Surveillance: Narrative Ping Pong in the Bond Market
Bloomberg Surveillance
Comparing the Flying Experience on Different Airlines
Comparing the efficient, cheap, and on-time experience of flying with Reiner to the horrendous experience with La Fanza, including lost bags and missed connections. Discussion of Adelweiss charging high prices and mentions of sponsors related to investing and financial services.
Mandy Xu, CBOE Global Markets VP & Head of Derivatives Market Intelligence, advises monitoring multiple asset classes going into the year-end. Michael O'Leary, CEO of Ryanair, says the airline remains committed to Boeing despite delays in aircraft deliveries. Amanda Lynam, BlackRock Head of Macro Credit Research, says there's an increased focus on selectively from credit investors. Julie Norman, UCL Centre on US Politics Co-Director, discusses the Israel-Hamas war and Antony Blinken's visits to several leaders in the Middle East. Ashley Allen, Franklin Templeton Corporate Credit Research Analyst, discusses resilient consumer spending.
Get the Bloomberg Surveillance newsletter, delivered every weekday. Sign up now: https://www.bloomberg.com/account/newsletters/surveillance
Full transcript: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Lisa Abramoids along with Tom Keen and Jonathan Ferrell. Join us each day for insight from the best in economics, geopolitics, finance and investment. Subscribe to Bloomberg Surveillance on demand on Apple, Spotify and anywhere you get your podcasts, and always on Bloomberg dot Com, the Bloomberg Terminal, and the Bloomberg Business App. I'm DeLine of joined us now at a macro credit research at black Line I and I don't worry. We're not going to be talking about that. I do want to talk about supply if we can start there. We've got forty eight billion dollars a three year notes this week, We've got forty billion dollars a ten year notes. We've got some thirty year bonds twenty four billion dollars worth. These are big, big numbers. That's treasury supply. What's happening with credit supply going into year rent, Good morning, Thank you both for having me so. As you know, credit supply had a bit of a flurry of activity in September. It calmed down in October. I do think with this tentative stability in the treasury market that corporates, CFOs and treasures may look to move ahead before the year end seasonal slow down. It will be an important test for the market how this treasury supply is digested. But as we know, the Treasury Secretary guided us towards the front end of the curve and not so much in duration in the refunding announcement last week. But I actually think, if nothing else, the past several months have shown corporates that this can be very episodic in terms of these windows opening, and so given that we know the maturity walls are coming up, I think for corporates it's better to issue early rather than late. We're expecting a big week in the IG market this week. I think expectations are a little lower in high yield, but I would not be surprised if we surprise to the upside in terms of those expectations, because I think it's just prudent for CFOs, which speaks to kind of the opportunism that one Sidi get desk told me about last week. He messaged me as soon as we saw this rally and he said, everyone's trying to come to market. I've gotten fifteen phone calls. Everyone's basically lined up. Is this going to be bad? With credit spreads widening in the sort of counterintuitive way because we've got more supply, I think the appetite is there, and I think we've had such light supply, especially in high yield year to date, and twenty two was a record a low level that I think the appetite for the market is there. I think where the real risk is is it that lowest quality cohort of the triple C market, that kind of lowest quality rung of high yield which are triple C issuers. There. I think we've seen some enhanced pressure where it's weak results coupled with refinancing needs have really pressured those capital structures. And even on this swift rally in high yield spreads that we've seen over the past few trading sessions, triple c's have rallied, but they've lagged on the way in. And I think it's the market telling you that there's an appetite for certain quality cohort in the credit market. Ig I think is there in most market conditions. Hig yield is a bit more tentative, but for that lowest quality rung, I think it's very case case specific and vary idiosyncratic. Are people kind of just pricing in perfection here? Well? With high old spreads below four hundred, it's hard to argue you that there's much risk premium added into the market at the moment. I think what we're seeing is a lot more focus on selectivity from our credit investors, so thinking about asset allocation between high yield and leverage loans, sector selection, issuer selection. I think where we're high old spreads are at the moment, the path of least resistance is probably a little bit wider in terms of choppiness, with some of the headline risk ahead of us. But again, as we've talked about before, where yields are, it's really difficult to see kind of highield spreads breaking out in this range of much wider from here, because when you every time, we tried to reach four forty last week and we kind of snapped back in, and so there is a bit of a tug of war between fundamentals and technicals, and even the most vulnerable fundamental pockets of the market have been the best performer, Like leverage loans. You mentioned the decision set between loans and say high yield help our audience understand what goes into making that kind of decision and whether that's changed in the last few weeks. So it has changed in the last few weeks because for a few reasons. One is, if you think we're at the end of the rate hiking cycle, if you think