Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Catch us live weekdays at seven am Eastern on Apple CarPlay or Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Brian Weezer joins us, Madison and Wall And what's great about Brian Weezer It's it's less by hold.
Cell and much more. What in God's name are they doing?
What's the single myth of Facebook Meta that our listeners and viewers have.
What's the thing that drives you nuts?
That the myth that advertisers care about all the problems on the platform, and that they will care, they care about performance for better and worse, and they care about whether or not they get what they think are results, and that they think results come from meta. Because Metta's got great attribution tools, right, even if a lot of its false attribution.
Will dan Off, Good Morning ninety to nine.
If I'm up in Boston, Will dan Off, I believe it's his number one holding, a contrafund, And I think he would suggest the reason it's his number one holding is he bought it and he never sold it and just kept adding to it as well.
Is that the emotion you feel about Meta even with these valuations.
That's a really good way to put it. I mean, if someone just held on, obviously they did incredibly well. There are lots of reasons why you should have expected that markers might have abandoned the platform, let alone consumers.
Nobody screwing it.
So the I mean, you got a two hundred billion dollar revenue company with Meta here streets forecasting twenty percent top line revenue growth. This is advertising.
Yeah, it's what's going on here the advertise. Well, to be clear, they undoubtedly have a more optimistic go look on the ad market, let alone the economy than we do. But nonetheless they're sure certainly taking share no matter what's happening here. And that's the main thing. They're building these performance based tools. They're segmenting the market really well. When I say segmenting, I mean Fudy, the markers who are willing to pay the most fun fact just came out
the ten k an hour ago. Their third biggest market, Singapore. Really that's new. Why Singapore it's a tiny ad market because that's where all the Chinese transhipers are sending all their budgets.
This is like when I talked to YouTube here at Bloomberg, whos spearheaded ore YouTube Bedford?
Paul's same thing for YouTube.
How was AI impacting? Is it making their ad tools even better?
Yeah?
I mean the attributed performance.
That's the key thing.
We don't know that actually drive performance, right, but they can claim performance because of the modeling tools that they offer, because they may just be targeting the customer that was already going to buy a product better than someone else does.
Thanks for joining this morning, Brian Weezer. Where a Seamashawn Deck and London. We'll get to her in a moment, Brian Weezer, is it Madison? And Okay, so you were an intern at Stirling and Cooper way way long time ago.
You nailed this.
I remember the IPO day, Paul Kodrowski, David Kirkpatrick. What a magical IPO release we did. Did you see this coming? Did you know in the first year of their public trading that they'd be twenty three percent per year?
Well, we definitely had an optimistic view in the business. Not the stock That's why I had a celebrating at the IPO, but the business itself was incredibly durable. That's why at the trough, if you remember the summer after the IPO, we're like, why is everyone selling this thing? This is a great business. It was always going to be a really good business, and they've got amazing business professionals.
That's the core thing.
When you look at the great results of Facebook here, how do we extrapolate it or can we extrapolate it to Google in the search business?
Yeah, well, at least you can say that there are good tailwinds for growth for advertising. Overall, Google's not going to grow this fast. But the reality is that if medic can grow at twenty percent, you should expect that Google can grow like called ten or something.
What is the it's much big? Yeah, I know, And but my use of Google right now Gemini gives me what I want right on tom means I'm not clicking as much, Isn't that doesn't that impact Google's revenue if I'm not clicking as much?
There's a lot of threats around that, but we argue that the budgets and marketers have are independent of what consumers do on that level.
Just because it's the time of the blue lights, did Detroit Lyons, Blue Light, Brian Weezer, just because we're here the super Bowl does it? You know you you nailed. People will still watch sports like you more than anyone. I know you, Nathan so Moffatt nailed in Greenfield.
You nailed. It's not going to end. Yeah. Super Bowl still a big deal.
Still the single most important event. It is the center of the universe for a lot of the advertising industry.
It's not going way anytime.
