October 7, 2025 • 14 mins
JPMorgan Chase & Co. Chief Executive Officer Jamie Dimon talks about the growth of AI and how it's being used at the bank. Dimon shares his thoughts on the US government shutdown and the problems with reporting quarterly earnings. Dimon spoke to Bloomberg's Tom Mackenzie in London.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Jamie, we're talking about the fact that you have lent
into technology over the last decade, billions of dollars invested
across the business. When it comes to AI, which parts
of the JP Morgan business are they'll be most transformed
by AI.
Speaker 1 (00:20):
So we already we've been doing AI since twenty twelve.
So people think it's a new thing. Jen AI is
kind of new, but not all of it. We have
two thousand people doing it, spend two billion dollars a.
Speaker 3 (00:29):
Year on it.
Speaker 1 (00:29):
It affects everything risk, fraud, marketing, idea generation, customer service,
and it's kind of the tip of the iceberg. And
so we know we're deploying it. Every time we meet
us a business, we ask what are you doing? What
are you doing to serve your people? Why can you
do better? What are somebody else doing? So we're freely
deploying it and safely. We have a lot of rules
and regulations in place in our own data and how
(00:50):
we use it, et cetera.
Speaker 2 (00:51):
Is it having a material impacts on revenues for JP Morgan?
If not now, then when so we have.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
Shown that for that for two billion of expense. We
have got two billion of benefit. We actually can do
real detail.
Speaker 3 (01:01):
We did this.
Speaker 1 (01:02):
We wereduced headcount, we saved this time and money. We'duced areas.
Some of you can't. It's just improved service something like that.
It's like almost worthwhile worthless to say what's the MPV.
But we know about two billion dollars of actual cost saves.
And I think it's the tip of the iceberg. You
were getting better and better at it. We know how
to do it. As the managers learn how to do it,
they're asking more questions why can't it do X? And
(01:23):
why can't do yx? And then were on on my phone.
Here we have a suite and all I'm sweet on
internal data to do research and summarize reports and you know,
scan contracts and do things like that.
Speaker 3 (01:35):
One hundred and fifty thousand.
Speaker 1 (01:37):
People a week use it, so it's it's quite productive.
Speaker 2 (01:40):
More and more of your employees are using the agentic
AI our.
Speaker 1 (01:43):
Own our own LLM, and Igentic is just starting, you know,
but that will be deploying over time too. But it's
also been used for coding. I mean, it's it's being
used quite broadly now. And like I said, part of
is getting your mind working around how you're going to
use this thing, and so our managers and leaders.
Speaker 3 (02:00):
Have to do it.
Speaker 2 (02:01):
If you look out five years, are there more jobs
in banking as a result of AI or fewer?
Speaker 1 (02:08):
Look I think is I think people shouldn't put the
head in the sand. It is going to affect jobs.
So think of every application, every every service you do,
will you'll be using AI, some to enhance it, some
of it will be you doing the same job, You're
doing a better job at it. There will be jobs
that it eliminates, but you're better. Have been way ahead
of the curve and retraining people, so we train and
(02:29):
redeploy a lot of people. So for JP Moore, if
we're successful, we'll have more jobs, but there'll probably be
less jobs and certain functions.
Speaker 2 (02:38):
When you look at the spend on AI infrastructure, chips open, AI,
not lost, not making a profit, loss making. Dales have
about of trillion dollars this year. The hyper scale is
to spend there. What is your reaction when you see
those numbers crossing? Are you comfortable with that kind of
spend on the infrastructure around AI.
Speaker 3 (02:56):
It's a lot.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
I'm not sure it's all ever going to be totally spent.
When you look at big tech, like tech that happens
like this and you're go look at cars, you click
at television, you click at internet. Big money's got spent.
There were a lot of losers, a lot of winners.
In total, it was productive. So take even take the
Internet bubble and remember that blew up and amount of
p I can united by the name one hundred companies
(03:17):
that you know were worth fifty billion dollars and disappeared.
But out of it came Facebook, YouTube, Google, you know.
So there will be real big companies with real big success.
