This is Bloomberg Wall Street Week.
The global push into infrastructure, breaking the IPO logjam in text. The financial stories that shape are work cutting inflation without losing jobs. Do we need rate cuts? And if so, how many? Investing in a time of geopolitical turmoil.
Through the eyes of the most influential voices.
Ten Rogueff economists of Harvard, former FDIC had Shila Bert ge CEO, Larry Kulp, San Francisco FED President Mary Daily, Bloomberg.
Wall Street Week with David Weston from Bloomberg Radio.
Shuttle diplomacy in the Middle East, protests on college campuses, and the FED pretty much stays the course for now. This is Bloomberg Wall Street Week. I'm David Weston. This week Josh Easterly of Sixth Street on private credit and investing in professional sports.
The fundamentals of sports.
It's great And if sny beche loss of Rock Creek on what US dominance means for emerging market investments.
Maybe we shouldn't even be using the term emerging Marcus because they've diverged from each other so much.
But we start with all those important data coming out this week, and we turn to our very special contribute here on Waltreet Week. He is Larry Summers of Harvard, So Larry, welcome back. It's been a very consequential week. We of course had the FED chair giving a news conference with the decision, We had ECI data, and then we have the jobs numbers at the end. What do you make of it all?
Look, there's been a lot of movement, but I don't know that we're in a fundamentally different place than we were at the beginning of the week. We have been realizing now for several months that disinflation is not on the secure path that the Fed had hoped it would be a few months ago. That's why the market has moved to go from six cuts this year to about one cut this year. And that has been a broadly appropriate move on the part of the market. And it was a blunder, frankly, of the Fed to be as
confident as it was about the prospect of disinflation. If you add up this week's numbers, what did you get? You got an ECI that was disturbing on the high side, suggesting that wage inflation wasn't coming down, that service sector inflation wasn't likely to be coming down, and the way
people hoped. You got a housing number suggesting more housing inflation than many people had been expecting in the presence of seven percent mortgages, and then you got a relatively soft number this morning and some corroborative ism evidence for that that reminds everybody that the economy may well not be on fire, that inflation may not accelerate. So I think you're at the end of it all about where you were at the beginning of the week, with a sense that the most likely thing is no cut or
a little bit of cutting this year. That there's some risk that, as sometimes happens, the economy will slide off suddenly, But probably greater than that risk is the no landing kind of scenario where inflation remains robust. So I think everybody's going to have to be watching all this data very closely and ironically, the more we learn, it's not really true that the more we know in terms of the uncertainties.
About the economy at this point.
So I suspect the share power would agree with you, we need more data. He likes to wait for data, and he's the data dependent.
As they say.
At the same time, what I took away at least from his news conference this week was a little bit different from the no landing possibility. It was sort of we're on the right course, it's just going to take us longer to get there. We are restrictive in what we're doing, and we will get there and we don't need to consider hikes. Is that a fair interpretation what he said? And if so, is that where he should be.
He's much more confident the policy is restrictive than is warranted in light of the various factors we've talked about pushing up the neutral interest rate, in light of good reasons to think that spending may be less intrasensitive than had previously been supposed, because, for example, higher interest rates with all the government's short term debt mean more income for people. I think that the Chair is making a mistake if he is confident that policy is meaningfully restrictive.
Right now.
So yeah, I have never said that I expect the next move to be a hike. I just think there's more of a possibility that that's going to be necessary than I think. He has been the view at the FED, and to some extent has been the view in the markets.
A HILARI. Besides the data, the wealth of data that came in. A big topic in the news this week was the Japanese yen and what's going on exactly the yen, whether the government there is intervening or not intervening to sort of support the end when it went up to one to sixty. Actually, you have some experience with intervention and currencies. Give us where you think we are right now.
And of course this is related to the FED, because part of the issue is if the FED stays higher for longer, it supports the strength of the US.
