Surveillance: Virus Causing Oil Shock, Says Goldman's Currie

with his important research over the decades on flows of capital. David, you have been clear and straightforward on negative interest rates. We just heard Christine Lagarde speak of the lower bound that we're at. Give us an update on what negative interest rates are doing to continental Europe. Well, firstgot has been dealt a bad hand in the sense that she stuck with this situation and she inherited, and the question

is how to get out of it. I believe there is a strong consensus at the political level developing that negative interest rates are to to quite a large extent, responsible for discontent within the broader population for a feeling that we're no longer we meaning central banks, and are no longer in control of of what's going on of monetary policy. Anybody looking saying that I put money in my savings account and I lose fifty BIPs, says to himself,

something is fundamentally wrong here. And when I when I talk to my German relatives and my mother said, what what are you guys doing? You can't even get this right? How can we trust you? So I think this does torculate down to that level and then back up to the political and creating pressure. So I believe that this negative interest rates from here on out not the policy tool of choice. The question is how to get out

of it now. You can't all of a sudden have a have a flipper switch and go back to zero. But our strong forecast and our sort of what we hear from very angles in Vayos segments is that there that the searches for a way out rather than thinking of it as a positive tool. Same same when you look at them. The FEDS review of its monetary policy tools and instruments to be going on not for more

than a year. Again, there is there's a very strong dislike for negative interest rates because of the secondary impact on the financial sector, on the general feeling in the population that something is wrong. So if we have today on the Bloomberg an official of MS Miracle's party associating the far right in Germany with Nazis. This is loaded language. Dr folkers land out. Can you equate this economic experiment, even if well intentioned, with the type of GDP and

economic growth of Europe over to us? You just said people have lost their bargain with institutions is personified by negative interest rates. If the institution's broken the relationship with the people. It's tempting to be attempting to say yes, But that wouldn't be quite right. I mean, there are many other factors that are involved here. There is a general breakdown of the center right in the center left

dominance of European politics. You see this in Spain with Fox, you see this in Italy with the League, and you see this in Germany with the a f D. And I think I think that there we have a real problem in the sense that we have any We have economies that are performing reasonably well and nowhere near large unemployment numbers, in fact almost full employment. Yet there is there's discontent that pushes people away from the center into the fringes. And I think this is a This is

probably the most serious political problem of our generation. There's no question that it does in fact policy both macro and both monetary and fiscal, and as it should. Indeed, this is too important to ignore. So Anglo Marco also called her party's decision to align with this far right party unforgivable and she quote said it is a bad day for democracy. Now she's talking during visit to South Africa. Can this be reversed. It's difficult to reverse it by feared,

but it can be reversed by lots of pressure. Obviously, I think to put this in perspective, you have to recall this is the first time since the Roma Republic that far right, radical far right party helped forming a government. They're not in the government, they're just elect the government left the state premier. Now that means they're going to have not much control over it, but a little bit

of control. But but it's very symbolic, particularly in Germany, and I think it's it's probably underestimated in the international process to how important is this for the German psyche. So it's definitely an earthquake political event inside Germany, one that has to be taken seriously, but will change policies. Right, So you look at this wrangling marcle you do you know, without going into whether this changes the head of the CDU, which it could, does it change how you speak to

your citizens and economic policies in place. There's no doubt that it will. There's no doubt that it will lead to a soul searching of why haven't we brought the rest of the country with us into the into this economic boom that it almost this and why do we have this discontent? And this will have an impact on fiscal policy within Germany, no question. There will be more inclination to spend on infrastructure, and it also may on the European side or there it's a little more difficult

to implement that. But so from that point of view, and the same of the negative interest rates, That's why I think negative interest rates are thing of the past. We try to get out of it. Fiscal policy will be expansionary and there this is going to impact policy, yes, but but but more than that, um it is what

it has done. It has legitimized the the role of really far right party in German politics and and and it's going to have international repercussions in terms of reputation and so so I think the quicker we can reverse is the better, but you can't just MECCA does not have the administrated power to reverse it, not not as a KK This is something that has to get done by lots of pressureent and and I presume that the three parties coordinated this before and they thought about all

the consequences the FDPA and it city you and that it is not going to be so easy to reverse. I want to again and bring this up to date. Our Patrick Donahue and Arn Adults reporting Chancellor Miracle's party lines up with German far right in shock vote and it's been extraordinary to see the language. David, what is the sched list for institutions? You are one of the advantage of the elite of Germany. What is the institutional

