BP EVP of Sustainability Giulia Chierchia on Net-Zero Ambitions

Net zero on carbon in VP's oil and gas production on an absolute basis by twenty fifty or sooner. A fifty percent cut in the carbon intensity of products VP cells by twenty or sooner, installation of methane measurement at all of vps major oil and gas processing sites by three and to reduce methane intensity of their operations by and lastly, to increase the proportion of investment into non

oil and gas businesses over time. In order to accomplish these aims, a few new teams were formed, including a strategy and sustainability team that has led by Julia. So today we speak with Julia about BP and why she thinks they are well positioned to achieve this important target, her views on some of the most discussed technologies in the energy transition, and a little bit about her and how she came to find herself last year in this

newly formed role. B and e F research on the energy transition can be found on the Bloomberg terminal at benof go, on b NF dot com or the BENF mobile app. As a quick reminder, we do not provide investment of strategy advice, and you can hear a more complete disclaimer at the end of the show. And now let's speak with Julia about the energy transition. Julia, thank you so much. It's really good to have you on the show today to talk about the future of the

energy transition and oil and gas industry. Thank you very much for having me. It's a pleasure to be here. I'd love to start with your story and what original drew you into the oil and gas industry, and then how you ended up at BP, because you've spent most of your career working in the consulting with a number of different stakeholders. So let's start maybe by telling you a little bit more about myself and how I actually ended up joining BP. So I think there's like redefining

things in my life. I think the first one is I'm half a town in half Belgium, grew up from London and then we moved to Italy from then Spain bustl Spain. So I think change is really something which is ingrained in my d NA since I was a child. The second thing I would say is, yeah, I had a pretty strong role model and my father who always told me to not confirm with my comfort zone, and so challenge is also something that has always been in

my DEA. And the fat thing is I have too little children thirteen year old natenniar old who are actually quite demanding in their questions on the energy transition. And I remember this if I moment when I was working in McKinsey where we're looking at potential temperature pathways linked to a potential energy transition paths and there was this businessess usual case which took us to a pathway of more than three degrees by and I literally thought, well

twenty six, my children will be in their fifties. And so I think that has actually contributed over time to build this significant sense of purpose. And yeah, I spent fifteen years in McKinsey. I left the firm as a senior partner. I was leading the global downtre more than gas practice, working quite extensively with clients to actually shape energy transition. And I loved it, and I think I learned a lot of around how do you actually structure

complex topics. But when VP approached me end of twenty nineteen and Bernard approached me, I jumped on it, and you know, talk about and I I said, I like change. There was a brutal change, and there was even more of a change because then COVID actually hit immediately after me joining, you know, and then I views one of the biggest challenges that one can think about in terms of our generation and probably the next generation to come.

And I was a huge privilege in terms of sense of purpose to actually have the ability to help contribute to shaping the PAS gen journey through the energy transition. So yeah, those are the reasons why I decided to join the oil and gas industry and then VP very specifically, I was immediately bought into the new purpose re imagined energy for people on the planet, which was at the

time being shaped the ambition. And then as I was talking to the two the leadership team, just that the buying from everybody on the willingness to actually embark on this What is it about BP that you think differentiates them in this space, and that it's it's quite progressive to say that you're that you think that an oil and gas firm is the exact right place to be

in looking at decarbonization and the energy transition. I actually think that if we want to play a critical role getting to the Paris Alignment and decarbonizing energy systems, we need to work with energy companies. I think that's the first element, which is you can't just decarbonize energy systems

by working with green companies. But if we really want to get to the Paris Alignment, we need to actually support companies such as OURS, which you know, energy plus industry plus transport represents so many percent of global emissions. So we need to really work with companies such as BP and other willing gas companies to actually help them

decarbonize and go along that journey. So I don't see joining your company such as VP and annointing gas company which is committed to actually decarbonizing as a progressive journey. I think it's actually very much aligned towards the ambition and the purpose in terms of what is unique about VP.

