Musk Drives Even Some Twitter Founders to Mastodon

or Bloomberg dot com. You can also listen to our radio show at the two pm Eastern time on Bloomberg Radio or stream us live on YouTube and Bloomberg dot com. But Elon Musk used to being in the driver's seat or seats considering all that he's involved, and sometimes that even means driving some Twitter founders to a competing social network. It's kind of like, wait, what are you doing? This is really interesting with who and where they're going in

the latest on the Twitter situation. Here with us is at Bloomberg News Technology reporter Alex Brenka. She joins us on camera from our l A bureau. Alex, good to have you back with us. Uh Mastodon, what is going on with Mastodon? And if you haven't heard of Massodon. I'll also kind of just explain it to you. It's this kind of new ish social network that a lot of folks who perhaps are unhappy with Twitter or who are looking for a different platform to share news or

short purse of information have been migrating to Massadon. Now, Mathadon started is kind of a techie community. Um. They call their kind of groups, servers or instances. Initially it was a lot of folks who were kind of deep in tech, but they started to attract a general audience, including a couple of really notable names like Twitter co founders Biz Stone and Ev Williams, who have now moved on the platform and said they are taggering and trying

it out. A big complaint that I've heard about Mastodon and full disclosure, I have not tried it. I've tried post. I'm on post news, but I haven't like signed in in two weeks. This is what happens, by the way, with competing social networks, UM is that it's complicated that mass Diodon is like, it's kind of tough to find servers. What has your experience been based on what you've done, and also like the people you've spoken to you know, someone someone on Twitter uh compared it to like using

Linux as an operating system. It sort of is, you know it is um. It's open source software that has these communities on it. I've gotten on it, and I'll tell you I had the same experience. It's um kind of gorpy, it's kind of tricky. I don't quite know how to use it. I only have a whopping three followers there versus you know, almost eight thousand on Twitter. UM,

so there's a lot of differences. I also don't think, frankly, if I were to go to my non tech friends and say, hey, try this thing, they wouldn't know how to sign up either. So I think that's one of the kind of uh hills to climb for mass it on, and also probably why they're excited to be kind of connected with Ev Williams Um, that Twitter co founder in particular.

You'll remember Ev also founded a blogging platform called Medium, and in this kind of shift over to mass it on, Medium has set up its own instance, its own server or community, where it's going to set its own rules and encourage its authors to go over there and perhaps bring some of their users. UM. As of recently, even after this rush of new users massed on and said that they have about two point five million people using the platform. Compare that to the around two hundred and

thirty million daily active users that Twitter has. So a bit more tricky, it's not as user friendly, and they don't have the user base. But it's really interesting that some of the moves that Twitter is making is is forcing some people to even jump onto a platform that has a few more hurdles than something like Twitter might. Alex makes me think, Okay, if somebody can set something up that can really challenge Twitter, you could quickly see people move to it. At the same time, it made

me think, you know what Twitter's power is. They've got so many people already in that universe and that's where you know, the tricky wick is what does Ellen do with it and to keep those people there. Yeah. Absolutely, you've seen some changes in recent days. Right now, your feed is now split. There's your following feed, which is like the old school Twitter feed are the folks that

you've chosen to follow. And I also have something called my four you feed now, which for folks who watched the social media industry that seems to be lifted from TikTok, who has an algorithmically kind of driven for you feed that is interesting too. On Twitter, My Twitter currently has a for you and it has a following. The for you are the for you people interspersed within your timeline, Like I've noticed, my timeline is full of people that

don't follow. Is that what you mean? That's what I mean. It's full of people I don't follow, and I'm seeing things like tweets from two days ago. I'm seeing things, uh, like tweets about topics that I haven't historically kind of engaged with. So this could be a play from Twitter to try to drive engagement, to kind of lift some of the tactics that TikTok's using that Instagram has borrowed from TikTok of introducing you to new kind of interest areas or new people to get you more engaged on

the platform. Whether or not that bears out in more engagement and more users in more advertise or interest, that will be kind of a to be determined. But it does seem like as folks like Massadon and even you know Instagram TikTok LinkedIn start to take some of the typical users away from Twitter, it seems like they have to try some new things. Why doesn't Why doesn't um, Facebook just do this? Facebook has the people, right, you know, there's so many people who are on Facebook and Instagram.

