm and Dodd, like he was their their method, you know, value investing.
I mean that was the foundation for Warren Buffett.
And you know we talk about value a lot, but he really did it and did it well.
And it's again it's the courage of the convictions, like he could spot what was he felt was undervalued and then pile into it.
And be right.
You know.
One thing that we love doing is talking to CEOs of companies that are owned by Berkshire Hathaway. Dan Sheridan was on with us just a few weeks ago ahead of the New York City Marathon. He's the CEO of Brooks Running. If you missed the conversation, check it out. It's great on our podcast feed. But he made the comment to us that he doesn't get micromanaged by Berkshire Hathaway executives.
That that was the whose whole point, that he just does his managements. He bought managements that he believed in and then gave them the room to do what they were going to do. It's such a bizarre level of confidence where we, you know, take confidence as intervening, as stepping in.
I know better.
What he knew was he could spot a good company and good management and then give them the money that they needed to succeed and get out of the way. And that that is like the most admirable level of confidence that you can have.
And someone who invested, yes in publicly held companies, but private companies, whether it sees Candies or whether it was Brooks.
I mean there were so many durisl Charter Brokerage, Benjamin Moore, Yeah, guy.
The lows and bought at the load like we would get would see these brands when they were discounted and go after them.
My favorite is Seized Candy right now, it was just been in an airport.
I'm like, I get those the nuts, you know, the nuts and the chewy ones.
Yeah, I really love them.
Hey, just get about a minute ago, just quickly the trade today it's obviously risk one I don't know, but doesn't feel like it has conviction.
Well, I mean it makes sense in that if you were worried about airplanes getting off the ground, and you were worried about like things being you know, crushed to a halt by the by the shutdown that appears to be ending. However, the risks in front of us are the FED and what they're.
Going to do.
Earnings look great, but like what where the economy is going to go? Where jobs are? Those questions aren't answered. But today you should be buying. Like if you sold last week on the chaos, today you step back in.
Yeah, exactly right, and you definitely are seeing investors doing that.
Eric, thank you so much.
Let me go anywhere back there. I know, I love it, like the perspective on Buffett. Very cool stuff, Eric Green or Bloomberg new Senior Editor, Equities America's.
Stay with us. More from Bloomberg Business Week Daily coming up after this.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Week Daily Podcast. Catch us live weekday afternoons from two to five eas during Listen on Apple Karplay and Android Otto with the Bloomberg Business app, or watch US live on YouTube.
Well, today, the White House expressing support for the bipartisan deal to end the US shut down, a key development that makes it likely the government reopens within days, we shall see. The Senate is resuming deliberations on its deal with centrist Democrats, but as yet scheduling a vote for final passage, although our hearing some talk that it could happen maybe later this evening.
Okay, well be tuned to that. Sen and lawmakers also still must wind its way through potentially time consuming procedures, and then the House members must travel back to Washington to vote for the first time since September nineteenth. That's a little bit of schoolhouse rock.
Yeah is that?
Yeah?
But you can leave I guess see when the government shuts down and still get paid. But yeah, okay, okay, Carol Masser, go ahead, aw you all right, Let's see what the co founder and director of Economic Policy and Vada Partners has to say. She is Henrietta Trey's certainly a friend to us all here at Bloomberg. She joins us from New Orleans. Henrietta, glad you could join us. We talked to you. The surveillance team does a lot in terms of what's going in and around the belt Way.
So is this real progress? Is it a political win? And if so, for whom?
Yeah, we definitely have progress. Overnight, very excited about it. I'm optimistic that they will be able to get the House vote done as early as tomorrow. I think there's no better Veterans Day gift to give to our veterans than making sure that the military are paid and all the seven hundred thousand furloughed workers can get their paychecks and some back pay as well.
So hopeful that that starts moving forward. For investors.
The most important thing is that we're open by Friday, so we might start to get some BLS data from September. I think that that's possible. Staff's still getting briefed, but that's my expectation and fingers crossed, we're there.
Do you think this is a solution.
Yes, I mean I think that we've got the final package. We're going to have opportunities to keep.
Having these ACA subsidy fights into December, and then we know that there's a January thirty a cr so we'll have the same exact fight all over again. Some of my smartest clients are saying, you know, what are the odds of a continued, you know, round after round of government shutdowns. And I think that if you look at what the two sides are taking away here. The Democrats are mad that they caved, and the Republicans and in particular President Trump have suffered quite a lot just on
their own personal approval ratings. So it's kind of like playing chicken with a crazy person. You know, they're happy to see what happens, and that's that's what we walked into this den.