It will work inspite of the fact that not everyone
who invested in it is going to have a great
investment return.
Speaker 2 (03:33):
And of course those investments are part of what is
powered this bull market in stocks. And on Sunday it
will be three years of that ballmark. Where do you
think we are in that ball market? Is this Is
there any complacency there? Is it underpinned by rational factors?
Is there more momentum?
Speaker 3 (03:47):
Yeah? You know, look, we're in a ball market.
Speaker 1 (03:49):
It has been clear as a price or high credits,
breads a low consumers. Still okay, the consumer has jobs.
Remember the jobs, jobs jobs. That usually starts to force
people to cut back and change staying a consumers spend
lesson companies cut back.
Speaker 3 (04:02):
So far, so good. There are a lot of issues.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
Out there that you know, the economy's got to deal
with from all this geopolitical stuff, maybe they'll sort well.
Speaker 3 (04:11):
Which could happen.
Speaker 1 (04:11):
Inflation, I'm a little more nervous about inflation not coming
down like people expect. That might be a surprise. And
then in the hand there's a lot of spending. There's
a lot of government spending which is inflationary too, by
the way.
Speaker 3 (04:23):
And so look, I don't know. I hope for the best,
plan for the worst.
Speaker 2 (04:27):
And you don't worried about a recession in twenty twenty six
for the US you might not clear.
Speaker 1 (04:31):
Yes, I think it could happen in twenty twenty six.
I just I'm not worried about it. As a different statement,
we'll deal with it, We'll serve our clients will navigate
through it. A lot of it has been through them before.
You don't wish it because you know certain people get hurt.
But it could happen in.
Speaker 2 (04:44):
Twenty twenty what's still a coose in the US government
shot down, But I.
Speaker 1 (04:46):
Do think they're positives, like deregulations are real positive which
also helps animal spirits that are positive. And you know
in the one big beautiful build is also more stimulus
that has positive for the economy, but maybe negatives for inflation.
Speaker 3 (05:00):
So how it all sorts.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
Out, We'll see markets are looking through the US government shutdown.
Is there a period of time if this shutdown continues
where markets start to wake up and become concerned?
Speaker 3 (05:11):
I don't think so. Look, I don't like shutdowns.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
I think it's just a bad idea, and I don't
care what the Democrats republics say.
Speaker 3 (05:18):
It's a bad idea. It's not a way to run
a railroad.
Speaker 1 (05:20):
I don't think it's critic We've had I forgot the
number four or five or six. You know, one of
them went for thirty five days. I'm not sure anyone
really affected the economy the market in a real way.
Speaker 2 (05:31):
You mentioned inflation. You said you're a little bit more
concerned about inflation than maybe some others. Markets pricing in
about a hundred basis points of cuts between now and
this time next year from the Fed. Does that therefore
seem reasonable to you? Or markets are over their skis
in pricing.
Speaker 1 (05:45):
I think, you know, markets have to make a forecast.
I want to point out that forecasts have almost always
been wrong, and the Fed's been wrong too, so it
doesn't like their forecast is you know, going to be
accurate if inflation does go up, starts ticking up for
whatever reason, and it might you know, it's gonna be
hard to do one hundred points.
Speaker 3 (06:05):
They might do some, you know, and then they.
Speaker 1 (06:06):
Have the battle, you know, the give and take of
if employer starts going up, we obviously gonna do some.
Speaker 2 (06:11):
So we'll say you've long talked about geopolitics as being
a risk factor. We're seeing gold at four thousand dollars.
We're seeing bitcoin at record highs. The dollar, though yet
to date, down about eight percent on the Bloomberg Dollar Index.
Are you staying structural shifts out of the US dollar?
And is that sustained theme.
Speaker 3 (06:28):
A little bit?
Speaker 1 (06:28):
But again I wouldn't have heart burned over it. The
dollar did well for a long time if you own
US stocks, So foreigners owned something like thirty five trillion
dollars of US docks and bonds. And because this dock
mark's gone up, your allocation the US has gone up.
