Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, Radio News.
Welcome to the Bloomberg Daybreak Asia podcast. I'm Doug Chrisner. On today's episode, we'll be taking a look at the global macro landscape. In a moment, we'll be chatting with David Spell, co CIO at Mount Lucas Management. Plus a discussion on the fed's path ahead with Bill Adams. He is the chief economist at Comerica Bank. But we begin in Tokyo. Joining us now is Katherine Thorbeck. She is
Asia tech columnist for Bloomberg Opinion. She's been very busy this week writing about the story on a Deep Seek, the Chinese AI startup. Catherine, thank you for making time to chat with us. I know it's been a busy week for you. What I want to begin with the story that just broke late in the day US time. American officials are investigating whether Deep Seek essentially circumvented restrictions
on advanced semiconductors from Nvidia. Now we know that the Biden administration cut off China's access to a range of some of Nvidia's most powerful products. Now Sands seemed to be shifting a little bit. Can you fill us in on what you understand the story to.
Be, right. So this news just came out, as you mentioned, just a few hours ago, and I don't think it really caught anybody by surprise that the US would launch a probe into, you know, what sort of chips Deep Seek was using to train its models and whether it
was able to circumvent export controls. And it's too soon to sort of know the outcome of that investigation, but honestly, it wouldn't entirely surprise me if they were able to get their hands on some Nvidia chips, some of the more advanced chips that have been cut off to China. You know, these export controls have proven pretty porous in
a number of instances. That said, we don't know at this point in time, and deep seek has it is out there that Deep Seek was hoarding some of the older in video chips before these export controls came in, and whether they were able to get their hands on the more advanced models, that's sort of the question now. And I think a lot of people in the US, you know, are just very curious how they were able to create these AI models with the technology that they had.
So it makes sense that the US would launch this investigation. Now, it wouldn't entirely surprise me if they were able to obtain some of these more advanced chips. I'm not sure that would necessarily change the narrative about how deep seak
has sort of upended big tech and BAI race. Right now, I still think that they were able to prove that they, you know, are able to come up with AI breakthroughs despite all of these restrictions, and I think that that still is very much top of mind for big tech right now.
So our reporting indicates when it comes to the chip story, that American officials are looking at whether they were acquired these Nvidia chips through a third party or a third parties plural in Singapore. But there are a number of other investigations going on in regards to deep seek, and that would include Microsoft often open Ai looking at whether open aiyes model was somehow used in training deep seek.
Is that right, that's correct? And so right now Microsoft is probing whether deep seek used outputs from open AI's models to train their own model, which would technically be a breach of the terms of service for open using open AI's models. But to me, this this really reeked of a lot of irony. You know, open ai has trained its models by basically scraping writing and art from the entire internet, you know, without really getting meaningful consent
from artists and writers to do that. So it did seem a little bit odd and it has rubbed a lot of people sort of the wrong way. A lot of jokes have been made about Oh now open a open ai all the sudden cares about, you know, intellectual property rights. You know, whether deep Seak obtained this data improperly or not is still sort of the subject of investigation. But I think it does put open ai in a little bit of an awkward spot right now.
So what does the deep Seek story tell us or allow us to understand about the evolution of the AI industry in China?
Right So, I think deep seek really caught the West by surprise when it released its most recent model on January twentieth, And I don't think it necessarily had to catch so many people entirely off guard, and you know, caused this multi billion dollar stock market sort of route, and some of those losses have been paired back over
over the week. But you know, I first wrote about deep Seek back in June more than six months ago when it released its V two model, one of its earlier AI models, and I was just saying that this
is actually a very impressive AI model. You know, for a long time, the West and Silicon Valley has sort of claimed dominance in the AI race, and they've thought there were years ahead of China, and I think policymakers in Washington have thought, you know, the export controls, the restrictions on chips that they've been putting towards China that would really hold China back, and Deep Seek really up
ended that narrative. You know, they showed that Chinese AI, Chinese AI startups are actually really able to innovate and are able to do it at a fraction of the cost that these Silicon Valley tech giants have been doing. So it really sort of I think people were really really impressed by this R one model that they put out on January twentieth, And this R one model, it can really it's a reasoning model, so it can really sort of think through questions the way you know a
human would think through questions. It's been on par with you know, open AIS models on a number of industry benchmarks, and it really I think, you know, caught the sort of tech billionaires in the US, some of these very powerful companies totally off guard this week.
To what extent do you believe there is an entrenched bias that China doesn't innovate, that it merely copies.
