July 29, 2025 • 38 mins
Watch Carol and Tim LIVE every day on YouTube: http://bit.ly/3vTiACF.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said that the US and China will continue talks over maintaining a tariff truce before it expires in two weeks and that President Donald Trump will make the final call on any extension.
Bessent, who led the US delegation with Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, said in Stockholm that he’ll brief Trump on Wednesday on the remaining issues.
“There’s still a couple of technical details to work out,” Bessent told reporters Tuesday, after two days of meetings with officials from Beijing led by Vice Premier He Lifeng.
On the heels of Washington’s preliminary tariff deals with Japan and the European Union, Bessent said his Chinese counterparts were “more of a mood for a wide-ranging discussion.”
The third round of US-China trade talks in less than three months wrapped up ahead of an Aug. 12 deadline to resolve differences during a 90-day suspension of sky-high tariffs that threatened to cut off bilateral trade between the world’s largest economies.
Adding an extra 90 days is one option, Bessent said.
Chinese trade negotiator Li Chenggang told reporters that both sides agree on maintaining the truce, without elaborating on how long. He added that the conversations in the Swedish capital were candid, in-depth and geared for continued close communication.
Today's show features:
- Bloomberg News Europe Correspondent Oliver Crook on the latest from US-China trade talks in Stockholm, Sweden
- Danielle DiMartino Booth, CEO and Chief Strategist at QI research, on the latest FOMC meeting
- Bloomberg News Boston Bureau Chief Brooke Sutherland on Boeing and UPS earnings, as well as the $72 billion megadeal between Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern
- Kabir Nath, Chief Executive Officer of Compass Pathways, on the pursuit of FDA approval of the first psychedelic treatment for certain people living with depression
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 (00:08):
This is Bloomberg business Week Daily reporting from the magazine
that helps global leaders stay ahead with insight on the people, companies,
and trends shaping today's complex economy. Plus global business, finance
and tech news as it happens. The Bloomberg Business Weekdaily
Podcast with Carol Masser and Tim Stenebek on Bloomberg Radio.
Speaker 1 (00:32):
We US and Chinese negotiators have concluded their latest round
of talks, a trade talks, of course, that were underway
in Stockholm, with an agreement to extend their tart truth
truth or so it seems. We have some questions here.
US Treasury Secretary Scott Besson and US Trade Representative Jamison
Greer holding a press conference last hour in Stockholm, the
Treasury Secretary saying an extension not a done deal.
Speaker 3 (00:55):
If we boomerang back to the April second level, if
they would go to thirty four. I noticed as the
earlier question said that the Chinese Deputy minister did say
that we had agreed on a pause. We have not.
Nothing is agreed until we speak with President Trump. He's
(01:18):
on Air Force one, I believe, doing a press conference
right now, and we will be seeing him in the
Oval tomorrow to go over the deal with him, and
then he'll decide if the pause continues.
Speaker 1 (01:32):
As is all right. That, of course, was US Treasury
Secretary Scott bess And earlier in Stockholm with more on
where we are. Bloomberg News correspondent Oliver Crook was in
the room where it happened in Stockholm, where that press
conference was went underway just about thirty thirty five minutes ago.
Oliver pause, no pause. I think we're all still kind
of scratching our head to understand exactly what was agreed to.
Speaker 4 (01:54):
Yeah, I think we were too a little bit, and
that was helpful for the Secretary of the Treasury to
give a little cast, a little bit more light on that.
You know, far be it from Donald Trump to withhold
any suspense from us. Basically, the two days of negotiations
that we had by the Chinese Vice Premier, the US
Treasury Secretary I'm the ambassador on trade, Jamison Greer ended
a couple hours ago. Then they briefed the media and
(02:15):
it ended, it seemed initially by the Chinese saying that
they basically a ninety day pause. The continuation of the
truce between the United States and China that that would
continue for another period of time.
Speaker 5 (02:25):
They didn't specify the period of time.