You know, does it does it seem like Democrats gave in on this they're not getting what they wanted.
Yeah, to the far left, that's definitely how they view it. They wanted the actual ACA subsidies extended. You can see why for voters over the age of sixty, your ACA premiums are going up nine hundred and nineteen dollars. It's pretty substantial. The average one people in their thirties forties is almost two hundred dollars. So these are you know, very real benefits for I think it's forty two million Americans.
So definitely something that Democrats wanted to see delivered. But the good news for them is that they got the fight back on the front burner. And when you were standing at a low thirties percent approval rating, you really don't have much further to drop, So the Democrats getting engaged in this fight and pushing back against what has otherwise been ten months of Trump running the board is not all bad on the Republican side for President Trump. His disapproval rating has doubled since October.
So there's a lot of reason to.
Think that even though the ACA subsidies didn't get extended, Democrats fought the right fight.
I think that that's what Schumer and Jeffries believe.
You know, as we watch the political fights that go on in Washington and have for a long time, no matter who's in the White House, at least over the last few administrations, I think it's safe to say, Henrietta, what really struck us all? And I want to go back to those snap benefits that one in eight Americans need food assistants.
Why is that?
What does that say about lawmakers, Republicans and Democrats through several White House and the job that they have not been doing for the bulk of Americans. I mean, aren't we the world's largest, in richest nation.
Yeah, we sure are.
And I think it's important to note that seventy percent of those recipients have full time jobs, so it's not like these.
People aren't working.
A disproportionate number of them are young people and also old people over the age of sixty or sixty five. But you know, if you really want to get into the nitty gritty, why are people seventy percent of these recipients on food stamps if they have full time jobs, what is their pay? I think there's some really interesting conversation that always comes up when we talk about snap benefits of what are these giant corporations Walmart, Target, Dollar, General,
et cetera. What are they paying their employees that they still also need to have food stamps? So it's it's really everyone to blame here on this front.
Why is this though, not something that gets pushed further in Congress with lawmakers.
Well, especially in a year like this one where they're focused on cutting federal spending.
I mean, and you look at the one big, beautiful bill.
There were repeated instances of cutting food stamps, back limiting eligibility, all in the name of saving money, which is interesting given that it was a three and a half trillion dollar deficit increasing bill, and they eliminated the current policy baseline, which forces Congress to pay for things going forward. So the decisions around trimming federal spending are very proactive. They're on purpose, and that was across Medicaid and Snap in the One Big Beautiful Bill.
So I don't know.
That this is necessarily seen as a problem. To see the limitations. It's part of making the government smaller, which is what COP and the Republican Conference are trying to do.
Let me throw on top of this and forgive men. I don't have the details right in front of us, but we were talking about this in the news, and that the President is now proposing giving Americans a two thousand dollars check, Like, how.
Do we do that? I don't understand.
We talk about deficit and if the economy is doing well, why do we have to do that.
Secretary Busons said it could come in the form.
Of tax cuts, okay, but.
The President said today that any extra would go down to pay the debt.
And that's exactly the problem. There is no extra.
So the trade deficit, the tariffs is my bread and butter.
And I would just say the following.
When we did the Cares Act under the President Trump's first term, at the height of the pandemic, we sent out rebate checks. The President was very happy to send those checks out. They were very popular. They cost two hundred and ninety two billion dollars. The tariffs have thus far this year, for AIBA brought an eighty nine billion dollars.
So if you're going to increase the rebate check from fourteen hundred bucks to two thousand dollars, and you know the presumer they'll be a qualifying child credit a five hundred bucks something along those lines, you now have to spend four hundred billion dollars of the eighty nine billion dollars in revenue that you brought in from tariffs. And why are you sending the rebate checks in the first place. Is it because costs of goods are increased? Is it
because of the tariffs? It sure enough is so you have this really circular logic. That's a huge problem, and there is no leftover revenue to reduce the deficit, which is of course what bond markets are so focused on.
Hey, Henrietta, just last quest on healthcare and whether or not Republicans come to the negotiating table in good faith when it comes to the Affordable Care Act later on. That's what Democrats want to see. Does that can get kicked down the road to January and do they meet.
I've gotten that question a lot this afternoon from clients. I think yes.
When I speak with Republican staff, they say that it's going to take two or three weeks to hammer out any kind of an agreement on income cap levels, on the high amendments related to abortion, on the phasing and the duration of any ACA subsidies. I think it's a bridge too far to ask this extremely acrimonious Congress to come together in the twelve legislative days they have before
the end of the year to get a solution. I think it's much more realistic that they need a deadline, and so January thirtieth, that January time horizon is probably going to be more intense around the EC subsidies getting extended or not.