Dollar given the massive size of the capital Marcus, I think the evidence is reasonably clear that intervention doesn't work, even in the scales that the Japanese engaged in.
It's just overwhelmed by the broad.
Magnitude of private sector capital flows. That said, nations tend to intervene when currencies have gotten very far from normal levels, and when they've gotten very far from normal levels, they sometimes bounce back. So I wouldn't want to confidently presume that the end will devalue further from here.
It could go either way.
But even if the end does appreciate, I'm going to attribute that much more to snapback. Then I'm going to attribute it to the efficacy of intervention. But I think this points up in important issue, which is that the dollar is extremely strong right now. That's been a factor that's contributed to our relatively favorable inflation performance.
I'm sad to say the disputes on college campuses growing out of the Israeli Gods' situation have continued some ways have gotten worse. Actually this week we saw police going in various places here in New York at Columbia, but across the country. You've been outspoken in the past on this issue as a former college president, yourself at Harvard and is now a scholar at Harvard. What do you think is going on? And more important, perhaps what should
the colleges be doing? What should the leadership be doing?
Right now?
This is very depressing and worrisome to me. As I've said on your show before, David, I think the United States is in the most dangerous geopolitical moment we've been in probably two generations, given what's happening in China, Russia,
rod North Korea, and so forth. And it seems to me that anybody sitting in one of those countries has to be taking great encouragement from the spectacle that is being made by our young future elits on so many of our leading college campuses, and even more by the craven responses that are typifying university leaderships.
Larry, thank you so very much for being with us, says Larry Summer is our special contributor here on at Wall Street Week. The equity markets dipped in the middle of the league, but came back on Friday, as the S and P five hundred added just over half a percent for the week to end at fifty one to twenty eight. That is just under the Bloomberg Elves consensus
year end number of fifty one to seventy. The NAZAC had a particularly good week, adding one point four to three percent, while the yield on the tenure was down almost sixteen basis points, closing the way at four point five to one percent. Here to take us through it all is David Bianco, DWS Equities CIO for Americas. There's David. Welcome back. Always great to have you, Thanks for having me. Let's start with the jobs. There's a lot of data this week. Let's start with the jobs numbers. What did
they tell you? What did they tell us about where we are in the economy.
It was a really big week and that was a very powerful segment from Larry Summers and difficult to follow. The Job's report was one of the indicators that we got during the week that the economy is slowing, but it's still a healthy economy. Employment is still strong, and the employment market is still tight. But the FED should get a little bit of help from a slowing economy. That said, I very much agree with what Larry said regarding the Fed and many other things that the Fed
shouldn't take this slowing for granted. Has mean that inflation is going to keep working its way down. They need to keep an eye on this risk because the risk of inflation staying above their two percent target is still very much with us. But the good news this week was relief in the bond market. We saw yields across the curve come down, especially toward the end of the week, and that rally and fixed income rally in equity markets upon that lower yield environment.
What we saw is that May.
Followed a tough April April showers brought in some mayflowers early.
Months early in the month. A month so I talked about about growth, you said, it's a slowing economy. We heard share J. Powell this week say he doesn't see stagflation, doesn't need the stag, he doesn't see the flation. Are you all concerned about really slowing growth to such a degree they should be worried about the economy.
I'm not worried about the economy yet.
I would have to really see the job's growth number fall below one hundred thousand before I really started getting worried about jobs. And the economy is very resilient because it's a service oriented economy, and we already went through a good amount of inventory liquidation and correction already, and that often is a cause of at least small.
Recession, so a lot of risks.
There are always tail risks, but this economy I think has a real safe distance away from a recession. And because of that, I think the fitches stay focus on making sure inflation keeps on working its way down to target. But things have slowed down. I would say US GDP growth is still in a two probably a little bit above of two percent trend, and that's healthy, but inflation relative to that growth rate is still too high.
Earnings this season.
We're another encouraging part of the week, really good news out of most tech companies, not bad news, but not as good as hoped out of the non tech company.
