Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news.
This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Jonathan Ferrow, along with Lisa Bramwitz and Amrie 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.
No.
We are Rabinie of Rabeni Macro Associates, looking ahead to the new year and writing this. Some of Trump's policies will increase growth and reduce inflation, while others could be stagflationary. So the impact on growth, inflation and on markets depends on how much of the former versus the latter. Noriel joins us now for more. No want for to see us, sir.
You're in seeing How difficult does it make it to look ahead to next year with any real clarity, to come up with some kind of outlook when things are so difficult.
There's a lot of policy uncertainty, as I pointed out some of the economic policies of TRAUM may increase over time growth, reduce inflation, being overall pro business keeping tax rates on capital and labor law, deregulating the economy, and things like increasing the production of fossil fuels and pushing down the prices of energy. Probably also this Dodge initiative over timing is economic efficiency and so on. So those are the positives, and over time they could increase growth,
they could reduce inflation. But we know there are some sets of other policy we don't know how much they're are to be implemented. They will increase inflation and potentially be staflationary. In my view, tariffs are inflationary. Protection is the risk of the economic world with China first draconia,
restriction to migration, if not the mass deportation. If we have unfunded physical deficits and the promises imply eight trillion dollars of deficits over additional over the next years, that's going to craft out growth by increasing interest rates normally and real and the bond marketgilands are going to wake up. If you try to disorderly weaken the dollar, that could
be inflationary and if you interfere with independence of the FAT. Now, I think on the positive side, I think there are a number of factors that are going to constrain the bad policies. One is market discipline. If you follow pols are inflationary, then bond market vigilands are going to wake up. Bond is going to go higher, the stock market is going to correct, and it cares about the bond market.
He cares about the stock market. Secondly, Fed independence. If he follows policies the lead to inflation, the Fed may not continue to cut traits next year, may even raise rates if inflation were to be going higher. And also policy choices, as you pointed out, on one side of people like Scott Besson want to escalate the escalate on tariffs and others were total trade hawks on trade and on China, like Peter Navarro. So it depends on the balance between who's going to be in power.
Let's unpack some of that, and Pe can't tariffs to pay already so far this morning, you've heard some of it. Clase weigh in, if it's targeted, could be a good thing for the American economy.
Well, if it's targeted, I would say that the impacts on inflation are going to be modest, and maybe some of the reassuring that a radio is occurring is going to continue, and there be actually pressure on our trade partners to say, if you don't want tariffs, you have to bring more investment semiconductors. Authors it beasy you name it to the United States. So that's the escalate in
order to de escalate. But I would say the higher the startuff become, the more there's an impact on improprises, the more there's an impact on inflation, and the more there is global fragmentation. There's also the risk, of course of trade wars of our trade partner retaliating against the United States. If that occurs, the impact on growth is going to be more negative. The impact on inflation is going to be value depends on the size of the startifs.
If it's Navaro types of policies on trade, is taflationary, if it's escalated, de escalate, Maybe the impact of inflation is modest and the negative impact on growth is also modest.
Some peopeople are arguing that we're in this wave of deglobalization that basically reverses some of the disinflationary forces of the three decades following really the mid eighties. I'm wondering whether that's actually true, whether that's what we're seeing, because there still is quite a bit of trade, it's just going different routes, and frankly, you could see that overproduction from places like China are going to lower prices in certain places, even if they don't in the US if
there walls up. In other words, are we overestimating the inflationary impact on a dramatic level of a lot of these tariffs.
Well, the impact of high tariffs on the United States would be inflationary, But if you think about the impact on growth and inflation, rest of the world will be this inflationary because if there is a shock to the demand for the experts of Europe, Asia, China, then there'll be access supply growth is weakened in those parts of the world, and that leads to these inflation rest of the world. So the impact on the US of high
tariff is inflationary. The impact on the rest of the world is this inflationary because the access is applied.
You used to be called doctor doom. Are you retiring that mantle?
I always said I'm not doctor Doom. No, doctor realist. There are plenty of upside in hallomic growth, and by the way, some of them are thinking that are more cycular. I think the impact of technological innovation implied that potential growth in the US by the end of the decade
could be close to three percent. And the fact we already have seen for the last couple of years growth of two point five to twenty eight percent with inflation falling, is signed that maybe PRODUCTI growth is increasing and potential is increasing, and we can grow faster with having lower inflation. So I'm not doctor dum well.