All right, so love, thank you so much, Henriette co founder and director of Economic Policy at VTA Partners, Henrietta Trees joining us from New Orleans. All Right, that's the latest tim on the US government shut down and expectations that were nearing an end. Has definitely put the risk on trade on Wall Street.
Yeah, traders rushing to the riskiest corners of the market. Stocks climbing alongside bitcoin, as the US Senate advanced have planned, and the longest ever government shutdown also removes significant economic headwind bond ed bonds edged lower. We've got a great guest back with us, Sally McCartney as managing director of wealth management and private wealth advisor with Alignment Partners at UBS. She's got more than a billion dollars in assets under management.
She joins us here in the Bloomberg BusinessWeek studio. The risk on trade today sustainable. I mean, it seems like we're seeing the riskiest corners of the market get a bid.
We've seen a lot of back and forth in this kind of trade. So last week was the worst week for the Nasdaq since April, since we began the Terarff tantrum. So what happened last week I think was a combination of a lull in earnings news. First of all, we had gotten all the good earnings news out and then everybody waits till Nvidia. We also had the end of October, which is a fiscal end for a lot of fund so there was a lot of purging and taking profits.
And then, for whatever reason, the sentiment in data was really unpleasant last week, and people chose investors small and large retail investors chose not chose not to show up, which has been the bid that's been getting the market through, and they chose to focus on things that, given what you just talked about, are not particularly surprising, like the
lowest consumer sentiment out of your Michigan ever. Right, So, I think you know when I look at everything that you talk about, and I love the way that you talk about it on the show because it's from an economic perspective, but also from a social and human perspective. Clearly, what's happening is the low end consumer is getting squeezed.
Things are much more expensive. There are probably many of those people who are on snap benefits who haven't gotten paychecks in a long time, and they're having a real hard time, and they see in that Michigan's sentiment number more hard times. Whereas you look at the five or ten percent that now spends fifty to sixty percent, and what are we seeing? Markets are at all time highs AI is increasing the productivity of our jobs and our labor.
We see interest rates going low, so we can probably have more of a tail in and more of an ability to borrow. But that same movement and interest rates doesn't give the general population access to a housing market. So we really are like a tale of two cities right now, right right?
I mean that's the other thing about access to lending. Who really gets it ultimately right? And I thought it was striking what Henrietta said that seventy percent of the SNAP recipients have full time jobs.
That shocked me.
I was very surprised to hear that that's not the narrative that I think we push on Wall Street or from a government perspective.
We've got one of our reporters on shortly Mark Niquette. They've got a story at on the Bloomberg it's Trump's economy now, and Americans don't seem to love it, and they get into how the US economy ali is so increasingly dependent on three narrow, interconnected a pillars affluent consumers, artificial intelligence, field investment, and acid price gains, making it less stable if any of these pillars weekends, those are kind of the three pillars of the market run up.
They absolutely are. It is not hugely atypical of sort of the end of a bull market or a boom cycle. And the question that everybody's asking now is not if, but when right. These are called cycles for a reason. Portfolios are built the way they are to have things that go down when other things go up. You're not supposed to have gold rally sixty five percent while stocks are up twenty eight percent while bonds are sort of mildly up. So we are in a very strange period
where something will have to give. The question is when and will it be on the federal side, will it be on the AI side, because.
You know the thing, what I do think most likely.
The federal side is interesting to me because the AI side, I see that there is a concern and an issue around circularity, circularity of investments, circularity of hyperscalar, circularity of financing. But I also see and believe that this is transformative and catalytical, like the steam engine, wise, like telecom, like electrification of the grid. And this not surprisingly is happening quicker than all of those other capital expenditure cycles happen.
But it's actually not from a like percent of GDP perspective concerning it actually probably has a lot of room to run. So I think that you know, the affluent works until it doesn't work, and whether that's because it gets litigated away or redistributed in some sense. Again, not a conversation we have in terms of portfolio managers on a daily point. But what all this means to me is that every day I have to wake up and ask myself three questions. With everything I own, is it
time to buy it? Is it time to sell it? Or do I not yet have enough information to make a different decision? And the truth has been that there have been times in the last year, for example, where the answer has been sell a little or the answer has been buy a little more, or the answer is I need to wait to see what happens with tariff negotiations. But nothing that happened last week in that sort of purge or today in Monday's excitement makes me change any of those three issues.
So you're not buying, you're not selling, You're waiting for more info.
