Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News. You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence podcast. Catch us live weekdays at ten am Eastern on Apple, Cardplay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
You're listening to Bloomberg Intelligence. Alex Steel here Paul Sweeney recover all the industries and all the analysis from our fabulous Bloomberg Intelligence arm of analysts two thousand companies, one hundred and thirty industries all around the world. And for that we're going to focus on Paramount for a moment. That stock US down about four and a half percent. The news is that they're letting go of hundreds of employees just after an amazing number of people watch the
Super Bowl on all different platforms. There's only one person that you go to for this analysis. Keith ar Monganathan, Bloomberg Intelligence analyst on US Media gets too. You have the layoffs and then you also wind up having this amazing streaming number. Walkers through your take.
Yeah, I mean this is really more of course, they did have a great Super Bowl, Alex, but I think this is really more about the future outlook for the company, and that is super super bleak. Yes, it was a great night for TV advertising. We think they've gotten seven hundred million dollars in roughly about four hours. But then it's more about the spectcular challenges. I mean, throughout twenty twenty three we've seen TV advertising decline by low double digits.
It was down almost thirteen percent in the latest quarter that they reported, and it's not going to get too much better. And it's not just the challenges on the TV side of the equation for them. It's also about their streaming business. And they've made good strides absolutely in terms of you know, streaming subscribers, and again I anticipate that they're going to have some good streaming numbers to report thanks to the Super Bowl. But it is burning
a lot of money. Almost one point seven billion dollars is what they will report in losses for twenty twenty four and for twenty twenty three, and before that they lost about one point eight billion, So it's just been a continuous drain on the company.
So Githa, the stock is down over the trailing twelve months about forty percent here, and I know there's a lot of talk around, perhaps the controlling shareholder, Sherry Redstone, will consider selling all a part of the company. What's the latest on that?
So the latest actually in that saga, and this has now been an ongoing drama for many months now, Paul, the latest is that Byron Allen actually came up with a bid for all of the company, not just for the controlling stake held through National Amusements. And he actually put up a pretty good bid. You know, it was fourteen billion dollars in terms of equity, so thirty billion dollars enterprise value. We think it was a pretty fair bid. The problem is, you know, Byron Allen, I don't think
anybody is taking him too seriously. He's you know, had this track of kind of coming up with these empty bids. So while it is a number, again we've not really seen a whole lot of action that we would have expected.
So this is a totally unfair question to Paul. Let's pretend you're still an m and a banker here, investment banker. What would you be talking to paramount about.
I would I would say, I think the best buyer here, there's a strategic buyer, maybe Warner Brothers Discovery, but both of those companies as githa wall and those balance sheets are not great. I think I would be shopping into a private equity because they're still good for free cash flows here and let them deal with it. So gethe what is what is the sense here as to I think about Paramount, I think about Warner Brothers Discovery. I
don't know. I mean, what do we what is happens to these companies because it just feels like against some of the big tech companies, Uh, you know, they're just not big enough here, and you know against Netflix are just not big enough. What did they do?
So?
I think Warner Brothers Discovery actually had a pretty interesting move last week, Paul, which was they banded together with ESPN, Disney and Fox to kind of create this sports super app which will launch in the fall. And that's one way for them to kind of protect at least some part of their linear revenue stream, because I mean, they've kind of everybody's seeing the writing on the wall here. We're seeing cord cutting, We're seeing about ten percent of
the subscriber based get eroded year after year. We've already lost thirty million subscribers. So that's one good way for them I think to kind of control their destiny a little bit in terms of distribution. Again, remember Paramount is not part of that bundle, so that again is a little bit of you know, a strike against them. But you know, you bring up a good point. I think at the end of the day, we are going to
have to see consolidation. Of course, as you just pointed out, there were rumors of actually Warner Brothers, Discovery being interested in Paramount, but you're right, the market did not cheer for that. That would be about more than you know, fifty or sixty billion dollars I think in debt or those combined companies. So yeah, it is it is definitely going to be challenging, but I think consolidation is definitely on the cards.
Okay, So then how does that happen? Because if like three wrongs don't make a right, and you're not gonna put all the media companies together because it's going to create more problems. So is it private equity like to split up different areas of media within the company.