It's the industry like when you were at Sterling Cooper. I mean, is he is he?
You know, Martin Soro and all that and Rob Schwartz and you know, is it gone.
No, it's involving.
Here's the thing, I argue, this is a contrary view for all of AI, and there's a lot of fears that A is going to places a lot of people. I argue it's going to cause the need for more people because that's more complexity, and the complexity is what requires people to manage the processes. We already saw this in ad tech at Technique, the automation of most core
media buying. It was meant to automate the whole industry. No, it caused the need for more people and you're going to see that in the creative size the agency as.
Well Warner Brothers Discovery. When you talk to big, big advertisers out there, did they care who owns Warner Brothers Discovery, whether it's Netflix or Paramount.
So, to be clear, while they care about many things about television, like sports in particular, they don't care about television broadly. So when you think about like the Warner Cable networks and now Netflix is still interesting too many because it's an incremental reach thing and it seems to be sexy, but at the end of the day to is diminishing. That's a good way to think about it in the minds of marketers.
Sparta emails it's Sparta, thanks for getting out of bed so early, seven h nine am. To have Sparta email in this early is a real shock here. We're like devoted to YouTube. Where is you too? In five years? Sparda wants to know.
So they continue to invest in content. They continue to look at this, having the oscars in twenty twenty nine, right, they're not letting up on investment contents speak of sports, right, NFL Sunday Ticket, that's the YouTube property. They will continue to invest They continue to share revenue with creators. They're spending more than anyone else on earth on content. I think they'll be fine.
Okay, see Michelle wants to know. Is met a single best buy? Is it like a bye?
Is it a hold where I don't have a bicell hold record? There we go. I need to hear that.
Brian Weezer, thank you, thank you so much for getting and started Madison room.
Well this morning, there, stay with us.
More from Bloomberg Surveillance coming up after this.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. Catch us Live weekday afternoons from seven to ten am Eastern. Listen on Apple Karplay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app, or watch us Live on YouTube.
This is a really important conversation thermodynamics this morning.
Yeah, physics is great.
That hurts. This is way more importantly one of the great words tossed around like a mint, like one of the York peppermint patties. You want you're to bar, you want to impress somebody. Well, I'm looking at the liquidity. Jerom Schneider is expert on liquidity. He's a pimpco legendary in the short term paper space and we're Theriolldy could be in studio with us today.
When an idiot like me says liquidity, what do we get wrong?
Well, there's two different aspects of liquid It's the one that the person thinks about how much liquid liquidity liquid assets they need to survive in day to day life. And then there's what the macroeconomist thinks about liquidy is what is the arrogate amount of demand for cash and liquid type products that saints yates or sustains business activity. And that's where the intersection comes within the economic cycles. And really, as a functionary you don't really want to
make it too complex. You want to understand that there's risk to both sides. People can over cherish liquidity and markets can over cherish liquidity or assume liquidity is there. But at the same time you want to keep your eyes open that liquity may not be there at all times at the same cost. And that's really what the lessons of the past twenty five years have been for the financial market.
Can I do an audible quickly?
Paul?
That right? Okay?
Okay, thank you?
I mean Jerome, your idea of long term is two year paper. Jerome Schneider on the liquidity of private equity and private credit.
I don't want to get you in trouble with Dan, but tell me about the liquidity of these new alternative investments.
Well, I think it's you know, one of the things to keep in mind as an investor is you're not only making an investment in an asset, meaning you want the asset to perform some ready to return and horizon for that asset's return of principle or capital. That's the key metric that many investors overlook. There's some variability in that metric. Many investors make that predisposition because they're assuming economic returns are going to be x percent over a
period of time. That period of time is going to grow in flocks. And I think we're finding in private credit markets is assumptions that were made several years ago may not necessarily be as concrete as what people had
expected to have a infruition. At the same time, what we are also finding is that there's differentiation in those private markets, in those private credit markets, and really what we're finding is that those assets that might have more resiliency because they're asset backed in those private credit markets or potentially of the transability to transcend. Both public and private credit markets have a different, perhaps a more improved
liquidity profile than the predecessors. And that's really what we're focused on is in the broader market, make sure, as an investor you understand what that liquidity horizon looks like and what you expect likelihood to get that maturity payment back or that capital repayment back over that horizon is incredibly important obviously to returns.
