Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.
This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Jonathan Ferrow, along with Lisa Bromwitz and Amerie Hordern. Join us each day for insight from the best in markets, economics, and geopolitics from our global headquarters in New York City. We are live on Bloomberg Television weekday mornings from six to nine am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or anywhere else you listen, and as always on the Bloomberg Terminal and the Bloomberg Business app.
Stocks aiming to extend the year end rally, Victoria Fernandez of Crossmark Global Investments, writing, we begin the year with equity valuations at somewhat rich levels and lots of optimism already baked into those valuations, setting a high bar for positive surprises and paving the way for moderate returns. Victoria joins us. Now, Victoria, thank you so much for joining us. If the bar is so high for next year, do you think we are going to see some sort of correction in the markets?
I think we will and ray, and it's typical that you'll see that in a midterm election anyway. So you add in the element of coming into the year at
high valuations and you're setting yourself up for that. I mean, you typically look at a midterm election year and coming into that year, you've already priced in those pro growth components, the optimism around things being positive after our new administration comes into term, and as those positive elements actually come to fruition in a midterm election year, you start to see some pullback, some entry year corrections, sometimes up to
as much as fifteen, sixteen, seventeen percent, you can see.
So there's a lot of volatility.
You usually get higher yields, so we wouldn't be surprised to see yields move a little bit higher as well. Setting this up for a year where you're going to see a lot of churning but have moderate returns, not like we're going to you know, like we've seen the last couple of years with these huge returns.
So do you think we're going to see investors want to have more defensive trades? Could we see also rotation in the market.
Yeah, we're already seeing some of that rotation, not necessarily into staples per se. Right, Staples are still struggling, so you're not getting that full on defensive shift. But what you are seeing is people come out of some of those high flyers, those hyperscalers, the high leverage tech or not leverage, but the high valuation tech names that are out there. You're seeing them trim those names back and going into some areas where you're starting to see uptrends
in the sector. So whether it's healthcare, whether it's metals, like you guys were talking about, we've seen it in financials, We're seeing it in industrials. There's opportunities there to go in Staples are still dragging, so we haven't seen, like I said, that full rotation to defensive, but I think you're going to want to have a little bit of that in your portfolio.
If we get a typical midterm year like we normally do.
Let's sayce Victoria, it's going to be pretty quiet until mid January when corporate earnings come out for the fourth quarter numbers. And given that we had this government shut down the longest on record, disrupt the flow of economic data, it feels like there's going to be more importance placed on what companies say, especially how the forecast things for the coming year than what we've been getting from official data.
What are you thinking in terms of the big themes you're anticipating from some of those sectors that you mentioned.
Yeah, I think everyone's going to be looking at the capex, not just for those AI names, but across the board.
That's really a driver.
I think of some of the optimism that we have is this increasing capex. Some of that do to the OB three bill that was passed and the tax advantages associated with that, but we know capex helps growth, it gives you increased productivity, increase profitability, so people will be watching for that CAPEX component. I think we're also going to be looking at those retail names to see how does that consumer continue to spend. We know there's this divergence and it's going to be focused on the high
income consumer. Will they continue to support the economy with their spending. So we'll be paying a lot of attention to that and really what the expectations are for profit margins, whether you're looking at EPs growth, revenue growth.
Or profit margins.
Those numbers are getting really high for twenty twenty six and going into twenty twenty seven, I think people are going to want to see can they actually see those numbers come to fruition or are those going to be pulled back some So those will all be elements to watch in earnings.
And I'm so glad you highlighted Capex because when the AI build out first began, CAPEX was something that was seen as almost a positive because it showed a company's commitment to the future. However, increasingly it's become something of a burden, something that stretches their balance sheet. What's the sentiment towards capex Because if you don't have any ROI to show for immediately, is it going to be seen as a negative.
That's exactly right.
You've got to be able to see that there's some kind of return that you're getting on the money that you're investing, especially if it's disrupting your balance sheet, and I think that's the issue people are going to watch. It's very much company specific because you can look at something like Oracle, where they're having to go to the debt market, their free cash flow is going to be
drawn down significantly. That's a very different story than looking at someone like an Alphabet, where they're still going to have very strong free cash flow. Yes, they can go to the debt market, but that free cash flow number continues to be strong, so there's not as much concern when it comes to a company like that. It'll really be driving down into the balance sheet to see how is the CAPEX going to affect cash flow going forward?