Yeah, I think Paramount I think one of the things has been, you know, to sell it for parts. Right, there are some parts of the company, the TV networks that could be very very attractive to private equity, as you just pointed out, because of the cash flows. Right, it's still a business. It used to throw out about six billion dollars in ebit dah, but it will still throw out about four and a half to almost close to four point eight billion dollars in ebit DA. So again,
cash highly cash generative. Of course, the future you know flows don't look so great. But then there have been a lot of uh, there has been a lot of interest in the studio part of the business, right, whether that's you know, David Ellison with his guy Dance Media, maybe somebody else, maybe even an Apple. We haven't necessarily seen any of those, you know, bids kind of come to fruition, but there definitely will be a lot of interest.
But I think the one thing that we kind of have to wait to get some clarity on is definitely the regulatory environment. We've seen big tech kind of really shy away from anything too splashy, but who knows, maybe when the government changes, all of that will change as well.
You know, Githa, when these networks bid and pay billions of dollars for sports rights, and even if you know, you put up that seven hundred million dollars of ad revenue that you reference. You know, it's tough to make a profit on that kind of business. So what the networks have always said is, yes, but we promote other shows on our networks, and that value is really worth paying these big rights fees. But if you're promoting all these shows on the CBS network that nobody's watching because
of cord cutting, how valuable is that? I mean, I thought about that they were promoting all their shows that I don't think anybody's watching because they've already cut the cord.
Yeah, you're absolutely right for them, though. The one that Paramount has done really kind of well, and I don't know whether this is a plus or a minus, but it definitely helps them at least shore up. I think the total value of their assets is they've actually all of their sports properties, including the NFL. They've actually kind of leaked it outside the muddle, so they were showing it on Paramount Plus day one, and they did the
same thing with the Super Bowl as well. So I think even if they're you know, even if you have cord cutters, they could make the argument that yes, you know, people can potentially sign up for that service. We saw,
of course Peacock do that with that Wildcat NFL game. Again, what they know that they're losing subscribers on the PayTV bundle, so they're trying to They're trying their best, I don't know how successfully to kind of make it up on the streaming side, but you're right, I mean it is kind of the lose lose.
But you know, for me, I have become addicted to Survivor. I've never seen it, and when I had a concussion, that was the show that I decided that I was going to watch. And now I'm paying like twenty five bucks a season to watch it on iTunes and I'm like, this is getting ridiculous. That's what they gotta do. I got to get people like me to then go pay for the streaming service because I'm like, wait a minute, it's spen one hundred dollars on four seasons.
Certainly a great promo Survivor by more people with concussions, yes.
Exactly, but I mean I'm also like, wow, that's really expensive to that is to put out there. Keitha. So what's next? Like, what are you watching pre Paramount? Now?
For Paramount, it's definitely. It is an M and a place. Something has to happen. It has to happen fast. Bob Backish, the CEO, has pretty much said it. He you know, he said he's evaluating Byron Allen's proposal. Again, not sure whether that will necessarily pan out, but somebody has to come up with something and it has to happen.
Quickly, all right, Keitha, thanks so much for joining us. As always, Keitha wrong and nothing. She is the media analyst Bloomberg Intelligence. Yeah, I don't know. I don't know what you do with media in general. I mean because I just don't with the cord cutting and the switch to streaming, I don't know where the profits are going, and I don't know what multiple to put on whatever profits the companies tell me they're going to have.
When you're taking I mean, I'll look at somebody like us, right, I mean you started in a different world. But for me, like I'm an unair talent person, like this is where I have grown up over the last you know, twenty years. What do you do if there's like a next phase, like where do you where is the media need going.
To be podcasts?
Right?
But at some point Armies, You laugh, because then we're going to get saturated, right then, like all the money's going to go into one thing and the pendulum switches back. However, I have been hearing about the death of linear TV for twenty years. Yes, so, and it's still kicking in some form of another.
It is still it's still kicking. And we saw if you want to get a big, big, big audience, partner up with the NFL and do the Super Bowl thing one hundred and twenty five million viewers.
If you're an advertiser, I'm probably not.
You're probably not.
But if you're an advertiser, you're like, there is no other place, full stop, where I can get that kind of reach, And seven million dollars at the end to day doesn't seem like such a bad deal in the world where everybody's audience delivery has been deluded.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence podcast. Catch us live weekdays at ten am Eastern on applecar Play and androyd Otto with the Bloomberg Business App. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station Just Say Alexa, playing Bloomberg eleven thirty again.
The Echo news of the day.
CPI came in a little bit hotter than expected. We've got yields higher, the ten year treasures up about nine basis points four point two seven percent, the short ends up twelve basis points four point five nine percent. iRED Jersey joins us. Thankfully he is safe at his home office. He didn't trick that three minute drive to the Princeton office. So I were glad that you're working from home and
you're safe and out there shoveling. What did you make of the CPI print, and more importantly, what do you think your friends at the Federal Reserve are going to say?