So I think we've seen this narrative for a while, and I think that there's a number of reasons why this comes up over and over again and why we're continually shocked by China's tech breakthroughs. And you know, some of these, I think, you know, a language barrier, separate social media ecosystems, and sort of a shrinking number of foreign reporters actually in China give the US very little visibility into some of the more exciting sort of developments
in China's tech sector right now. And I also think that there's sort of an insular mindset in the US that you know, Silicon Valley and sort of these the Silicon Valley leaders, a lot of them seem to think that they're the only ones who can really lead the charge here, and I think it leaves huge blind spots
to what's going on in China. A lot of sort of the coverage of China that we read in the US is very focused on geopolitical rivalries and a lot of you know, voices in Washington see any sort of tech breakthroughs in China as you know, a threat to
democracy everywhere. And whether or not that's true, I think it does create these big blind spots to some of the sort of actual people working in China, and you know, the more than one billion people that live there and a lot of times are innovating and sort of driving tech forward despite their government and not because of it.
I know, the TikTok story is something that you and I have discussed in the past, and the proprietary nature of that algorithm something that Chinese would like to protect. I found it curious that in the case of deep Seek, the developers opted for kind of an open system. Did that surprise you at all?
It didn't entirely surprise me. I think that they were sort of working with what they've got, and you know, open source models you can sort of tweak and a lot of people can work on them at once, and you can sort of they're they're a little bit cheaper to run than sort of what open ai is doing, which is just training bigger and bigger and bigger proprietary models, So it didn't totally surprise me that they did this.
I think it does sort of raise larger questions of sort of the future direction of the AI sector and whether it will be you know, dominated by these like smaller startups that are really perfecting and tweaking these open source models, or whether sort of the open AI route, which is just you know, creating bigger and bigger and bigger models and spending more and building out these models, whether that will sort of prove superior and we'll have to see how it does play out in the long run.
So we were talking a moment ago about open ai, and you reference the fact that open ai essentially was trained using the US intranet, and I'm wondering, from the point of view of deep seek, do we know much about how this model was trained at all?
So I think it's interesting. I think when it comes to deep Seek. One of the big issues that sort of as the swarm of American and international users have discovered as they've logged on and you know, downloaded this app and it's you know, shot up to the top
of Apple's app store this week. One of the things that they've discovered, is you know what's off limits behind China's Great Firewall and whether that's you know, talking about Shijinping, talking about China's human rights record in Shinjong, where you know, there have been documented human rights abuses of weager Muslim minorities, and right now, when you chat with deep seek about that, you know it'll initially say, let's change the subject, let's
talk about something else. There are sort of workarounds that I was able to play around with this week where I did get it to say and sort of encode. You know that Xi Jinping has faced international criticism for his treatment of Hong Kong protesters and political dissidents. So it does show that deep Seek was trained on data beyond the Great Firewall, and I'm sure that's going to
cause a headache for deep Seek. You know, I don't think Chinese authorities are going to crack down on this tool that you know has brought such a positive international spotlight to its tech sector and tech capabilities. But what I do think that this all shows is that there's a lot more at stake in this global race for AI dominance between the US and China. You know, as more people turn to these tools for research, for homework help.
They could also be used to sort of covertly influence our ideas and influence our ideologies, whether that's from Beijing or from the US. So I think that, you know, there's obviously a lot of money in stock market value at stake here, but these tools are also very powerful and they have the power to really influence people. And I think that that we're going to see more of that sort of play now in the long run.
Catherine will leave it there always a pleasure. Katherine Thorbeck, Asia tech columnist for Bloomberg Opinion, joining us here on the Daybreak Asia podcast. Welcome back to the Daybreak Asia Podcast. I'm Doug Chrisner. There was certainly volatility in the currency markets in late New York trading today and the catalyst was President Trump. He said that he will follow through on his threat to impose twenty five percent tariffs on
imports from Canada and Mexico this Saturday. For a closer look now at how these tariffs might affect the macro outlook, I'm joined by David Aspell. He is partner also co CIO at Mount Lucas Management, joining us from just outside Philadelphia. Thank you for making time to chat with us. David, do you have a sense of what the tariff threat may mean to global markets generally speaking?
I mean, there's a lot of uncertainty, doesn't it.
You know, we've got a new administration that's just come in that you know, it's clearly sees volatility as a feature, not a bug. And you know they're using tariffs, amongst other things, for negotiating leverage to try and push through some pretty large macro policy goals. And these policy goals run directly through currency markets, through bond yields, and they're going to have large impacts on economies everywhere.
It's going to be a fascinating four years.
I think, yeah, definitely, the dollar has been a big beneficiary. We can talk about FED policy in a moment. But do you expect the dollar to remain very strong here against the matures?
I think it's hard to say.