we've seen stability in long end rates, you might think that the bulk of the loan outperformance is behind us at this point. And indeed that yield pick up that leverage loans were offering over high old bonds has narrowed. So what we are seeing is a bit more interest, say even within capital structures, of investors saying Okay, well I'm in the loan, should I rotate into the high old bond or given the fundamental pressures of this higher for longer rate environment, that we're expecting our loans disproportionately impacted by that because they've been contending it with it for a longer time. Again, we don't view fixed rate bonds as immune from that in many instances, but I do think on the margin, given the strong performance of loans here to date, there is some refocusing on Okay, is the bulk of that loan performance behind us read some life into that just a little bit more. We sort of big equity move last week. If you're looking at a and I know it's unique and idiosyncratic, but ultimately just give us the thirty five thousand foot view. If you're looking down a capital structure right now, is the bias to be higher or lower in Actually, you know, I think the high end of the highield market has actually outperformed the low end of the IG market. So it's not as clear cut as saying be underweight high yield versus IG. There are a lot of nuances there. I do think for choice, I would prefer to be higher in quality within high yield in IG. I think moving down into that triple beat cohort is a relatively nice place to be. For the most part, the vast majority of those corporates are committed to maintaining investment grade ratings. You are picking up a bit of a spread pickup relative to the highest rate cohort. I think that's important in this current environment, especially if we don't get a severe downturn in growth. So I don't mean to be overly basic about this, but when you take a step back, I do wonder if we do get coalesce around this higher for longer kind of idea. Does it make sense that we're not going to get any kind of major default cycle, either in public credit or in private credit. If we're looking at benchmark rates that are five percentage points higher than when all of these companies were bar in bulk not so long ago, it's a great point, Lisa. So we are seeing a modest uptick in defaults. Were it just under five percent in the US when you combine high yield and leverage loans, that's well off the rock bottom levels of twenty twenty one and twenty twenty two. Do we break out to the levels that we saw in COVID eight and a half nine percent, I think, barring a severe downturn, I don't see it. Part of the reason is that corporates have entered this period in a really strong position. The other part is that the investor appetite, to your point, John, is there. And then third, I would say corporates are actually shifting to a more balance sheet friendly posture. So we haven't seen a lot of debt funded m and A, we haven't seen a lot of debt funded share buybacks. They're still investing in capex, still investing in debt repayment in terms of uses of cash. But I do think corporates do have some discipline. I think the real risk is that if there's a severe downturn in growth coupled with just a capital market's freezing such that these corporates don't have access at any price, I think it's I think it's difficult. As for the private credit point, historically we look at losses between the two markets, and private credit losses have held in better than public credit losses. Part of that is because the enhanced flexibility that those corporates have. We think that holds true. But I think the point remains, we're expecting an ongoing normalization higher and losses across all those asset classes not extremely given where we know where the maturity will is. Can you identify what would be the least optimal time to have any canoa down to and is that what's basically on the horizon now? So I think probably the biggest risk is that if corporates try and time this opportunistically, they let the year end play out, they think the environment will be better in the first half of twenty twenty four, and then we have some sort of shock, whether that's geopolitical unforeseen risk contraction. We're watching bank lending very closely. Although that has actually played out I think a bit more benign than we would have thought. That is the risk. I think that if corporates try to be almost too strategic about the timing and they cut it too close. We saw that in the financial crisis, where some corporates we're shut out. So that's why I think, if I'm a CFO or treasure, better to issue early rather than late. At a Lisa's point, maybe we get a lot more supply in the coming weeks and months based on what we've seen develop over the last few weeks. No matter, thank you always great. I'm out of line in there of black Rock. Michael I literally with this around the table to Ryan CEO. Michael, I wish people could see your face, as said Basting, wispeak it just to get some reaction. It's going to see you. Good morning, It's great to be here, John, Lisa, good talk to you again. Well, thank you, buddy. You've had earnings out this morning. We've been talking about this dividend of four hundred million euros. We've got to talk about this relationship with Boeing. I want to share a couple of quotes with you and then try and get some clarity. So you said in the last week, if anything, it's getting worse. I would have been reasonably confident up until about a month ago that we'd get fifty seven aircraft by the end of June. I'm not confident. We heard from your CFO this morning. So the worst case scenario is that we'll end up with growth of forty seven aircraft next summer instead of fifty seven. Help me understand where things are. What did you want and what do you