A couple of things. First, let me say my school district, my daughter school district, does have a snow day today, so they are not learning online. Second, the hill in front of my house, I saw three cars slide down it because there's a sheet of ice under the snow. So, believe me, I'm glad I didn't go into the office
today just because of the treachery of getting there. Yeah, today's CPI report obviously was stronger than expected, and in particular, and I think this is something we've been harping on
for a little while. It's that the services component, so that what they call super core inflation, so services excluding housing services grew at over six percent on a year on year basis, and that's, you know, that's really the component that is really driving the fact that inflation is finding it very difficult to come down as quickly as
I think some people had hoped. And you know, we've priced out basically not quite a whole nother cut, but we've priced out a large portion of another cut this year, and we're getting now toward the idea that maybe the FED is actually only going to cut three times this year, which is what they've been saying. There's still a lot of people and I was talking to some investors this morning who are thinking, well, why is the FED going to cut at all? If inflation keeps coming in like this?
And I think that that's a reasonable question to be asking, is you know, is the Fed ever going to cut now? I think that they probably will cut at least one time before midyear, because if they don't, it'll be politically difficult for them to cut in say September, right during the election cycle, just because you know, they don't want to be seen as being political. And I think that they want to get at least one out of the way.
That way they can say, well, you know, if we cut again, it's not it's not something that they haven't done already.
So last week I was on TV and I brought up the risk of inflation reaccelerating, and I was almost kind of laughed off set a little bit by the guest, how much do we have to worry about a reacceleration? There is no hedging against, say, another hike, like there is no hedging against a reacceleration necessarily, do we need to start?
Yeah, that's that's an interesting point. So I think there's a couple of things. One is, when you look at the composition of inflation, it's not that inflation has reaccelerated. I think you know, some people have said that to me. It's just that they didn't come down as the market expected.
It's basically flat month on month more or less. The The issue I think with a the potential of another high is that you'd really need to see a meaningful acceleration in goods prices, and goods prices continue to fall
at least very slightly. So the question is if we do see like supply chain issues or something like that that forces goods prices to increase another you know, even if it's just a little bit, like another percent or something like that, that will increase all of all of CPI a little bit, and that would, you know, certainly keep the Fed on the sidelines, you know, whether or not they hike. I think you need to see a
string of that kind of reacceleration. And it seemed that that would be the trend in order for the Fed to hike again. But again, like we have to first price out all the cuts that are still being priced. Keep in mind, we're still pricing for the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates two hundred basis points over the next year and a half. So let we have to price that out first before we start talking about talking about the market pricing and heights.
So we talk to traders here, Ira, what are they doing here? I mean it looks like they're I mean today yields are up twelve basis points on a two year Are people trading off of the are they investing off of this number? What do they trade off of this number?
Well, so, investors in aggregate, it seemed to have been more or less flat to slightly underweight duration. So that means that they're basically short interest rate risk, which which means that they did pretty well today right with ten years yields up about nine basis points right now. The people had gotten long interest rates and then they started to cut those when we got under four percent. So I think things are a little bit more balanced now.
I haven't talked to a lot of like traders, like high frequency traders, but the investors that I've talked to over the last couple of days certainly are you know a little bit, but they're looking for an entry point to get long rates at least a little bit. You know, they didn't like rates at three eighty, you know, well they like rates at two and at four and a quarter. Not sure, but there certainly is some appetite for people maybe to you know, shorts to cover and to get
flat duration for example, and that could be coming. And there definitely is demand. You look at the auction last week and you know, you guys have been really in front of the coverage on some of the auctions. On the treasury auctions, they were really good. So there is primary demand. Right investors still want to be owned treasuries. The question is you know, how much do they want
to own visa VI. The the amount of supply coming out outstanding, and it seems, you know, at least today, you know, everyone was surprised by this last thing that I have to say, most of this move, or at least half of the move in in treasuries today comes from inflation break evens. So this is the first time in the last six months or so that we've really seen inflation expectations move up significantly higher than they were, so that that's something to keep an eye on today too.
So that explains and obviously also the short end is getting hit too. But I gotta say, when the numbers came out, I was like, okay, let's look at this twenty basis point move. Twenty five basis point move we're going to see and it's only twelve. I feel like this feels orderly to some extent. And is that because of those buyers that you're talking about or is it a position thing?