I think what's going on is that, you know, we've gone through a period of US exceptionalism over the past few years, where the US economy has been stronger than others, and so that's why you've seen it particularly against Japan or against the Euro. You know, the euro has been weak because the European economy has been weak.
It's the same with the UK. And if you think why that.
Is, it's because the US has had has higher rates currently and it can survive higher rates because it's got a slightly different type of economy where mortgage rates don't feed through in quite the same way. And now you've got an administration that seems like it's unleashing some animal spirits. So as long as that continues and the US does better than others, then yeah, I think the US dollar can stay can stay fairly well bid.
There's been some debate in Washington as whether or not these policies regarding tariffs are inflationary. Do you have a view on that.
I don't think they are.
I think they might be for a short period of time as a macro trader, and how I look at inflation, how I think the FED looks at inflation is maybe a little different to how people on main street see it.
What inflation to me is.
Is an ongoing process of higher prices for a period of time, whereas tariffs to me are a one off price shock. Now it could be that they get embedded, particularly at a time when people are nervous about inflation, but I think that the negatives of inflation will take you know, as they slow down the economy in some places, if people are nervous about them, will take the edge
off them. And I think generally if the inflation part of me seems quite well set over the next few years, partly because of housing.
Just a few weeks ago, the debate in the bond market was whether or not we were going to see a five percent yield on the tenure. I'm looking at something now that's closer to four and a half percent. What's your view on yields going forward?
Unless something goes very wry in inflation, which is possible but seems unlikely.
I think we've seen the peak and yields. I think the economy can survive them.
But I think you've got a FED that wants to reduce rates and is able to reduce rates over time. If you look at where the FED projections were at the end of the year, you know they thought that with a two point five percent core PC at the end of this year, they would have rates down at three point nine, which to me seems like they're making an easier bar to cut rates rather than a higher bar.
So I think they offer good value.
It seems that they're useful in a portfolio context currently because if the economy slows down, the FED is able to cut which I think.
Is real helpful.
In terms of the story across the Asia Pacific, it's mainly been about weak domestic demand in China and sluggishness in the industrial economy. Do you have a sense of what China is going through, where we are now in this cycle, and whether or not things are beginning to improve.
Yeah.
I think that that's been one of the major stories in the global economy over the past few years. The extent to which China has been slowing. They've clearly got a consumption problem. That their economy is incredibly unbalanced. They run very large surpluses and rely on other people to soak up those surpluses, and.
The rest of the world has decided that rightly.
I think that it's not going They're not willing to absorb those surpluses, which has led to some slow down in China. I think what they're doing is slowly they are trying to rebalance, and I thought that the stimulus policies they put in around rates and the other loosenings and the cleaning up a balance sheets. I thought they were quite powerful. Just about now starting to see those, to see those come to fruition. The data seems like
it's starting to turn up. It seems like the stimulus was powerful around the consumer.
It's just I worry that it's.
Going to run into a buzzsaw of the new administration and tariffs, and I hope that we can get a deal done that rebalances their economy and means that we don't have to the rest of the world doesn't have to soak up their surpluses without too much collateral damage.
I'm curious about whether you're finding any value across markets in Asia. Now, Chinese assets may be inexpensive on a relative basis, we can go there, but I'm also curious about what you're seeing in Japan.
I would say that we generally do systematic trend following, So what we're doing is just following prices. If things are going up, we're along them. If things are going down, with short them, which means you know, we've been in the in the yen trade for a long period of time. We have been long dollars and short yeah, and that's been good. I think that trade can continue because of
the interest rate differential. Alongside on the discretion side where we run macro strategies, I think the Chinese equity market is incredibly cheap.
As long as it can do the things.
It just needs to be able to do the rebalancing to get through this period and come to a trade agreement and operate in a much more normal way as something closer to a regular emerging market economy. If it can do that, then the equity market there is incredibly cheap. If it cannot do that, then I think we'll end up this will be another false down of which you've
had a few over the past years. But I'm pretty hopeful that the new administration is able to do a trade deal and we see some brighter times ahead in Asia.
David, we'll leave it there, Thanks so much. David Spell, partner co CIO at Mount Lucas Management, joining us here on the Daybreak Aasia podcast. So let's turn our attention now to the US economy. Today, we learn that economic growth expanded at a solid pace in the fourth quarter, albeit a little less than forecast. Fourth quarter GDP growing at a rate of two point three percent, and can consumer spending advancing at an annual rate of four point
two percent. Let's take a closer look now with Bill Adams. He is the chief economist at Comerica Bank. Bill, thanks for making time to chat with us. Give me your overall impression of this GDP print. What do you think it tells us?