What does that mean in terms of earnings, What does that mean in terms of dividends if it's a dividend paying stock. Those are all elements that will play into what CAPEX looks like for each specific company, But as a whole, we know it's typically supportive of GDP and productivity, so people will be they'll be biased towards positivity as long as the balance sheets can handle it.
Picture you mentioned the midterm election years tend to be high growth. What are you expecting from the administration to make sure they keep that growth continuing.
Yeah, I think we're going to see not just some stimulus coming for the consumer, but we'll see it for corporations as well.
So we talked about CAPEX, what that looks like.
R and D.
There's going to be benefits associated with R and D and building infrastructure here in the US, so that onshoing benefit, but consumers as well. There's a lot of tax advantages for consumers not just no tax on tips, but you're looking at interest on car payments, You're looking at changes in regards to salt taxes, in regards to the child deductions.
That you get.
There's a lot of elements there that I think will be beneficial to the consumer as well that will lift them up for at least probably the first half of the year. Those are some of the things that I think you'll see coming specifically from the administration. And there's always talk about something new, right We're hearing talks about checks being given because of the tariffs that have come in and the elements that that are positive there, So all sorts of things that I think could boost consumers
in the first quarter coming from the administration. And then add on to some of the things you have like the World's Cup coming, two hundred and fiftieth birthday party for the nation, all of these things that will generate more activities here in the US and generate more GDP.
So they're looking forward to the World Cup.
But when it comes to things like tax refunds, do you think consumers because they know what's coming, do you think consumers are already out there spending that money right now? On the holiday season, They.
Might be in anticipation of that, so it could be less of effect. It kind of goes to that point that we're saying, where you come into the year with a lot of those growth elements already built in for your optimism for what you think is going to happen in the market, and when it comes to fruition, there's not much of an effect.
That could be part of it.
They could be spending that now, but it seems like lower income consumers really are holding on right now. You're not seeing savings rates go down tremendously, which is telling us that it's the high income consumer that's really spent.
Low income consumers are.
Not dipping in to those savings just yet, and year over year holiday spending for that cohort is actually negative, So I think they're holding back a little bit, waiting to see what happens, and a little bit of extra cash coming in next quarter could be a benefit for them.
Well, high income consumers are spending in part because of the wealth effect, and Marie has told us several times about how the S and P five hundred closed at a record high for a thirty.
Ninth time on Wednesday.
If there's a sudden market pullback, if we see those gains unravel, how quickly could we see the wealth effect work in reverse.
Yeah, I think that's actually something we really need to watch, Scarlett. So you're right, lower income consumers spend based on what they're making, right, what their salaries are, and what the job market looks like. High income consumers do spend based on wealth effects. So as long as the market.
Is doing well, they're going to spend.
If we see that pullback, if we see the volatility that we think we'll see in twenty twenty six, you should see the high come consumer pull back a little bit. They won't stop spending completely because they still have the job component there, but as they see housing prices maybe start to come back a little bit, as they see the market pull back a little bit, their spending will start to shift slightly.
I think that means you have to be a little bit more.
Cautious on those more expensive retail companies that are out there. Those high income retail companies will probably suffer a little bit if that happens, so there'll be a much lower level of spending that will occur.
Soterory, let's just send on the big debate going into next year in financial markets, in terms of the fed's next mute move, what are you pricing in for twenty twenty six.
Yeah, we're really only pricing in one cut for twenty twenty six. We think they'll hold in January just because there's still a lot of unknowns going on. We did have a strong GDP number, but they do have a whole month of January to wait. They'll get more inflation numbers, they'll get more job numbers.
We'll see what happens.
But the debate here, I really think is where is neutral and how accommodative are.
We right now? I think that's the underlying battle that's going on.
It's a FED and how accommodative do they want to be in order to not stoke kind of the flames of inflation. That'll be the battle we continue to see. We think we're probably closer to neutral than what many people think, which means they'll be fewer rate cuts going forward.
Stay with US Multilemberg. Savannah's coming up off to this.