When I actually had my first conversations with Bernard at the time when I was actually considering joining, Bernard had already embarked on a series of multiple conversations with multiple types of stakeholders, from institutional stakeholders e g. Government stakeholders, with investors across the world, and with you know less hope your stakeholders such as NGOs and some of the

most challenging in GEO. So there was a whole process of listening which was going on, and that process of listening actually very much shaped his perspective and also the lt S perspective, the leadership team's perspective. So what I was actually struck by was the super strong alignment within the whole leadership team and within the company itself on

this ambition to transition. You know, at the end of the day, if you're actually working in an oil and gas company and you're delivering energy to the world, you

also want to feel good about what you're doing. And in equivocably, we are delivering energy to the world, and in the frame of the energy transition, we have the capabilities and the skills to continue doing so through the energy transition and UH and towards the low Carbonwell, what sort of things have been done in order to drive a culture shift within the organization and to really rally around the net zero target or did it just really

happen very organically at all levels of the business. Well, I think there were several initiatives, right. It all started with the announcement when Bernard started on February twelve of the new purpose like re imagine energy for people on the planet, the ambition and the aims the net the reins that was thereafter, if you wish, underpinned by the strategy which was actually announced on August fourth and then

detailed in September. It was also accompanied by a full reorganization of BP, which we call reinvent BP, which is really targeted towards moving away from the upstream downstream model to an organizational model which aligns to the energy transition. Right with business lines which are production and operations. Were

focused on our hydrocarbons businesses. Business line on gas and low common which is really the growth engine in terms of low carbon customers and products, which is really focusing on the growth engine around customers and then you know enablers in terms of trading in terms of digital and region cities and solutions or integrators as we call them. What that did was it really reframe the organization towards

alignment with the strategy. So it was really all the building blocks that came together in terms of ambition, in terms of integrated strategy, in terms of organization supporting it, and then a lot of communication around cascading the story and implications for all of the different people in the organization. So if you are in production and operations business, yes we might be in the world worth was we are reducing production by but you are literally funding the energy transition.

So it really is a game of and we need you to deliver today to be able to actually transition the company. So you have a fundamental role to play. At the same time, the growth engines need to deliver. So we really did an exercise of cascading if that strategy into what does it mean for the different parts

of the organization. So about a decade ago, BP was really pushing the limits in terms of a focus on sustainability with the Beyond Petroleum kind of ambitions and campaign, and since then specifically focusing on kind of the renewable assets that PP had. Many of them were sold off and we went through this period where that was really not a favorable part of the industry for the business to be in. Now it seems like there's a look

at renewables again. And my question in this really is do you think that in order for an oil and gas for him to transition into an energy company, do you think that a large percentage of the revenues can actually come from renewables or is that not the right way to look at how the company is going to look to change and grow and diversify. There is no one size, fit soul strategy in terms of oil and gas companies decarbonizing. We've seen companies, for example, in the US,

actually focusing very heavily on carbon capture. We've seen other companies actually focusing more heavily on retail power to consumers. Our answer is one where we do see low carbon technologies altogether having to play a critical role in the energy transition. And I'm talking about really multiple technologies coming

to play. So we have technologies which today, like renewables, are proven and are extremely cost competitive, and the challenge is one of how do you accelerate the deployment of those technologies and rollouts, which talking about moving from one hundred and fifty gigawatts of added capacity in the recent years to something like three hundred and fifty or five hundred and fifty and a well below two debrecent erra

on one point five degresoner. We have other technologies that are proven but need to be scaled up, and this

is for example, hydrogen or carbon capture. We have technologies which are more at a pilot level but might have a very critical role to play, for example in the carbonizing aviation, such as synthetic fuels or refuels, and then they still have fossil fuels of having to actually bridge the energy transition and in particular, as an example, gas having to provide that firm capacity as renewables come in. So we don't see this as do you need to

invest in renewables to the sake of renewables. I think it really is a multi technology strategy where one of the critical advantages that are companies such as US can actually bring is the integration of all those different technologies to provide firm capacity in terms of energy and low

corbon energy. So I don't think this is a renewables only play, but we definitely see in a world where renewables actually get to accounts to proximately sixty of power generation by renewables have a critical role to play, and they can integrate into hydrogen, they can integrate with gas

to provide that firm capacity. So it's really around that integration and which these technologies that are still I mean you're mentioning hydrogen and ccs and synthetic fuels, I mean very much on the edge in that they're quite expensive

to deploy at this point in time. Which of these did you say you're most excited about and why From a technology standpoint, I'm really excited about this notion of multiple technologies and the integration across multiple technologies because if you think about it, you know, with renewable penetration increasing significantly, you have a challenge in terms of how do I provide flexibility and stability to assist and batteries can provide it intra day, I need gas to back that or