I think it's perfectly reasonable for investment committees in Europe
and around the world to cut back a little bit
of their equity ownership. We've also seen people changing their
(06:50):
hedge ratios and stuff like that, so it may just
be a rational adjustment to you know, I don't expect
a stronger dollar the tariffs has this effect, but it's
still if you look at America's still the greatest place.
Speaker 2 (07:02):
In the world to invest in long term and deal
making seems to be picking up, and of course JP
Morgan played a significant role in the takeover. The take
private of EA twenty billion dollars in financing provided by
JP Morgan. Is that a marker in the sand?
Speaker 3 (07:15):
Is that?
Speaker 2 (07:15):
Is that a one off as a deal of that
type or is it a sign of a more competition
between frankly, the banks and private credit.
Speaker 1 (07:22):
Well, we're agnostic about private credits, so there maybe competitions
or not. We want our customers to do with their interests.
We work for both, you know, and we did that
whole deal in eleven days, and we didn't do it
that way to make a point to private credit, you know,
Dave said do it differently, and we could have done
it differently too, and so. But there's a lot of
merger talk, there's a lot of firepower, there's a lot
(07:43):
of tech. You know, we had a bunch of IPOs
in the US. I know they've only been a handful here.
The tech world is still doing quite well. You know,
the eight hundred companies here, I think it was four
hundred last year. You know, we have five hundred bankers
coming the innovation economy globally around the world, including edit
like fifty your loan here. So you know, look, I'm
(08:03):
the long term optimist. I do think acid prices are high,
credits breds are low, and you know you should take
that in consideration how you think about the future.
Speaker 3 (08:10):
When you talk about credit and you talk about debt.
Speaker 2 (08:12):
I'm thinking of some dates in fact that JP Morgan
put out on auto loans biggest losses in the most
recent months, I think since twenty twenty March of twenty twenty.
Is that idiosyncratic to auto that means in the US
or you seeing other weak links being stressed.
Speaker 1 (08:23):
I think you know, there were one or two frauds
which I won't go through, but in general, consumer credit
was so good. It's basically most of us just normalizing
for both credit card but subprime order is a little
bit worse than normalizing. It doesn't look like it's getting
worse mirror, but it might.
Speaker 3 (08:40):
But a lot of that.
Speaker 1 (08:41):
If you look at the history of credit for consumers,
it's employment is when employment or home prices go way down,
which you know we don't maybe not expect that, that
drives you know, credit.
Speaker 2 (08:53):
The administration is talking about possibly challenging the requirement around
quarterly earnings, and you've talked about this, You've written about
this bor and Buffett around the guidance part of earnings
and quarterly guidance. Would you welcome a change like that
and would it mean a change to JP Morgan in
terms of how often.
Speaker 3 (09:08):
You Yeah, I would welcome in.
Speaker 1 (09:09):
We still play update investors quarterly with much less stuff,
and we just very transparent. I think the bigger problem
was just reporting quarterly. It was forecasting, where you know,
CEOs get their backup against the wall. They have to
meet these things earnings and they start doing dumb stuff
to meet earnings, and that kind of public pressure. I
think it's a smaller part of a much bigger problem.
We've gone from eight thousand public companies in nineteen ninety
(09:32):
six to like four thousand today, and you know that
I'm not actually as good. We drive companies out of it.
We have cookie cutter governance. There are some activists are good,
but they're activists. There's litigation, there's cookie cutter compensation, there's
very expensive listing. There's disclosure rules, which you've heard about
them here, I mean endless rules, and that it makes
(09:53):
it hard.
Speaker 3 (09:53):
For a small cut to go public.
Speaker 1 (09:55):
So I think, and they're trying to do that here,
have an active small company going public. You all need
and create an equity culture, which Rachel Reason is trying
to do here. And I think they're doing a good
job reducing regulations, you know, trying to make it easier
to do business and you know, reducing regular banks, but
also in business in general, you want an active market
and we've kind of crushed it and could the research
(10:17):
laws and miffit and disclosure requires it. So if I
was a regulator, I would take a step back and
look at the whole system and say, how can we
improve it and make it safer, you know not and
look at it holistically as opposed to know just everything's
like a one off conversation.