think you're going to get? Yeah, I mean ourkis so we are contracted to deliver as fifty seven aircraft by the end of April twenty fourth, in other words, fifty seven additional aircraft for summer twenty four. At the moment that has slipped by the spirit production issues, in which it all Boy's own production issues in Seattle. I think now it looks like we'll get they'll leave us maybe ten short by about the end of June. We're hopefully we get forty five fifty aircraft by the end of June. We said the point we're not taking planes in July and August because frankly, we're too busy. But we're reasonably hopeful that we'll get forty five fifty aircraft front. They will leave us short. I think that's inevitable at this point in time, which means we'll have slightly slower growth next summer, but we'll still add forty five aircraft. It'll still be enough to enable us to grow traffic from one hundred and eighty three million passengers this year to just over two hundred million passengers. It's for a number you have in mind whereby you would have to cut capacity the next summer. There isn't. I mean, we haven't yet announced what the capacity will be next summer. As we said this morning, we have ninety percent of our summer twenty four capacity already on sale. Strongforward booking is good pricing, but we can't commit to the last ten percent until we get a better picture from Bowie. I speak weekly with Dave Calhoun. I think he's doing a good job in difficult circumstances. I have less faith in the management in Seattle, but I think you know, we're working closely with them. We have our own people in Seattle. We have our own people in spurting Wichita and anything we can do to expedite these deliveries will do because growth is so strong in Europe. What is it about the management in Seattle what they're getting wrong? I think there isn't enough focus there on a daily basis on how do we get in with these aircraft out? Everybody is kind of ringing their hands blaming Wichita. You know a lot of the issues are in Seattle as well. They need a more crisis I would like to see greater crisis management in Seattle and greater focus on quality control. You know, I don't understand how Wichita Spurt and Wichho We're able to have this succession amount of production problems if BOE's quality control was up to speed. Do you have options options in terms of what do you do if you don't want to work with Boeing anymore? I don't know. Let's say we want to work with Boeing. We're Boeing's biggest customer by a mine in Europe. We're a committed Boeing customer. Now I would buy Airbus aircraft if they were five percent cheaper per seat than Bowing. But Boeing continue to beat Airbus on pricing. The seventy three seven Max is a phenomenal aircraft, like we now this summer we've flown one hundred and twenty five of the Max eight aircraft. We're carrying four percent more pastures, we're burning sixteen percent less fuel. You know, they're transformative in terms of the engine and aircraft efficiency. We've ordered three hundred Max tens, which will allow us to carry two hundred and twenty eight passengers per fight and burn twenty percent less fuel. So they're making great aircraft. It's just they're not making them on time or delivering them in time. Is it fair to say, though, this is a relationship you're stuck with regardless of what it delivers next year. I mean yes, you know we're committed to Boeing. If you look around the world, the aircraft manufacturers, i mean Airbus are no better than Boeing at the moment. Airbus are way behind on their deliveries too. You have the and Whitney engine, which is going to be a real crisis next summer across the A three twenty fleet in Europe. You know, the part and Whitney engine is going to ground a significant number of airbus aircraft next summer. So all of the air craft manufacturers are challenged. We're a very proud Boeing customer. I think Boeing will get its act together. It's just taking a bit longer than we had originally hoped. In the meantime, how far can you jack up prices if capacity is constrained? I mean I think that the real issue for at least is not how much will we jack up prices? How much will Luftansa or France IAG or BA keep jacking of prices? And the answer is a lot. You know your control estimate this sumwhere Europe's operated about ninety four percent of pre COVID capacity, That includes US growing by twenty five percent. So take Ryan air away. Europe still at less than ninety percent of pre COVID capacity. That's not changing next year. The aircraft manufacturers are delivering aircraft late the part and whitneys will mean five ten percent of the airbus street will be grounded. And consolidation. Lufthanso will buy al Italians, somebody else will buy TAP and there'll be even less capacity on offer. Okay, so this is good news for you because you don't have to really have to try too hard to be the lowest cost aircraft while still raising prices. How much you're going to raise prices next year, we're price passive, load factor active. I think what's happening is how much if Lufthansa Air France Scalem will drive up fares I think by a double digit number next year. It will send even more people in the direction of Ryanair. People want to keep flying, Families want to go on holidays. They just don't want to pay off hands as outrageous prices. So I think fares that next year, I mean my operating assumptions fares will go by a low double digit percentage again through the summer twenty four to be the third year in a row, third summer in a row, we'll see double digit fare increases. In Europe. This is the first year in the first time that you're initiating a dividend YEP, it's a four hundred pounds dividend. It is the first time. Does this mean that you have nothing else to do with that money? Essentially? Yes, you