What do you say to the people that have got that I don't know, seven billion dollars in money markets? You go see them at a PIMPO dinner somewhere. You say, hey, come on and buy some two year paper. Here, let's get into the market here. What do you say there?
So we've been having that conversation a lot over the past few years, obviously since we got off the zero bound, and we recognize the fact that it has worked. We have seen people come off the sidelines where seeing people move to those ultra shortened loderation strategies. You know, about fifteen percent growth year of year. Oddly though, money market funds are still growing at twelve to thirteen percent, above the organic growth rate of you know, three to four
percent interest. So what I would say is is that that message is making and is resonating, but there's still a lot of cash sitting on the side, and so that doesn't mean it's all risk seeking. There's a lot of equidy from central banks, from corporations, that's operational cash, but it is sitting on the sidelines. But people are recognizing that with the FED coming to the end of their rate cutting cycle over the next year, let's call it.
You find yourself in a situation where rates are fairly balanced, there's real rates that are attractive and maybe adding a little duration to the portfolio outside my long bond. That, to your point, is perhaps perhaps a perhaps an attractive point.
Jerrem senaider or PIMCO with US. I need to do some economics here. As mister Holman was speaking in Minneapolis, claims came in. It is stunning, two hundred and nine thousand, just above survey the four week moving average of claims. Paul is worth noting two hundred and six thousand. That is just absolutely was really addressed by the chairman yesterday. Some other nother non farm productivity came in on survey at a buoyant four point nine percent, and Paul, you
and I mentioned this yesterday the thirty year bond. Jerome doesn't even know the function on the Bloomberg the thirty year bond four point eighty eight percent creeping grinding, I say, up to five percent.
Paul Sweeney, what did you.
Take away from our fit chairman yesterday in his comment?
Yeah, First of all, GT thirty is the function, so I know. There you go there, Bill Groves Cone. So, but I would say that a few things. One, we're obviously data dependent for some period of time here, and I think one of the Fikey facets here is that the tension between jobs and inflation is probably going to be a key theme that we have to see evolving as we sort of dissect inflation or economic data over
the next few few months. At PIMCO. We believe that, you know, we obviously have one to two rate cuts later on this year, obviously influenced by the incoming FED share But the committee based approach really maintains the fact that we're going to have to look at it from an economic point of view, recognizing the fact that yes, there's growth that's pretty pretty outstanding compared to where we
thought it'd be. A year ago being resilient, and the and the FED is going to have to sort of take that into account as we get into the later months of this year. So from that perspective, we might actually find ourselves in attention that has high growth inflation that obviously is moving higher over the coming months, but then coming back down to two and a half percent. But the need for significant rate cuts beyond the one maybe two cuts later on this year is not really noteworthy.
And I think you know, we are, you know, at the usual rate probably right now. The market's probably going to bifurcate that and cut another expect another cut or so, but is it meaningful to the broader market? Probably not. And I think a stronger economy and productivity combined with profitability of many corporations is going to be a dominating theme for later on this year.
Do you is that kind of your call there that you think this economy a is strong and perhaps can even get stronger throughout the year.
There's inclinations. One of the key facets to obviously keep in mind is the fiscal element, the stimulus coming from the fiscal side, the consumerism. Yes, we call it the K shaped economy at PIMCO, and that lower end of the economy is under some stress and to rest, but the average remains really really impressive right now. So you could easily have a growth rate that's about two and a half percent. That sort of creates animal spirits from
the positive side. And yes, you might have that as a lingering effect that is in the back of the Fed Committee's mind as we get into the later half of this year as reasons maybe to maybe hesitate about that great cut later this year.