Speaker 2 (10:33):
I need to talk to you about some other changes
that the Trump administrations take. You are a champion of
capitalism and free market capitalism. So when you see states
taken by the administration or the US government's put it
that way in terms of intel golden share for US
steel investments in the lithium mind producer, how does that
sit with you?
Speaker 1 (10:50):
So the first thing is there are legitimate complaints around trade.
So just take that first somewhere around just unfair trade.
It's unfair to use, you know, not just tariffs. It's surpluses,
it's capital, it's quotas, it's just you know, it's the
non tariff parers. And then there's national security related so
I think a national security you have to take some
special thing I called industrial policy.
Speaker 3 (11:12):
But it's not to be done right.
Speaker 1 (11:13):
It's got to come with permitting no virtual signaling. And
so like the deal it was done for MP, I
thought they did a very smart thing. They're giving MP
which we were part of banking. You know, it does
rare Earth's magnets a chip because they're gonna have a
long term contract with the government. It gives them a
chance to survive, to get through it. They call the
Value of Death, and they bought a piece to go
(11:34):
into it. So I thought that was really well done.
I'm not going to comment all of them. I think
it'd be very careful when you get involved in that
kind of stuff.
Speaker 3 (11:40):
Why are you doing it? What's the long term benefit?
You know?
Speaker 1 (11:43):
And then of course you know if Democrats get in powered,
they're gonna do even more of it, So I would
be very cautious about how you go about that. I
do think they need to do more. You cannot do
certain things in the United States. You think a company's
gonna do it, they'll be They'll be bankrupt in seven months.
They either need freelam and cheaper financing. And maybe the
most important is long term purchase agreements with defense or
(12:06):
company to something that gives me a real chance to.
Speaker 3 (12:08):
Build a business.
Speaker 2 (12:09):
You touch on the fact that we're here in the UK,
the chance a little here. She addressed the summit, she
dress the conference, she's making those changes. Is the UK
doing enough? They're going to be potentially some changes when
it comes to listings. They may be announced in the
budget in November. Is enough being done to make the
UK to make London an attractive listing destination again.
Speaker 1 (12:26):
Well, at first of all, it's come here. It's a
wonderful city. It's a melting pot. The brain power is extraordinary,
and I'm talking about not just financial but lawyers and technology, media.
It's it's unbelievable. It's a huge benefit to your to UK,
though I'm not sure the rest of the UK appreciates
that much. And they are there's saying the right things.
They're deregging. It's not just banks but business in general,
(12:49):
reducing red tape. I call it blue tape. Now you
know they're reducing red tape, blue tape.
Speaker 3 (12:54):
They're you know, they're.
Speaker 1 (12:55):
Trying to create a consolidate the pension and save these schemes.
So I think it's very smart have a little more
of an equity risk culture, you know, not to lose money,
but to take a little more risk. And maybe some
of these tech companies here. Yeah, I apployed everything they're doing.
I know the you know, the public here doesn't applaud
as much as I do. But they have to keep going.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
H one B visas in the US talking about attracting
talent one hundred thousand dollars, is that a barrier to
the US tech sector.
Speaker 3 (13:22):
You concerned about it, I'm not. Again. I've got Harpero.
It's six hundred thousand employees. That's it.
Speaker 1 (13:29):
We have one hundred and sixty million people working. And
I do think you know, these things happened. I didn't
like when I first. I still don't particularly like it,
but but you know what it was being abused. We
did the analysis and the work. It was not supposed
to be to bring cheaper workers here to make more
money for your company. It was meant to bring very
talented people and you don't necessarily have to for your company,
and we do. We may have made some mistakes, but
(13:51):
let's just fix the system. I was with the President
once and he said, more merit based, more merit based.
In fact, I heard him say it was just stamp
of green card and every person in this country who
went to university or advanced degrees and have him stay
here and build their career here. That would be my belief.
I want him to go back to that, not make
it hard to be or make it easier for real
(14:13):
merit based it.