mandate to turn Germany towards a more moderate path? Well, I think it's important that that institutions, that the firm stick to their primary business and in our case that is intermediating between savers and investors. And we're not a political actor, but we have strong views about this. There's no doubt that uh, this is bad for everybody concerned, and we play we prepared. There are there are political issues that that where we can actually do something. This

is less so. But we can do a lot about for instance, about sustainability uh and and we have done that. But on this issue, all we can do is voices to those that are critical, and we are and our CEO has done that already. So I think we speak out strongly. And if you strom me about this, extraordinary comments. David Fulkers, Lando Is with joutsche Bank. Let's springing, Jeff Calry, Showy Golvin Sacks, Global head of Commodities Research, Donna Soul Jeff,

what is the cult? Well, when we look at the current coronavirus and pandemic, we'd say the biggest impact is coming from the quarantine. You're shutting down fact, shutting down school, shutting down transportation to and fro China. Obviously oil sets at the center of us because it's both the activity inside China as well as the travel um in and out of China. UM. The question is how long will this go? I think most people are budgeting sometime to

at least early March. UM. After that, I would tend to think you get a rebound, and I think you'll get stimulus that's focused on the consumer to boost consumer confidence UM. So you get much more of a V shaped check type recovery coming out of it. UM. And so the question is what does this due to activity in the second half of the year versus today. We think all the weakness is up in the near term with oil, and sometimes it's two x the economic weakness

because you're shutting down all that those interconnectivities. UM. But when you look let's say out four months, five months out, we'd expect to rebound right back up to the same levels that we were at before in re you know, and actually even be on a faster growth path. So one of the biggest demons shelks since the financial crisis solcably, but with a K caveat that you think this is transitory, You think we get a vacape recovery. What are the

risks around that view? What the risks around that view that you can identify that you can say if that materialize is if X happens, we've gotten through an inflection point, I'm going to change my mind. I think there's two. One is that we've disrupted supply chains around the world. It becomes much more difficult to restart. We don't know that yet, And that we've seen that historically. UM. That

the second issue is the contagion. Now, the reason why it's having such a profound economic impact today is they're trying to contain the contagion by doing a largest quarantine I've ever seen in my lifetime, UM, which is why you're having the sharp drop today. But I would say the bigger issue is we don't know the parameters of the contagion. A lot of people are saying that this is the containment, largely having to do with the slowdown in the economy. I was reading about the Spanish flu

of uh. The death rate was very similar to the coronavirus. It was a one to two percent type of fatality rate, but it spread so widely that fifty million people died. What's your concern that perhaps people are under bawling the potential impact of the coronavirus. Saying it's gonna be fine even if it's not contained is basically everyone says it will be and it escalates to something that Let's go back to why they call it the Spanish flu. Spain was the only one that had a media that reported

on it. Um. You know, there it was an issue of transparency and they weren't on top of it. This is the exact opposite. Um, they are so much on top of that. The extent of the quarantine really demonstrates that the ability to maintain the contagion is unprecedented. I mean, you're paying the economic costs for it today. Um. But but the contagion um is more contained than I think

we've seen any of the other events. So given that, are you surprised that we're not seeing more of a boom to oil prices today, given the fact that it's risk on because what where this oil is going is it's going into storage in China, um or it's being backed up onto the global market. Commodities are spot assets. They have to price today. Financial markets are anticipatory assets. They price tomorrow. So oil has to pay the price for the day. All the commodities have to pay the

price today. The financial markets com price the much more positive story that we see, let's say in July or August. So incomably with saying that, Jeff, so let's talk about a stimulus response, shall we? At the moment you think we're gonna see some real stimulus in the back half, I just wonder what they'll do because At the moment, it's very very short term stuff, liquidity to banks, cutting rates on that liquidity to banks, all of that good stuff.

When we start to see the longer term measures, I think you've got to know, we we don't even know when this end is when they can actually start doing it UM. I think at this point right now, their ability they're trying to maintain and deal with the virus as opposed to focusing on the economic growth. So we're we're just watching for some evidence of the restart. We have a bunch of different high frequency variables were focused

on UM, everything from real estate, transactions, power generation. Once we see that began to rebound, I think that's when people are going to focus on these other issues. So what does riad do? I mean, if the oil demand craters in China UH and its oil one price Brent crude, what how does OPEC and how does Saudi Arabia react to what you're predicting? Well, the question is how much of this is backed up onto the global market exactly?