Why don't they try to sort of, I don't know, become a place where for for people who are disenfranchised or field disenfranchised by Twitter. Is they're building the metaverse? Come on, Tim, did you not get the mask? Alex? Okay, they're building the metaverse, but they're also it's part of it. But they're also investing a lot in AI that's not only applicable to photos and videos, but also to tax So it seems like whether you're interested in something that

could be a place to go. But for someone like me in the journalism industry, for folks who care about finance news, um, for folks who are you know, a lot of the news so says Twitter has kind of in the space for that. Facebook, on the other hand, has gotten into a lot of trouble um for its dealings in misinformation. Um that's been a bit of a

debate now on Twitter. But when when you think about like why you go to certain platforms, Uh, Facebook seems to be meta with Facebook and Instagram, moving in a little bit of a different direction than where Twitter has historically been as a kind of de facto place of news, political conversation, and conversation around live events like the Super Bowl or major sports event. All right, alex so net Net, does Ellen need to be worried about mastadon? I think

right now the users don't don't give him any worry. Um, But in the future, if folks continue flocking there, then you know, I think he's a lot of worries on his table and this might be another one. All right, while we're talking about worries, what about Twitter employees? You know, there's another story on the terminal talks about workers at Twitter Singapore office told to empty at their desks, vacate the premises. According to those familiar as Ellen must continues

to pair expenses around the globe. All right, so that's like go to work from home, but you do wonder Okay, do that and then maybe what's the next step. But anyway, I'm just reading into this, maybe incorrectly, but how do you see it? Yeah, so this is kind of one of the moves that we're seeing happen under mask where costs are being cut basically the offices the leases are expiring, UM,

they need to kind of figure out another plan. Twitter employees have have had a lot of whiplash lately, UM, and it seems like there's been kind of a month long refocusing on things. So whether you're working from home and that's kind of changing your day to day, whether it's you know, changing the feed like we've seen, whether it's trying to roll out new kind of valuable offerings to advertisers, a lot of which have left or pause

spending on the platform. The Twitter employees that are left are not only doing their jobs but also having to deal with a little bit of the chaos UM that we've seen over the last few months. So Singapore is one of the offices. We'll see if they continue to kind of shrink their footprint and shift to a UM kind of grand work from home model, which Ellen has

also said he is not interested in. UM. So I think that the read through is the chaos or the whiplash seems to kind of continue for folks both on the platform and those behind the scenes who are keeping the lights on. Is it just me Alex or is Elon Musk kind of toned it down a bit on Twitter. Over the last couple of weeks, he's been a little quieter. I don't know if that's the holidays, or if that's the New year rush, or if their annual planning, but

it does seem like the drama has calmed down. But you remember, there's some big beads still to come, right. He said they're looking for a new CEO to take over a lot of the operations. He's got a big debt bill do in January, so I think we'll still have enough drama and fodder to talk about even if he's not taking it to Twitter and listen, he told us at fourteen hours ago, maybe we should spend less time on social media. I mean, come on, he's got other things to Oh my god, it's going to be

an interesting year. Um, Alex Brenka, thank you as always. We're getting a double dose of Alex this week and really good to check in with their um Twitter. Yeah, well see, we'll see you are going to try mastered on No, there's also post news which post news? Do you are you on it? I'm on that, but I haven't been. Do you use it? No? I haven't been. I gotta get this is the guy who liked eletes Twitter and then put it back on. Yeah, it's just

I'm an addict, no offense. I loved him, but I don't know that I'm going to follow you follow me on Twitter. I follow you on Twitter, but I don't want to follow what you do here. Thanks, Hey, thanks Thanks co anchor Carol Heart Love Love Love. You're listening to Bloomberg Business Week with Carol mess Here and Tim Stenovic on Bloomberg Radio. All Right, we talked earlier about today's CPI report. The US is making progress, it seems

on inflation. Uh. It has also made progress on COVID, and yet we also talk a lot about how we're not completely over the pandemic, how a new omicron sab variants out and the cases are once again rising around the United States. Back with us for an update on the virus and where we are in the US and around the world. We've got Dr Amish Adulges, senior scholar and infectious disease physician at the Center for Security at

the Bloomberg School of Public Health. It is of course supported by Michael R. Bloomberg, the founder of Bloomberg LP and Bloomberg Philanthropies. He joins us from Pittsburgh this afternoon. Dr A. Dodge, It's good to talk with you again. It's been a while, which I guess is kind of good because you know, it's it's not good when we were speaking with you every single week and the only

thing we were talking about was COVID. But like you said, you know, over the last two and a half years, as we've been talking to you, this is a virus that's going to change. It's a virus that's here to stay. How are you looking at it being part of our

lives right now? I'm looking at it as something that we are going to continue to have to deal with that people are going to have to continue to learn how to risk calculate within science and technology are going to continue to have to advance to give us new tools to be able to make it as manageable as possible. But I do think that it's going to be something that is always going to be generating new variants and headlines.

