Treasury’s $1.9 Trillion Quarter

d C. The deficit is ballooning. Is the government works to get cash to companies in need, But what are the long term ramifications? And should we care? I care, Sarah, I know I care, but yeah I do. And we've got a great guest who will give us some some insight on all these topics. But Sarah, before I introduce them, I need an update on your quarantine. Such way down there in Florida, how's it, Cohen? Are you? Uh? You? You live in large? Live in large? I must say,

as as large as you can be. I mean, at least now I'm able to go out on my patio. I can go on walks in the neighborhood. Of course, staying six ft from other people. But but Florida's opening up pretty soon. Um, not the county that I am in, but starting on Monday, the majority of counties across the state are going to be working on reopening. So it

should be pretty interesting. And I have heard from a couple of people who have been out and about on the streets more than I have that they're actually pretty crowded. So so life life continues down here in Florida already. Well. And they let your dad back in the house. Yes, my my dad. For all of those of you who are are concerned and very caring, my dad is now back in the house. Thankfully. He no longer is exiled, so he's very happy about that. We we had a

nice celebration when he was welcome back. That's good, you know. I always like to get the dad perspective on this show. A lot of dad's out there listening. But let's we all care about the dad. Let's bring in our guest first time on the show. Very excited to have him. His name is Zach Griffith's. He's a macro strategist at

Wells Fargo's Security. Zack, welcome to the show. Thanks for having me so Zach you might have heard, but we we have a tradition on the show where at the end of the show we talk about what we call the craziest things we saw in markets this week, and we usually leave it towards the end um because it's kind of a fun, lighthearted thing. It's like having to desert at the end of a nice healthy meal. You

got to have those vegetables first. But the craziest thing I saw this week is kind of right in your wheelhouse. I'm gonna jump the gun. I'm gonna serve the cake his appetizer here and ask you what you think about this story I came out on Thursday, uh Washington Post story saying US officials are crafting retaliatory measures against China over the coronavirus. Uh. You know. The notion is that the White House thinks that China is to blame for

the virus um. So they're they're talking a bunch of different measures, possibly uh, eliminating the sovereign immunity that countries enjoying the court system to allow people to sue China for damages. But the thing that really I think caught my eye. It caused a little bit of buzz on Thursdays this one line in the story. Some administration officials have also discussed having the U s cancel part of

its debt obligations to China. Two people with knowledge of internal this conversation said it was not known if the President back the idea. Now, obviously the news flow out of this administration is unique in that you get this stuff floated like this, that they're considering or thinking about, and then it's promptly denied. Larry Cudlow was out almost

instantly denying this. But boy, I just wonder, you know, as a macro strategist, you know, especially a guy with a rates background like yours, this must even the talk of something like this must make the blood pressure go up. Um. I think this was widely The reaction I saw from everyone was that this is nuts. There's no way they could do this. Um. But I gotta I gotta get

your take on it. Is this something that we should really be worried about or is it just, you know, just sound like a bunch of rumor mongering going on. I don't think this is something we should be worried about. And when you think about the US debt, I don't think the Treasury or the White House is gonna want to do anything to call into question whether or not the US government is going to pay interest on its

debt or principle on its debt. The long term ramifications of something like that are just it's not a path they want to go down. And I think that it's definitely crazy time. So you're getting a lot of news flow, and you know, you say craziest things in markets this week. It's hard to find something it's been happening that hasn't happened recently or is more severe than something that's happened recently.

So I think it's it's definitely an interesting time, but I don't I don't give too much credence to that. I think the long termament ramifications would be too detrimental to really consider. Two things I have to say about that. One, it's it's kind of like this was the pre dinner drink, Mike, and then we'll get into the vegetables, then we'll get to the dessert. But but I also have to say, I think that question may have been longer than the question that you asked last week on the show, which

one of our listeners did call you out. Let's all stop timing my questions here. I know they're long. You know, it's like on the soap opera where all and friends. Remember they said, you you put your hands over the face of the person you're kissing, so you get all the screen time. That's kind of my my idea with questions.