We'll talk about that specifically. We've had such a fibrication in the SPP five hundred and the stock market generally on that. What about earnings for the top guys, the big tech asppose of the rest? How do they com bear well?
The biggest or what I call the Grade eight, which would cut across big cap tech and communication stocks and a couple of consumer discretionary companies. These great eight companies continue to lead the market upward, and their earnings growth will be over fifty percent on a year on year basis, whereas the other four hundred and ninety two companies of the s and P only about two percent Ernie's growth
year on year. So it's a bifurcated market. We're here in a bunch of consumer oriented companies, staples, retailers, fast food companies saying they're seeing a slowdown, nothing falling off a cliff, but slow down and their customers more price conscious.
David, it's always great to have you here. Thank you so much for being here. That's David Bianco of DWS coming up, investing in professional sports as an asset class. We talk with Josh Easterly of Sixth Street.
It's recession proof, content, super valuable.
That's next on Wall Street Week on Bloomberg.
This is Bloomberg Wall Street Week with David Weston from Bloomberg Radio.
This is Wall Street Week. I'm David Weston. Professional sports has wrapped gone from something the very wealthy do for fun and prestige to a serious asset class in its own right. One of those at the front of the sports as an investment movement is Sixth Street and we welcome now it's co founding partner, co president and co CIO. He is Josh Easterly. Josh, welcome, It's great to have you on Wall Street.
Well, David, thanks for having me here.
So let's talk about this investing in sports. As I say, it's become a real asset class for investment. How is that developed? It seems to have happened fairly quickly.
I don't know if it's fairly quickly or or or a long over a long time. The fundamentals are sports is great. It's recession proof, content super valuable in a day and age where you're doing where there's streaming and so life content is super valuable. And what Sixth Street we alway does is we finance the ecosystem. So like all the things we do at Sixth Street, we pick the best risk reward and some of those we buy assets, some of them we finance assets. And I'm happy to talk about that.
Well, I'm curious about that that very question, debt versus equity, because you've done both.
We've done both.
You have equity in some teams, you also have taken debt positions. How do you make that decision?
I think that what offers the best fisk reward. So for example, where the owner of the franchise the Bay Area Football Club in San Francisco on the Women's Soccer League, that was a new franchise, so we stood up that franchise. And then on Real Madrid, for example, we financed the stadium. Bernabo was redoing that stadium and we provided financing. And FC Barcelona we bought Metea rites and then the Santas Spurs were a minority equity owner and partners with the
owners there. So we've done it all.
You refer to something that it strikes me certain the United States and Also in Europe, we've seen the ancillary businesses around the sports teams. It's not just the sports team anymore then, even with the sports meetings, winning or not, but they're also an ancillary business, often around the stadium as you have in Madrid. So how do you decide how valuable the an businesses around the team?
So they're super valuable, there's revenue streams in those businesses. We own a business with the Cowboys and the Yankees called Legends, which provides services to that ecosystem. And that ecosystem is growing because their sports owners are trying to find different ways to monetize the asset they own sports team owners and that could be through concessions, that could be through merchandise, and so Legends is our platform that we get to participated in that trend.
Is there a continuing demand for more capital on the part of team owners, that is to say, we need to raise more capital so we can invest it back into some of those ancillary businesses.
Yeah, so capital. Think about COVID. Take a step back and think about COVID for a second. The government supported a whole bunch of small businesses. The one sector they did not sport, was live sports and so in that moment in time, there was a need for capital, and that capital still exists. I think sports owners want to make the product better for the fans, and so Legends is a part of that. Sixth Streets a part of that, and it's been a good theme for us.
What's next? How big can this grow sports investment?
I think that ecosystem can continually. There's more opportunity in that ecosystem, for sure, so I think, and it's going to need more capital. And that ecosystem historically hasn't had institutional money and now is opening up to institutional money. So I think it will continue to grow.