Speaker 2 (14:14):
You speak to the President every week, No, okay, I've
spoken him a couple of times. Jamie Donald, chairman CEO
JP Morltman, thank you very much and dank I appreciate it.
Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Jamie, we're talking about the fact that you have lent
into technology over the last decade, billions of dollars invested
across the business. When it comes to AI, which parts
of the JP Morgan business are they'll be most transformed
by AI.
Speaker 1 (00:20):
So we already we've been doing AI since twenty twelve.
So people think it's a new thing. Jen AI is
kind of new, but not all of it. We have
two thousand people doing it, spend two billion dollars a.
Speaker 3 (00:29):
Year on it.
Speaker 1 (00:29):
It affects everything risk, fraud, marketing, idea generation, customer service,
and it's kind of the tip of the iceberg. And
so we know we're deploying it. Every time we meet
us a business, we ask what are you doing? What
are you doing to serve your people? Why can you
do better? What are somebody else doing? So we're freely
deploying it and safely. We have a lot of rules
and regulations in place in our own data and how
(00:50):
we use it, et cetera.
Speaker 2 (00:51):
Is it having a material impacts on revenues for JP Morgan?
If not now, then when so we have.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
Shown that for that for two billion of expense. We
have got two billion of benefit. We actually can do
real detail.
Speaker 3 (01:01):
We did this.
Speaker 1 (01:02):
We wereduced headcount, we saved this time and money. We'duced areas.
Some of you can't. It's just improved service something like that.
It's like almost worthwhile worthless to say what's the MPV.
But we know about two billion dollars of actual cost saves.
And I think it's the tip of the iceberg. You
were getting better and better at it. We know how
to do it. As the managers learn how to do it,
they're asking more questions why can't it do X? And
(01:23):
why can't do yx? And then were on on my phone.
Here we have a suite and all I'm sweet on
internal data to do research and summarize reports and you know,
scan contracts and do things like that.
Speaker 3 (01:35):
One hundred and fifty thousand.
Speaker 1 (01:37):
People a week use it, so it's it's quite productive.
Speaker 2 (01:40):
More and more of your employees are using the agentic
AI our.
Speaker 1 (01:43):
Own our own LLM, and Igentic is just starting, you know,
but that will be deploying over time too. But it's
also been used for coding. I mean, it's it's being
used quite broadly now. And like I said, part of
is getting your mind working around how you're going to
use this thing, and so our managers and leaders.
Speaker 3 (02:00):
Have to do it.
Speaker 2 (02:01):
If you look out five years, are there more jobs
in banking as a result of AI or fewer?
Speaker 1 (02:08):
Look I think is I think people shouldn't put the
head in the sand. It is going to affect jobs.
So think of every application, every every service you do,
will you'll be using AI, some to enhance it, some
of it will be you doing the same job, You're
doing a better job at it. There will be jobs
that it eliminates, but you're better. Have been way ahead
of the curve and retraining people, so we train and
(02:29):
redeploy a lot of people. So for JP Moore, if
we're successful, we'll have more jobs, but there'll probably be
less jobs and certain functions.
Speaker 2 (02:38):
When you look at the spend on AI infrastructure, chips open, AI,
not lost, not making a profit, loss making. Dales have
about of trillion dollars this year. The hyper scale is
to spend there. What is your reaction when you see
those numbers crossing? Are you comfortable with that kind of
spend on the infrastructure around AI.
Speaker 3 (02:56):
It's a lot.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
I'm not sure it's all ever going to be totally spent.
When you look at big tech, like tech that happens
like this and you're go look at cars, you click
at television, you click at internet. Big money's got spent.
There were a lot of losers, a lot of winners.
In total, it was productive. So take even take the
Internet bubble and remember that blew up and amount of
p I can united by the name one hundred companies
(03:17):
that you know were worth fifty billion dollars and disappeared.
But out of it came Facebook, YouTube, Google, you know.
So there will be real big companies with real big success.
It will work inspite of the fact that not everyone
who invested in it is going to have a great
investment return.