When it comes to terriffs. Just to go back to this idea of the personnel. We know what Jamison Greer as well thinks about China. In hearing to Congress, he had talked about strategically coupling. Do you expect that over the next four years between Beijing and Washington.
Yes, I do. I think that one of the biggest risks is not just tariff in general, but a broader economic war against China. Fleet they listen to the long list of complaints of the drum administration. They say China has been thriding on free riding on international trading system, Tariff non tariferiy barriers, government procurement policies, FTI policies, intellectual property rights, and of course fend and lots of other things. And also geopolitically, there may be an attempt to try
to contain the rise of China. So the biggest risk is not just tarif on China, but how much the overall policies for China is going to be confrontational. And if they feel that we're trying to contain their rise, they could become quite aggressive themselves.
Well, from page of the ft today is talking about these four government back authorities that are telling local chip companies that you can no longer buy silicon from the United States, they're no longer safe or reliable or we already in this moment you're describing, Well.
Certainly in anything to do with the high tech, we've started already in the by the administration to be in a process of the coupling restriction to experts both of semiconductor and secconductor equipment, restriction to anyth investiated with AI and high technology. Under Biden was an narrow yard and high fences and stuff that was supposed to be critical.
So the risking I think that in the case of Trump administration, we may move from the risking with China to decoupling with China did something much more how to say.
Severe, does Europe need to pick a side?
They'll be in a very very tough position because geopolitically Europeans are close to the United States, NATO and so on, but they do a lot of trade and investment with China. You know, under the Bider administration was easier because there was a compromise within the digit seven about the risking as opposed to decoupling. If his US goes towards the coupling, it says European I have to follow us. Otherwise the consequences not just on trade but also NATO security and
you name it. Then I think Europe is already weak to being a tougher spot.
How much worse could things get for the Europeans. We've been saying through this morning that France is ungovernable at the moment, which means it can't still of reforms. And you know in Europe things have to get worse before ultimately they find solutions. How much worse does it needs to get?
Well, things are really pretty bad already in Europe. I think that potential growth is below one percent in Europe. Growth Europe is going to be in the Eurozone less than one percent next year, and structural reform I'm not going to occur anytime soon. There's a fragmentation between these twenty seven countries. Some of them want more integration, some of them one less. At the core of Europe, German
and Germany and France are going to politically unstable. So I don't see either the Letter Report or the Drug Report for more integration, for a common market, for more productivity combatants being implemented. So it looks pretty dark for Europe right.
Now, which is the reason why I'm surprised that so many people come in and they say it's priced in. We don't really see a path out of here. We don't necessarily see an economic engine or the political will or capability to really counter it. At what point are
we facing off with a potential dollar shock? And I asked this because yes, the euro is likely to stay around here a week and further, but what if it actually weakens dramatically, is the ECB is forced to cut rates and that divergence widens.
Well, there are many good reasons why the dollar may continue to strengthen. One is, of course tariff if they reduce the trade deficit, is going to strengthen. Two. Trumpet said, I want to have actually the dollar the center of the global reserve system. And therefore that implies you want
strong dollar than a week dollar. Relative grow differential relative monetary policies, the fact that the US is innovating and capital is flowing into the US capital market and the stock market all implied that the dollar over time should become stronger, the euro and other currencies should become weaker. The problem, however, is that Trump says a strong dollar has led to the industrialization, to American carnage, people free writing on us, to having large trade deficits, and we
want at some point a week dollar. The fundamentals imply a stronger dollar. But policy that may be an attempt eventually, maybe in a second enough of an administration to find an agreement on currency, maybe to say either you accept ten percent tariffs or you accept a ten percent depreciation of the dollar. I would not rule out there'll be
some big Mara lago agreement. Is you know, the effects agreement are always in a resort, you know, Bretton Woods and Maria the coach Lasa, you know Louver and so on. So Mara lagoa cord is something that they're gotta think about, not in the first two years, but down the line they're gonna say to the trading partners, you don't want tariffs. You have to do other things for us as right the currency.
Talk about bitcoin, Bitcoin pushing one hundred and three k upon the session by more than five percent. Norian Repining is back with us. Norio. You've had a big move in bitcoin over the last month or so. I had a big move over the last several years. Have you rethought the way you think about what's happening here?