In any market, I think some things are fully priced and some things aren't. And you look for things that are not yet fully priced. Where do you see opportunities that maybe are not fully priced in the sports area, Well, I.
Think that's so. I think that's for us. That's a really unique thinking about Sixth Street is, as you point out, if capitalism is working, things get fully priced and it goes through cycles and then they feel cheap and being able to have flexible capital across the capital structure, from buying assets to buying revenues, streams the financiing stadiums to buying teams to do a minority and majority control investments.
I think that's the power of the platform is we can actually, you know, when things become fully priced, we can move on. Who do you compete with all different types of people? That being said, there isn't that much institutional capital in this space right now, and or general partners are gps that have built brands. I think there's only a handful, including Six Street, has really built brands in this fource ecosystem.
How related is the success of the team to the value asset I mean, I'll pick on one that you mentioned. Actually, Dallas Cowboys very very valuable as a business. I understand it maybe one of the most valuable that there is. They won a Super Bowl in a long time, so maybe it's not so essentially a win a super Bowl to really deliver asset value.
Well, I think our experience the Cowboys are a partner and Legends, and our experience with the Cowboys is they have an excellent management team Jerry Jones and Steven and Jared Junior as an excellent management team. My guess is a Super Bowl is going to come their way. But it's an excellent group of folks and we're happy to be partners with them.
So, Josh, let's talk more broadly about private credit. There's an awful lot of talk about it right now. It's grown really fast. At the same time, as you look at the overall size of it, it's still relatively modest compared to a lot of data out there.
Yeah, I mean, I think when you think when we think about private credit, I think there's a lot of growth areas. And it really started in the lower middle market, non investment grade market. Now is expanded into the upper middle market and at some point it's going and we're at the beginning to continue on the sports talk when the first and second ending on the non corporate lane. So think about asset backfinance or asset based finance for non corporate.
So let's talk about that. It started the middle market and some risk of your lending, it's grown beyond that. Why is that, I mean, why is it that you can take that away from banks or from syndicated loans.
Yeah.
I'll argue with the premises risk here, I don't think it's actually riskier when you look at the loss rates. The loss rates are on par with the leverage low market historically, and this actually has better loss rates than the high old market, about fifty basis points less on the high old market, and it offers better spread.
Are you seeing the sorts of rates of growth that we're seeing overall? I've heard it said that it's going to grow like fifteen percent a year for the next few years.
Yeah, Look, I think so. I think private credit somewhere on the non investment grade corporate size between one point five and two joint dollars. But there's all these growth aspects of private credit outside of non investment grade corporate, including investment grade non corporate. So think of it as consumer receivables, figure it as credit cards, mortgages, and then the non investment grade tranches. So those growth rates seem
right to me. But there's there's large areas that private credit continue to expand in.
So so what about the risk factor you were saying, it's a mistake to say that this is risky than others.
So look, I think this has been a little bit of the narrative from from banks who are trying to protect their their syndicated business. But I think when you look at private credit, private credit is unique compared to where banks banks have a business we're studying where actually we study business models is a living and private credit unlike banks, have match funding, and so banks quite frankly, they lived long. They fund short with deposits and moments
of crisis, deposits come out of system. Private credits match funded. So the asset class itself is more durable than those same loans sitting in the banks, mostly because of the funding model.
They can't be a run on your bank, so to speak, can't be a run on our bank. Depositors can't come and say I want one buy back now because it's locked up for brit Look.
Look what happened in Silicon Valley Bank. Not to name names, but that was a lot of their assets for high quality assets. A lot of them were actually government guaranteed mortgages. We could all agree those didn't have risk on the assets side, but they had a business model issue which is a really funding issue, which was their funding ran from private credits.
Is not a secret anymore. I mean you read the Bloomberg. Any given day there's an expansion of For I have a credit, that must mean there's more competition in your sphere. Does that actually push you to take bigger risks because other people are willing to do things maybe you otherwise wouldn't be well.