Here's the latest US consumer confidence dropping for a fifth consecutive month in December, according to fresh data from the Conference Board. Aaron McLaughlin of the Conference board writing expect real GDP growth to weaken amid a fragile balance of resilient labor markets and softening consumer demand due to tariff induced inflation. Aaron joins us now erin thank you so much for joining us, and hopefully you had a lovely holiday.
When it comes to the consumer and the latest readout, I was struck by how more consumers are actually starting to actually be also worried about keeping their job.
Yes, so we find that consumers really tighten up when they don't have jobs, And so the concept of deteriorating business conditions, the weight of tariffs, and inflation all definitely influence consumer spending and consumer sentiment. But concepts around rising unemployment, we've seen it tick up now to four point six in the concepts there are less jobs out there, jobs are not as plentiful, will really weigh on the consumer.
In twenty twenty six.
We know that government shutdown did not help matters. It made people feel more nervous, and it certainly created a lot of uncertainty. And I know it's over, but I bring this up because we could face another government shutdown in January as well.
So how do we fold in.
The government shutdown and what that does to consumer sentiment even as it's become a more freaking occurrence.
Well, that was the longest shutdown we've had in modern history that we just had. It certainly impacted economists, it impacted consumers, especially this year. Consumers are just facing it's sort of constant news about politics, geopolitics, tariffs, inflation, and that constant news impacts them, and so another government shutdown will certainly also impact them, even if they don't feel
the immediate effects of a shutdown. And sort of the news today and the concept that there could be rising oil prices in oil and gasoline excluding fuel oil for homes has been pretty low as on the inflation spectrum, but even news like we're hearing today, if prices go up, how does that impact consumers?
The administration has been out there trying to paint a picture of a robust economy. Howard Lutnik, the Commerce Secretary, went on to talk about the third quarter of growing more than four percent and how that was a sign that things were better. He also mistakenly equated that with
an increase in people's pay as well. How is that contradiction, that seeming contradiction of data that shows the economies holding well, holding up well, balancing with this sense from consumers that things are not getting better necessarily, especially on the job front.
Well, consumers are not paying attention to GDP the way that we are in the way that economists and business and financial markets are necessarily paying attention to these readings. What they really feel is the effects of prices for things that they buy every week, every day, every month.
And so those things include coffee, which has gone up in price twenty to forty percent, Beef and other proteins at the grocery store have gone up, and some big structural costs have really not come down, the cost of housing and in particular insurance, and the price of a more, while it has come down a little bit, is nowhere near as low as it was pre pandemic. And so when you see some of these really big price structural changes happen, that also weighs on consumer sentiment.
What about when you look at trade induced inflation?
What are you looking at for next year? Given the fact that.
This administration will be renegotiating USMCA.
We really think that federal policy, particularly around trade and tariffs, is going to have a huge impact on consumers next year. Our three largest trading partners are Mexico, followed by China, followed by Canada. Those three trading partners, our agreements with them are not settled. You know. We sort of kick the can down the road twelve months from China from November of this past year to November of next year.
And then the USMCA, which is essentially NATA version two, will enter a version three phase as it can be negotiated, and that deadline is in July. And there is so much that we just trade between our three largest trading partners that there is really the potential for a lot higher inflation and price pressures on consumers for some items that we get that again, are include non discretionary as well as discretionary items like food.
Stay with US mult Bloomberg surveillance.
Coming up after this, Ukrainian President Vladimir Lensky saying he plans to.
Meet with Trump in the coming days.
Zlensky signaling a lot could be decided before the new year.
After a Christmas Day sit down with.
US envoys Steve Wikoff and Jared Kushner, Ed Mills of Raymond James joins US. Now, so, ed, you do have Zelenski looking like he's going to be going over to Florida, mar A Laga, where the President will be for the remainder of the Smith New Year holiday. Do you think potentially we could get a deal before twenty twenty six, a.
Marie, It's possible.
I think that there is probably more to work out on the Russian side. I think Zelenski is trying to find what he can get with the American contingent here because I think he wants to put pressure on Putin right now. The twenty point plan that Zelensky and the Americans have agreed to is probably unacceptable to Putin. This here is trying to reverse some of the pressure that has come onto him in the recent months, especially that kind of pre Thanksgiving deadline that the Trump administration had
put on him. So I'd say there's going to be progress, But I don't think people are really expecting that what Zelensky and Trump workout will be acceptable to Putin, at least in the near term. We probably need at least one more round of this before things get settled.