Speaker 2 (03:33):
And of course those investments are part of what is
powered this bull market in stocks. And on Sunday it
will be three years of that ballmark. Where do you
think we are in that ball market? Is this Is
there any complacency there? Is it underpinned by rational factors?
Is there more momentum?
Speaker 3 (03:47):
Yeah? You know, look, we're in a ball market.
Speaker 1 (03:49):
It has been clear as a price or high credits,
breads a low consumers. Still okay, the consumer has jobs.
Remember the jobs, jobs jobs. That usually starts to force
people to cut back and change staying a consumers spend
lesson companies cut back.
Speaker 3 (04:02):
So far, so good. There are a lot of issues.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
Out there that you know, the economy's got to deal
with from all this geopolitical stuff, maybe they'll sort well.
Speaker 3 (04:11):
Which could happen.
Speaker 1 (04:11):
Inflation, I'm a little more nervous about inflation not coming
down like people expect. That might be a surprise. And
then in the hand there's a lot of spending. There's
a lot of government spending which is inflationary too, by
the way.
Speaker 3 (04:23):
And so look, I don't know. I hope for the best,
plan for the worst.
Speaker 2 (04:27):
And you don't worried about a recession in twenty twenty six
for the US you might not clear.
Speaker 1 (04:31):
Yes, I think it could happen in twenty twenty six.
I just I'm not worried about it. As a different statement,
we'll deal with it, We'll serve our clients will navigate
through it. A lot of it has been through them before.
You don't wish it because you know certain people get hurt.
But it could happen in.
Speaker 2 (04:44):
Twenty twenty what's still a coose in the US government
shot down, But I.
Speaker 1 (04:46):
Do think they're positives, like deregulations are real positive which
also helps animal spirits that are positive. And you know
in the one big beautiful build is also more stimulus
that has positive for the economy, but maybe negatives for inflation.
Speaker 3 (05:00):
So how it all sorts.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
Out, We'll see markets are looking through the US government shutdown.
Is there a period of time if this shutdown continues
where markets start to wake up and become concerned?
Speaker 3 (05:11):
I don't think so. Look, I don't like shutdowns.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
I think it's just a bad idea, and I don't
care what the Democrats republics say.
Speaker 3 (05:18):
It's a bad idea. It's not a way to run
a railroad.
Speaker 1 (05:20):
I don't think it's critic We've had I forgot the
number four or five or six. You know, one of
them went for thirty five days. I'm not sure anyone
really affected the economy the market in a real way.
Speaker 2 (05:31):
You mentioned inflation. You said you're a little bit more
concerned about inflation than maybe some others. Markets pricing in
about a hundred basis points of cuts between now and
this time next year from the Fed. Does that therefore
seem reasonable to you? Or markets are over their skis
in pricing.
Speaker 1 (05:45):
I think, you know, markets have to make a forecast.
I want to point out that forecasts have almost always
been wrong, and the Fed's been wrong too, so it
doesn't like their forecast is you know, going to be
accurate if inflation does go up, starts ticking up for
whatever reason, and it might you know, it's gonna be
hard to do one hundred points.
Speaker 3 (06:05):
They might do some, you know, and then they.
Speaker 1 (06:06):
Have the battle, you know, the give and take of
if employer starts going up, we obviously gonna do some.
Speaker 2 (06:11):
So we'll say you've long talked about geopolitics as being
a risk factor. We're seeing gold at four thousand dollars.
We're seeing bitcoin at record highs. The dollar, though yet
to date, down about eight percent on the Bloomberg Dollar Index.
Are you staying structural shifts out of the US dollar?
And is that sustained theme.
Speaker 3 (06:28):
A little bit?
Speaker 1 (06:28):
But again I wouldn't have heart burned over it. The
dollar did well for a long time if you own
US stocks, So foreigners owned something like thirty five trillion
dollars of US docks and bonds. And because this dock
mark's gone up, your allocation the US has gone up.
I think it's perfectly reasonable for investment committees in Europe
and around the world to cut back a little bit
of their equity ownership. We've also seen people changing their
(06:50):
hedge ratios and stuff like that, so it may just
be a rational adjustment to you know, I don't expect
a stronger dollar the tariffs has this effect, but it's
still if you look at America's still the greatest place.