But uh, you know, you gotta you gotta give him, you gotta give him some meaty questions, Sarah, so they know, Uh, let's hear you're a very short question for Zach, then, Sarah, I don't know, Well, won't be that short of it, but it only shorter than yours. I can guarantee that. But I mean, speaking speaking of debt, uh, And this past week, you guys had a note titled Bill's Barrage continues, and you revised upwards to the upside what you think

the deficit is going to amount to? Uh? And you raise it to three point two trillion from two point four trillion. Now, one line that I loved though within the research report was you said, in total, we expect Treasury to issue a net one point nine trillion. This is not a misprint because everything is just so crazy

right now. But I mean, seriously, you think about the amount of debt being issued right now, you think about the amount of money being pumped into the system right now, I mean, can can we continue to see this amount of money uh and this amount of debt being uh digested by the market in a smooth way? Yeah, that's a great question, and it's that we've been contemplating. And when you're talking about one point nine trillion of issuance of any type of security in a single quarter, you

have to ask is there a market for it? And when we think about what's happened recently in T bill issuance, which has already been north of a trillion over the past month alone, we look at where the demand comes from. And if you look at inflows into government only money market funds over roughly the past eight weeks, inflows into those types of funds that do a lot of investing in TE bills, primarily te bills, it's been over a

trillion as well. So the demand is there, fortunately for Treasury, who needs to raise these funds extremely quickly for these emergency lending programs, whether it be for unemployment insurance claims or just to cut checks to certain Americans for a certain amount. That is a deficit that needs to be raised quickly, because that's money that actually goes out the door in a very short time frame. When we think about budget deficits historically you think about spending over the

next year. So they may do a trillion in spending, but that's over a year, and you have time to raise money for that. You have tax payments coming in which those have been delayed to July, so really the it's been remarkable how much they've had to raise, but up to this point it does seem like there has been a market for it. And going forward, we think

as some risk appetite comes back into the market. You see credit spreads have fallen, equities have risen, people are getting a little bit more comfortable and a little bit more optimistic with some states reopening and maybe some promising drug tests. I don't pretend to have much knowledge or insight into how some of those things are progressing, but

you're starting to see some of that optimism. And as people move into somewhat risk your assets, whether it even be just prime money market funds instead of government money market funds, we think that backstop of demand is going to come off a bit, and that's when the FED is going to need to come in and start shifting its asset purchases, which has been ratcheting down quite a bit. We think it will have to evolve treasury bills pretty soon, as that backstop the man kind of falls off at

least a bit. Well, Zack, I'm glad you don't pretend to be an expert on the pharmaceutical end. I don't know how many epidemiologist experts have suddenly appeared out of the blue to mansplain this all to us. But um, you know, as you mentioned this, this insane amount of supply coming and the possibility that risk appetites re emerge at the same time, you know, the FED seems to be willing to basically write a blank check to the treasury market. Do you have a sense of of how

that will all play out? How aggressively would they allow yields to rise? I mean, will they be trying to actually keep a lid on rates in your opinion, or more just as they described it, to keep the treasury liquidity uh functioning as it should be given this huge supply. I mean, um, because it's a you know, in a normal world, you would think this much supply would just automatically be bearish for rates um, But how do you see the Fed's role evolving as sort of the economy

recovers in that risk appetite UH resumes. We think the FED is going to have to continue tapering the amount

of its asset purchases. As you mentioned, We really do believe that the whole point, or at least the majority of the point this time around versus when they were doing large scale asset purchases after the global financial crisis, is restoring liquidity to the market, and they're not necessarily focusing on keeping long term yield suppressed as they were in Operation Twist, where what they were trying to do is really spur economic growth. Economic growth is essentially not

possible right now. They're not looking to really jump start the economy, but build a bridge from here to the other side of when some of these virus concerns have really started to pull back, economies start to reopen. So we do think that they continue to taper their asset purchases. We think they include bills as they digest some of the supply. And the other thing that I would point out is it's not necessarily even that they need to take down this supply of T bills. We haven't seen

significant signs of any market indigestion and T bills. But if you think about what their longer term plans for asset purchases are, it's to be done across treasuries proportional to what's outstanding. They haven't been doing any bills over the past month and a half, so just adding those into the mix is simply getting back to what they see as their longer term framework. And so do you see no sort of effort to control the yield curve

at all going forward? Or yeah, So that's been something that's been talked about quite a bit, and from our perspective, that's not necessary and not something that the FED is looking at immediately. And you heard no mention of it Wednesday at Chairman Paul's press conference, whether it be in his prepared remarks or or I was very surprised to