Well, keeping mind, Alex, you know, we've priced out thirty six bass points of cuts just in the last week, so we had been selling off going into today's number, So I think part of it was people, you know, again, position squaring people getting you know, flatter the market, so you know you didn't need to see a necessarily a twenty basis point self. Really yields are probably you know, reasonably close to fair value right here. So when I say really yields, I mean the yields on tips on
treasury inflation protected securities. And I've been saying, and Paul, I know I've mentioned this to you a number of times over the past couple of months. Is I think that inflation expectations, so inflation break evens, are habitually a bit too low, and I think that those do need to kind of recalibrate to the idea that hey, maybe we'll have three percent inflation for a long period of time instead of inflation continuing to come down toward two percent like the market's currently pricing.
Yep, very good.
We've heard that from you before. We appreciate getting your thoughts here today, iRED Jersey Gus interest Rate Strategises Forloomberg Intelligence giving us some thoughts on the CPI data.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast. Catch us live weekdays at ten am Eastern on Affo car playing enroud Otto with the Bloomberg business app listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Market selling off today. CPI print came in a little bit hotter than expected. So if you were in the camp saying I think the Fed's going to cut sooner rather than later, probably today's not your day.
Here.
Let's check in with somebody who does this stuff for delivering Jeffrey Cleveland. He's a chief economist that Payden and Regal, joining us on zoom from Los Angeles. So, Jeff, you know, is this a bumping a road for the dubbish FED folks or is this something more on the inflation front.
I think it's probably something more. I mean, this is pretty disappointing if you thought the FED wasn't cut in March or or even may really disrupts the trend. So whether you look at core CPI up point four percent months a month, or you know, as the policy makers have counseled us, we've been looking at core services X shelter. You know that was up point nine percent month to month in January, the highest print in over two years. So that's there's some inflation pressure still in the economy.
So I think this really should dampen expectations for cuts.
Jeffrey. Maybe what we're learning though, is that inflation is just lumpy, that it's it's just gonna be hard. It's not gonna be a straight line down for disinflation, but it'll be sort of a volatile, evolving target. How is an economist? Do you just kind of factor that in?
Yeah, So, I mean it's possible that January has has some noise. I think we saw that to pre two thousand and eight. If you go back to that era, you would often see januaries where you'd see some price increase. So maybe that's what we saw also last January January of twenty three. So it's I don't want to over
overweight or over index to this particular number. So I think that's important to keep in touch, you know, in mind, it's possible by the time we get to summer that core CPI will you know, have cooled off a bit. And but I guess at that point you're still gonna have three percent plus year on year core CPI. So maybe something like three point four or three point five Is that enough or is that cool enough to justify rate cuts? I don't know that's gonna be a tough question.
So I think that months and month you could be lumpy, you can have noise, but it's a question of Okay, where are we going to be by mid year? Even in the best case scenario, seems like we're three percent plus on core CPI at mid year. Jeffy, what do you guys at ping for rate cuts?
Yeah?
Hey, y, go ahead, Jeffrey, just want to what you guys are thinking about in terms of kind of GDP for the US and twenty twenty four here, I mean, how measured is it going to be.
Well, we're pretty bullish, actually, I think, but compared to the Bloomberg consensus right now, we have a two percent GDP growth for twenty twenty four. I think the Bloomberg consensus last time I looked was closer to one one point one percent. So that is powered primarily by the consumer. So we're still pretty upbeat at paid in about the health of the consumer, the strength of the labor market, the growth and consumer income has been.
Really, really key.
I think that's why a lot of forecasters maybe were too barish in the last twelve eighteen months. They're just not seen the consumer income growth was continuing, so pretty upbeat on the growth prospects for the US economy at least.
What I love when we were just talking about inflation, though, is that you sound like you're trying to work it out just like we are. And I think if that says a lot about how hard it is to probably be an economist right now because something just don't make consistent sense. So how do you then model out if you taken to the growth that Paul was talking about in the inflation confusion, when the FED cuts and what that cutting cycle looks like, and if it's a normalization
versus oh gosh, growth is terrible, it's a recession. We have to cut now. Yeah, it's not.
It's not that difficult. I mean, so we look at what the market is pricing, and if you go back a few weeks months, the market we thought had too many rate cuts priced in. Why did we think that, well, because we thought growth would come in better then the market had anticipated. We thought you could have some you know, lumpy inflation as we've seen this morning, So we had
we had fewer rate cuts penciled in. And what we found over the years is, you know, this happens from time to time, but the bomb market just gets ahead of itself where has too many cuts priced in, and then we can take advantage of that in portfolios by positioning a little bit more conservatively, so we weren't adding to duration and expecting that rates we're going.