Not really. I mean people talk about bitcoin being a cryptocurrency like the other ones, but they're not really currencies. They're not a unit of account, they're not a scalable means of payment. They're not a stable store of value, not a single numeror Bitcoin in the past went to seventeen down, then to sixteen, has above one hundred. You could have another fifty percent correction. So it's a speculative
act like mime stocks, sparks and others, highly volatile. Many people are going to eat but don't take El Salvador the force. Everyone's used bitcoin as legal tender, and less than one percent of all transaction occurring in bitcoin, so I don't think it's going to ever become a currency. There's going to be a speculative act.
One thing the dollar is depreciated against is bitcoin, and I think this is where I would see some separation between what's happening with main coins and main stocks and what is happening with bitcoin. There seems to be a preference. There are market participants who believe that this is a place to be if you're worried about the depreciation of the US dollar and a fiscal trajectory of the United States of America, Do you see a case for it there?
Not really, because actually when the FED was essentially arising rates and inflation was higher, Bitcoin was falling, like in twenty two as there was the stock market correction. And now the stocks are going higher and the fact is easy and inflation has fallen, Beacon is going higher again. So historically has not been a hedge against inflation. Actually
looks like it's highly correlated. Positively, bit stocks a better relative to the equity market, so it's not a traditional like hedge like gold that is in periods of time or inflation rising, or the basement or worries about the dollarization. So it's something to me, it looks like expectedlyve A said, it is highly correlated with equity, so it's not a hedge against inflation, you say, sort.
Of parallel tracks to meme stocks and some of the other euphoria that we've seen. At the same time, there seems to be something more concrete behind this. You mentioned gold, and we are seeing that rally in gold and tandem because of what John is talking about, that store of value outside of the US dollar to protect against some
sort of laws of fiscal dominance. Do you see with a more institutionalized structure endorsed by a presidential administration there being a case for at least a crypto based store of value that could offset some of the risks of volatility in the dollar and the potential loss on the margins of fiscal dominance.
Down the road.
I'm not sure, because if you're worried about inflation, the basement of field currency, or even the dollarization, there are plenty of other assets that provide a good hedge. Shortened treasuries, tapes, oil out commod it is gold, precious metal, so it's not as if there is not other alternatives. And as I pointed out, in the last few years, when inflation was higher, actually bitcoin was falling. And when inflection has fallen, Bigcone is going higher, so it doesn't look like it's
been actually negatively correlated with inflation. So it is a spectultive act for some people. E is a store of value. But if you want to hedge yourself against inflation, I think that a spectrum of variety about their assets that are backed actually by real income or something store of value that are a better hedge against some of the risks that people worry about.
But given the change of tone in Washington, do you think there could be retail adoption at any point?
Oh? Yeah, and there's already been retail adoption. But my word is actually that the regulation on crypto might become looser like they were before, and then you have another speculty run, you have another sets of scams like FTXSPF and so on, and then you get another bust. So there ri is kids who are going to go towards a very little regulation. You know, there are lots of
players in this space. That are quite shady, and the lack of regulation actually leads to a bigger bubble and a bigger bust down the line.
None you a long time. Just want to finish up with something positive looking out to twenty twenty five. Favorite region right now, Favorite economy, the place you're most optimistic about for next year? Which one?
It's a bit consensus, but I think the United States still is going to outperform both in terms of economic growth and equity markets.
Yes, seems to be the one place to big here. It repeated it. Don't we the United States. It keeps coming back to America.
It feels like Tina. This is the Tina trade. There is no alternative at a time or essentially, growth is concentrated in the world's biggest economy, and maybe it's trickling out, maybe it's not. But nonetheless you also have yield.
Here, Lariel, It's good to see us, sir, Thanks for catching up with us. Thank you. Noria Rabini there of Rabini Macro Associates. Let's keep it on the administration, Let's stick with politics. President lec. Donald Trump rounding out his economic team, naming former Congressman Billy Long to lead the IRS, former Georgia Senator Kelly Loffler for Small Business Administrator, and former SEC Commissioner Paul Atkins for the role of Chairman of the Commission. Joining us now is Tobin Marcus of
Wolf Research. Tabin, Welcome to the program. A lot of focus on the Atkins appointment. A lot of focus because bitcoin is rallying so hard when we hear things like they are a crypto advocate, they are pro crypto tope and in practice, what does that actually mean for policy?