Well, as you we're speaking, Dimitri Peskov is speaking right now, and he's saying Russia has analyzed the information on the peace plans, according to the TAST news agency, or you shake off. They're saying that contacted US representatives. He's been one of the main negotiations. Senior Russian diplomat at the table and the Kremlin saying it is contact the US on Ukraine peace plan. Do you think Putin is just playing for time or do you think they are serious about getting to an agreement.
I think that they are open to an agreement. I think that they are really going to be looking at these territorial concessions.
And I think this is really what it comes down to.
Emory, because what is the future of the Dumbos region. How much does Ukraine have to fully kind of acknowledge that Russia has kind of certain parts of this territory. How much of it is a de militarized zone. How much does Ukraine get to control this, How much does Russia get to control this?
I think that's the critical issue.
The second issue is even if you kind of create a de militari zone, what are the security guarantees. I think that Zelensky and Ukraine are willing to give up more of that territory, at least as a demilitary size zone if they get.
Those kind of security guarantees.
But if there's not the security guarantees, they're not willing to do that. And I do think that Putin is not going to be okay with the security guarantees that Zelensky wants, and are probably not going to be okay with a demilitary zone. They want more territorial concessions, I think than what the US and Ukraine are willing to give at this point.
So these are all pretty familiar sticking points thinks that have really locked both sides into their respective positions for months now. And what about Europe Henry was mentioning earlier, Europe is kind of missing in all of this. And if Zelensky goes to mar Lago on Sunday, does your play any role in this?
They could?
I think what we've seen, Scarlett is that Europe has played a bit of a backstop.
To these negotiations.
If they seem as if they are going too far towards Russia, if they are seen going kind of to aggressive towards Ukraine, there are kind of key constituencies within Europe that step up. I do think what we're going to see if we do have a demilitarized zone.
How much do NATO or European forces.
I lean more towards European forces, so it's not seen as a specific NATO operation could be part of that security guarantee in that area. But they just want to make sure that Ukraine is not on the wrong end of any of these negotiations, so they stay out for now, but if it goes in the wrong direction, they step up that diplomatic pressure on the US envoy.
Okay, And of course we are anticipating a visit between Zelenski and Trump in the coming days. According to Vladimir Zelenski, I also want to get your take on what happened over the holiday, which is the US launching Christmas Day military strikes in Nigeria against the ISIS targets. And of course we had known that in November the President threatened possible military action if the government did not halt the killing of Christians.
Talk a little bit.
About why now and whether this is a one time action or this is the start of something more sustained.
Yeah, so President Trump has said this is at the request of the government. He does view kind of the defeat of ISIS during his first term as his signature geopolitical kind of military achievement of that first term. To the extent that he is going to have requests and it is against ISIS, I don't think that there's anything that he would hold back trying to go after that group. So I do think at this point, I think you would consider this as contained. But if there are other needs,
he's absolutely willing to do this. It is unusual to have strikes under the Trump administration. He so far has been fairly limited in how aggressive he wants to be with some of that proactive military use. So that was keep me more in that contained camp versus this is the start of something news well.
At the same time, ed he did promise on the campaign trail to not entangle the United States any more foreign conflicts. Is this going to be a problem with his base when it comes to the midterm elections.
I think as long as it's specific, it's targeted, I think it is kind of couched in. We cannot let isis kind of reconstitute or kind of get stronger in any sort of fashion. Memory and also the fact that he would probably kind of couch this in the targeting of Christians, something that from a political perspective.
Is in a pretty decent standing.
That's why I did say that I think this is probably more contained than a start of something new. Something that he has done quite well with his base is trying to maintain that contained military conflict, and he's kind of ticked off more of the items that he has negotiated peace between kind of Israel in kind of the conflict in Gaza, other kind of areas where he's working on with kind of Thailand, Cambodia. He has this whole list of things that he has stopped globally. So containment
is the base case here. He also always wants to project US strength and so he's not going to be shy if he's requested and it is needed.
What's going on with you as strength in Venezuela. It's been six days that the US continuously is trying to pursue this sanctioned oil tanker that's linked to Venezuela.
Do you see the.
Administration just trying to control the sanctioned oil or do you think this is part of a bigger regime change?
Yeah, am Marie.