know, I mean some of the first time we've done it. We've done special differdence in share buybacks, We've done about seven billion in share buybacks and special dividends. But you know, we're clearly generating a lot of cash at the moment. We've paid down about two billion in debt. We're down to our last two billion in bond that we'll pay that down over the next three years, and we're generating more cash that we know what to do with. We have specific requirements. Firstly was to do pay increases for our people who worked with us during COVID. Secondly was to pay down the bonds, and thirty is to fund aircraft deliveries. But we're running out of the existing order. We take the last aircraft in December twenty twenty four. The first of the Max tens doesn't rive toll January twenty seven, so we're looking into two or three years. So we have effectively very little uses for cash, and I think it's a commitment on our part. We'll return to shareholders. We won't squander it the way many other airlines do in m and A or buying hotels or whatever, or Delta or as Delta would do, giving monstrous pay increases to its pilots over the next four or five years. We need to keep our cost low keep our efficiency high and keep passing on on beatable air first to our customers. Do you think scheholders then can expect more of the same of an xt few years. I think so as long as trading continues. You know, who knows what's going to happen in Ukraine or in the Middle East. But as long as we get a reasonable wind on trading, then I think we will continue very cash generitive and we will return large amounts of cash to share. It's hard to know what is going to happen in Ukraine in the Middle East. I don't expect you to give us a projection. I do want to understand, though, Are you saying things slow down in any way, shype or form when you start to see these things escalate anything that's a no. I anyway, we saw the initial when Russia invade the Ukraine in February twenty twenty two, twenty two or three account Remember you know, there's a sudden downturn in all of our traffic into Poland, Romania those countries. It recovered after two or three weeks. We've had to suspend We're suspending all flights. We've about thirty flights a day into Tel Aviv. They've been suspended until Christmas, so we do want to see those scenarios resolve themselves. But the ultimate underlying trend across Europe we've locked up everybody for two years in COVID. They all want to go back. Traveling families want to go on holidays. We've just completed the October midterm break. We were still full, and I think what people want is to travel more. But there's only ninety percent of the pre COVID capacity. So in Europe you've constrained capacity enormous demand and that is resulting in very strong priceing, not just for right there, but for all of the airlines. Are you're noticing any trite down? I had to describe it as trite down from b to Ryan abbat United saying anything like that. Not at the moment, but you know, I think it's inevitable if the next year or two, if consumers are under pressure, I think you know, you'll see the little and all these are the supermarkets. Ikea will do very well and Rhine will do very well. So what about using some of the cash to make the experience nicer for people who might be frustrated with at least it'd be impossible to make the experience on Rhinier any nicer. You know, new aircraft on time flights, the fewest cancelations of any airline in Europe. But I don't understand why people pay such ridiculous air force for a horrendous experience on Lafanza. Who lose your bag, miss your connection? On Rhiner it's efficient, it's cheap, it's on time, and it is blow like a man four million people. Once upon a time, Did you live like I had to do on a road show a year ago. I had to fly from Frankfurt to Zurich, which is only about a one and a half hour flight, so they stung me for nine hundred euros one way in economy and I was sitting at the back, in the middle seat, in front of the toilet on an age Vice A three twenty. I mean seven hundred jews. I can fly all year round on Ryan here for seven hundred jurors. Michael, It's good to see it, Thanks John, Lisa, Thank fantastic. Got to see Michael Leary there the Ryan Air CEO. I'm at the line of joined us now at a macro credit research at a blackground and I don't worry. We're not going to be talking about that. I do want to talk about supply, if we can start there. We've got forty eight billion dollars of three year notes this week, We've got forty billion dollars a ten year notes. We've got some thirty year bonds twenty four billion dollars worth. These are big, big numbers. That's treasury supply. What's happening with credit supply going into year end? Good morning, Thank you both for having me so. As you know, credit supply had a bit of a flurry of activity in September, it calmed down in October. I do think with this tentative stability in the treasury market that corporate CFOs and treasures may look to move ahead before the year end seasonal slowed down. It will be an important test for the market how this treasury supply is digested. But as we know, the Treasury Secretary guided us towards the front end of the curve and not so much in duration in the refunding announcement last week. But I actually think, if nothing else, the past several months have shown corporates that this can be very episodic in terms of these windows opening, and so given that we know the maturity walls are coming up, I think for corporates it's better to issue early rather than late. We're expecting a big week in the IG market this week. I think expectations are a little lower in high yield, but I would not be surprised if we surprise to the upside in terms of those expectations, because I think it's just prudent for