Speaker 4 (02:27):
Then we started to hear from the Americans with a
slightly different story that basically this is still conditional to
Donald Trump's approval. We understand that Scott Befson did speak
with Donald Trump after the conversations before he gave that
press briefing, but he's going to give a more complete
briefing a little bit tomorrow in the Oval Office in
the White House in order to get the final sign
off from Donald Trump, who may you know, change his mind,
(02:48):
may demand something else. But again, we the deadline that
we're facing here is August the twelfth, when these terrif
rates will shoot.
Speaker 5 (02:53):
Right back up.
Speaker 4 (02:54):
So for the market, this is really a crucial thing
to get over the line.
Speaker 6 (02:56):
Interestingly enough, at least the equity market not reacting much
to this news. Perhaps it was priced in, perhaps there
was the expectation that there would be some sort of
extension here. I want to go to rare Earth, specifically
Oliver and what we learned about the way that rare earths,
not just today but really over the last few months,
have taken center stage when it comes to these negotiations,
what do we know about that?
Speaker 4 (03:17):
Well, what I think is interesting is that there were
concessions on rare earth. There were concessions in exchange for that,
on the Age twenty chips by Nvidia, by the United States,
the allowing of selling them into China. And we should
say that one could interpret this as a sort of
act of goodwill on both sides in order to try
to make progress. But the reality of the situation is
that for each of these economies, they're dependent on the other.
There is no alternative for these technologies. This is not
(03:40):
just an act of good will. This is the leverage
that China holds over the United States. It is the
leverage that the United States holds over China. And they
did manage to make some breakthroughs on that. And again
this is something that was active in the discussions with
the delegation from China and the United States.
Speaker 5 (03:54):
Today we heard from Jamison.
Speaker 4 (03:55):
Greer saying that I don't want to talk about magnets basically. Ever, again,
as far as they're concerned, the magnets should be flowing.
Speaker 5 (04:01):
They are flowing now, and.
Speaker 4 (04:02):
That this should be a close topic and that they
can then put that aside in order to make progress
on the many other issues that are sort of large
issues between the China and the United States, they'd like
to basically put into it, and as far as they're concerned,
they hope it's done all right, Oliver.
Speaker 1 (04:16):
Back in June, President she of China, we know, invited
President Trump to Beijing. Are the two leaders talking at
all during these talks? Are they just waiting until I
don't know the final terms. What's what's kind of going
on behind the scenes here?
Speaker 4 (04:30):
Yeah, I mean our impression is that the last time
that they spoke, this came up during the press conference,
was in the call that they held in June. We
understand that Shijiping did invite Donald Trump and the first
Lady Millennia Trump to China at some point. There has
been some discussions today. I think there was a Donald
Trump truth saying that basically he's not seeking a discussion
with President Jijenping, but he has been invited. But this
(04:50):
is really at the crux of the issue here, right.
The Chinese, in the last few decades have been building
out their economy, have been building out.
Speaker 5 (04:56):
Their status on the global stage.
Speaker 4 (04:58):
They don't want to be seen sort of bowing theatrically
to the United States on these trade issues. The Europeans
have much less of a problem with that. They're being
much more pragmatic about these sorts of things. But for
the Chinese, this is not just about trade. This is
about their status on the global stage. And I'll remind
you that in Trump won the first Trump administration, these
trade negotiations between the Chinese and the United States, they
(05:18):
were held in Washington, d C. These discussions today are
being held in Geneva, the United Kingdom, and Stockholm in
neutral sort of third party places. And we've seen what
China's appetite is to escalate this trade where if they
have to, they shot the tariff up to one hundred
and twenty five percent, which is how we got to
this truce. But that is the sort of dynamic going
into this. Both leaders want to appear strong and need
to exert their leverage on the other.
Speaker 6 (05:40):
What are the questions that remain unanswered at this point
in terms of the details, the nitty gritty and what
really needs to be hashed out here.
Speaker 4 (05:49):
Yeah, so, I mean, there are a panoply of different issues.
For example, there's the issue of TikTok right, there is
a buyer potentially for TikTok in the United States, so
says Donald Trump, the Chinese still need to give a
nod to sell that. That is apparently something that did
not come up in these conversations. There is the question
of fentanyl Bess and says that he is not pleased
with sort of how things have been progressing there.
Speaker 5 (06:09):
China could still be doing more.