Sixth Street were investors first, So when I think about our business, so when we think about our business, we have a way of thinking about credit visk reward. We're going to continue to be investors first. That's how markets work.
And so what I would say is on the competition side, there's been more competition that total addressable market has grown significantly, where so at the same time it's more capital the addressable market has grown too, and so that fills I don't know if the competition issues, it feels as cute as one one.
I think, as you say, there's some criticism. We're questioning from some of the big banks, are you taking market share for them? We've heard Calm color or Ubs raised questions about it. We've heard Jane Fraser Rais of questions when it comes to the insurance part of it, at least, are you taking market share every day from banks? And is that what actually the regulators do you think want?
Yeah?
So I think that again, I think this was the intended consequence for the regulation, which was to diffuse the risk where taxpayers had written put people I think can remember can remember the seven hundred billion dollars and TARP
that had to recapital those banks. So is there What I would say is I think there is a little bit of protectionism as it relates to the bank model again where students of business models and in the non investment grade corporate side, banks are in the moving business, not the storage business, and so they have a lot of fees in that business, and users of capital rather go to the end user and provider of capital than have to go through an intermediary, which has been the
historical leverage loan model.
There is, I think you'll correct me if I'm wrong, a certain lack of transparency. We saw the IMF come out just recently and say there's some risks there because we don't necessarily know the values of some of the loans. They don't get marked to marketers often, and the market to market may not be what you would have in an open public market. Is there risk? There is an IMF right that there's a problem.
First of all, I think again I would argue with the premise investment accounting, has you marked the market air loans that bank accounting on the other hand, no offense to banks out there use held a maturity county and don't mark their loans, and they have a less storable funding model. And so I don't think you can look at the assets side without looking at the liability side. And private credit has a much superior business model given the durability of funding. So again I don't see it.
I'm a little bit we're talking in our book a little bit, but when you look at the overall business model, a much more durable and safe business model for investors.
How much do you partner with banks and so what you do, because that's actually something that people have been concerned about. IMF mentioned actually the exposure of some of the regular banks perhaps to private credit.
Yeah, so we partner with banks. Banks are a big lender to the space. That is what regulators wanted. They get better risk weighted assets treatment, but they're only lending forty to fifty percent LTV on the underlying loan we're making. So there's a whole bunch of capital that sits behind them and subordination. And so you could think about a world where if every loan that the industry underwrote defaulted, but there was a fifty percent of recovery banks wouldn't
be harmed again. I think what banks are doing is really smart and really prune in and what regulators wanted to do.
Okay, Josh, is really great to have you here. Thank you so much. David. That is Josh Easterly of Sixth Street. Coming up on the eve of the Milken Institute Conference in Los Angeles, we talk with Offsni Bechelists of Rock Creek about what the focus on investing in the United States means for emerging markets.
I think when you put emerging market as one term and generalize, it hides the goods, the ugly, and the in between.
That's next on Wall Street Week on Bloomberg.
This is Bloomberg Wall Street Week with David Weston from Bloomberg Radio.
This is Wall Street Week. I'm David Weston. Economic challenges in China and geopolitical uncertainties have made the United States the place to go for investors. But what does this US dominant world mean for those investing in emerging markets. To explore the world of em investing, we welcome back now of Sonny Bachelists singing on and founder of Rock Creek. So something always a delight to have you with us.
You know emerging market investing better than most. Give us your sense of where that is right now, because all we hear about is it's all about the United States investing United States, the strengths in the US dollar.
Great to be with you, David, And of course, as our letter said recently, that US exceptionalism or US dynamic investment theme is still going very, very strong, and that's really for no reason except we have great innovation in the US, we have great technology AI and then of
course rule of law. When it comes to financial markets, emerging markets where I have been investing for a long time, but I have worked in also during my days at the World Bank, I think are going through a phase where maybe we shouldn't even be using the term emerging markets because they've diverged from each other so much. Obviously, the big elephant in the room is always China, and that used to account for forty percent of the equity indices.