CFOs, which speaks to kind of the opportunism that one that he get Desk told me about last week. He messaged me as soon as we saw this rally and he said, everyone's trying to come to market. I've gotten fifteen phone calls. Everyone's basically lined up. Is this going to be bad with credit spreads widening in the sort of counterintuitive way because we've got more supply. Yeah, I think the appetite is there, and I think we've had such light supply as especially in high yield year to date, and twenty two was a record a low level that I think the appetite for the market is there. I think where the real risk is is it that lowest quality cohort of the triple C market, that kind of lowest quality rung of high yield, which are triple C issuers there. I think we've seen some enhanced pressure where it's weak results coupled with refinancing needs have really pressured those capital structures. And even on this swift rally in high yield spreads that we've seen over the past few trading sessions, triple c's have rallied, but they've lagged on the way in. And I think it's the market telling you that there's an appetite for certain quality cohort in the credit market. Ig I think is there in most market conditions. High yield is a bit more tentative, But for that lowest quality rung, I think it's very case case specific and very idiosyncratic. Are people kind of just pricing in perfection here? Well? With high old spreads below four hundred, it's hard to argue that there's much risk premium added into the market at the moment. I think what we're seeing is a lot more focus on selectivity from our credit investors, So thinking about acid allocation between high yield and leverage loans, sector selection, issuer selection. I think we're high old spreads are at the moment the path of least resistance is probably a little bit wider in terms of choppiness, with some of the headline risk ahead of us. But again, as we've talked about before, where yields are, it's really difficult to see kind of highield spreads breaking out in this range of much wider from here, because when you every time, we tried to reach four forty last week and we kind of snapped back in, and so there is a bit of a tug of war between fundamentals and technicals, and even the most vulnerable fundamental pockets of the market have been the best performer, Like leverage loans. You mentioned the decision set between loans and say high yield. Help our audience understand what goes into making that kind of decision and whether that's changed in the last few weeks. So it has changed in the last few weeks for a few reasons. One is, if you think we're at the end of the rate hiking cycle, if you i think we've seen stability in long end rates, you might think that the bulk of the loan outperformance is behind us at this point. And indeed, that yield pick up that leverage loans were offering over high old bonds has narrowed. So what we are seeing is a bit more interest, say, even within capital structures, of investors saying Okay, well I'm in the loan, should I rotate into the high old bond or given the fundamental pressures of this higher for longer rate environment, that we're expecting our loans disproportionately impacted by that because they've been contending it with it for a longer time. Again, we don't view fixed rate bonds as immune from that in many instances, but I do think on the margin, given the strong performance of loans here to date, there is some refocusing on okay, is the bulk of that loan performance behind us? We read some life into that just a little bit more. We sort of big equity move last week. If you're looking at AG and I know it's unique and it is syncratic, but ultimately just give us the thirty five thousand foot view. If you're looking down a capital structure right now, is the bias to be higher or lower in it? Actually? You know, I think the high end of the high old market has actually outperformed the low end of the IG market. So it's not as clear cut as saying be underweight high yield versus IG. There are a lot of nuances there. I do think for choice, I would prefer to be higher in quality within high yield in IG. I think moving down into that triple beat cohort is a relatively nice place to be. For the most part, the vast majority of those corporates are committed to maintaining investment grade ratings. You are picking up a bit of a spread pickup relative to the highest rate COHORT. I think that's important in this current environment, especially if we don't get a severe downturn in growth. So I don't mean to be overly basic about this, but when you take a step back, I do wonder if we do get coalesce around this higher for longer kind of idea, does it make sense that we're not going to get any kind of major default cycle, either in public credit or in private credit. If we're looking at benchmark rates that are five percentage points higher than when all of these companies were borrowing in bulk not so long ago, it's a great point, Lisa. So we are seeing a modest uptick in defaults were it just under five percent in the US. When you combine high yield and leverage loans that's well off the rock bottom levels of twenty twenty one and twenty twenty two. Do we break out to the levels that we saw in COVID eight and a half nine percent, I think, barring a severe downturn, I don't see it. Part of the reason is that corporates have entered this period in a really strong position. The other part is that the investor appetite, to your point, John is there. And then third, I would say corporates are actually shifting to a more balance sheet friendly posture. So we haven't seen a lot of debt funded M and A, we haven't seen a lot of debt funded share buybacks. They're still investing in capex, still investing in debt repayment in terms of uses of cash. But I do think