But it's something that is now much like other respiratory viruses because of all of those tools that science and medicine have given them. So Okay, I mean it's interesting, Like I think, first of all, I can't believe we're what two years out here now three years out um, so much has happened, so much in terms of how we think about these things and understanding that on a health basis, you know, the unthinkable can hit a developed

in many developed nations like the US and others. So way forward here, Um, I think about this a lot. Five shots in, I mean, do I just have to keep getting shots? Well? I think if you're somebody that's of average risk, that you don't have any high risk conditions, that you're not older, you don't have harder vascular disease,

you don't have obesity, you're not pregnant, immunocompromise. The actual regular vaccine, the standard dose does hold up really well against what matters serious illness, hospitalization and depth and boosting is really important for people that have risk factors for severe disease. I don't think that for the average healthy person,

boosters do much. They don't cause it harm, but they're not really going to give you much protection against infection because this virus has sort of evolved away from being able to be protected by our first generation vaccines. And I think it's really about protection against serious illness, when it comes to vaccines and boosters, maybe we'll get better vaccines that are more that are more broad, that are not as susceptible to being kind of kind of limited

by variants. But right now with these first generation vaccines, is really about protection against serious illness, and that's why I think boosters should be targeted to high risk individuals. That's really surprising to hear from you. I mean, I thought the general guidance was everybody who's eligible should be getting a booster. I've always been sort of a booster skeptic.

I thought that when you look at what the vaccine was doing, it was protection against serious illness, hospitalization, and depth, and so you have to actually have a baseline risk of that for the boosters to give you benefit. And what we see is the boosters don't really do so much, especially in the age of omicron, when it comes to protection against infection. What they really do is protect you

against serious illness. So that's why I think it's really almost mandatory that if you're old there and have or any high risk condition, you should be boosted. And in fact, I think we we have kind of this wrong situation in the United States where there are people who are at low risks, who tend to be boosted to a very high degree. And then you look at the three hundred to four hundred people that die every day in the United States from COVID, and none of them are boosted.

So I think that we diluted the message by pushing for universal boosting, and the people who actually needed to be boost who needed to hear that they should prioritize getting boosted, that really didn't reach them. And I think that's the problem. You know, we nursing home residents to be boosted, not healthy thirty year olds. Is there a difference between the antibodies that are formed as a result of getting boosted versus the antibodies that are formed as

a result of a prior prior infection. Not? Not. Really, they're in the same general category. There may be some tweaks depending upon which variant you are infected with, which booster you've got, If you've got the original booster, the bi valent booster, how strong they are, and and there is some evidence that you're getting repeated boosters. You don't even with the bible and booster, you don't make different

types of antibodies. You still continue to overwhelmingly make the antibody to the one virus that you first were exposed to, or the one type of slike protein you were first exposed to. That's something called imprinting, which is a little bit complicated, but in general, the bottom line of boosters is, yes, they're helpful, but it's really about protecting a high risk

populations with them, not necessarily the average person. And I think what's surprising to me is just the anecdotal And you know, it's so dangerous to use anecdotes when it comes to anything about medicine, because medicine is you know, when we would you get this stuff. It's approved, it's pure viewed, there are follows the scientific method and so on. You know. But it's like, Okay, my mother in law comes and stays with us. It turns out she had COVID the whole time, you know, and the three of

us don't end up getting COVID. And I kind of attribute to that too, well, okay we previously had COVID or because we were recently vaccinated. I don't know, Dr Adulge. It's like hard to explain this stuff that you know, you feel protected, but you don't necessarily feel protected. Yeah, there's a lot of variables that really influence whether somebody gets infected. When was the person that you're exposed to, When where they contagious? What kind of immunity do you have?

We know now that people who have hybrid immunity, a combination of being vaccinated plus natural infection have the strongest type of immunity. How fresh was your last vaccine or booster or last infection, all of that plays a role in how likely somebody is to get infected. And it's there's a lot of variables that that are at play, but it's this is a ubiquitous virus, and we're always going to be getting exposed to it. We're always going

to know someone that has covid uh. This is now part of kind of the infectious disease mill you that we all will face, you know, all humans will face, you know, for the foreseeable future on this planet. All right, So if we are thinking about moving beyond this one, the coronavirus or covid um, is there another one that's likely to hit us probably in a few years or sooner. I mean, is that just kind of the fabric of our life now? Well? And not now it's always been

the fabric of our life. If you look at the history of the human the human species on this planet, it's been pandemic, epidemic, famine, infectious disease threat after infectious disease threat. It's only in the last hundred or so years where we've had somewhat of arrestpite because of sanitation, because of the development of vaccines, because of the development

of antibiotics and modern medicine. But for you know, if you talk to somebody, if you look at that, if you plot the whole human species time on this planet on almost just a little lit bit from around nineteen oh I think we're having some problems with that cell

phone target. If you want to finish your thought in terms of like historical you say, this has always been a part of it, but it really in modern times it feels like it hasn't, right, I think, but only because we kind of had the luxury of vaccines and sanitation and antibiotics and anti virals. But if you look at the the entire world, you know there were still tens of thousands of people dying from measles. Uh. Even in the United States we have tens of thousands dying,