Well, the big complaint about the SEC from a digital asset perspective over the course the past few years was the so called regulation by enforcement approach that Gensler took. I think that's frankly more of an issue for a lot of these sort of smaller and newer entrant digital assets in terms of like not being able to get the clarity from the SEC that they wanted, either by trying to go through formal channels or through sort of
seeking forgiveness not permission. From a Bitcoin perspective, I mean, obviously it's been able to thrive despite Gensler's approach to the SEC and has continued to rip hire. So I think that's obviously a kind of an animal spirit story.
What kind of U turns can we see at the SEC under akins that were put in place by Gensler.
I think Acinus is going to be broadly dirego story across pretty much every access. I mean, he's talked about rolling back formal roles. He's also been critical of penalty as imposed by the SEC in the past, So I think even where there are enforcement actions, he's going to be tending to take a more lenient approach with an eye towards not kind of reducing competition, not imposing costs,
and ultimately flow through to shareholders. You know, a lot of the formal rules that Gensler put put forward that have faced the most criticism are already in litigation in terms of climate disclosures, for example. You know there's already litigation against the market structural rules that they put out
earlier this fall. So you know, I don't know how much of it is going to be a story of formally rolling back rules as opposed to just sending a very clear message that you know, we're not going to try and regulate through enforcement. You don't need to sort of worry about what we're going to do quite as much.
We also know who's going to be filling in now taking the job of Jonathan kantor over at the DOJ when it comes to antitrust, and that's Gail Slater. What can we glean into what she has said in the past about big tech companies into maybe how Trump two point zero might potentially be a continuation of what the Biden administration was already doing.
Yeah, that was a very interesting pick. I think a little bit more populoust at the margin than we expected heading into the election, where I think are we going to get a fairly traditional pro business Republican approach at DOJ and FTC From a competition policy perspective, I think the clearest signal about what she stands for is what Trump said about her announcement and what we can glean from her working for Vance, both of which you know,
are really focused on big tech. In terms of what's in the crosshairs, I don't see as much risk on in sectors that are not kind of explicitly targeted as we saw under connin Canter in the Biden administration, you know, but her personal trajectory, I mean, she spent ten years as a staff attorney at the FTC. She's done some work for the tech industry, so you know, looking at her resume, you wouldn't necessarily think that she's going to
be pitchfork wielding. But I do think the expectation, based on what Trump advancer are saying, is that we'll see some populism in that approach.
So far, Tobin populism aside, A lot of businesses are looking at the agenda and saying this gives us a lot more confidence going forward in our business models. There are a couple of surveys done by different places, one of them showing that now two thirds of business executive survey are optimistic about the path ahead versus twenty six
percent of respondents in August. Do you think that that is justified simply because of the deregulation and do you think that was sort of I don't know a commentary on the regulatory regime before.
It's fairly typical to see very dramatic reversals in business sentiment on transitions.
You know, generally.
Republican leadership tends to be better welcomed. Especially you know, some of those surveys like NFIB have a very very strong part is in balance to them. So, you know, I think that's not terribly surprising. You know, I think the sentiment swings tend to be bigger than the activity swings in terms of what people are doing versus what they're saying. But you know, I think in both cases we're seeing stronger animal spirits.
But you know, our.
Expectation heading into the Trump administration, or heading into the possibility of Trump win, was always that the good news would be kind of front loaded on some of those priorities like deregulation that were very clear, and then the more potentially adverse news is backloaded in terms of what happens with tariffs, what happens with some of these offsets for a fiscal package next year where we're going to need to wait to where these risks land.
Backloaded at the same time that people are talking about how this is really going to be first order priority for President elect Trump when he takes office to put tariffs on and I wonder how much you expect that to really impact sentiment. We've been talking to a number of people about how much investors are really aware of that the idea of tariffs coming in and not just being a negotiating tool.
What's your take on that.
How much are the people you speak to taking it truly seriously?
So I certainly don't think tariffs are priced in from a market perspective. I think that's the clearest thing. Even people who are taking it seriously. I think it's very challenging to figure out, you know, what are some of these single name traits, given how much prescretion the president has in implementing tariffs, and how much uncertainty there is about exactly what his agenda looks like. So you know, there's a lot of uh, sort of interest in it.
We're having tons of conversations with institutional investors about what that might look like. But ultimately there is a lot of uncertainty, and I think people are going to need to see it to fully believe it.