And you know we would estimate by looking at crude runs in China it's probably somewhere around a million barrels per day as opposed to the full demand hit. So when you think about the numbers that the JTC, the Joint Technical Committee of the OPEC recommended last night, there are somewhere around six thousand barrels a day, which is not too far off the mark, and that probably manages the external surplus for a few months, for a few months.

And the great call here of your four point zero percent g d P call is it's gonna be a recovery. Can you model that recovery now to a few months or is it just you just don't know? I don't know. I think that's that's why I'm surprised that the equity market is so positive, because you do have Constant's fault. That's right, yeah, David, you know, but but the equity markets what what why would you suggest, as a commodities guy,

why Coston's world has a bid to it? Because they're looking at the stars like recovery here to three months out. I mean, that's the end of the discussion. Yeah, because I think that the view is, hey, you've got a lot of problems you're dealing with, but the quarantine is so large, um, that's most likely going to be effective. And you put it, it's a very low probability tail risk of something bad happen. Explain to our audiences phrase forced masjour. We've got the l en g cruise and

no we don't think so. I mean every other company today, frankly outside of China as well in Singapore is getting out the Latin book on forced masjour. Is that Latin genre French? I can't remember? Are we? Is it forced masjour? March? Yeah, it's gonna be not only in commodities and particularly oil.

We see it quite a bit. You're gonna see it across all types of goods and it goes both directions, not only stuff going into China, but stuff coming out of China, particularly some of the key commodities that they produce, like stealing aluminum. Jeff Carry's on the show. You said we have to wrap things up by getting the gold coal. What's the gold coal? Now? What is it? What's the dynamic around that metal that you're thinking about. By the way, the one thing I did not anticipate was the ding

to jewelry demand in China being significant. It's significant at the margin gold's trading um you know, sixteen seventy and change right now, our fifteen seventy in change right now. UM. Our our target is sixteen hundred. UM. We were pretty close to it a few weeks ago, but this demand hit has taken some of the tinge out of it. We're still positive. We view gold much more as a strategic allocation trade as opposed to a directional trade. UM.

You know. So, and if I were highlight the key issues geopolitical risk de dollarization, I think is a big one. Central bank buying of gold last year was the highest since in Nick scen era, representing global supplies. UM. So then nout of that we see some models upside in your term your clients, the guys that you speak to on a daddy basis, are that becoming more sympathetic to your view that boosting their radication to gold in their portfolio is just that's something you've witnessed of in the

last twelve months. Um. In Europe they can't get enough of it, but remember they have negative bondyles. UM. In the U S it's a it's a hard call because you know, the Hans are still positive here. UM. So it really depends on where you are in the world. Can central bank policy affect your world? Um? Absolutely? Um, Yeah, you get a rate cuts, one rate cut to rate cuts. Whatever he's saying, is that help commodities find a bid um. Not as much as stimulus coming out of China, UM,

but it is. It is a positive development. This has been sphere. Jeff Curry, thank you so much. With a really important call there in China GDP before the market clears. Right now, Henrietta Trust joins us she director of Economic researcher course UH with Data Partners. Henrietta, we need to talk about the fractured polarization in Washington. But I've gotta ask you, uh what you thought of the Romney moment yesterday. I mean, how did that fit into the floor the Senate,

the house that you know, uh well it was. It was certainly very unwelcome news for Republican leadership. We had been with staff there throughout the day in real time just understanding that, UM, they were extremely displeased with Senator Romans decision to get so vocal um. The immediate fear is for him to see some substantial backlash. And obviously, okay, but I don't mean to interrupt, but I think it's so important, Like what backlash you can't get on the

squash court. I mean, what actually happens to the senator from Utah. Um, I don't know that the Senator from Utah is the one that's most at risk, but any of the vested interests who have supported him are now going to get nothing of their agenda accomplished, like Chuck Schumer, like Chuch Schumer Shore, or any of the trade associations who have donated to him or who are looking to

him to advance any of their legislation. One of the issues that I'm not particularly familiar with, but something to do with college sports and his legislation and impetus um, something came up there just this the manifest options for them to sort of squeeze him are the focus. Now. I mean, you're grizzled pro on this, So just one more question in the politics of it before John gets the policy. But is he a Democrat in Utah? Now? I mean, I mean, I'm fascinated by what happens in

his state right now. I mean, it's like what four Democrats in Salt Lake. Yeah, exactly. And Um, it was interesting to see the Utah Republican Party and the junior Senator from Utah, Mike Lee respond They essentially it's a senior senator. Um, you know, we don't agree with anything that the detractors had to say, really teaming up against him. So that internal politics of Mitt Romney in the state