So the headline was a slowdown, but the details were strong. If you look at my preferred measure of core real GDP that's real final sales to private domestic purchasers. That tracks GDP's trend by leaving out the effects of inventories, leaving out the effects of trade and government spending. That grew three point two percent annualized in the fourth quarter. So that's good news. The US economy is in good shape.
Growth momentum is stronger than the headline in the fourth quarter and closer to the annual growth rate two point eight percent, which is excellent for the US economy.
So at the same time, today we learned that weekly jobless claims came in well below estimates. And I'm wondering whether when you look at the claims day on top of the GDP data, you come away with a conclusion that, yeah, the Fed's going to be on hold for a bit longer.
It sure looks like it. The labor market data in the second half of twenty twenty four, we're worrying the Fed. You'll recall that was when we were all talking about the Psalm rule, form of FED economist Claudia Sam's observation.
When the three month moving average of the unemployment rate rises by half a percent or more from it's twelve month low, typically the economy has been in recession, and so that Psalm rule triggered, and I think that was one of the big contributors to why the Fed cut interest rates a full percentage point between September and December.
But now we have this solid GDP growth data in hand, Labor market data like that claims data like the jobs report have stabilized, and that means that the FED is less worried about the economic outlook and they can they feel they have the latitude to refocus their attention on bringing inflation closer to that two percent target.
So, Bill, I'm curious to get your take on how the policies from the Trump administration as they relate to deportations may impact the labor market. Do you have a sense of that.
So directionally, if the US labor market has fewer workers, that would tend to push the unemployment rate down. That's just labor demand is not going to decline as much as labor supply would, and so it's a question of magnitude how large this effect is going to be. But I think the Fed is clearly taking a wait and see approach to see how much the change in immigration policies affects labor supply over the next twelve months, next twenty four months, as well as waiting and see this
for what exactly happens with tariff policies tax policies. But directionally, it all kind of points to either a tighter job market with changes in immigration policy, or higher prices for consumers and for businesses if teriff rates go up, or just an overall hotter economy if we have tax cut directed stimulus. So all of that would be reasons for the FED to slow the move lower in interest rates or to just hold interest rates steady for an extended period. That seems to be the theme right now.
So if you extend that then into the market's response. I'm talking about the treasury market here, is it likely that that tenure yield could approach five percent this year.
I'm expecting that for most of the year, the ten year is probably going to range between four and a quarter percent and four and three quarters percent. I think a lot of the concerns about upper pressures on inflation, or pressures on the labor market, or on the fiscal deficit if we have more stimulus, all of that is I think pretty clearly reflected in market pricing today.
What about the knock on effect that it would have with the mortgage market.
I think we'll have less of a recovery of home sales than we would have in the absence of these policies, but you know that's relative, and if you're comparing to twenty twenty four, that was the weakest year since the mid nineties for existing home sales, I think the direction, even with mortgage rates staying high, is probably a bit higher this year. It's just it's going to be a more measured recovery for existing home sales than we otherwise
would have seen. New home sales I think look better because there's homebuilders are offering incentives to home buyers, and the kind of the absolute number of existing homes that are listed right now is still pretty low, and that is directing home buyers, the ones who can afford to be buying in a market like this, to have a look at new construction.
I mentioned a moment ago, the consumer spending in the fourth quarter of last year was very robust at four point two percent growth. How do you evaluate the American consumer right now? Are things beginning to become less robust in a way?
Perhaps that's a funny question. So on average, the American consumer is in great shape, benefiting from the big increases in the stock market, big increases in home equity for homeowners, and that wealth effect is funding robust spending on discretionary categories on new vehicles. New vehicle sales also helped along by both fears of higher prices because the tariffs, and then also the idea that maybe those incentives for EV sales could go away. But in general, the average American
consumer is performing well. But that average is really being held up by high income, high wealth, affluent households. And if you look at the typical consumer, the media and consumer, they are much more affected by the increase in rents, by the increase in the cost of food and other essentials and that side of the American consumer is struggling
to an extent still. I think it's been directionally a little bit better over the last six to twelve months, but if you look at high frequency measures of food insecurity, for example, it does look like you see more stress right now than you saw before the pandemic hit and transform the US economy.
Bill will leave it there. Thank you so much for joining us today. Bill Adams there. He is the chief economist at Comerica Bank. Joining us here on the Daybreak Asia Podcast. Thanks for listening to today's episode of the Bloomberg Daybreak Asia Edition podcast. Each weekday, we look at the story shaping markets, finance, and geopolitics in the Asia Pacific. You can find us on Apple, Spotify, the Bloomberg Podcast
YouTube channel, or anywhere else you listen. Join us again tomorrow for insight on the market moves from Hong Kong to Singapore and Australia. I'm Doug Chrisner, and this is Bloomberg