To rally here.
So that's it' That's kind of the how we process this information.
Jeffy, how you feel about to the labor market here? That's been one strong part of this economy from the get go.
Here.
Is it still a strong as it seems?
Yeah? In fact, it looks like it's picked up in the last three months. If you look at the three month moving average of non farm payroll growth, it says of January two hundred and eighty nine thousand. I mean, that's excellent, Paul. I mean the way to think about that for me is just we need about one hundred and five thousand jobs every month to keep the unemployment rate at where it is. So if you're growing at two hundred and eighty nine thousand, that's a pretty good
labor market. That's pretty strong labor market. So think things look solid. We're looking at real time looking for signs of layoffs. I mean, we're seeing it anecdotally talking to clients in tech. We're seeing it there, but we're not seeing broad based layoffs at least not yet. So the labor market looks solid in my view.
Solid labor market gross, okay, inflational, lumpy, sticky, sticky, but it's all right. Is the FED fueling this? Like, is the FED cutting cycle that we're anticipating in the looser financial conditions that have already happened, Is that fueling any of this?
Well?
I think the FED has been pretty clear, like, hey, we we think if things progress, if we continue to see broad based inflation, uh, you know, on target month to month inflation, we could later this year we could reduce our policy rate. That's what they're saying. The bond market is the problem. It gets ahead of itself. Said, oh yeah, I mean they're they're going to be cutting six or seven times. That was the probably the easing of financial conditions. I go to really blame the FED
for that. When I listened to cher Pale, when I listened to Christopher Waller, I think I feared a really measured story, which is, hey, this is not a slam dunk. It's we're not declaring victory. We'll see how things progress over the next few months. It was the bond market, it was bond trader.
I blamed bomb, it's our Jerseys ball.
Someone else I know, I don't even I don't want to name particular names.
No, I'm kidding.
I'm all right.
Great stuff. Really appreciate it. Thank you very much. Jeffrey clevel and a chief economist over at Paydon and Regal. Thank you very much.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast. Catch us live weekdays at ten am Eastern on Apple car Play and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station. Just say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Because it's me. Now, I'm gonna make Paul talk about natural gas. Yes, So, Williams is one of the largest natural gas pipeline movers. While oil and natural gas, it's a midstream company that means the pipes, that moves the stuff. It's one of the biggest in the entire country. Alan Armstrong is president and CEO. Williams reports tomorrow. So we're not going to ask about earnings, but we can go Macro. With the stock up about eight and a half percent
over the last year. Alan, you're in d C. What are you doing in DC?
Yeah, Alex, good morning and great to speak with you.
As always, we are in d C because we have a combination of both our analyst day that we'll do tomorrow as well as today we're doing a clean energy expo, and we've got a collection of regulators, legislators here with us, as well as a lot of the startups that are in the technology business associated with reducing emissions in and around our business, and so we're really trying to demonstrate all that we are accomplishing in terms of reducing reducing
emissions around our business and kind of the power of natural gas in its ability to reduce emissions around the world. So it's a great opportunity to bring and.
We've got parties from both sides of the aisle here with us, and a lot of the regulators and agencies that we engage with on the energy front as well with us.
So, Alan, I know from just going back and forth with your company that this was on the schedule before the Biden administration put a moratorium on LERG XP words to non FTA countries in terms of new approval for projects. How does this playing into the conversation? They say it's an environmental impact, right, you're exactly talking about the environmental impact. What's the convo?
Yeah, you know, we are certainly trying to draw awareness of all that the US has to offer. I think a lot of people forget that the number one reason that we were able to meet our Paris climate accord here in the US was on the backs of natural gas, and we want to bring awareness to that. But we also want to show, you know, one of the things that we hear from what I would say is the serious environmental opposition is to concern around fugitive methane emissions,
and that goes for L and G as well. And you know, really it's not that difficult to reduce fugitive methane emissions from our industry, and we're doing that with some great new technologies as well. So it's really a combination those things. But but ll G really is such a powerful tool that the US really needs to unleash. I think we see it as a very unfortunate political move that really does stand in the way of progress of the US being a bigger and bigger player in
helping reduce submissions around the world. Hopefully that's all it is as a political move. But it's difficult to convince our customers around the world and consumers around the world to make long term obligations to LNG. You can't. You don't just decide one year to use LNG. In the next year to go back to cole. You have to make big long term obligations on the capital side to
use LNG. And so it is pretty damning when our administration makes it unclear about whether or not we really are serious about continuing to provide our allies with natural gas around the world.