Speaker 2 (07:02):
In the world to invest in long term and deal
making seems to be picking up, and of course JP
Morgan played a significant role in the takeover. The take
private of EA twenty billion dollars in financing provided by
JP Morgan. Is that a marker in the sand?
Speaker 3 (07:15):
Is that?
Speaker 2 (07:15):
Is that a one off as a deal of that
type or is it a sign of a more competition
between frankly, the banks and private credit.
Speaker 1 (07:22):
Well, we're agnostic about private credits, so there maybe competitions
or not. We want our customers to do with their interests.
We work for both, you know, and we did that
whole deal in eleven days, and we didn't do it
that way to make a point to private credit, you know,
Dave said do it differently, and we could have done
it differently too, and so. But there's a lot of
merger talk, there's a lot of firepower, there's a lot
(07:43):
of tech. You know, we had a bunch of IPOs
in the US. I know they've only been a handful here.
The tech world is still doing quite well. You know,
the eight hundred companies here, I think it was four
hundred last year. You know, we have five hundred bankers
coming the innovation economy globally around the world, including edit
like fifty your loan here. So you know, look, I'm
(08:03):
the long term optimist. I do think acid prices are high,
credits breds are low, and you know you should take
that in consideration how you think about the future.
Speaker 3 (08:10):
When you talk about credit and you talk about debt.
Speaker 2 (08:12):
I'm thinking of some dates in fact that JP Morgan
put out on auto loans biggest losses in the most
recent months, I think since twenty twenty March of twenty twenty.
Is that idiosyncratic to auto that means in the US
or you seeing other weak links being stressed.
Speaker 1 (08:23):
I think you know, there were one or two frauds
which I won't go through, but in general, consumer credit
was so good. It's basically most of us just normalizing
for both credit card but subprime order is a little
bit worse than normalizing. It doesn't look like it's getting
worse mirror, but it might.
Speaker 3 (08:40):
But a lot of that.
Speaker 1 (08:41):
If you look at the history of credit for consumers,
it's employment is when employment or home prices go way down,
which you know we don't maybe not expect that, that
drives you know, credit.
Speaker 2 (08:53):
The administration is talking about possibly challenging the requirement around
quarterly earnings, and you've talked about this, You've written about
this bor and Buffett around the guidance part of earnings
and quarterly guidance. Would you welcome a change like that
and would it mean a change to JP Morgan in
terms of how often.
Speaker 3 (09:08):
You Yeah, I would welcome in.
Speaker 1 (09:09):
We still play update investors quarterly with much less stuff,
and we just very transparent. I think the bigger problem
was just reporting quarterly. It was forecasting, where you know,
CEOs get their backup against the wall. They have to
meet these things earnings and they start doing dumb stuff
to meet earnings, and that kind of public pressure. I
think it's a smaller part of a much bigger problem.
We've gone from eight thousand public companies in nineteen ninety
(09:32):
six to like four thousand today, and you know that
I'm not actually as good. We drive companies out of it.
We have cookie cutter governance. There are some activists are good,
but they're activists. There's litigation, there's cookie cutter compensation, there's
very expensive listing. There's disclosure rules, which you've heard about
them here, I mean endless rules, and that it makes
(09:53):
it hard.
Speaker 3 (09:53):
For a small cut to go public.
Speaker 1 (09:55):
So I think, and they're trying to do that here,
have an active small company going public. You all need
and create an equity culture, which Rachel Reason is trying
to do here. And I think they're doing a good
job reducing regulations, you know, trying to make it easier
to do business and you know, reducing regular banks, but
also in business in general, you want an active market
and we've kind of crushed it and could the research
(10:17):
laws and miffit and disclosure requires it. So if I
was a regulator, I would take a step back and
look at the whole system and say, how can we
improve it and make it safer, you know not and
look at it holistically as opposed to know just everything's
like a one off conversation.