I mean flenz. I think that was kind of a false sense of security, just based on the fact that people weren't paying attention to what was going on in the infectious disease world. So it's hard to predict when the next pandemic will be. But it's it's always not a question of whether one will occur. It's it's it's when it occurs, it's not if. And there are other viruses, other respiratory viruses, flu viruses, particularly topical list including AVI and flu viruses that that I think we have to

continue to prepare for you. I've heard also just the general flu or the seasonal flu. This this time around has been really rough on a lot of people. Um Dr Amos Sadalja, thank you so much, appreciated senior scholar and infectious disease physician at the Center for Health Security at the Bloomberg School of Public Health. Supported as you know by Michael R. Bloomberg, Founder, Bloomberg ALP and Bloomberg philanthropist, joining us on the phone from Pittsburgh. I don't know

about you. I mean, I'm gonna probably still if I can. I was surprised to hear those comments about boosters that he made. But it's he's right that you know, it needs they need to get to the people who really need it. Yeah, but I also I'm watching China because its delinations, you know, fighting it. These is Bloomberg Business Week with Carol Messer and Tim Stanovic on Bloomberg Radio.

The new issue of Bloomberg Business Week. It is out on newsstands, online at Bloomberg dot com, slash business Week and of course always on the Bloomberg Terminal. It's the annual the Year Ahead issue, the major trends, disruptions, breakthrough products,

innovations and movements to watch in the coming year. It compliments this week's Bloomberg Live event in Davos that's happening as the World Economic Forum hosts its annual meeting there, and the cover story has to do with the economic outlook. It's written by Stephanie Flanders. She's Bloomberg News Senior Executive editor for Economics and the Government. She's here with us

now in the Bloomberg Interactive Brokers studio. It's a real treat to have her on this side of the pond because she's usually of course based in our London office. Stephanie how are you. I'm alright, I'm alright looking at the year ahead. Yeah, well, let's talk about the year ahead, because you're write about these three pillars that kind of

held together the global economy. Was helpful to have low rates, but it's also helpful to have a kind of a conflict free world, you know, notwithstanding some minor conflicts here and there. And then also of course energy prices were kept low for for quite a while. If we look back on those pillars are kind of crumbled. Yes, And that's what I was thinking. So what's useful about doing this exercise for for Business Week? And I have done

it a few years now? Is you sort of Obviously you're quite caught up in especially these days, on exactly what's going to happen to the economy this year? And are we going to get at heads around inflation? Is the FED going to stop tightening? But you also want to step back and think, okay, what how is the world fundamentally changed? And I think this was one of those years where I thought, Wow, we really have had these fundamental assumptions underpinning maybe thirty forty years of global

economic history. Certainly my lifetime of thinking about economics and thinking about the world all having kind of been kicked away over the last couple of years. It's not just cheap energy prices, it's not just cheap labor costs and transportation costs. And as you said, the sort of friction free period for geopolitics, at least when it came to you know, am I going to find it fairly easy to set up a complicated supply chain in Asia or China?

And all of that has gone away. And then on top of all that, you know you kind of every time, but any one of those pillars was sort of shaky. You always had the FED put right, You always had the FED there um super easy money, kind of free money to make everything still make the numbers still add up.

And when you start looking ahead and thinking, okay, if if, if those have gone in quite a lasting way, decoupling whatever you want to call it, as well as potentially kind of higher interest rates sticking around for a while, you know that that could mean something quite fundamental, not just for economic growth, but also for global politics. You know, we talk about pivots, and I do think about Stephanie,

is it just a case of a reset? Certainly here in the United States, but elsewhere this whole dea of cheap money no more. Yeah, and I think I mean, as you know, I'm normally in London and that the sheer pace of change there has been extraordinary. I mean people, you know, the difference between getting a mortgage in July and getting it in September, partly thanks to the sort of craziness we had in Parliament, but actually not just

that you had rates double or treble. In many cases, people are going to be going up in the next few months, renegotiating their mortgages and going from a one percent rate to six and they're going to fail their affordability tests and you know, so, yeah, we don't know how that's going to play out. Well, how do you think about this, Like this whole idea of the Fed still thinks they're going to get down to two percent right in terms of inflation, and that that's their target.