Today it is accounting for only twenty five percent. But what you're seeing through the same themes of American growth in our economy and growth in our equity markets, and this sort of term exceptionalism, if you want to call it that is also impactful in emerging markets. If you go to Korea and Taiwan, which now account for thirty
percent of emerging markets, they have done very well. If you look at Taiwan, whether you look at one year, three year, five years, ten years, twenty years, it's always been very competitive with the US. But why because the goods that Taiwan has been producing, mainly microchips, have been something that has been very much part of this theme of innovation. If you go to India in the last five years, ten years, similarly, the economy done relatively well.
Obviously we had elections there recently, but the markets continue to do very very well and sort of run between nine to eleven percent, depending on which periods you are
thinking about. And now with French shoring which is definitely impacting India positively and other countries like Mexico positively, where are terms of trade with Mexico have changed, and Mexico of course is also benefiting from FDI for this French shoring as well as remistances from abroad, you see very different kinds of markets in the last few years in Mexico. So I think when you put emerging markets as one term and generalize. It hides the goods, the ugly, and
the in between. And I think where things have not gone so well in emerging markets is where, for example, the continent of Africa where we opened for much bigger growth, parts of Latin America that are not necessarily commodity rich or very close to the US in terms of French shoring that have not benefited from these from these kinds of themes, and those countries have been left behind, especially since COVID and dragged down the markets together with China
and drag down, drag down growth in these countries and the potential for their populations.
So that was a terrific laying out of the alternative. So, if I can sort of simplify it a little bit, if this or a horse race, We've got some steady ones that have been investments destinations for some times, such as South Korea, such as Japan, such as i Wan. You have India, which it sounds like it's sort of an up and comer as it were, and perhaps Mexico as well. Where would you rate this in the horse race in terms of the change in position, Which ones are coming up the fastest?
Well, I think I think Definitely, India is coming up the fastest, but also let's not forget if you looked at India the last ten years, the returns were really
really strong as well. Taiwan is the big question mark given the geopolitics and it's very very rough location in the world, being right next to China and if and when there could be a military threat there and what is going on despite that is the fact that their companies are doing well by producing in Taiwan but also now investing in the US and other locations to produce
micro chips. Obviously, they have not been as fast and as as efficient as they would have liked outside of Taiwan, but I think that's a trend where we might see these Taiwanese companies continue to do well, but maybe not in Taiwan.
So I talk about the role of currency in all of this, because obviously those are investments in different currencies. As I understand it, right now, the FED has been pretty dominant in terms of their setting rate policy, and that sort of determines the through the dollar. But when you talk about other currencies, when you invest in a place like India, for example, or in Mexico, how do you account for currency volatilely do you hedge against that? And how expensive is that?
So two or three things. Obviously, with the really strong policies that Chairman Power has had in the US, our economy has done well, but also our currency has stayed very strong. The interesting things you said is our currency has stayed quite strong relative to other DM currencies. We saw with the evaluation of yen, and what the interventions in the recent weeks in Japan, still dealing with weaker
yen than the Japanese government would like. Europe obviously is also going through its own relatively rough patches because growth has not taken up, has not gone up as much as they would have liked to. The emerging markets have been a really interesting spot. I think one thing that has happened in the last few years is that the quality of your central bankers has increased, has improved a lot in emerging markets, so you do have really good
people running them. And you may remember before you know, in the beginning of the rate increases, they were maybe earlier than us in the US to increase rates when
they're more used to having these terrible inflationary periods. So when they saw inflation come they increased rates earlier, and so when we look at their currencies, it is also a tale of two cities where you see, for example, relatively relatively i should say, stronger currencies again in places like India, places like Mexico, places like even China has had you know, again depending on which side of the
of the ocean you're looking at. But then you have other countries that have not benefited, except for maybe some commodity rich countries around emerging markets. Despite the emergen Now two things about the currency factor. The currencies are stronger. That impacts more of the bond markets. So you have seen bond markets in emerging markets over the last ten years. The size has increased hugely, both local bond markets where
local people invest, as well as foreign markets. The emerging markets industries are close to natree trillion or thereabouts, So the size of these markets have increased, and people do look at currency very much. When they look at them, you look at them the bond markets. On the equity markets, currency has not necessarily moved the needle too much, except you could argue with outflows for emerging markets sometimes when their own currency is stronger relative to the dollars, you
see more of an outflow. And last point I want to make on that is in China where there has been very big outflows and people have maxed outs to the amount they could to bring savings outside of China.