Speaker 4 (06:10):
I mean, there is the issue of Russia, which increasingly
we've seen Donald Trump change his position on Russia and
Vladimir Putin, and we had a large discussion apparently between
the two delegations today on the question of Russia and
Scott Besson again airing their displeasure at the continued buying
of fossil fuels both from Russia and China, but also
that dual use military technology that they're seeing increasingly on
(06:32):
the battlefield in Ukraine. So these were active discussions. And
then there's also this question of the secondary sanctions that
Trump is now talking about imposing on people who buy
crude oil from Russia if Putin does not come to
the negotiating table in the next ten days.
Speaker 5 (06:45):
This came up in the.
Speaker 4 (06:47):
Press conference and when asked you know whether or not
the Chinese position had altered. Scott Besson said, basically, the
Chinese take their sovereignty very seriously.
Speaker 5 (06:54):
They don't really want to be told what to do.
Speaker 4 (06:56):
And if they want to pay one hundred percent tariffs
as a consequence of buying Russian oil, than they will.
Speaker 1 (07:01):
Secretary of the Treasury Scott Essen said, we understand China's
agenda much better. What is really the Chinese agenda? What
is really the US agenda? Is it just for both
to kind of get wins here ultimately.
Speaker 4 (07:12):
Well, what's interesting is again what we see in the
dynamic with the European Union.
Speaker 5 (07:16):
And the United States.
Speaker 4 (07:16):
You have a situation with Japan, the UK, the EU
where they almost want to appear to be giving more
to Trump than they are sort of potentially giving these
sort of you know, big, sort of sweeping statements of
committing to buying you know, seven hundred and fifty billion
dollars of energy, you know, investment pledges of six hundred billion.
These are sort of big concessions. But again, there is
a lot of room to fudge these sorts of things.
(07:37):
With China, you have sort of the opposite dynamic where
the Chinese do not want to appear to be giving more.
They want to appear to be giving less. And I
think that really is the tone in these discussions. And
I think that again, what this meeting was supposed to
do is to kick the can down the road another
ninety days. You didn't get that today. I think that
everyone is hopeful, and we should say overall, the tone
that we got from this press conference from the ambassador,
(07:58):
from the Treasury Secretary, they were saying, these were very,
very constructive discussions, and even if we didn't get a
deal today, they're sort of were signalings maybe why you're
seeing modest reaction in the market that they will get
it over the line, right, And.
Speaker 1 (08:08):
We know another thing that will be a focal point
is the Treasury Secretary say that they'll meet with the
President in the Oval Office tomorrow. All Right, Gonna leave
it there, Oliver, Thank you so much. Oliver Crook, Bloomberg
News out there in Stockholm.
Speaker 2 (08:19):
You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Weekdaily Podcast. Catch us
live weekday afternoons from two to five pm Eastern Listen
on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app,
or watch us live on YouTube, Mac.
Speaker 1 (08:36):
I'll about you.
Speaker 5 (08:37):
Let me drive.
Speaker 6 (08:37):
Oh no, no, no, no, this is not a toy, honey.
Speaker 4 (08:42):
Please.
Speaker 1 (08:45):
Lest I want to drive. It's a good question. This
is the drive to the clothes plunks for me.
Speaker 2 (08:56):
Well, Ja don on Bloomberg Radio.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
All right, TikTok, everybody, just about eighteen minutes to go
until we wrap up the trade on this Tuesday. It's
kind of fomcee because we know.
Speaker 6 (09:06):
The Fed is fed Tuesday.
Speaker 1 (09:09):
For it is kind of ish. They began their two
day meeting today.
Speaker 6 (09:12):
Yeah.
Speaker 7 (09:13):
For J.
Speaker 6 (09:14):
Powell, every day is a FED day.
Speaker 1 (09:15):
Yeah, I guess it is.
Speaker 6 (09:17):
Some days, Mike's key. Every day is a FED day.
Speaker 1 (09:20):
Some days a construction day. Some days I mean a
pressure day.
Speaker 6 (09:23):
We'll talk about that.
Speaker 1 (09:23):
We do have stocks hovering near their loads of the session.
We did see yields ticking down a little bit. We
had a lot of economic news that came our way.