Cherald, thank you so much.
She really waited around quite a long time to be with us the Home and Press conference on Really Cherim, thank you for your commitment to Bloomberg Surveillance.
Mister Schneider is with Pim Koll. Stay with us.
More from Bloomberg Surveillance coming up after this.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. Catch us live weekday afternoons from seven to ten am Eastern Listen on Apple Karplay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app, or watch us live on YouTube.
Stephanie Sansheva, Besides the privilege you're working under, Kenneth Rogoff at Harvard has become a force worldwide and economics, founder of Social Economics Lab at Harvard in her latest research, goes to the tension that we heard in the home and press conference. This is the emotion and the anger in society in our political discourse. Stephanie, this is going to be a three hour conversation. I got to squeeze
it in a few minutes. How do you measure the rage the anger of a modern American political discourse?
Yes, that's a great question, and really happy to be with you today. We measure it both online and offline. So we have this amazing data of a lot of social media posts. You know, since since twenty eleven, we have campaign speeches, we have congressional speeches. We can compare the same person tweeting online and talking in congress. So we have this amazing body of data where we can measure,
thanks to AI, that emotional content of the statements. And what we can see is that, especially since twenty sixteen, there has been a really sharp rise in anger. So the share of statements, the share of tweets that are angry has really really risen.
And this comes at the expense of.
The factual or like lack mutually emotional tweets. Other emotions don't show this pattern, so fear, joy, other emotions have been pretty flat.
Professor Richard Nixon, November third, nineteen sixty nine. Is there a silent majority out there in twenty twenty five.
Yeah, that's a really great question. But what we see is that this rise and anger is actually very general.
So you might think it's on one side.
Of the political spectrum or not, But what we see is that policy makers do follow some cycles. So when policymakers are in power, they tend to have less angry content, and then when they're in the opposition they have more angry content, And it's pretty symmetric on both sides. But for citizens, it seems like the anger has just risen and doesn't come down anymore, regardless of your political leaning. So perhaps this anger has been triggered by policymaker and
now just doesn't come back down. And what we also see is that it seems like anger is used strategically. If you tweet something angry, you're much more likely to be retweeted and to get engagement. If you post something angry, you know, you get a lot more attention, and so this actually reinforces this pattern where angry content is going to spread much more rapidly than neutral content.
So if in fact there has been a rise in increase in anger in political discourse, that does that suggest that centrist type policy making is that becoming more and more difficult going forward.
So what's interesting is that anger is not a part is an issue. It is actually very evenly spread on both sides of the political spectrum, and so it is not something that will determine, you know, which side you're.
On, if you're on the center.
On the ends, it does correlate with being more extremely partisan, So it is stronger among people who tend to follow more partisan accounts, who tend to be you know, more stronger Republicans or stronger Democrats rather than moderate. But what's most important to me is that this really matters for our policies.
It matters for economics.
What we see is that if you make people angrier, they become more anti immigration, more anti free trade, they become more anti democracy as well. So there's this very strong effect on the policy views that you express. And while this might be short lived, you know, in the moment, if we are constantly being bombarded by angry content, you can imagine that this is going to persist and have some real consequences.
Social media doesn't appear to be going anywhere soon, Professor, Is there any solution or I don't change in behavior that may take the rhetoric down and may allow for some more again, I get bipartisan policy making.
So I'm glad you're mentioning the role of social media here because we can compare the same person, the same Congress person online you know how they tweet, how they speak online and offline, you know which means on the Congress floor. And what we see is that for the same person, content is systematically angrier when it's online. So it's not that some people just tend to be angrier than others. It's also that everybody tends to be angrier
when they're posting publicly, when they're posting online. So clearly social media does have a role to play in amplifying this.
What are next steps here? Do you think?
I mean?