There are many people say, no, way, things have changed dramatically. How do you think about that globally? Like has something is it different this time around? Is there kind of a new rate because of some global macro forces that have changed forever? Yeah? I think so, there's as you know, a big debate about this, and there are plenty of economists on both sides as always, so we can keep about keep up the debate. But I think, um, it's gonna I think this year it's going to depend quite

a lot on China. So you have the very rapid reopening actually may be unhelpful to the j pals of this world, because, as you know, we could then see maybe an extra one percentage point, maybe an extra two percentage points on global inflation just because of faster China growth and higher energy prices from that. But looking further ahead, has there been a more fundamental shift between the relationship

between unemployment and wages? You know, we've had all these years where you had super low unemployment, you know, very tight labor market, but wages didn't budge. Now you know, the dam is kind of broken, and you have got these much bigger wage rises coming down the track in many countries. If they get locked in, then you're right, you know, we're in a we're in a different world.

You right at the end of the piece that the microeconomic trend for three is going to be near shoring the idea of untangling some of these fly chains that companies have spent a generation building as they've gotten concerned about Okay, maybe COVID zero in China or trade relationships

with countries including China. Um, how do you think that's going to continue to play out, Because at the same time, it does seem like labor is so you know, you don't want to you don't want to unravel too much in a company like Apple, for example, is so inextricably bound to a to a country like China. And I actually think that's one of the fundamental tensions. And that's actually it's why I've I've set up a whole squad. Now I've got control of the economics and government. Here

at Bloomberg, We've got a geoeconomic squad. And precisely because the economics and the politics is really kind of coming into into tention at the moment. I don't think any of these big companies wanted niche near shore. Particularly, it wouldn't be their first choice. They certainly it wouldn't be their choice to come out of China, and they're resisting that in many areas. But they're also looking at the

riding on the wall. But as the geopolitical trends that we talked about, from the last thirty years have gone into reverse. You know, the politicians in sense and no longer on the side of closer and closer integration and globalization. So I think businesses for the first time in a long time, have to reckon with you know, if you like the kind of the current of history running against them.

You know, whereas previously, you know, in most places people wanted to make things easier for global business, that's not the case. Now you've got President Biden, You've got politicians all around the world actively making their lives harder. Um, it feels kind of glum if you're not alone. Even the good news in China is exactly like and there's a lot of individuals. So maybe it's not so great in the first half, better in the second half. But I think there's a lot of debate over that too.

Could things actually come in better? Could the US fear better too than the rest of the world? Are are a lot of the world. Yeah, And actually I even say that there. I think there's a scenario which says, um, the US dodges recession or has a very shallow recession. Even in the Eurozone, it's looking like I don't think my optimism extends to the UK at last, but in the Eurozone it's looking like it's going to be a very shallow recession, and quite a lot of the country's

may even dodge a formal recession. If we get to the end of the year and central banks have also kind of have basically got control of inflation, and that we are within sight of two, then as I say at the end of the piece, everything does become a bit easier. You know, we may still have these structural trends, these question marks, but it's on a slower burn and you're not talking about these relationships just kind of going

up in smoke. Definitely, does it feel since you've said, you've done this a couple of times for Business Week, kind of setting what the economic outlook is for the year, does it how does it feel different from last year? Do you remember like does it feel more certain or

still uncertain? But different debates. I think the fundamental sort of narratives are actually clearer, and actually going back to that point of geoeconomics, I sort of feel like I know what the story is or what the different elements of the story are going forward, but of course I never know what's going to happen, and that's what makes life so interesting. Okay, thirty seconds just to end on

Russia's invasion of Ukraine. I think it's been most a full year, uh at the end of February and thirty seconds against Stephanie, I mean, how does this How does this play out in Europe? I would say one positive. I mean, of course it's a massively negative event for the continent to have a war on its on its shots. But the way that Europe has hung together, not just the governments but the people I think is a source of inspiration and potential optimism. We'll just we'll see how

whether they managed to carry that forward. Well, it's a great set up for the year, which should turn out to be. It sounds like another interesting one, Stephanie, Thank you so much, really appreciate it. Stephanie Flanders. Of course, she's senior executive editor for Economics and Government here at Bloomberg News. This is the cover story of the new issue of Bloomberg Business Week. It's the year ahead issue.