What I've told clients at Raymond James is this is part of a re establishment by the Trump administration of the Monroe Doctrine. I do think that we are looking at kind of North and South America as America's sphere of influence. I also think this is a bit of a shot across the bow and a warning sign to Mexico and to the extent that the drug cartels are the kind of underlying issue here. I think that this is a warning to Mexico, where he has already labeled
the drug cartels in Mexico as terrorist organizations. If President Scheinbam does not get that under control, he's willing to take additional action. I think the big debate that I've had with clients at Raymond James is that to the extent that we are re establishing our sphere of influence, is that going to make it harder for us to push back as Putin wants that more territorial concern and what his former sphere of influence is, Is it going to be harder to push back against she if he
gets more aggressive against Taiwan. So a near term that's a projection of strength by this administration, but it could have significant unintended consequences on the geopolitical stage.
Stay with US Multblemberg. Savannah's coming up off.
To this.
Stocks pulling back just ever so slightly after natching fresh records highs as the Santa Claus rally really sets in. George Kunkalvas of MUFG, looking ahead to twenty twenty six, runing quote a growth set of risks that will require careful navigation, particularly around concentrated risk market valuations and we labor markets.
George joins us.
Now, George, thank you so much for joining us. So you don't sound so merry this morning when you.
Look ahead to twenty twenty six.
What are potentially how you're looking at in terms of risk and rewards.
Yeah, the twenty twenty five obviously was a year full of disruptions, ended with markets near the highs as you're describing it, volatility declining, all that seems like you know it could continue. But those sort of setups were the ones that are the most precarious given the sort of
backdrop you're talking about. The geopolitical at the beginning, we are really focused and have been focused on the labor market, and we need to have this economy of broaden out and not just be really concentrated both in income distributions, but also in the tech sector, we need a broadening out of the economy to really change our view.
Do you think we will see your broadening out? And if so, how do you time this?
Yeah, it's likely. Some of the key kind of indicators to watch out for, is you real small businesses really start to pick up the hiring pace. Is that something that we can kind of keep a real time assessment as we go through the course of the beginning of the year. You know, we are concerned about the potential
head faith at the beginning of the year. Probably we'll see benefits from the fiscal policy that was put in place with a big, beautiful bill, But then will that be sustainable into the second half of the year.
That's really the big question.
Yeah, I've seen several notes, including yours George, mentioning the World Cup as a catalyst for first half growth GDP in particular. Would that would certainly help specific hosting cities, but how meaningful would that impact be an aggregate?
Look at me. Look, it's hard to kind of quantify specifically, but look, next year, you have the hallmarks of potentially pretty exciting year. You have the World Cup, you have the US is two hundred and fifty, the anniversary. I'm sure that between up until these fourth of July, I think that the is going to be kind of a
buoyant sort of spending pattern amongst US consumers. The question is like, is it concentrated, will kind of even out over the year, And I think those are the big questions to kind of think of that.
You also have the midterm elections, and we know that midtrum election years tend to be high growth years. As with everything else, investors do tend to price in the benefits before they actually filter through the economy.
Where is this going to be most apparent?
Is it going to be in equities, in treasuries and the dollar in commodities.
Look, I mean this is interesting because a lot of these sort of views I think are largely probably sent to your point. I mean, the dollar was week this year, but most of the weakness came at the beginning of the year, and we've been basically going sideways. You know, the movement in precious metals has been off the charts.
Stocks continue to grind higher. Now, if a lot of that was capturing the news of both that pivoting towards more easier policy a lot of that's kind of baked in the cake, and so the question is what's the follow through. I think that it's going to be hard to meet some of these expectations.
Last time you were on, it was an early in November.
You were on with John and Lisa, and you were talking about the market internally starting to look exhausted and ripe at least for correction. But here we are December twenty sixth, and we had on Wednesday before Christmas a thirty ninth record high. When it comes to equities, do you think we could see a meaningful can recalibration inequities in twenty twenty.
Six looks so in between.
Nothing's linear, and we did have a minor correction or a minor pullback I should say, in November before Thanksgiving, and then since then it's been off to the races, very typical the end of the year type rally. Also very typical of a low VALL environment. We have had the VIX very low rate volatiley declining. All of this is kind of engendered further is taking. We do think that you know, there's going to be a meaningful correction at some point over the course of twenty twenty six.