We're waiting for more info. The one thing we are taking advantages is given all of the massive uncertainty long term, short term Wall Street DC, I'm still happy to buy gold, palladium, silver. Though there's more gold buying this year than we've seen since twenty eleven, it's by distrust in the US government concern about national treasuries, full stop alienation from the US declining dollar. All of those things are going to continue.
And when you look at the other precious metals, they have a lot of the same catalysts, but also with a real demand against a supply constraint. So those are interesting to me. And then to the extent we can get into some of those megacaps are into say financial names at lower prices, those are interesting given all the tailwinds behind them.
You title together as always, thank you so much, really appreciate. Ally McCartney, Managing director of Wealth Management and private wealth advisor with Alignment Partners over at ubs.
Stay with us more from Bloomberg Business Week Daily coming up after this.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Week Daily Podcast. Catch us live weekday afternoons from two to five these during the listen on Applcarpley and Android Otto with the Bloomberg Business app, or watch us live on YouTube.
Hey listen.
When Magna International reported earnings on Halloween, shares of the autoparts manufacturer rallied as much as seven percent inter day in response to third quarter sales and adjusted EPs beats. Magna Management also raised its fiscal year sales forecast thanks to strengthen North America and China. There was a lot going on. Company based in Canada, biggest automotive supplier of North America. Everything from automated driving control modules, powertrains, lighting mirrors,
complete engineering systems, so much. It is a great, great, great read on the auto economy.
Back with us is Swami Coda Geary, president and CEO of nearly fourteen billion dollar market cap autoparts maker Magna International. The stock up close to eighteen percent so far this year. I want to start with kind of where we left off when we spoke to you back in April. This was just after the president's so called Liberation Day tariffs you liken them and the additional cost to drawing upon the playbooks from past rotating UAW strikes, COVID, the Great
Financial Crisis, the Chip crisis all rolled together. We were pretty shocked about those comments because you said it was big. Is it still that big of an impact? Has it been that big of an impact?
Hi, Echonon, Thanks for having me.
Yes, there has been a lot of dynamic challenges in the industry, as you know, and when you spoke to me last week was fresh, you know, at that time, as we sit here and look at it, I think our annualized tariff impact is roughly in the range of two hundred million. But we continue to work with our team, with our customers, with our supply base in mitigating as much as possible, you know, adhering to the USMCA compliance.
All in all, I think we have been able to with a lot of self help, a lot of work with our customers, we've been able to bring down that impact to roughly ten bass points, which means about thirty million for Magna this year.
So I will say our BI team reacted to our Bloomberg intelligence team, Swamy reacted and they said they believe that your company's continuous cost cutting and operational excellence could further release margin gains in twenty twenty six. And they talk about in the US major customers are benefiting from a more profitable sales mix, with higher sales and pickups and SUVs offsetting lower EV production, which should enhance Magnus program economics for upcoming twenty twenty six launches.
Do they have it right, Yes, they do.
There's a lot of hard work and thanks to the team, there's been a lot of traction in our operational activities, including some of the activities that you men mentioned cost restructuring, optimizing our operations. We have really worked through about forty
divisions in terms of restructuring, consolidation, bringing things together. And when the mix in the volume becomes stable and it comes through, you see profitability going to the bottom line, and that has been our focusduction, margin expansion and free cash flow generation. We've talked about one hundred and fifty basis points over the last three years, and I'm glad to say we have an additional visibility of thirty five to forty basis points going into twenty twenty six.
So this is a journey.
It's never going to stop you in an industry that we need to constantly work on improvements. We call them continuous improvements, and we are starting to see the result of that.
But you did talk about demand destruction the short term when we talked with you in April, right after Liberation Day. Has it played out as bad as you expected? And where are we today? Your top customers are who's who of the global auto industry, So where are we today in that demand destruction?
Are we done?
I wish I could have that crystal ball.
But you know, the way I look at it is we peaked out as our industry in North America about seventeen and a half million units. Interestingly, I was looking at the data go back twenty years. In two thousand and four two thousand and six time frame, North American production volumes were somewhere between fifteen to sixteen.
We are still at fifteen to sixteen million units today. I think the.
Volumes held up this year, but I always like to stand back a little and see where it was. Magna Magna twenty years ago was a twenty billion dollar company. Today we are a forty billion dollar company. And it's the result in the efforts of the team to continue to gain CPV and to diversifire customer base, and that's where our focus is right And to your point, though, I hope this is the trough. If you look at the average age of the fleet, it's pretty high. The
inventories are pretty normal. So I like to say, you know, there is an elasticity of demand that's going to come back looking forward if there is no more externalities like we have had in the last four years.