hydrogen as it actually acceleerates to provide the flexible capacity. So it's really the first thing ANCE is really excited about the integration of those technologies. We are therefore so extremely excited about the renewable acceleration. We are very excited about hydrogen as a potential technology. Hydrogen could, as I was saying, get to account for approximately of primary energy

in twenty fifty. We're talking about increasing from seventy million tons per annum today in terms of hydrogen production to potentially in a one point five degree scenario six hundred or north of six hundred and fifty. And that will have to be clean, be it blue or be it green. So I think that is an area in which we

are very excited. We see obviously a need to abate the cost of hydrogen as we look towards twenty thirties in a world where today blue hydrogen is more expensive than gray hydrogen and green hydrogen is more expective than blue, and we expected to be the case for until probably limit the early thirties. So we will require support to accelerate hydrogen. But we think hydrogen will be a critical element to decarbonize hard to eight sectors. In that same line,

I think CCS has a critical role to play. We see five point five gigatons of c O two emissions of c O two to be captured through CCS and and at zero scenario d I a just release a scenario which talks to seven point six gigatons of c O two and then at zero scenario. So CCS we think has a critical role to play, and it also allows to actually half the cost of the energy transition as we try to align with the Paris Agreement. And it obviously has a critical role to play in terms

of blue hydrogen. I think other technologies such as sim fuels E fields have a role to play. They are less mature and need to be proven if you wish, in terms of in terms of adoption, and I think they will take a bit longer in terms of adoption.

So looking at these technologies, you did mention that some of them some forms of hydrogen or more expensive than others and even more more still, so this requires investment and reinvestment into the business and into technologies and R and D. What has been the reception by the investment community and really those shareholders looking at BP saying you know, maybe I'm not getting the same dividend payments that I was getting in the past, and you know, yeah, really,

what has been the response regarding bps net zero future. So I think the response has been very positive. It's been very positive across eholders, so it's been very positive for our own employees who very much embarked on the

new purpose and the new strategy. It's been very positive if you think about external stakeholders and end us, and I think in terms of investors, we had a very positive response on the strategic direction and at the same time and acknowledgements that the focus now is very much an execution and I think that's what we've been focused on.

And the dialogue with investors is very much one of ongoing dialogue with individual investors such as well as UM you know, Climate Action one hundred plus and yeah, just continuing to show those proof points, continuing to drive transparency and to some extent help our investors come with us

on the journey. And this is also the reason why this year we've actually changed our disclosures to actually align also are disclosures to the new strategy, so that we can actually help investors understand the value in the different elements of the strategy. Well, and this might be dry for many people, but really if you're looking at this, the different frameworks are important, and the disclosure element is

how you communicate with the investment community. I really want to know which frameworks you find to be most of lable and really give the most accurate view of what's actually happening. It is indeed an area in which we see quite a multitude of initiatives. So I think when when you try to answer that question, the way we actually tack on it is what are we trying to achieve in terms of in terms of disclosures and metrics

we try to answer that question. I think the first element is very much transparency, so that we can create understanding for the investors not only of the risks associated with a potential company and its transition strategy, but also the opportunities it actually is exposed to, as well as comparability across companies. So if those are the two objectives, then you get into okay, so what do those disclosures

actually need to have? And I think they need to be simple, yet not too simple, because I do acknowledge that only in gas industry has a very complex value chain and there is a risk of ultra simplification, and they need to be as much as possible standardized. And

so when we look at disclosures. We very much favor disclosures which obviously have a very strong element on in terms of carbon and by common we definitely include scope PREE because in our industry very specifically it represents eight total emissions and forward looking carbon metrics, so not only in terms of your own track record and position today, but you know what are you actually himing to or

targeting too. We're looking for disclosures which include financial lead indicators which give an indication of how you're actually aiming to transition the company, such as, for instance, what's your share of topics into low carbon versus Orno gas. And we're looking for disclosures which actually also allow us to showcase some of the qualitative elements such as governance, board composition, incentives, efforts in terms of advocacy, so we're collaborating with many

different initiatives. I would call out TCFD, I would call out obviously SASPY, the I I G C C SO nanzero standard for Ordan gas companies, which we've worked very extensively with to try and actually shape what those forward looking metrics could actually apply for, in particular for the oorin gas industry, and this year we will start also