You can find it on newsstand. You can find it online at Bloomberg dot com, slash business Week, and of course always on the Bloomberg terminal. You're listening to Bloomberg Business Week with Carol Messer and Tim Stenovic on Bloomberg Radio and Shares of Disney. They're up again. They're now up about four this year. Last night a flur of headlines as the company squares off against activist investor Nielson Peltz,

who nominated himself to the board. What happens though, now is the responsibility of longtime CEO Bob Iger, who, as you all know, he retired. Then he came back to run the company late last year. So there's a lot going on here. Yeah, We've got a great group of

voices with us this afternoon. We've got Bloomberg News Entertainment nitor Chris Paul Mary, who's on the phone from l A. He's going to give us the news, and then we get some more analysis from Bloomberg Intelligence Technology and media analysts Gita ron Ganathan, who's with us via zoom from our Bloomberg Intelligence headquarters in Princeton, New Jersey. Chris, I want to start with you because I met this comment to Carol earlier today. Uh, Bob Iger, the return of

the Bob. He has not wasted any time in undoing some of the changes that his predecessor and successor, I don't know if there's a word for predecessor and successor. Uh. Bob Japeck made starting with, you know, some some rules at uh the parks, some rules at corporate HQ, and then also squaring off with with Pelts, bring us the latest, right, Yeah,

so you're right out to the bat. He indicated he was gonna do away with is sort of controversial distribution arm Disney that sort of made decisions about where all the movies and TV shows go and to rankle a lot of staff internally. He hasn't really come up with that new plan yet, but he's indicated that on the

way out the door this week. Also, as you noted, UH, and it changes to the parks, you know under tape that was known for, you know, squeezing every dollar that he could at park guests and UH and now uh I was offering things like simplice photo passes this year and other things, UH to to sort of win them

back a bit. UH and now yes, going to war with Nelson Pelts, one of the most formidable corporate activists have been doing this for decades, you know, taking on big companies Parker and gamble, hinds uh and uh, and Disney's warn't saying no, thanks, Nelson, we we'd rather not have you on it. So a proxy war, you know, shaping up over the next two weeks. All right, to come on in on it. It's wrong with Disney, too many things, unfortunately, Carol. So this, you know, this whole

timing by Pelts seems to be very very smart. Obviously, I think Disney is in a lot of turmoil right now. We had a dismal, you know, earnings report when they reported in November. You know, we saw streaming losses kind of balloon to about one and a half billion dollars for just that quarter. And if you kind of look at Pels's slide presentation, which he calls Restore the Magic, he says that a website. Yeah, he's got a website.

He's got a website. Yes, Restore the Magic is the name of that website, and he basically says that, you know, streaming losses are huge, they are going to reach fifteen billion dollars by twenty four which we kind of agree with. Um, you know, so all of those things, and then of course you had that huge management upheaval with the Ouster of shapeg the reinstatement of Bob Iger. So obviously the timing is is kind of very astute on the part

part of Pells. But having said that, I mean a lot of the critiques he has leveled against Disney and the board and the management, I mean, these are all all these are all already on the radar, and Bob Iger, as Chris pointed out, is is already working on these. So you know, yes, he's given all of these, he has given this londly list of items to do, but

he hasn't necessarily given us a plan. Well, I guess that brings me to my question next question for Chris, which is, you know, when we think about a succession plan here or any sort of plan, you know, Iger had fifteen years to to make his plan at Disney when he led it from five to Chris, and then he hand picked Bob Jpeck. So his next step is is figuring out not only what to do in terms of strategy, but also who's going to take the helm right.

And you know they've made proactively some announcements along that route. When they rehired I, they said, you've got some years and what one of your main missions is going to be you know, groom that replacement. As part of this week's news did they announced the retirement of their current chairman of the board, replacing her with Mark Palmer, Nike's former executive and he is now heading a specific subset of the board that's going to be um passed with

finding that replacement. I mean, this is certainly one of the things that you know, Iger is well well respected in the industry, but there's no one, no corporate government's effort, no analysts, who really believes that this, uh, this succession plan worked very well. And so this is definitely a weak point from him and something he didn't expect. Nelson

Felts to hammer away at. You know, Chris, I'm listening to you and I think about you know, years ago, right and I did you know we did a deep dive into Disney and it was Tom Stags and I can't remember um Rasulo right, the CFO where they switched places. And these are the two guys that were said to be you know, kind of getting different perspectives of the company, and one of them was going to maybe possibly likely take over for IGOR and then it didn't happen. So

you know. I mean, is Bob okay about handing over the mantel? Uh? That depends that you ask. Uh. You know, there's certainly the school and thought that that says he's not a guy you know and historically, by the way, Disney CEOs if you have had a hard time given up the job, remember Vitaliser. So uh, yeah, you know it's you know, he stayed. We knew his contract four times at least five mouth counts this one. Um, you know, he is he is one who very much wanted to

stay in that role. Gita, what's your thoughts in terms of Bob Iger back at the helm, Is this exactly what the company needs? Um to kind of set it straight? And then ultimately do you think he'll be comfortable in two years time handing over the top spot. Yeah, that's that's a loaded question, Carol. So you know, um, I think he is absolutely the best person to leave the company right now. He knows what needs to be done. He's very very familiar with all of the assets, all

of the I p uh you know. He he clearly understands that some of the content, especially the animated content, has been underperforming. So there is a clear task on hand. Uh, for for Bob Bikers. So I'm sure he knows exactly what he's doing. Now the question comes to succession, and this has you know, this has been botched by either I mean he's for all the successes that he's had,