not hear it in the question and answer sessions. So I don't think it's something they would completely rule out, but I also don't think it's something that they're looking at and really focusing on right now. When you think about a tenure treasury yield at sixty basis points. That doesn't feel like a rate that needs to have explicit

yield curve control. And I suppose you could see some type of implicit yield curve control as we go forward if rates were to really back up in what they see as an unhealthy manner, and I think that would almost be more representation of poor liquidity like we saw at the end of March, than some other issue getting out of control. And so I think what they could do in that instance is shift their purchases to the longer end of the curve without explicitly saying we are

targeting zero point five on the tenure yield. I don't think that's a path that they want to go down, because when we think about the longer term implications of putting in place yield curve control, we think that probably reduces market liquidity, and you don't have of a quote unquote free market. I really don't think that's a path that the FED is looking to go down at this point, and you'd have to really see some serious issues in addition to what we've seen so far for that to

come into play. So no mention of yield curve control, but essentially a few things that Powell did say was that he's not worried about risk assets right now the price of risk assets also not really to worry about inflation at this point in time. Seeing where we stand now, though, does it seem like the FED is almost stuck? They have to continue to say they're going to do whatever it takes. I mean, are we ever going to get to the point where we can actually see a tape

erring of their balance sheet? Because we know they tried and they weren't able to do it. I mean, but we ever get to a point where that day actually comes and we don't see a freak out. I think we will get to that point, but I agree it's probably a long ways away still, and there really is no upside for a FED to start trying to get ahead of itself. There's still plenty of economic damage that's

going to happen. And at least from seeing what the actual numbers are, our economics team is expecting a decline in GDP in the second quarter. I think that's probably somewhere in the middle of the range of estimates. You've seen some really remarkable numbers, and when you get into these annualized numbers, if you think more happens in a shorter time frame, you get a larger decline on an annualized basis in a single quarter. But I think at this point the FED has made it clear that they're

going to do whatever they need to do. They're going to continue to signal that for as long as they can, or as long as they need to, I should say,

And that's the right move right now. And I don't think they're really going to get pushed back from anyone regarding how accommodative there being just because of how much the economy has contracted, how much activity in all ways types shapes has shut down, and it's really an unprecedented issue to deal with and they're dealing with it with unprecedented actions, and we think that's the right way to

go about it. And it's been an impressive They've been impressively quick and proactive, and Chairman Paul reiterated that they will continue to do to be that way going forward, and we think that's the right approach. So that question was nice and long. You're learning, you're learning here and learning learning from the best night. I also loved that the FED press conference was over zoom. That was pretty interesting.

I was I kept expecting like a Zoom bomber to show up, you know, like Mario dragging or something to to show up and crash the party. You would you would think that someone would leak the Mario Dragon or someone like that, just leak them the code, lead them the Zoom meeting. We don't love it. So, Zack, what do you think about that notion of negative rates? I mean, did we get a pretty good indication this week that that is not something that's really on the table at

the FED? Or or is it never say never type of situation? Well? I do think it's a never say never type of situation. But one thing the FED has been adamant about throughout this whole process is negative rates is not something they want to do. It's something they looked at during the global financial crisis. They didn't think it was the right approach. Then all comments by FED policymakers we have heard recently would suggest they don't think

it's the right approach. Now again, I would agree it's probably a never say never time and you've seen some remarkable things, including the introduction of corporate bond purchases to their mix, to their toolbox. But I think negative rates is out of the question for now, and perhaps that changes, but we don't expect it to. I mean, after the meeting, there are a lot of people who are very quick to throw their hands up, say this was a non event. Uh,

nothing new, nothing really surprising here. But I want to get your take after we did get a statement after hearing from Powell, were there any new details surrounding either previous facilities that the FED has announced um that you may be picked up on, or or any hints on what could be to come down the line in the future, should we need more than we've already gotten In the Q and A session, we did get a little bit of additional information at least on timeline for the corporate

credit facilities, and it sounds like those are actually should be up and running quite soon based on Chairman Paul's comments. And in addition, he commented on the main street learning facilities, and I thought there was some interesting comments there and we actually did get Thursday morning, they released additional information expanding the availability of the main street learning facilities to

more companies, larger companies. So he did allude to that a bit, and he also alluded to the fact that this these types of facilities are going to go to a lot of different companies, so they're gonna have various term sheets and tried to sort of piece it out, and that's why something like that is taking a bit long or so. I think that was an interesting look into what we can expect down the road for some of these main street learning facilities and how they're looking

to tailor them to different businesses. And then I think it's reasonable to expect that the corporate credit facilities could be coming online relatively shortly, and when we think about what that means for the market, it's almost hard to separate simply them announcing them and what that's done for the corporate credit market and what bringing them online will do. You've seen primary markets are certainly open for corporate credit borrowers.