I think will be interesting to watch. They were certainly very unhappy and to the media publication should expect to play this up. Of playing this up, but let's be honest, it will be a footnote in the history books. Will move on to the election very very quickly in November, So let's focus on that. If you want to win elections, you're probably going to need a few people from the other side of the arts crossover and the made for

Twitter moments that might entertain the base. That we've seen from the Democrats over the last week or so, it's just turning go off everyone else. And there is a conclusion that many people have come to on both sides of the art over the last couple of days that the president has had a very good week. How does he capitalize on that? Henrietta Absolutely, I think probably the most important data point was the underwhelming turnout in Iowa earlier.

That is a story that doesn't get enough attention. But if Democrats are going to win they have to depend on a massive voter turnout, and that's something that just didn't show up in Iowa. So when you think about the president's good week potentially you know, as described to us by Republican leadership, maybe his best week ever. Um,

that's probably the number one driving factor. So Democrats have to um, fix what's gone on in the last week, immediately get to New hamp or figure out if but you're just going to get it bounced from this, figure out if the establishment's going to firm up behind Biden. Um,

they have a lot of decisions to make. The conversations I heard from investors on the road were regularly intoning um that Mike Bloomberg has a chance to really drive and pull away here um to to take on the nomination, and the party is pretty unprepared for that in my opinion. Of course, Mike Bloomberg the found a majorityano of Bloomberg outpay the parent company of Bloomberg News and Henriette for

the market. It comes down to something quite simple. Do we get a progressive candidate or a moderate out of the Democrats side. What are you looking for in New Hampshire? What's the right through from Iowa to New Hampshire next week. The most important thing to me is that Bernie Sanders is under performing in New Hampshire. Versus two thousand sixteen, he got six of the vote there in sixteen, he's

getting so now I think that's the story. So the potential for a more moderate candidate continues to be my most likely outcome. Um, I doubt that it would be Klobachar, So I think the contest is between Biden and h pet Buttag at this point and Bud has some momentum but very little minority support. So it's always been my view that other candidates must win both Iowa and New Hampshire.

Biden doesn't need to win either, so his firewall in South Carolina and Super Tuesday make me comfortable with that. And there's a question of what the narrative will be among the Democrats in terms of how to counter the strong economy and the trade achievements that President Trump has made.

I'm wondering what you think of particularly the trade developments, as China does say that they will have tariffs and some seventy five billion dollars of imports from the US later this month, as we do seem to get progress across the board. What's the sort of narrative that he

can use versus the counter narrative. Well, the counter narrative is one that we're hearing from Democrats and increasingly from Senate Republicans behind the scenes, which is that the tariff rate reduction China announced overnight is potentially being driven by a increased sense of reality that China's going to miss its purchase commitments. That's the most important thing. Democrats would obviously sees on that immediately. It's got ratifications for Senate

races as well as the administration UM. The key states of Iowa and North Carolina are both major pork producers. They're looking for massive shipment UH commitments from China in that space, and they importantly both have Republican senators at risk for re election in Johnie Ernst in Iowa and