Hi Tibin, good to hear from you. It's Tobin macus that of Wolf Research on the alex of policy. Market's very focused on one thing tomorrow morning, and that's the payrolls report, with the hospitality sector coming into focus. Bloomberg Economics ranks in the following as this sector has been the biggest drank on headline payrolls in past novembers. We think underperformance here will be a major factor in a
disappointing headline print. A man who has to manage the hospitality sector is Eric Resling, the CEO of KSSL Capital Partners, which invest in travel and leisure. It joins us now for more. Eric, good morning, it's good to see you.
Good Mary, Jane, great to see you all to day.
How are things going you managed in a hospitality sector. What does the labor market look like at the moment.
Well, if you step back, we're the largest private investor in travel, solely focused on travel we believe in the world. We have about twenty five billion assets under management. Two thirds of that's inequity, a third in credit, and we employ about fifty thousand people. So when we look at that, I realized that in October there was comments on the
softness in leisure hiring. Really see that. So there's been I think a resurgence of consumer confidence post election, when you alleviate the uncertainty around the presidential election, and so we're seeing bookings strong when we look into twenty twenty five. So I anticipate that whether the November jobs report is strong or not, I suspect that you'll see increase hiring as we look out over the next few months.
Before we continue, you mentioned the sort of uncertainty around the election and that affects travel. Can you explain why, because none of us can figure that out. We've been trying to understand this is that there's an election coming up, so I'd better just stay home.
I was hoping you could tell me it's an odd thing, but we see it most This is not specific to this election. Often in presidential elections, right ad spending goes up and generally consumers become a little less confident. I think it's just the basics of uncertainty is unnerving. Unnerving is less confidence. Less confidence, you don't spend as much and travels a place. In that circumstances, you tend to delay a little bit.
So we saw a little bit.
Of software third quarter and fourth quarter bookings going to the election. We've seen it rebound since, and when we look to twenty five, you know, bookings for US advanced bookings up about fifteen percent. So we're very excited about that. But it is odd to me. I can't give you an answer. I wish I knew.
So when you talk about hiring and I do want to stick on that because that's one of the key components of people's confidence and their ability to keep going and traveling. How much easier is it to hire people now? I remember a time post pandemic where it was incredibly difficult and you couldn't find people, and in order to find somebody, you had to find someone who didn't work very hard and pay them thirty dollars an hour after paying them fifteen dollars an hour.
How different is it now?
It's very different. I would say, looks zooming back, what's fifteen dollars an hour? Like you mentioned, it is probably more like twenty. In big cities it's more. But if you look across the industry, I would say it's gone fifteen to twenty over four or five years. So it's
still meaningful wage inflation that has helped. So right now we are staffed well above levels that were typically staffed at this time year in terms of the pace of hiring for us going into the winter ski season, so we are basically ninety five percent hired across Alterra Mountain Company and the Icon Pass, which is our ski pass that we created about seven years ago, catering to go on right Yeah, over that time period, we've seen a dramatic ramp up in demand for skiing and hiring this
year has gone easier than it has probably any time since pre pandemic.
Which traces this question about how sustainable this is going forward. And I don't want to get glimmy, because this is all very positive and vacation plans are something that we all want to make. But I am curious about whether you're sort of getting to this place where what we hear from companies is that consumers are pushing back against price increases. That's true, they don't want to pay that much more. Hiring is pretty easy. People are plentiful in
terms of availability, not demanding that much more. Does this speak to a moment that in the past, over your decades in this industry have been tipping points things start to not be quite as good.
I think that the rate of growth, which was robust coming out of COVID, has now stabilized to a more normal rate of growth. There's no doubt about that. I think we also see that the more luxury end of the market is growing faster than the lower end of the market. This past year, you've seen three or four percent red part growth in the luxury endo the market. You've seen a couple percent red part decline in the economy into the market. I think that speaks of a
bit of what you're going after. There is some pricing fatigue out there. I think the consumer is willing to pay at all ENDO the market do want to pay for service. You have to execute against that.
If you don't.
Execute against it, you're going to be a net loser in that industry in terms of market share. So for us, we try to be an employer of choice that helps us on gaining effectively market share of the labor market, and we try.
To be.