You've seen a remarkable amount of issuance at the end of March in early April. So I think some of these facilities have had their desired impacts already without even becoming operational, and that could be an additional boost to market liquidity once they do. But you've seen a lot of progress so far that I think the Fed's got to be pretty happy with. It's like I was looking over some of the notes from your team, some of your recent notes. UH one um uh position you guys

have that it's kind of interesting. Interesting to me is um you say that this rally in the dollar uh is running out of steam and you expect sort of a weaker dollar over I guess the medium to longer term. And I bring it up because boy, I've read a lot of dollar parish dollar takes over the years, and it's a it's a it's a very very dangerous thing to predict. But um, I think it makes sense with the dollar being so strong, if that risk appetite does resume.

UM that this seems like it's in a sense and overdone rally in the dollar. But unpack that for us a little bit. Why you guys feel that way? Is it kind of that whole dollar smile notion? You know that the dollar dollar is very wrong when the economy is very weak and strong when the US is booming, but in that middle time, Um, there's room for it

to weakend. Yeah, So when we look for some US dollar weakness over the medium to longer term, that that is sort of a nod to improved risk appetite, and more importantly, improved funding conditions U S dollar funding conditions abroad and here in the US, and you've seen the FED pump a ton of liquidity into the market, whether it be here in the US or abroad. I think the FX swap lines have been tapped for roughly four

billion dollars. So we think that as some of the global commerce starts to pick up again, you get US dollars flowing throughout the world through typical economic ways. That's going to improve funding conditions and remove some of the U S dollars scarcely that you've seen all the while, some of these funding measures that the FED has enacted are probably gonna be slow to come off, So you're gonna have what will probably be at least a short time period of an abundance of dollars in the system.

As the FED recalibrates, the economy opens back up, opens back up, and you see some of this concern and

risk off tone fade more broadly. And I think one of the biggest risks to that, and it's it's a big risk to our rates call as well, is if you see some of these states opening up and it goes poorly, perhaps you see a big spike in cases or even you have fewer people coming out than expected and spending money, and and it's really going to be a slow grind back to a new normal of sorts, and people aren't spending money the way that you would expect, and you see you or an L shaped recovery, whatever

you want to call it. I think that's going to be key in the direction of most financial markets going forward, is is how do some of these preliminary openings go. And if they are quite poor or if they go quite poorly, then you're gonna see probably another bout of risk off which would actually strengthen the dollars. So it's

it's kind of balancing those risks. But we do think that if if things go reasonably well, you start to see risk appetite continue to improve, then you might have an oversupply of dollars at least for a short time. As as the federy calibrates, Zach, what do you and your team make of, say, the tenure pretty much being it's been anchored, it seems around the sixty basis points level or so. I mean, we've seen this immense rally

in the stock market. Yet at the same time you look at the rates market, and not a whole lot is going on. I mean to you, guys, is it surprising that we haven't seen much more movement there. It's a bit surprising, we we thought, and we still expect the yields to move a little bit higher even in the near term, before moving even higher towards the end of the year, with our year end target being one point to five scent, which seems kind of crazy right now.

But if you think about where we are and if things in the economy start to improve, the FED is buying less, we think that's very much in reach. So I think it's a bit surprising when you consider how much equities have rallied, credit spreads have come in, that additional risk appetite does not seem to have flowed through to the treasury market. And perhaps some of that is due to the fact that the FED has been buying in such remarkable quantities that that really puts a hard

ceiling on yields. But they've really dialed back the amount, and we think that's one of the contributing factors to why rates should rise at least a touch from here over the next two to three weeks. And when we think about some of these odd correlations across markets. That's sort of an indication that while things have improved, you probably aren't back to perhaps where the FED would like

to be. If you have days when treasure yields are falling but equities are also falling, so you know, it's not your typical risk on risk off relationship or using that as a little bit of a barometer for health of balance sheets, health of ability to transfer risk, and sort of the function of markets more broadly. So you're you're starting to see some of that thought. Back at the end of March, you saw some of these really odd correlations with with markets moving in the same direction.