corporates do have some discipline. I think the real risk is that if there's a severe downturn in growth coupled with just a capital market's freezing such that these corporates don't have access at any price, I think it's I think it's difficult. As for the private credit point, historically we look at losses between the two markets, and private credit losses have held in better than public credit losses. Part of that is because the enhanced flexibility that those corporates have. We think that holds true. But I think the point remains we're expecting an ongoing normalization higher and losses across all those asset classes, not extremely given where we know where the maturity will is. Can you identify what would be the least oportable time to have any economic down to and is that what's basically on the horizon now? So I think probably the biggest risk is that if corporates try and time this opportunistically, they let the year end play out, they think the environment will be better in the first half of twenty twenty four, and then we have some sort of shock, whether that's geopolitical, unforeseen risk contraction. We're watching bank lending very closely, although that has actually played out I think a bit more benign than we would have thought. That is the risk. I think that if corporates try to be almost too strategic about the timing and they cut it too close. We saw that in the financial crisis, where some corporates were shut out. So that's why I think if I'm a CFO or treasure better to is you early rather than late. At at least's point, maybe we get a lot more supply in the coming weeks and months based on what we've seen developed over the last few weeks. Matter, Thank you always great amount of line in there of black Rock joining us now is Judy Norman, the co director of the UCR Center on the US Politics. Judy, always wonderful to catch out with you. You've articulated this, the pressure to articulate and endgame given what's developed over the last couple of weeks. Do you see sense that that pressure is ramping up once again over the weekend? Well, I think it is John and very much from the US increasingly on Israel, mostly behind the closed doors, but starting a little bit more publicly as well. And this has really been an issue since you since the after October seventh, to trying to figure out what would be next for Gaza after an Israeli operation. There are many different options that are considered, but really none of them seem to be very good for either Israelis or for Palestinians. Israelis un Palestinians are not looking for a ReOC patient of Gaza. Some have floated the idea of the Palestinian authority, the West Bank governance having a role in Gaza, but they are very weak, very illegitimate, and also I think would not take on that role just yet. And the US is even exploring some options of saying having a multi national transition kind of group there, some kind of almost like a peacekeeping force. But again, all of these are very tentative options. And I think crucially right now is trying to identify what Gaza might look like after this in a way that is, you know, not just a continued downward spiral for both Gazans and Israelis. Judy. As we can all see at the moment, the administration domestically facing pressure from all corners, Judy, from your position, can you identify any kind of success this administration is having convincing the Israelis of having some kind of humanitarian pause, convincing it Israel of changing its approached somehow. Is there any kind of success you can identify? Yeah, John, So, I would say the US came out very strong and supportive Israel, and some in Israel have called this a sort of bear hog, a public embrace but also a private restraint and kind of some whispers in the ear. So this has started from the beginning, and I think most importantly Blincoln was pushing for a humanitarian pause over the weekend that does not look forthcoming at the moment. Some areas where they have had some success is starting to get a bit more aid into Gaza. There are currently about one hundred trucks now coming into the Gaza Strip per day. Before the invasion. That was about five hundred trucks a day, so still much less than is needed, but more than was coming in for several weeks. The other area that they had some temporary success was getting communications reinstated in Gaza, but I understand over the weekend there have been more blackout so that seems a bit inconsistent. So I think that pressure for humanitarian pauses will continue. For Israel, I think they see that as perhaps halting the offensive, and they're halting their overall aim of ousting Hamass. But for others that is just seen as absolutely necessary for both getting aid into the strip and getting people out, So I think Blncoln will keep focusing on that. And I would note now who suggested that if hostage isbury leased, that might open up some room for a humanitarian pause. So I think we'll see more focus there in the coming days, Julie, what I've found more interesting rather than Tony Blinken going to Israel was all of the other meetings he's had on this particular tour. Right now, he's in Anchora in Turkey. There's a question over Bill Burns and his relationship with Jordan, the head of CIA, and his tour in the region. What is our sense right now of some of the regional countries and their position, their involvement both in what's happening now negotiating with Hamas, but also some solution after this conflict is over sure. So I think there's a couple different facets to this. One is, again the short term, trying to get other Arab states to also back this idea of humanitarian pause. Most leaders are very forthright about calling for a full cease fire, so Lincoln was trying to get some space there as well as just keeping diplomatic channels