Speaker 2 (10:33):
I need to talk to you about some other changes
that the Trump administrations take. You are a champion of
capitalism and free market capitalism. So when you see states
taken by the administration or the US government's put it
that way in terms of intel golden share for US
steel investments in the lithium mind producer, how does that
sit with you?
Speaker 1 (10:50):
So the first thing is there are legitimate complaints around trade.
So just take that first somewhere around just unfair trade.
It's unfair to use, you know, not just tariffs. It's surpluses,
it's capital, it's quotas, it's just you know, it's the
non tariff parers. And then there's national security related so
I think a national security you have to take some
special thing I called industrial policy.
Speaker 3 (11:12):
But it's not to be done right.
Speaker 1 (11:13):
It's got to come with permitting no virtual signaling. And
so like the deal it was done for MP, I
thought they did a very smart thing. They're giving MP
which we were part of banking. You know, it does
rare Earth's magnets a chip because they're gonna have a
long term contract with the government. It gives them a
chance to survive, to get through it. They call the
Value of Death, and they bought a piece to go
(11:34):
into it. So I thought that was really well done.
I'm not going to comment all of them. I think
it'd be very careful when you get involved in that
kind of stuff.
Speaker 3 (11:40):
Why are you doing it? What's the long term benefit?
You know?
Speaker 1 (11:43):
And then of course you know if Democrats get in powered,
they're gonna do even more of it, So I would
be very cautious about how you go about that. I
do think they need to do more. You cannot do
certain things in the United States. You think a company's
gonna do it, they'll be They'll be bankrupt in seven months.
They either need freelam and cheaper financing. And maybe the
most important is long term purchase agreements with defense or
(12:06):
company to something that gives me a real chance to.
Speaker 3 (12:08):
Build a business.
Speaker 2 (12:09):
You touch on the fact that we're here in the UK,
the chance a little here. She addressed the summit, she
dress the conference, she's making those changes. Is the UK
doing enough? They're going to be potentially some changes when
it comes to listings. They may be announced in the
budget in November. Is enough being done to make the
UK to make London an attractive listing destination again.
Speaker 1 (12:26):
Well, at first of all, it's come here. It's a
wonderful city. It's a melting pot. The brain power is extraordinary,
and I'm talking about not just financial but lawyers and technology, media.
It's it's unbelievable. It's a huge benefit to your to UK,
though I'm not sure the rest of the UK appreciates
that much. And they are there's saying the right things.
They're deregging. It's not just banks but business in general,
(12:49):
reducing red tape. I call it blue tape. Now you
know they're reducing red tape, blue tape.
Speaker 3 (12:54):
They're you know, they're.
Speaker 1 (12:55):
Trying to create a consolidate the pension and save these schemes.
So I think it's very smart have a little more
of an equity risk culture, you know, not to lose money,
but to take a little more risk. And maybe some
of these tech companies here. Yeah, I apployed everything they're doing.
I know the you know, the public here doesn't applaud
as much as I do. But they have to keep going.
Speaker 2 (13:14):
H one B visas in the US talking about attracting
talent one hundred thousand dollars, is that a barrier to
the US tech sector.
Speaker 3 (13:22):
You concerned about it, I'm not. Again. I've got Harpero.
It's six hundred thousand employees. That's it.
Speaker 1 (13:29):
We have one hundred and sixty million people working. And
I do think you know, these things happened. I didn't
like when I first. I still don't particularly like it,
but but you know what it was being abused. We
did the analysis and the work. It was not supposed
to be to bring cheaper workers here to make more
money for your company. It was meant to bring very
talented people and you don't necessarily have to for your company,
and we do. We may have made some mistakes, but
(13:51):
let's just fix the system. I was with the President
once and he said, more merit based, more merit based.
In fact, I heard him say it was just stamp
of green card and every person in this country who
went to university or advanced degrees and have him stay
here and build their career here. That would be my belief.
I want him to go back to that, not make
it hard to be or make it easier for real
(14:13):
merit based it.
Speaker 2 (14:14):
You speak to the President every week, No, okay, I've
spoken him a couple of times. Jamie Donald, chairman CEO
JP Morltman, thank you very much and dank I appreciate it.
Popular Podcasts
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com