But I think all of the fed's measures are starting to have their desired impact and you're seeing improvement there, but maybe not quite to where they'd like to be. And that's sort of one of the issues restricting yields probably is that some of these correlations aren't back to what you would consider normal. I was gonna ask you about that, is they liquidity issues in the in the bond market, um sort of mission mission accomplished at this point,

are you still seeing any any liquidity problems? I mean, treasuries being one thing, but elsewhere in the bond markets as well. It seems as though liquidity has improved quite a bit. And I think when we look at all that's going on, there's this focus on returning to normal, but these aren't normal times. There's only so much you can expect from the FED, from the Treasury to get things operating as close to normal as possible. But normal it's just is not going to be within reach when

you have economies shut down this way. So I think for the most part, you could say that the FEDS operations in treasuries and agency mbs have been quite successful. But if you do see, like we talked about, another bout of risk off, if some of these reopenings go poorly, if expectations for perhaps a treatment or a vaccine really fall off the table, then that could really go in

the other direction. And the FED is shown that it's not going to hesitate to ramp up whatever measures, alter, whatever measures, do, whatever they have to do to address any strings in the market wherever they may show up. Mike, I think we've had enough vegetables. I think we should be allowed to get to dessert. Nor well, you know me, sir, I like to have to desserts. So even though I gave one crazy thing earlier, I'm prepared the second helping. But I will let you kick it. I will let

you kick it off. Go ahead, alright, mine is a very odd one this week. I will just say that up front. So central banks have gone virtual. There is a story in the Financial Times, and I'm just going to read you a few excerpts. So the headline is virtual rate cut forces Nintendo gamers into risk your assets. Shock among users as Animal crossings Bank of Nook slashes rates ten year zero. So so this is this is

the start of the story. It says savers at the Bank of Nook are being driven to speculate on turnips and tarantulas as the most popular video game of the coronavirus era mimics global central bankers by making steep cuts and interest rates. The estimated twelve million players of Nintendo's cartoon fantasy Animal crossing New Horizons were informed last week about the move in which the Bank of Nook slash the interest paid on savings from around zero point five

percent to just zero point zero five. And it details players of this game on Reddit saying things like I'm never going to financially recover that from this. I would sat an incoming talks about how there's this stock market s t a l K where people have to bet on turnips and people have to go out and buy tarantula's now because people aren't making enough and their savings accounts um. And it's absolutely hysterical that a video game

decided to take a central bank. You know there was a video game such bank um and cut their interest rates to almost zero. Talk about going out on the risk spectrum when you're buying tarantulas is you don't even know what you're getting there. I'm assuming there's an end the Bank of Nook and audit the Bank of Nook. Uh movement ready, I don't know, but the face of Bank of Nook looks to be a raccoon, So you'd have to have it out with the raccoon, all right,

Zach Sarah. Sarah clearly brought her a game when it comes to the craziest things this week, like no pressure. That's a tough one the top, but let's hear you got I'm impressed. I I don't know how I follow that up. That's that is phenomenal. I gotta I gotta give you that I I told you off the bat, Thank you. I really tried on this one. So mine is definitely less interesting and perhaps less crazy than that. But I've been watching what's going on with three month

libor US dollar three month librar. It's fallen I think about thirty three basis points this week alone, and thirteen basis points from Wednesday to Thursday, and it's been a huge move. It's down almost ninety basis points in the month of April. And I was going back to see how when was the last time it's fallen this much in a short time, And sure enough, it's only been about a month and a half. You go back to March, when expectations for rate cuts really started to come into

effect and into focus. Three month dollar library was falling quite a bit then. But I think this time around, it's showing that funding markets in the US are improving. You're seeing CPU rates come down. The Fed's got to be happy with what's going on there. I think credits starting to flow. In the very front end, which is one of the first places that we saw issues crop up, is corporations started to lose the ability to raise cash through commercial paper and draw down their revolvers. So I

think that's another encouraging sign. And it's been quite a move over a very short time, so that's it's definitely I think something the FED will be happy with and something we've been keeping an eye on. Yeah, I was gonna say, was that that spiking library? You think is that primarily because so many corporations we're drawing down their