open. The second was really in terms of trying to keep the conflict contained and trying to avoid flare ups in other Arab countries and in other areas, especially like Iraq, where US troops are stationed and where there are Runi and proxy groups operating, so trying to kind of quell any potential flare ups and just further dispersal of this conflict. And the third, as you mentioned Lisa, is again trying to look ahead to what that endgame might be and what the role of Arab states might be within that. Again, would Arab states be part of some kind of multinational you know, transitional authority or force or something like that. Again, right now, I think most Arab leaders are reading the room pretty clearly with their own populations, who are very sympathetic to the Palestinian cause and are not going to stick out their neck too far for what the US is pushing for. But at the same time, you know, work quite closely with the US and some of these states with Israel as well, and so needing to kind of find that middle ground. So a lot of diplomacy happening that I think will be just continuing wholeheartedly over these next couple of days. As President Biden lost the room with his own party at this point, given his approach on this conflict, I would say it's very clear that the Democrats have a lot of internal divisions over this conflict, and this isn't new to Biden. And I think he knew with an issue as difficult as Israel Palestine, you are probably never going to please everyone, especially in a party like the Democrats, which are pretty split on this issue. Now he's getting a lot of very vocal criticism from many on the left, from many progressives, and from many on the pro Palestine side. But I think he's also getting a lot of support from more traditional liberal Democrats who appreciate the solidarity that he's shown towards Israel. So in some ways, again, you're not going to please everyone. And again, right now, the US is trying to find a very difficult middle road and kind of thread this needle between supporting Israel but also trying to minimize casualties and think ahead to what might be next and what might be best for the region. It's going to be incredibly difficult for the president going to get too next year, Jurney. Just to finish, net poll from the New York Times over the weekend, big lead to for the former president Donald Trump in Arizona, Georgia, and Michigan, Nevada, and lead in Pennsylvania as well. Judy, your thoughts on that as it came out over the weekend, Yeah, this is going to be a big wake up call for Democrats and for the Biden campaign. We've been seeing these neck and neck numbers for Biden and Trump for quite a while, but to really drill down to the six swing states and see that five out of the six Trump is leading with less than a year until the elections is quite notable. And again, this is a little bit different than past elections because both of these both of these men are known quantities everyone and someone like Trump, everything is out there already, So I don't see a lot of this necessarily changing. Obviously, polls a year out, our year out. But I think for Democrats who thought, you know, Trump was going to be an easy target or something like that, it's clear that Biden has a lot of work to do and that's you know, it's going to be challenging for him to keep his coalition together. So I think we'll see some different strategies emerging pretty soon. Hiy, Judy, Thank you, Judy Norman of the US Sales Center on US Politics. Thank you joining us now. I'm so glad to say. Is Ashley Allen, corporate research analyst at Franklin Templeton YU counuigh in maybe I'm Birkenstack, But more importantly, thank you so much for being here, because to me, the big question really is how resilient is a consumer? After people have been saying that they're running out of their savings month after year after month, have we reached a point where you actually are seeing evidence of that? Maybe? And I think it's been maybe for a few months, to be fair, but I think we find ourselves in a really interesting situation right now, especially following three Q earnings. We just heard from a handful of staples companies from restaurants. Consumers are still spending, especially on some things that they'll want to indulge in, whether it's coffee, sweet treats in the grocery store, so that the stata is backward looking, so we have to keep that in mind. But up until this point, again, resilience has been the word that economists are said over and over. They're still showing up to spend on the things that make them feel good. How much in some of the earning calls that you've been tracking and just some of the communication that you've had with corporate officers about what they see going forward, how much do they see this continuing in a durable fashion just based on how much wages are increasing and the fact that the label market is strong. I don't think it's durable, at least at the same level that we have sustained thus far. A lot of the resilience that we've seen on the top line has been driven by price volumes, let's call them flat plus or minus on either side, both in kind of the restaurant space, but also in staples. If you think about the CpG companies in the grocery store, volumes have kind of flat lined, so where they can consumers have technically been pulling back from a volume perspective. They're consuming less. Companies have just realized that they can still benefit from taking price that likely can't continue you forever going forward. Well, a lot of people will argue that a lot of the household balance youes look pretty good. So if people want to lever up to get a latte a double mocacino, they can do that. Is that what we're actually seeing that people are just continuing with indulgences, but levering up to do