disclosing along CDP. So disclosure speaks to everyone in the community is really looking to better understand what's actually going on in terms of how you're going to get there and and where you are in the process. And you know, when I was asking about the traditional investors who maybe aren't keen on reinvestment, there's the other side, there's the E s G investors who are or even a step further,

the activist investors. And we've seen this recently with Excen where they ended up giving multiple board seats after substantial pressure from activist investors to take it a step further. And what areas are you getting pressure from E s G investors to do more that you know you think might be an interesting place to discover in the future

that maybe BP is not yet ready for. We are very much engaging with s G investors and non E s G investors by the way, as we navigate through the energy transition, and I would say the dialogue is a very rich dialogue which has also allowed us to progress and progress together with our investors. So as an example, in ten we actually got a joint resolution with Climate Action one hundred plus, which was a resolution on precisely

disclosures and transparency. So I think that engagement is actually extremely helpful because we value the challenge, right, We value the challenge and the ability to actually, you know, take a step back, think through do we have all the elements embedded within what we're aiming to do. And it was very much at the core towards one the new ambition, the net zero aims, as well as a strategy that

we actually announced. So we're actually very much looking forward to continue that engagement with individual investors as well as with organizations such as Climate Action one hundred PLUSS as we continue to execute on the strategy. Now for a very short break, stay with us, So switching tracks a little bit. We started off talking about you and then we went straight into the business. Let's go back to you and your role within the business. And clearly you know a lot in regard to you have a lot

to say, that's the right way to phrase it. You have a lot to say in regard to the different frameworks the company is looking at in your strategy. And you're in a role that is new for VP, is it not, And could you talk to us a little bit about what that role was designed to accomplish and and how you see it fitting within the organization. It is indeed a new role and a new organization. It was created within the frame of the reorganization of BP is one of the integrators and what we did create

that role. The role is basically the strategy and sustainability organization of the group. Is we very much concentrated within that organization, the group strategy, so we no longer really have beyond operational strategy of strategy teams within the different businesses and the same is true for sustainability. So we were aiming for two things. I think the first thing was really to bring together strategy and sustainability and policy

living to that. The reason being that as we navigate through the energy transition and by the way, even more after and the COVID pandemic, the two are very much coming together and a sustainable strategy as a strategy which is resilient for the future. So the first objective was

to bring the two together. The second one was very much one of actually creating this central BP Strategy and Sustainability team which would actually basically help the different businesses and organizations to craft the strategy which would actually take us through the energy transition and deliver on the aims which were announced by Bernard. Really optimizing for the group was breaking a little bit of maybe the upstream downstream

silo that could have been present in the past. So it's really an organization which is focused on working with all the different businesses and obviously finance and the and the functions to actually craft what's the optimal path. And that optimal path is really an optimal path in terms of delivering on the aims, the purpose and the ambition, but also delivering a performance today and our shareholder investor

value proposition. So you joined, then there was a global pandemic, and how has that changed how you are getting your job done and maybe even just the scope of the role, because surely you know the things that you were setting out initially to do have in some way it's probably

been modified by this. I joined, indeed, and then the global pandemic hit, and you know, what I thought was made a pretty interesting challenge became even more of a challenge because creating an organization and the strategy when you're working remotely and you do not know necessarily the team is not something which is the easiest task that one

could actually lay out. It is actually quite incredible how the organization of raw has adapted to the remote working and how incredibly efficient we have been in terms of actually really moving into virtual and driving the reorganization design and driving the strategy. I think what we've done through the pandemic is actually the detailed design of the organization and that has slightly morphed as we were going through the detailed design, but it would have been the same

vel without pandemic. I think what the pandemic actually did do is that through the pandemic, I think we have witnessed an acceleration at these in terms of momentum and intense in terms of energy transition. And so what the pandemic had it actually done is it has one confirmed the strategy that we were shaping, and two helps us on board the organization on the strategy and on the

need to actually re reorganize along the new structure. So it sounds like you're actually fairly hopeful, and recently we looked well. So some forecasts are showing that we may reach that one point five degree C before pre industrial levels that that International Planel on Climate Change really put.