So do you spend the money to hedge when you invest in e merging markets? Oh?
Sorry, I did not answer the hedging. Hedging is extremely expensive in emerging markets, yes, except for the much larger, much larger countries. Even there, the relative cost of hedging generally means that you don't hedge too much. So the cost, yes, generally makes it prohibitive to go into these currencies. And if the market returns had been so much higher than what has actually transpired, maybe you would have you would
have been okay with the cost of hedging. But given that their markets in general have been if you look at emerging markets as a totality and you look at the returns let's say over the last ten years, and you are just up a few percent, that definitely does not cover costs of currency edging.
Sign has been terribly helpful as always, Thank you so much. That is a Sonny Besch Loss of Rock Creek, fal Staff and Shakespeare's Henry the Fourth taught us that the better part of valor is discretion, which I take to mean that sometimes it's best, perhaps even bravest, to give
up the fight rather than continue to lose. We saw that this week when a police officer in upstate New York tried to pull over the district attorney from Monroe County and met resistance from a less than contrite prosecutor, only to have her realize that backing down was her better course.
I am so sorry.
What I did was wrong.
No excuse is.
I take full responsibility for my actions.
I fell short of the values I've held for my entire thirty three year career. We've also seen it in the drama that is Paramount International. Cherry Ridstone fought hard for control of the company her father had founded, stuck with it even as its market value fell, and now has concluded that the better part of valor for her is to sell it, and this week moved out the CEO just before the earning skull to facilitate the deal.
Cherry Redstone here is desperately trying to get a deal done with sky Dance, which is actually had to get rid of Bob Bakish, who was opposing the deal pretty vocally from the get goal.
Fencher J. Powell showed both valor and discretion this week, valor in sticking to the Fed's course, but discretion in admitting that it was taking longer than they'd thought to get to their destination.
I do think it's clear that policy is restrictive, and we believe over time it will be sufficiently restrictive. That will be a question that the data will have to answer. I think it's unlikely that the next policy rate move will be a hike.
We definitely saw a discretion triumphing over valor in Major League Baseball's decision this week to dump all together those new uniforms they'd worked so hard on with Nike, the uniforms that showed us just a little too much of our favorite baseball players. It's painful to admit our mistakes, even if doing so will put them behind us. I learned this the hard way when I ran ABC News and we enlisted Leonardo DiCaprio to help us with an
Earth Day special. This was back in the days of yore, when journalists were trying to make a line between themselves and entertainment celebrities, and we took it a bit too far by arranging for mister DiCaprio, fresh off his performance in The Titanic, to go to the White House to
interview President Clinton. It caused an uproar, but I resisted calls for me to back down and admitted it all bit a mistake, insisting that we had been trying to get an audience for a serious news program about climate and for my troubles was rewarded by sitting down front at a black tie dinner as the President of the United States. Got some laughs, very much at my expense. I just want to say this to David Weston. You know.
I've been in a lot of tough spots.
Don't let this get you down.
You may not be America's newsleader, but you're king of the world.
It sure didn't feel like I was the king of anything that night. That does it For this episode of Wall Street Week, I'm David Weston.
This is Bloomberg.
See you next week.