so. Potentially, I don't necessarily it's always a maybe, right, I don't necessarily think that they're leveraging up to buy their latte. But I think if you have to look at the bigger picture macro, if you think about millennials broadly speaking, who maybe are waiting to buy their first home, if you can't do that right now, I would argue that, you know, spending seven bucks on a coffee isn't going to impact your ability to buy a home the same way the Fed would in regards to their rate policy. So I think from a consumer perspective, it's less so about them leveraging up, but a bit more about the bigger macro picture, what they are spending on and how they're supported by jobs to be frank as well. So as an investor, sure do you recommend then consumer discretionaries that are the small luxuries in life that people seem pretty committed to. Yeah. So there is something called the lipstick effect, which we've seen before, specifically, you know, in regards to beauty, where women will still spend on small luxuries to make themselves filtered during times of economic stress. I think that same the pattern or thesis could easily be applied to sweet treats. To think about you know, oreoles or cookies that we like as well as well as just the occasional splurge in regards to dining out and whether that's at you know, full price restaurant. Maybe you're okay spending you know, twenty bucks on your fast food meal that at one time they will indulge, especially during times at economics spress. Do you buy the holozembic argument. Not yet, it's TBD. I do think, you know, these drugs are really powerful for the individuals that they were originally designed to help, maybe those with type two diabetes or who are severely overweight and obese. But consumer habits really die hard, and I think that it might take more than ozebic, at least in its current form, to change those patterns to zooming out. We were just speaking with Veronica Clark over at City Group and she was talking about how they expect a soft patch now and then a reacceleration and inflation because a lot of consumers just keep accepting prices where they are. Do you agree with that, just based on sort of a company specific kind of analysis, I think that if consumers, if the can keep their wage gains that we've seen recently, if they can, if those can be persistent there's a good chance that they will continue to accept the price gains. I think it's as a matter of who's going to blink first. Is it the consumers or is it going to be the corporations in regards to pulling back on price to drive volumes or consumers finally going to reach a point where they say, hey, you know what, I don't want to spend six bucks on a box of cereal anymore. I don't want to buy that seven dollars CLO fee. But as long as they're supported by jobs and some wage gains, I think you know they'll continue to spend. Which raises this question when you talk to corporate executives and they can pass along these costs, are they then hiring more people? No, because at the end of the day, corporates are also responding to markets. Broadly speaking, they're trying to recover the margin that they lost over the past eighteen months or so when inflation and input cost really got out of control. Margins became compressed. At that time, profitability was hammered. They've benefited these past few quarters from those price increases in conjunction with falling input costs. Now, to be fair, those costs haven't completely reverted, but profitability has been strong from them. And for the most part, this is very idiosyncratic, but companies have been rewarded when their bottom lines, of course have expanded or reverted to pre pandemic levels. So is it's just zooming out to wrat this. I guess there's this question of whether some of the legacy retail companies and whether the legacy service companies can continue to operate and thrive based on their capital structures, you know, borrowing costs that was a lot lower from another era that they were going to have to refinance at a higher rate, whether they are still incredible companies to invest in in a current environment. Are you basically saying that yes, because they're able to pass along those costs to consumers that have continued to really go for the products that they're selling. Yes, they've been able to pass along the cost But the maturity wall, broadbly speaking, has been pushed out for several corporates, including those in retail indiscretionary names. And so you know, they have balance sheets these days in the cash fload to support you know, the interest expense that they have now in three or four years when their maturity wall comes to do, we'll see where we are and we can address it at that time. But at the moment, balance sheets are strong, the cash is coming in, they can make their payments, and they're passing along those higher prices. What are the strongest segments of retail right now? It's a great question. Broadly speaking, beauty as a segment that's continuing to do well. Historically, pet has been a segment that's been strong, but we have seen some weakening there. It's probably a bit of a post pandemic trend that's reversing. But people are sick of spending their entire paycheck on Fido. Ashley Allen, thank you so much of Franklin Templeton. We really appreciate that. Subscribe to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast on Apple, Spotify and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live every weekday starting at seven am Eastern on Bloomberg dot Com, the iHeartRadio app, tune In, and the Bloomberg Business App. You can watch us live on Bloomberg Television and always on the Bloomberg Terminal. Thanks for listening. I'm Lisa Abramowitz, and this is Bloomberg
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
The AI-powered Podcast Player