Tom Killis in North Carolina. So for Democrats right now, what they are seizing on is this very real anxiety from farm state Republican senators and congressmen that China's going to miss its purchase commitments and that this drop in

tireff was driven by that. Um the potential for coronavirus and the African swine fever or whatever to impact their ability to hold true to their purchase commitments, which behind the scenes they'll tell you they think President Trump inflated beyond which China was able to commit to in the

first place. Well, Henry, let's talk about these commitments, because there is a clause in the Phase one deal that in the event of natural disaster or unforeseeable events, you can consult, either side can get together and try and work something out. As far as you can see, have we seen that from China as yet, because I haven't seen any official statement from either side that suggests they have made that approach, And do you expect it to

happen in the coming week. No, we haven't seen that approach. Um. I think that the administration is starting to telegraph that the coronavirus is a pretty severe issue, and so that might smooth the way for eventually having those conversations. They're at least laying the groundwork to make that an option that's available to folks, um if if we eventually get there. China has not to my knowledge, done that yet. There

is obviously some conflicting reporting going on around there. Um, But I think that the given that the option is escalating tariffs further from here, which is because ordinarily unwise going into an election eight months away. UM, my expectation is that if they do miss purchase commitments, there will be a very real willingness to blame it on coronavirus

or whatever and engage in further talking. Henry had one final question after this history made yesterday and early over the last few weeks in Washington, what happens today on Capitol Hill? The people just like come in and get their coffee and sit in their office as number like, what's the to do list on Capitol Hill today? There is no to do list? Um, I imagine everybody will go retreat to their corners and come back and talk about appropriations in a few weeks. There's Henrietta, thank you

so much. Brilliant. That was just brilliant. Mike Wilson is with Morgan Stanley. He has not said go to cash, but he has decidedly been cautious on this great bull market. He joins us. Now, Mike, I want to go to one of your individual stock selections, but far more than that, I want to go to one single sentence in your recent note which is up up, but beneath the data,

there's been some real damage to the markets. What do you mean by that, Well, what we've been saying for quite a while is that, you know, it's definitely a bull market. Uh. You know last year, I think bank in October, when it became clear that the central banks were going to go to the next level and inject money into their balance sheet, and they called it kiwi, not keywi, whatever it is, the liquidity bull market took

over again. And so we're on board with that, and we raised our price targets last fall, and we've talked about price target for the first half of this year, but the fundamentals have really not supported them move. It doesn't mean it's you know that they were going to roll over into recession in factory economists or quite constructive on the global backdrop more than the US, but the

global backdrop looks quite good. We have this virus which is threatening that they think it will end up being fine and will end up weathering it, like I think most people are saying at this point. And so what we have is we have a liquidity driven bull market and underneath the surface, tom the market has traded very offensively. What do I mean by that? Large caps have handily beaten small high quality stocks have continued to beat low quality stocks. And the one area we've been focused on

its defensively oriented stocks have really beaten cynical stocks. So just to give you to our portfolio, are you know model portfolio that we manage is has basically outperformed the SMP by sevent basis points over the last you know, eighteen months. And it's very defensive. I mean, it's it's a very boring of stocks. But that's worked well and so I think that continues. But we're getting closer to a point where that may start to revert and we

should we should try to talk about that too. So, Mike, you know, when we think about the move up in the SMP last year, there's little to no earnings growth accompanying that is mostly multiple expansion. Have you seen anything in the current earning cycle to give you confidence that can be a high single digit, if not a ten percent type of earnings here, We're not quite there yet, but what we are seeing is is definitely a troughing. Okay, So the earnings recession that we called for I think

is probably completed. Uh, for now, we're stabilizing. We're not seeing a big inflection point in earnings growth, but you know, the stabilization is enough to get people excited, and that's why multiples went up. You know, you combine that with extraordinary monetary accommodation, and that's what you had, and that's

that's what markets typically do. All we've said is that you know that that extension that we've seen is our surpass the fundamental uptick, and so now the fundamentality to catch up and that and that can happen, right And so I think the coronavirus is obviously you know risk um the markets, I'll tell you right now. You know that's a real risk. And the markets basically shrugged off. So that tells me the technical picture of the market is very strong. Okay, at the index level, it's still

buying quality. And what that means is that the liquidity driven bull market is intact. What is your partition of buying US versus buying international If you're saying your global economics is a more constructive international We saw that queue for pop in international equities. Do you sustain that? Well? We have. It hasn't been the case that obviously this year in the US markets have retaken the lead because

the markets have gotten scared. But we do think in the intermediate term, so far our longer term portfolios, we are positioned for a global growth rebound and we we would argue strongly that there is going to be a rotation back towards the kind of more cyclically geared areas. And once we get through this most recent concern around the virus. That doesn't mean, by the way that U

S docks can't work. It just means that you know that the really fatter, the fatter pitches in in those markets outside of the US and in the areas that have been beaten up the most. And we're in the process now of probably making the final low so we can have that next wave of a global reflation. So, Mike, taking a look at your research, which we love to read, I see you added J and J as a name that you think the Morgan Stanley clients should be looking at.