Your company is based in Ontario. We are curious about the US and Canada trade negotiations or lack thereof. Given the impasse between the US and Canada, how is that affecting your industry and you specifically.
Yeah, as you know, auto industry is very interdependent ecosystem and it's pretty complex in North America, so it has been challenging. But I would like to look at Magna really as a global company. We have tens of thousands of people in Mexico, in Canada and in US, and obviously we are following the footprint of our customers, looking at the economics, looking at transportation, looking at logistics, and that is the competitiveness that ultimately lets you be the
player that you are. Right, So the focus has been on it. Whatever the policy is, if there is certainty and visibility to the policy going forward, I think it's just going to be a tailwind to everybody, the OEMs and the supply base.
In all but Tswami, Is it broken the US? Canada? I mean it's been so intertwined.
Really the North American and you know, global auto supply chain.
But is it especially the US and Canada? Is it changed forever?
Again, I'm not an international trade policy expert.
Speaking from it, but you have a great advantage and a great window on how it has worked and how it feels today.
It's definitely been strained, right, there's no question about that. But I've lived in this industry for twenty six years, and what we're talking today is going to impact maybe twenty seven or twenty eight. So we're always looking at what we are doing today impacts three or four years down the road. What we're doing today has been planned and decided three or four years ago, So I tend to think a little bit in longer cycles.
You know.
I'm still hopeful that the policy is going to get to a point where it's mutually beneficial to everyone the president.
In the past, the President of the US has talked about his back and forth in his conversations with executives at North American auto companies. Have you had conversations with the President or his team.
We have had obviously a seat at the table in being able to communicate facts that possible impacts, the challenges of the industry and what could benefit I always say we are able to give an opinion. One of the opinions, I hope it's a dot on the chart, and definitely We have talked to all three regions right expressing what is the jobs that we have, what is the investments that we've made, and how it could impact right Definitely, that is the conversation that's always ongoing.
Hey, Swami, one thing we wanted to ask you the EV retrenchment that we continue to talk about here at Bloomberg, how is it affecting your business and the auto industry in general. You've got Ford considering killing the F one fifty lightning, Stilanti is killing the ram EV, and GM taking a one point six billion dollar impairment charge on its EV assets.
That feels pretty chilling. How is that if impacting you guys?
In the past, we've always looked at EV and if you look at some of the comments that we've made, I think we were a little bit conservative. But definitely the North American EV penetration has had an impact on us. We came back and talked about the impact of our revenue going forward in the August I think of twenty twenty four. But the key thing has been how we've been able to pivot. We had our peak cap X
spend in twenty three twenty two. We got back to the sales to capex ratio shows our agility and being able to get back and look at optimizing how we can re use some of the capital with the help of the customers and so on and so forth. But overall, EV, I think in other regions continues and as a global company, we see that continuing in China and Europe. But when it does come back, and we still believe EV is a secular trend, that take rate is very different than
what we all expected a couple of years ago. But with the investments already there, with the development that's behind us, and our ability to hit whether it's an internal combustion engine or a or a hybrid, that flexibility in our product line has helped us whether the storm pretty well. And I think that's what we need to continue to do going forward.
I know that the decisions you make now are decisions for four years from now. So are you changing product plans to develop more gas powered vehicles or helps make supplies for more gas powered vehicles?
Yes, Tim, I think we have had a lot of content in obviously the internal combustion engine platforms right and as some of these programs are delayed or pushed out, we continue to get leverage on the existing programs and we continue to win. The other thing to note is a lot of our products, almost eighty percent of our product is propulsion agnostic. That means whether a make a mirror or a door, or a structure or a seat, we'll make it for whatever propulsion it is.
Right.
So, as far as we are flexible and continue to do that in our processes, we've been able to take advantage of that of that flexibility and gain market and continue to grow our revenues.
So I want me just thirty seconds here, any signs of a US recession, a global recession? What's the word that you would use to describe the marketplace right now?
Just quickly?
Yeah, I think there is signs of stress, I would say. And obviously that you know, puts us all us on a cautionary foot. But like I said, from a auto industry, the inventory seem normal. The average age of the fleet is pretty high, so we are looking for order demand not to be impacted that much. But we still remain very cautious.
Say I need a new car pretty soon, so Miller, I know, Yeah, he's got a bunch, hey, so Amy. We always appreciate when you carve out some time for Tim and me. The Bloomberg BusinessWeek Daily team Swami Kudigary. He is Chief executive Officer Magna International, joining us from Troy, Michigan on this Monday.
Thanks again.
This is the Bloomberg Business Weekdaily 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