I'll try to also provide choice to the consumer, value to the consumer in the terms of in terms of high end service, so that they feel like while they're paying more for their vacation, they're getting more as a result. And so if we get that equation right, I don't think there's any inflection point that we're at now. A's negative. I think we're in a sixty frankly sixty year cyclical trend of people spending more towards experiences over material goods when it.
Comes to employment, though, how are you thinking about potential change of policies and the crackdown of illegal immigration by the incoming Trump administration and what that could mean for the supply right now in the market.
Look, it's a relevant issue again, think for us in our industry, legal immigration policies are very important and creating vertical pathways for often legal immigrants and people getting their first job and giving them an opportunity to grow their careers over time in the leisure and hospitality industry, we think is a wonderful opportunity that our industry provides. Now we take very seriously making sure that our employees are
legally here. And I don't think there's a broad issue in our industry in that regard, but certainly anything in the industry, but the knock on a fact, there is a knock on effect. We'll see what happens. There's talk and then there's action. Certainly we can't predict exactly what's going to happen. If there were something that resulted in a meaningful pullback in that kind of entry level labor market, that would certainly have a knock on effect. You know,
as you mentioned emory in our industry. But what we have shown that could be inflationary if there's less available labor, it could be inflationary on wages. If that's the case, We've shown in our industry that we're very resilient. Just looking at the COVID, we were able to manage through a period of rapid inflation and come through that actually healthier than we went into it.
The post COVID tourism flows have shifted, though, and geopolitics has been that Russian tourism has disappeared in certain places, the Chinese tourist was very slow to come back, and still our states for America as well. What do you noticeeing with regards to that, where's the tourism coming from? Where's it going? Where do you want to be? Where do you want to have a prophecy?
Well, I can't give you a specific answer and perspective investments, but what I would say is Indian tourism is way up, China is down, Middle Eastern tourism is up, Russia is down, American tourism to.
Europe is up.
European tourism to the US has come back actually quite robustly. Japanese tourism is down to the US, Chinese tourism, or actually all tourism to Japan is up, currency flows, macroeconomics all coming too play there. We think of those as short term trends generally speaking, when you look over the long term, fundamentally, we think that global tourism, global travel flows, if you will, all generally are pointing up into the right.
But yes, everything you said is true for us. We're looking for those unique destinations that have broad appeal, ideally a place that we can take a consumer. If they haven't appealed to the Indian tourists, how do we create more appeal to the Indian tourists that's growing will come to our new destination. Maybe that's in Italy, maybe that's in the US, maybe that's in our resorts in the Maldives, just as one example. But I wouldn't say that we're
particularly concerned about that. We've never where the where the trends are weaker. We've never had a lot of Russian demand is for example, at our properties. But yes, you are right when we look at markets like Kurschevel in France, just as a consumer, the Russian travel of that market is down materially over the last several years.
So I know you can't talk about prospective deals, but you can talk about the type of deals that you are interested in, and you had been focused much more on debt. Now you're much more shifting your focus to equity investments.
Why, Well, I wouldn't say it's a shift. It's more if you look back last year, the typically year, we deploy about three billion dollars worth three billion dollars of capital, half in debt, half inequity. In the last year, credit debt was up fifty percent and equity was down fifty percent, And that was simply a symptom of a big bid ass gap between buyers and sellers on equity offset by a tremendous amount of refinancing demand combined with bank pullback
on the credit side. Looking forward, we still see those seams trends ends in credit, but on the equity side we see real reason for optimism. We see NDAs that we've signed increasing, We've seen initial conversations with banks and sellers increasing. Going into twenty five, bank or get availability is there, So that helps spinning us acquisitions. Interest rates for down seventy five basis point, it's hopefully more coming. So all of that boats well for the equity market
as we go into the first after twenty five. It will take a quarter or two to play out.
Just before you go. I am an amateur hotel and restaurant critic. Congratulations, I'm aware. Yes, Bil, Savannah Lake Como. Fantastic property. It is a fantastic property. I highly recommend it. The self drive boats there are fantastic. Did that? The mini reeve of boats A beautiful think there, they are wonderful, sir, amateur, thank.
You, thank you, thank you, thank you for being one of our past guests.
Anytime, sir, anytime. Thank you.
Good to see it, Thank you great.
I appreciate you you having me.
On, Eric Restmika KOs sound Capital pon this. This is the Bloomberg Seventans podcast, bringing you the best in markets, economics, angie politics. You can watch the show live on bloomber 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.
HM