It's this interesting polarization. We all feel it, we all see it. It seems to be growing. Is there a sense that at some point people on both sides, if nothing else, will just grow punch drunk, weary, tired, And maybe you just start seeing that in tone down rhetoric and policymaking.
So what we see is that this is happening in many countries actually, so it is not just a US phenomenon. They have data for friends, for other European countries, So it seems to be something more general. And I'm also very curious where it will go and to keep studying it.
There's so much to go on here.
My book of the I think the Year of the Summer a couple of years ago is Paul Pearson, Eric Schickler, professor out.
At Berkeley, and it's folks, three hundred dense pages.
It's called Partisan Nation, and it basically goes from Madison and then Paul, we pick up at the civil rights of nineteen sixty four and then the culture War and the raging debate that we're in. Professor forgetting about the academics, what's the path for America to get back to the middle ground democrat, the middle ground republican, the quiet that we used to remember in our parents' political debate.
Now that's a very very important question to which I don't have the answer. But you know, what we see in general is that the economic environment matters so so much, and especially younger people today are growing up in times which have lower growth, lower mobility.
I totally agree this is really important. This goes back to Benjamin Friedman at ear Harvard. The bottom line on this is the bargain of economic growth broke a number of years ago.
That's the first order regressor.
Isn't it.
I think it is.
And you know, we can talk about changing mindsets, et cetera.
But what I see is that mindset's really.
Follow the reality that people live in and their experiences, and especially you know, the younger generation we see is living in this time of lower growth, living in lower mobility, with a lot of competition you know, for housing, for jobs, and so this is the reality people live in. So I think before we think about just quote unquote changing mindset, I think we have to think of policies that actually you know, grow the pie and also share the gains that are happening.
So this case shaped economy, it's something we've all I've probably gotten a better understanding of over the last ten to twenty years. Should is that how do we think about that going forward? It doesn't that doesn't seem to be solving itself as well.
I think, you know, many things are a bit the role of policies. You know, we think of policies as trying to grow the pie or trying to redistribute it in a more in a more equitable way. And you know, as much as I love the market as an economist, it cannot do everything.
And so I think there's a lot of role for policies.
You know, we know some policies literally pay for themselves over the medium or short run, for instance, helping families with children, whether it's on nutrition, education, health investments, Those pay for themselves later create opportunities for lots of generations. Innovation policy, innovation is something that grows the pie. So I think this is the direction which we need to think.
Because Stephanie, you came from Europe. I got one time for one more question. We're going to November. We just heard all the tension of Minneapolis in that what is your prescription where people on the edge of the middle of this nation in a broader sense, where they have a voice this side? How do they get a voice? Given the polarity of our media, the polarity of our discourts, we can't even hold a dinner party anymore between Republicans and Democrats.
Right, Yeah, it's tough, Stephanie. How do we find go in search of that middle ground?
I think a lot of a lot of things are stacked against this. You know, we talked about social media and even the algorithm is going to tend to amplify, you know, more extreme voices, and so I think there's a real structural issue to actually have that type of dialogue and that type of that life type of debate. So I don't have the answer, but really hoping I keep studying this.
Do you have super Bowl tickets? I mean you're up at Harvard. I mean, you know.
She's did you get you get Patriots super Bowl ticket?
Stephanie, I don't have super Bowl ticket?
Talk to Rogueff, We'll get them.
So Stephanie san Seva is at Harvard with important research there on the fabric of our culture.
Stay with us.
More from Bloomberg Surveillance coming up after this.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. Catch us live weekday afternoons from seven to ten am Eastern Listen on Applecarplay and Android Otto with the Bloomberg Business app, or watch us live on YouTube.
Let's get right to it. The newspaper's Alexis Christopherus.
Thanks Tom Soker. I'm gonna start with a Bloomberg story here. Robin Hood now wants a key role in the SPACEXIPO, which we know is supposed to be coming in June. So Robinhood, playing with the big Wall Street banks here, wants to secure a big block of SpaceX stock to sell directly to retail investors. So it wants to do this through its own platform called IPO Access Platform, and Elon Musk himself has said he's considering setting aside a
significant portion of the shares for retail investors. This would be amazing to get in on the ground level, though, right you're looking at evaluation of one and a half trillions.