So Alan, unlike Alex, I am not an expert on energy, but my lay person understanding is, you know, natural gas versus coal versus burning oil, that's a pretty good trade anywhere. So what is the I guess the opposition. What are some of the key arguments for the opposition to l G.
Yeah, you know, the two primary arguments have been out there is one is fugitive methane emissions and the second is what people perceive to be stranded assets. Assuming that down the road we come up with lower costs, better technologies as a way to replace spinning reserve power generation capacity around the world and things like steel making, fertilizer,
all the things that we use natural gas for. So to the degree that we come up with a better solution, people are concerned in the wow, why are we spending all this capital on this now when we're going to come up with better technology. Here's the struggle with that second argument. In twenty two and again in twenty three, we hit record levels of coal consumption around the world.
Here in the US, gas is sorry.
Coal is two point three times more CO two emissions.
Than natural gas.
But the first issue I mentioned was the fugitive methane emissions and the IEA. So this isn't This isn't the US government, This is the IEA. The International Energy Administration just came out with their Fugitive methane or their methane emissions report for twenty two. It takes a long time to compile all that information. But in twenty two, natural gas was only six percent of the total methane emissions throughout the world. Coal was seven percent, and oil was
eight percent. So even when it is the product, we're moving primarily natural gas, methane is primarily natural gas. Even with that, we're still the lowest amongst the fossil fuels of fugitive methane emissions, and in total, only twenty one percent of the total methane emissions around the world are coming from fossil fuels, So we are doing a lot
to reduce methane emissions. Great players like Schineer on the LNG front and like EQT on the natural gas production front are making huge strides in reducing emissions around fugitive methane emissions. So it's not rocket science. It's not that hard to reduce fugitive methane emissions, and we're taking it down very rapidly across the industry.
So if I also just look at the idea and I realize your pipeline right, But just in terms of the export issue, it is hard to think about why would I approve a project now that will be there for decades when in theory, in decades we should be all using solar and wind. What's the argument against that?
Yeah, great question.
Aut Well, first of all, you know, we have to have backup to our renewable power. We don't have that today. The reserve capacity available from from wind is ten to thirty percent. In other words, you can only count on ten to thirty percent of that capacity. And as we all know, there are plenty of times obviously when the sun isn't shining, but there's also a lot of times when the wind isn't blowing, and there's longer periods of times.
So we're talking about batteries today that are four hours, and frankly, we just don't have the materials to be able to even build out that. But four hours is not anything I think people want to depend on that the wind's going to start blowing again.
And even for the next forty years, Ellen, like in forty years.
Even listen, if we come up with a better solution, fantastic. These are commercial, These are commercial contracts that are being made. It's not like the government or the public is the one that is stranding the ass sets here. You know, these are private investments. They're not subsidized investments. And so if we're wrong about that and we come up with solutions that are affordable and cleaner than great, we'll move
ahead to society and we'll move on. But to deny the ability to reduce emissions right here, right now, while we continue to grow coal use around the world, and the US is the is and can be the low cost exporter of natural gas around the world. Really just doesn't make any sense because it is right. Were continuing to grow missions around the world unfortunately. Yeah, and coal generation is one of the primary reasons. And so we're
not against coming up. In fact, we're investing in all kinds of new technologies ourselves, but they're not there today at scale to reduce submissions the way that natural gas can reduce emissions.
Alan, we really appreciate you taking the time. I know it's a really busy day for you. I think energy literacy is so important, So thank you so much. Alan Armstrong, President and CEO of Williams. Also will get you back after your earnings. And this is kind of the point, Paul, is that everyone can be right. I don't understand why this issue becomes so black and white sometimes because it's
very difficult. This is gonna be very difficult. And you look at country like India, right, you're gonna put a bunch of solar panels, like, I mean, how are you going to power that country coal? Right? So what are different options aside from coal? Having that conversation is quite interesting.
This is the Bloomberg Intelligence Podcast available on Apples, Spotify, and anywhere else you will get your podcasts. Listen live each weekday, ten am to noon Eastern on Bloomberg dot Com, the iHeart Radio app tune In, and the Bloomberg Business app. You can also watch us live every weekday on YouTube and always on the Bloomberg terminal