I mean, this is one consistent area where he has failed. Uh. And you know it's going to be interesting to see because he has I mean it really ultimately, I think comes down to creative expertise. And this is something what all the other prior candidates I think have have collectively lacked, right, whether it was a Tom Stags or whether it was a j Rossulo and even Tom jay Bick. I mean he was a Parks guy. So you know it kind of that whole creative process managing talent. I mean that

that is something that only very few people can do. Um. And so it's going to be interesting to see if they can really find somebody within two years. My sister, My suspicion is, you know, this is again going to be a deja wo situation, because yes, he's invigorating think the content right now, he's you know, rejiggering the whole creative process. But I don't think two years is going to be enough for him to really uh complete what he starts. So if he's doing really well, is it

possible that he sticks around? And yes, yeah, he's gotta he's gotta update that autobiography that he released a couple of years ago. I think he gita Um. In terms of names, is there any chance that Disney would go outside of the company to find someone, I definitely think that's possible. I mean, there are a few names that you know, keep coming up internally. You know, obviously Christine McCarthy,

she's the CFO. She has a lot of experience. But again, if they're really looking for somebody with that creative kind of genius, I don't know if she necessarily fits the bill. Of course, you have Dana Walden who comes from Fox who probably you know, does have a lot of creative expertise. She's you know, kind of managed the TV and entertainment business. But I wouldn't be surp rise if they if they

look outside as well. Uh And again here also, you know, a very interesting point by Belts about why they would have chosen you know, Bob Japeck and not Kevin Mayer. And that's something that we were all kind of scratching. Kevin Mayor's long gone at this point, he is, Yes, he's he's doing his own thing now. But um, you know that that was that was a big shock, actually a big surprise when when that whole announcement came out, just kind of given his involvement in the whole streaming initiative,

just kind of given his whole expertise with content. Yeah, what about the Hey, Chris, what with the Marvel head? I mean, uh, Kevin fahey, I mean, is that a possibility? Yeah, I don't think so. You know, Kevin is, without adapt the most successful bruiser in the history of Hollywood. Uh, And so you know, he's had plenty of opportunities if he wanted to to to rise within the organization or

go to another studio. I think he's very content running mar and um, you know, probably it would be arguably doesn't have the bottom experience it would take to run the Wall Basy company. Well, it's an incredible company. When we talk about, you know, world where content matters, this is a company that has so much and it's so good about kind of mixing it across the platform. So it will be interesting to see one that's reinvented itself

many times over a century. Yeah, I mean absolutely, Um, so we'll keep an eye on it, I know, so will our team. Chris. Thank you, Chris, Paul Mary Entertainment edit up Bloomberg News on the phone from l a and always always our thanks to Gita ran Ganathan. She's technology media analysts with our Bloomberg Intelligence team from our BI headquarters in Princeton Road, marrow a Journal. Yeah, but you let me drive? Oh no, no, no no, no, an please, I'll do I want to drive. It's a good question.

Drive is the drive to the globe on blue Bird Radio. I just got about ATMs left in the Thursday trading session, getting ready to wrap that up. Stocks. You just heard the numbers and the overall market numbers from Doug. But stocks coming off their highs of the session, So let's see what our next guest has to say about the outlook. Very pleased to have with us this afternoon, Chris. I go c I O at the asset Manager Access Investment Managers with us via zoom from London. Chris, how are

you very well? Thanks thanks for having me well, thanks so much for joining us. Really appreciate it. So the CPI report here in the US has come and gone and it will really just hit expectations. My feeling is that investors were kind of pricing in something even softer. Carol, Yeah, I think so helpful. Yeah, they were hor hopeful about that. Um what do you make of it? Chris? Yeah, I mean I think that there was the expectation it could have come in lower. But I think the trend is

is very encouraging. We had all the nasty surprises in the middle of last year, and the last few months the numbers have come in line with with what economists of forecasts, So that's encouraging, and it suggests that inflation is going to gradually ease as we go through three Hey, Chris, one thing I do wonder you know, bonds have definitely gotten more competitive when it comes to the equity side

of things. If you look at you know, what we're seeing in terms of yields versus what you yield on the S and P five hundred, How do you think about bond stock let's go basic bond stock allocations. How do they compare? Well? I think bonds are back. I mean we've got yields now which are attractive and for many years they weren't. So I think investors who are managing or running multi asset portfolios can really see a

more interesting role for bonds this year. You're getting high yield or the same amount of duration or credit risk, and at a time when the outlook freak, which is is still somewhat uncertain because we're just about to head into earning season. Most of the forecast for a modest recession in the US this year, I think bonds give that certainty of return which we haven't had for some time. Having said that, you know, we just talked with their