Is this line in the sand regarding where that we think we're going to start to see some more catastrophic responses to climate Where do you have reasons to be hopeful within the oil and gas industry that we may be able to, you know, limit climate change to one point five C when it looks like that year is very very near. I think the challenge is indeed very big. At the same time, I am hopeful, and I'm hopeful for several reasons. I'm hopeful, first of all, because I

think the world is accelerating. It's celerating in terms of definitely society towards the energy transition, it is accelerating towards in terms of regulatory frameworks, policy frameworks. I mean, let's not you know, needless to mention the new new US screen deal, the UK Turndpoint Plan, the EU production ambition, and by twenty thirty China's common Neutrality. By the recent announcements on call, so I think altogether we are seeing

an acceleration. We also seeing in acceleration as we discussed in terms of investor focus on the energy transition, and we're seeing an acceleration in terms of companies. I think we saw one five hundred new companies commit to net zero. We are seeing quite some momentum. The other reason why I'm hopeful is because I think we do have the technologies right, and some of those technologies, as I was saying, are really extremely competitive, such as renewables. Other need to

be proven at gale. I think the fab reason I am actually hopeful is that we are seeing tremendous growth. So if I look at the last ten years in terms of renewable penetration, we saw an average of sixty giga what's added in terms of at IT capacity. In the last few years, we've already reached one hundred and fifty gigo what's and yes we need to ramp that up to more than three hundred and five hundred and fifty in a well below two degrees or one point

five degrees scenario, but it is still significant acceleration. If you look at CCS, I think there are twenty six projects ongoing operating in terms of CCS, and in the last three years there's been thirty announcements, so almost as many announcements in the last three years as we have

projects operating to date. At the same time, it is a challenging journey and I think a lot still needs to happen from a regulatory and policy standpoint to enable and accelerate the journey to mention a few We very much believe in the need for global carbon economy system which can actually accelerate the transition and in link to that carbon border adjustment so that that actually becomes more

efficient and effective. We also need to have policy support for hard to abate sectors as a transition, and that can actually be either in the form of mandates or other structures. But if you think about how to abate sectors av agency of cement, we will need to have

support in terms of policy to make that happen. The ecosystem will also need to support what we call greening companies such as ours, as long as they're committed to transitioning, both because we need those emissions to actually reduce, but also just in terms of the sheer scale and size to actually drive the investment into the alternatives. So the VP is not alone. I mean the oil majors are looking at this and then getting pressure from the investment community.

Let's so from the national oil companies that aren't getting that external pressure. In what ways is BP working directly with some of your competitors and other oil companies around the world, whether they be oil majors, r n ocs, on sharing best practices or trying to find a path forward for these ambitions because to your point, the industry is going to need to move not just to BP. We are working indeed across companies to actually try to

enable the transition. And that's a different level. So if I look at our fruts, clearly O g c I plays a role. It plays a role in terms of knowledge sharing and in particular around working among oil and gas companies to really set the standards and the ambitions in terms of how do you actually develop hydrocarbons business

which are really low emissions hydrocarbons business. So the o g c I is an example, has invested with nineteen investments into projects to reduce methane emissions and projects to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, into projects to to actually also look into accelerating technology such as CCS egen at zero tea side and also setting some of the ambitions right the methane intensity ambition of zero point to zero percent

is one example. So I think there is a collective industry effort in terms of actually within that focus trying to set those practices, standards and advanced solutions towards lower emissions. So you mentioned methane, which I think is really interesting because there's so much fixation on the carbon aspect that methane has talked about so much less in many circles, but maybe not as much within the oil and gas

base or the energy companies. Do you think that methane should be talked about more as a potent greenhouse gas or is the balance about right? I think there is quite a lot of focus on methane at please within the oilan gas industry and the energy sector. And yes, it is definitely are the called topic that we need to address, and it is one which we have actually

framed as one of our aims. So our aim for within our net zero aims is very much around deploying measurement in terms of methane in our operating sites by twenty three and they're naming to actually half our methane intensity. And this is actually something which is quite unique because today methane emissions are calculated on an estimated basis, so actually a shift from estimated basis to a measure the basis is a very very strong commitment, but there is

significant collaboration within the industry. There is significant collaboration with organizations such as e d F in terms of setting the standards on methane and advocating for mefane regulation, and I think there is quite a lot of also engagement with regulators to support mefane regulation, both in Europe as well as in a geography such as a US. One potential strategy for a company in order to have their company appear to be much more environmentally friendly is to