Of time, is Paul, You're better at this?
I am.
It's a timeless debate, it is.
And you know, typically in an IPO, fifteen to twenty percent will be allocated to retail. If it's a tough to execute IPO, even more would go to retail because they're less Christ sensitive. But this makes a lot of sense. I mean, Robin Hood's a huge platform, especially for young people, yep. And it's a monster fifty billion dollars is there a red hearing yet, I'm not. I don't think so. I've
not seen it. But the bottom line is they're going to need everybody and the brother to be, you know, have access to this.
Their brother, their mothers, this.
I think it's going to be really I think it's gonna be absolutely fascinating and one of the most fascinating ipeos of all time. In my opinion is it's it's the story, it's Elon, it's the size and valuation, it's all there.
For just it just isn't a sign for twelve seconds we are preparing over this frigid weekend to send astronauts into orbit around the Moon.
It's barely in the zeitgeist.
Yeah, that's a good true.
It kind of got lost in the shuffle.
I think we're talking like early February. You know, they're they're getting, they're preparing, they're putting. It's like formula one.
They're putting it to exactly exactly, rocket mixed all right.
New York Times got a story the sun Dance Film Festival saying bye bye to Park City, Utah. So it's happening this week, right, You got in industry insiders, fans are all making that annual pilgrimage over to Park City. This was started, of course by Robert Redford, the late actor and director, back in nineteen eighty five. But they're
moving over to Boulder, Colorado. Why you ask infrastructure because Sundance has grown so much over the years, but you can't beat financial incentives from the state and the city. Apparently that was even better than Park City sixty percent of their programming first or second time directors. Was always sort of the spirit of indie films in indie artists.
What I love about.
This is you can go out and now to Boulder and you can see some new indie film with your course light at the sink.
Yep exactly. I maybe you could just sit right there at the sink. Yeah, have the beverage of your choice, which we did.
Yeah, absolutely, And I hate just the festival just kind of outgrew Park City, and quite frankly, Park City doesn't need it. They're packed all season and it's almost like, oh, now I got to make room for these film festival guys. I got to shut down my restaurant party.
And look like Davos right might be moving. They were talking about maybe having it.
Yeah, sensitive issue is this question, alexis if you ever had a Corrus three to two beer? Oh?
No, yeah, should I No, no, you shouldn't.
Okay, No, that's why Primo exists in the rain or whatever it was.
No to sell business insider, this is a good one. Why Wall Streeters love expensive gyms. Look, you can spend thousands of a month on an equinox, on a Chelsea pier's lifetime. They're all here in the city. Now you might think Tom and Paul that the draw here is that eucalyptus steam room or that cold plunge pool, But no, no, it's about networking, socializing and guess what, actually being healthy. So a lot of these gyms they'll set up designated
networking events. So you know, you would usually go to the bar to do those kinds of things. Now people are going to Jim, can I.
Just editorialize, not that I need gym's a lot. The cell phone is ruined gyms.
In the Havings film. Now, yeah, thanks film. They workout for those you radio.
Your list pumping and then they look at their they look at their phone and go, you know, you know what's Carol and Tim say, I'm bloomberg rate and then they get back into another exercise.
Hedge fund manager said, banks will now take us out do a workout class instead of getting a drink. It's a good value if someone pays fifty bucks for your pilates class, boy times a change.
It's I was gonna say, I didn't get that. Alexis Christopher, thank you so much. That is the newspapers for the day.
This is the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast, available on Apple, Spotify, and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live each weekday, seven to ten am Eastern on Bloomberg dot com, the iHeartRadio app tune In, and the Bloomberg Business app. You can also watch us live every weekday on YouTube and always on the Bloomberg terminal
M