Stephanie Flanders. The year ahead issue of Bloomberg Business Week is out, and she really you know, sets the tone in terms of talking about the global economic outlook for three and how it too could hold some surprises. Right. Whod thought we'd see a Russian invasion of Ukraine. Whoda thought going back to that would be in the midst of a global pandemic that shut down the economy. You know, Wow, a reminder that things come out of nowhere. And I do wonder how do you think about that in regards

to this year. Yeah, I mean, I think these things are always unfoecastable. Aren't they. But what I would say is that today markets are cheaper than they were this time last year on the eve of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. We're going back to bonds. You've got more yield providing a cushion two returns, and equities are still you know, ten off their high. So I don't see as much downside. And I don't know what the big

shot will be this year. But you know, we've had the war, we've had the invasion, we've had four hundred basis points of FED tightening. Hopefully we won't get those things again. So I'm hoping for a more boring year where you can get decent returns, and boring boring in decent returns, that certainly would be nice. I think the

five hundred seven right now. Earlier on our program, our colleague on TV Remained Bostick mentioned that it was close to its two day moving average is certainly an important technical level to you looking out across the at least this cycle. Do you think we've seen the bottom in the cycle. I tend to think we have. Yeah. I think, you know, a lot of the d rating last year was because yields were going up and particularly real yields

that they seem to have peaked. Now. Um, we've we've you know, we've had the uncertainty about how much they're fed will need to tighten. That seems to be clearing up a bit. We know there's going to be a growth slow down. I think that the swing fact to at the moment is the earning numbers and how they're going to look over the next several quarters. But to me, it would take some really, really bad news for us

to test last year's lows. I want to go back to fixed income income because you say, Chris, that fixed income really stands to benefit most when inflation interest rates peak, and it does feel like we're going to get to it, whether it's this year or maybe at least. The thinking is that the FED is coming near an end, and maybe global central banks are as well. So what's the fixed income play? Um, is it sovereign debt? Is a corporate debt? What is it? I think the speech sweet

spot is investment grade credit. And actually it's the short end of the curve. It's the short maturities because the yield curve is inverted, so you're getting higher yields at the short end. Of the market that you are in the five, ten or fifteen year sectors. So why take on that additional maturity risk when you can get nice

yields today? So investment grade looks good. We're we're quite as on the fundamentals for great credit and if you're feeling really optimistic, going to high yield where you can get six seven eight percent yield without taking too much duration with risk, and I think given where we are

in the cycle, that's a very attractive proposition. Any any you know companies sectors in particular, or any regions of the world when it comes to corporate well, we like we like dollar debt, we like US dollar denominated debt, and it extends to things like emerging market hard currency debt as well. We're already seeing, i think, some signs where the fundamentals are improving. And we've already had quite

a bit of issuance this year so far. Saudi Arabia came with a big deal, Israel came with a big deal. You know, US rates are peaking, the dollars seems to have peaked. These are all good signs for emerging markets. What about Europe closer to home? How does the how does the year look. I mean, we spent a lot of last year talking about concerns that we could hit a recession, and Carol you mentioned it at Stephanie Flanders essentially saying that, you know, reset in Europe might be

more shallow than many people thought. It's pretty interesting to hear this, although UK she wasn't so sure about it exactly. Um, do you see opportunities there, Chris, as a result of the continued strength that we're seeing. Well, you know, I think the big the big issue for Europe was was the energy situation and the turning off of the Russian supplies of gas, and they seem to have dealt with

it pretty well. We're having a relatively mild winter so far, so but how about those energy prices that you're paying for for what you are paying for heat. They're coming down and eventually they'll come down for the consumer as well. China reopening is actually pretty good for Europe as well, because a lot of the industrial goods will get a boost from when China starts to demand more imports again.

And I see more opportunity on the equity side really there, on the fixed income side in Europe because equity markets here got smashed last year. They were training on you know, below ten times this year's expected earnings and if things aren't going to play out quite as badly as they as as thought a few months ago, and there's certainly some significant upside for for equities. It's more of a

value cyclical play. But in contrast to the US market which remains dominated by take, I think Europe has got some upside on the equities side. Well, Chris, really appreciate getting some time with you today. Chris i Go his chief investment officer at Accent Investment Managers, joining us via zoom from London on this Thursday. Thanks for listening to Bloomberg Business Week. Download the podcast on iTunes, SoundCloud, or

Bloomberg dot com. You can also listen to our radio show at two pm Eastern on Bloomberg Radio or stream us live on YouTube and Bloomberg dot com.