their revolvers. Yeah, I think that's what you saw back then, is you know, think, you know, people, we're starting to get really concerned with our corporation is going to make any money? Are they going to have any money in a very short time? So I think that's that was the big story back then. And as all of these measures come on line, and if you think about the commercial paper funding facility, that's priced that oh I as plus one ten for the best borrowers. That's way above

where market rates are. But it seems just the existence of this backstop facility has really improved markets. And if you look at the Fed's balance sheet, only three billion has been taken down by that commercial paper funding facility, So it's having the desired effect again without really being operational. And I think the fed's got to be pleased with that.

I wonder how many of those revolvers were drawn down in sort of a moment of conic where you were worried that the corporate market, bond market was not going to be open anytime soon. And maybe there's a little regret on on some of the part of the some of those people. I would imagine if you see, if you've seen what happened at the end March and April, the markets were wide open. I think we notched record weeks of primary issuance, two to three weeks in a row.

And really anecdotally we've heard these companies drew down their revolvers so that they have the cash and then parked them back at the bank. So I think you're starting to see some of that thought as people are more confident that they have access to the capital markets, and that should be good for financial markets and good for

economic prospects. As we get to the other side of this virus fallout, well, you know, we're crazy times when you see a massive move like that Jack, and you look back to what is this the biggest sense and it's only a month ago. I know that happens to me almost every single day where I'm like, oh, this has got to be something. Two weeks I was thinking to myself when I was looking into this, I'm like, what is even crazy? We've struggled. We've struggled. It's true.

That's why I've had to go to virtual video games. Getting creative over here. All right, Mike, I'll give you my bonus crazy thing. Uh Zach. You might not agree with me, but as Sara knows, I consider the gambling markets to be legitimate markets. I know, I know uh many on Wall Street to not like to conflate the two, but uh t purposes of crazy things, I do so.

New York Coast, once again, a great source of crazy market stories, brings us the tale of a guy in Canada who got into a game of rock paper scissors with his buddy. It was a high stakes game of rock paper scissors, mind you, and this guy lost five thousand dollars playing rock paper scissors with his buddy. The crazy part is he actually paid up. He took out a mortgage on his house to uh pay this guy um.

But then of course it ended up in the in the courts, uh and a court basically invalidated this gambling debt uh and the decision that forced this guy to take out the mortgage uh and and the reason why because they view gambling it has to be on something that involves skill, and rock paper scissors does not involve skill. So they invalidated this guy's half a million dollar rock

paper scissors loss. I got mixed feelings on this. So if this one to court, if this one to court, then this had to have happened before coronavirus happened, right, I think yeah? So the the the actual rock paper scissors game and question was like in two thousand and eleven, and then this SIT's okay because my immediate my immediate question was how are people together playing rock paper scissors right now? Shouldn't be happening. I guess we can do

it over you do whatever? Zoom? Sorry? Right? You ready for one million dollars Saturday? You ready ready? Rock paper scissors? Shoot? You get the grants? What do you have? Perss million bucks? Because my life savings and much more. I'm gonna say, you guys gotta I gotta come on and bring my a game or whatever is better than a game for my craziest thing. You guys just blew me out of the water big time next time. You know, yeah, yeah,

Now Mike's dishing out the truth. But look, Mike, Mike stretches the rules a little bit, then I gotta catch up. Then Mike stretches the rule, and I gotta catch up. This is an ongoing cycle we have. Well now, I know, very friendly competition between Sarah and I are over this. Well, high expectations for you next time. I'll give her the

rare w on this one with the Bank of Noah. Well, high expectations of you even higher next time, Zach so Zach Griffith, thanks so much for coming on the show today. Thank you. What goes Up? We'll be back next week. Until then, you can find us on the Blue Terminal website and app or wherever you get your podcasts. We'd love it if you took the time to rate interview the show on Apple Podcasts so more listeners can find us, and you can find us on Twitter, follow me at

at Sarah Ponzack. Mike is a reaganonymous. You can also follow Bloomberg Podcast at podcast and remember we also have our very own Bloomberg Podcast hotline, which is six four six three two four three zero. What goes Up is produced by Tobur Foreheads. The head of Bloomberg Podcast is Francesca Levie. Thanks for listening, See you next time.