What's the story behind J and J. Yeah, it's really simple. I mean, this is a this is a classic you know, defensively oriented growth name. I mean, it doesn't grow fast, but it grows, you know, top line, and it's been punished because of the litigation concerns that are out there, and our analysts thinks that those concerns are overpriced. It's trades in the sixth percentile on a relative valuation basis.

There's obviously been concerned around the healthcare industry because of the far left, uh, you know wing candidates in the Democratic Party that we're in the lead. That looks to be fading now to some degree. And so this is just an opportunity for evaluation catch up. And you know, we think high quality, defensive growth should contain to work. And this is a good This is a good this is a good place to put money right now. Hey, Mike,

thanks so much for that. We appreciate your thoughts as always, Mike Wilson. He is Morgan Stanley ke, us equity strategist and chief investment officer. We have the perfect guests this morning to frame the emotion of yes today afternoon, as a Senator from Utah spoke to his Congress, to his state, indeed to his family. Lannie chen Is at the Hoover

Institution that barely describes his path. Is the child of Taiwanese immigrants to a sterling academics at Harvard University and onto being the and everybody says, without any hesitation, the advisor to the Governor of Massachusetts, a senator from Utah, Lannie Chen, Have you spoken to Senator Romney in the recent hours? I have not. No. You know, it was

obviously very emotional moment for him yesterday. And you know, I think we all understand, or those of us who know him understand that he made that decision, uh, with some gravity and not lightly and so uh, you know, the best to let that decision sit with him and his family. You've been in the vortex of the separating of the Republican Party. How distant are supporters of the Senator of Utah their Republican Party, from the new Republican

Party of President Trump. It's a great question. I think this is going to be the question at the heart of conservative politics for many years to come, which is you know, you have in a lot of ways a separation on a number of different key issues over the years. Now, I think increasingly that Trump coalition and the Republican Party

has matched up. And what you've seen in this most recent impeachment vote is the degree to which the president and his supporters have managed to essentially take over the entirety of the Republican Party and the Republican apparatus. And so I think, you know, the issue is going to be in the years to come, how much of this

is lasting beyond the president. How much of the president's particular policy proposals, for example, that may not have matched up very well with with the Republicans in the past, how much of that continues to be the the position of the party going forward. I don't know that anybody knows the answer to that, but but I do think that a lot of that won't get resolved until the president leaves office, whether it's this coming January or four

years from that. Lonnie, are you surprised at all that perhaps other senators who may be privately voiced concerns about President Trump and maybe specifically about the appeachment, did not join, uh, Senator Romney, No, I'm not surprised. I think you know, everyone was going to arrive at the decision they were going to arrive at based on on the on the facts they were looking at, and and you know, important

factors they were considering. Um. But there are you know, as as the Senator Romney said yesterday, there will be repercussions for him in terms of having to get blowback from Republicans around the country for the decision that he made. And you know, I I think it was a very difficult decision, and so I it doesn't surprise me that others didn't walk the same path, even if they may have privately felt looked the president's behavior, um was not something they agreed with. So what I think is that

everybody had to reach their own decision. They reached and at the end of the day, everyone's got to consider the different factors that that that mattered to them, and for Senator Rodney, those factors led to the decision that he made. Um, Lonnie, do you think it's accurate or fair for the Democrats that came claim a little bit of a victory here saying, you know, this was not a partisan which that in fact, it was bipartisan. We had even if it was just one Republican, but it

was in factory Republican crossing the aisle. I I don't see how they can claim victory because, look, the presence approval rating is as high as it's ever been, uh, and it's not clear that the American people really felt that the exercise that they went through was wholly productive. I suppose the ultimate verdict will be rendered by the voters in November. Uh and and so we'll see. But I have a very difficult time saying how they can

claim victory on anything. Lonnie chan with this folks, with the Hoover Institution, of course, his support of economic annalste policy for then presidential candidate Mt Romney a number of years ago. We're thrilled I could join us. Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. Subscribe and listen to interviews on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, or whichever podcast platform you prefer. I'm on Twitter at Tom Keane before the podcast. You

can always catch us worldwide. I'm Bloomberg Radio.