When it comes to how you're thinking about the Federal Reserve, you say, a lot of this is baked in. When you say baked in, do you mean one more ray cut or two more ray cuts?
Look, so the market has about one and a half two cuts basically in the back of their mind priced into the forward curve.
It's actually visible, you know. We think it's all about the sequencing.
It depends on what takes place, who's pulling, you know, the actual rate cuts forward, you know, is going to be under our pals, you know, kind of last few meetings, we think, you know, maybe one more cut under the current sort of FED, and then in the future we don't know. There's been a lot of questions about FED independence, and we'll FED cut for the right reasons or for other motives. Either way. We think that the Fed's probably
cut further than what's priced into the market. But if they cut from more than more than two times, I think something has change in the macro sense. So if the Fed's cutting more than twice next year, something's kind of weakened in the economy. That justifies it.
Yeah, your view is that the FED will cut rates three to four times in twenty twenty six, and of course it is expectations of lower rates that's helping to support those commodity prices, gold and silver prices in particular. What is different George about gold run this time versus say in October when it peaked at about forty three eighty one and a lot of people saw that run up as overheated.
Well, I think the whole year of precious level move is something that is very telling of a both you know, there's a view around the commodity needs for sort of the new technology in the new economy that's evolving, but I think it's also a referendum on sort of thet policy. The Fed did go from basically not wanting to cut, pivoting towards cutting stopping QT, and then introducing a version of not QI the reserve management, which is going to
add a lot of liquidity into the banking system. So I think that the precious metals is definitely picked up on that way earlier than other markets.
Yeah, you can also argue the precious metals are part of that debasement trade too, where people are straying away from the dollar and treasuries and moving to precious metals. And indeed bitcoin as well, although we haven't seen crypto really participate in this leg of the rise in gold and silver. How do you fit bitcoin and what's happening in that speculative part of the market int your overall thinking, So.
Yeah, obviously I look at crypto or these sort of alternative assets more from the lens of the macro. What it's telling us about liquidity more in general, and the preferences amongst liquidity, the fact that it's going into kind of harder you know, more of the older sort of precious metals versus the new age version of digital goal.
I think it's telling you something that there's a preference to more safety versus what is still prove unproving sort of technology, and how long it's going to last, and what's the true valuation of bitcoin. It's not something that's in my wheelhouse, but in general, it's telling you from a macro sense that there's a preference for kind of the more traditional forms of alternative assets.
We've seen in the entire commodity space, though left higher. Copper has been on an absolute tear as well. When it comes to the concerns in the commodity space, the physical commodities that are used across supply chains, like silver and copper. There's some concern that potentially will get more
tariffs in twenty twenty six. How do you think about trade policy given there's some key dates coming up when it comes to this administration and some of the trade policies they've enacted in twenty twenty five.
Obviously we're still waiting on them sort of key information, but we do know that tarris obviously are a key sort of platform agenda item that's not going to go away.
So there's a baseline of expectations around tariffs, and then the question is do we get more secutorial tariffs as you're alluding to, you know, we do think that you know, this this full impact of tariffs is not just an inflationary sort of phenomenon, and maybe it's you know, toward its course there We don't know, but I think it's more about the sort of impacts and indecision that it does on planning, especially around the sort of you know,
items like commodities. So I do think that, you know, the trade policy will have an impact on that side of things as well.
Does it complicate potentially corporations and whether or not they are going to and when they may pass on more of these costs to consumers.
Well, look, I think that you know, what we've noticed thus far is just a sort of hesitancy to kind of pass through fully the tariff effect and improfit margins have been kind of absorbing some of that. I think there will come a time and I think we're getting close to that point where companies will not be ass and absorbing these sort of profit costs and they're going
to try to pass on to the consumers. Now, if it's towards the industrial sort of mid production, business to business sort of inputs that they're assessing and seeing if they can negotiate with their partners, maybe they can pass on some of it. But instead of us consumer outright, I think that they're going to have a challenge to do so, and it's going to eventually have to hit their margins.
This is the Bloomberg Savlans podcast, bringing you the best in markets, economics, angiot politics. You can watch the show live on Bloomberg TV weekday mornings from six am to nine am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or anywhere else you listen, and as always on the Bloomberg terminal and the Bloomberg Business app.