sell off their most polluting assets. What is to stop companies from doing that? And where do you think there is a place for leadership in trying to make sure that that is you know, visible in the industry to the investors. I think divestments is, as we've shared, one of the critical elements actually of our strategy. The way we actually look at divestments as one of the critical elements of the strategy is that divestments basically helps in

our case, advanced the world towards that zero. And the reason for it is we're actually divesting assets and we are reinvesting the proceeds into creating a low carbons supply, so it's not divestment for the sacred divestments, it's really divestments and reinvestment into low carbon supply, and so that actually advances the world in the energy transition in the sense of actually bring in that capacity, that additional low

carbon capacity in solution online. And I think it also enables bp TO itself to advance towards its Natzi ra aim and position in the world, which is paris aligned in the future. The world is very much evolving towards increasing transparency on emissions. So I don't really think there is a world where we can imagine that you know, buyers of potential divested assets will not be put on the you know, transparency requirements in terms of emissions reporting

and emissions progress. And while divestments do not take assets out of a system in terms of aidin gas production, I think it helps advance in the energy transition. I think it's also fair to say that if you look at scenarios and you look at a well below two degree scenario or one point five degree scenario, he's still having tent of the primary energy mix, which is actually

linked to point in gas. So we will need to oil and gas production as we transition and the question is is really one of who's abist owner for the assets in the frame of the individual strategies. Well, and then the other question is for how long? So you have this zero target? But where do you think the inflection points are? Because there has been some discussion around the fact that emissions today are much more impactful than emissions in three years, five years, ten years. Where do

you think the most important year is? Given that these are industries that take a long time to turn and to make these changes, so it can't be six months from now. What do you think is the biggest inflection point between now and we have very much shaped it with a short term, medium term and long term aim so very completely. You know, we have to look at on net zero names. We have five ames which are focused on getting BPT to net zero by sooner. Aim one is very much around scope on and scope too

from our own operations. Aimed two as a carbon content of our oil and gas production. Aim free is around the intensity the carbon intensity of our marketing products. Aimed for is a methane intensity, as we discussed and named five as a lead indicator in terms of capets into

low carbon. For each of those we have set a target, and we have set at twenty thirty am on the way to the let's see your own for me in terms of reassuring investors, in terms of and other stakeholders, in terms of efforts and trajectories, but also just in terms of actually informing strategies, because a lot of the decisions that make today will be required to actually frame where you're trying to actually head to towards twenty and

uh and towards. We believe that in that frame you actually do need to have short term targets, medium term as we described them as being ten years, twenty thirty games, and then the longer term objective. And I think that's now there's debate, but I think it actually aligns quite well. Were for instance, when you look at some of the potential initiatives, which are looking at a five year and

a fifteen tents of fifteen year confering. So it's impossible to think about the future as a parent without thinking about your kids. So you talked about your two young children. I've got two of them as well. They've been probing, they've been asking you very pointed questions you said around the future and climate and in your role, what advice have you given them regarding where they should be looking in terms of, you know, maybe their future careers or

even education choices. Oh that's the tricky one. In full transparency, my my children are actually looking into pretty different careers. So one of them wants to be a criminologist, the other one wants to be a doctor. It's very it's actually pretty distant from anything loosely related to the energy transition now, but I think they do indeed have pretty

probing questions. And the probing questions are literally around elements such as what car are you driving and for the record, I don't have a car, Or how is recycling we do actually contributing as an oil and gas company, what are you doing right in terms of energy transition? And and that is actually fueled by both the personal interests, but what they hear and what they actually also engage

on as activity at school. So I think that's another reason to be hopeful, Dana, which is I think the generations to follow are very very much focused in terms of energy transition, but also more generally sustainability also linked to just transition and other topics. I would certainly agree with that. They definitely have grown up with this as being a focus so a reason to be hopeful about

the future. Well, Julia, thank you very much for sharing your vision for the future and what's going on at BP and then your personal journey with us here today. Thank you very much for having me Dana. Today's episode of Switched On was edited by Rex Warner with Grace Stoke Media. Bloomberg Any App is a service provided by

Bloomberg Finance LP and its affiliate. This recording does not constitute, nor should it be construed as investment advice, investment recommendations, or a recommendation as to an investment or other strategy. Bloomberg an e F should not be considered as information

sufficient upon which to base an investment decision. Neither Bloomberg Finance LP nor any of its affiliates makes any representation or warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this recording, and any liability as a result of this recording is expressly