Let's get to it with Danielle di Martino Booth. She
is CEO and chief strategist of QI Research, formerly at
the Dallas Fed. Back here in our Bloomberg Interactive Brokers studio.
Nice to have you here. How are you. I'm doing
(09:44):
very well today.
Speaker 8 (09:45):
How are you doing okay to be here, counting my blessings, happy,
my children are healthy, all of those things.
Speaker 1 (09:50):
Yeah, I agree, right like every day. Those are the
things that certainly matter and make us feel much better.
Having said that, we're thinking about the FED and kind
of the late that lays ahead of them, or that
they're considering right now, the plate of economic data, anecdotal
data news from the White House a day where we
(10:12):
think there's an extension between US China talks, but it
sounds like that hasn't been confirmed quite yet. What do
you think is top of mind for the FED as
they are sitting and meeting. You know, there's a lot
going on.
Speaker 8 (10:23):
I think there's probably a sense of despondency and regret
right now.
Speaker 1 (10:27):
At the FED.
Speaker 8 (10:27):
I think that the full array of data would have
them cutting rates tomorrow if not for you know, the
constancy of the humiliation coming out of the White House. So,
I mean, you don't see the labor differential in the
Consumer Confidence report decline for seven months, which it did today,
Jobs hard to get rose up to the highest since
(10:49):
March of twenty twenty one. You don't see that outside
of We've never seen it outside of recession.
Speaker 6 (10:54):
So what I'm hearing you say is that the pressure
from the White House is to ky rates is having
the exact opposite effect on the Federal Reserve.
Speaker 1 (11:01):
It absolutely is.
Speaker 8 (11:02):
I mean, at this point it's kind of a matter
of integrity because you don't want to appear that you're
cow towing, acquiessing, whatever you want to call it. But
it's to the detriment of the of the real economy.
And that's exactly what we're seeing, and for heaven's sake,
it's on both sides of the dual mandate. When we
had case Shiller hit this morning, three months ago, the
three month annualized rate was plus one point six percent.
(11:23):
This morning, the three month annualized rate was negative three
point seven three percent. There is a fast decline in
shelter inflation going on, and that is the biggest input
to CPI. So the Fed is winning big on the
inflation front and it is losing on the labor front.
Speaker 6 (11:38):
So if the Fed can't cut tomorrow as a result
of politics fifty basis points in September and signal that
they're doing that.
Speaker 1 (11:47):
From Jackson Hall, is it twenty twenty four.
Speaker 6 (11:51):
It's not. It's twenty twenty five.
Speaker 8 (11:52):
I know, but that would be an exact repeat, now,
wouldn't it.
Speaker 6 (11:54):
It would be it would be do you think they
should do that?
Speaker 1 (11:57):
I think they're going to end up doing that.
Speaker 8 (12:00):
And you know, I'll add another little tidbit on politics.
Just because Waller and Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman are
Trump appointees, I don't think that should necessarily negate their
expected descents tomorrow.
Speaker 3 (12:15):
Well. J.
Speaker 6 (12:15):
Powell is a Trump appointing, of course he was.
Speaker 8 (12:18):
Of course he was, and to thumping Senate votes that
were even almost as thumping when he was reconfirmed. So
he's very much a bipartisan type of FED chair. Again,
it's a shame. It's a shame that they're not able
to act tomorrow.
Speaker 1 (12:35):
Danielle, do you think the presidential policies and certainly how
they were presented in terms of tax cuts and spending,
that they would be good for the economy? And we
certainly had a guest on yesterday who thinks that there
will be somewhat stimulative and that the FED doesn't necessarily
(12:56):
need to be cutting rates at this point. To be fair,
we do have an extension on this US China trade deal,
so we don't know exactly what this is going to
play out. And to be fair, we do know that
tariffs are going to be higher they already have been,
So why wouldn't it be smart for the Fed to
maybe hold back until they really know what they're dealing with,
(13:20):
because it would be terrible right to.
Speaker 8 (13:21):
Have the Fed cut and they have to raise rates again.
It would be Arthur Burns all over again and the reducs.
And I completely understand that. But your vacation intentions are falling.
Hilton just announced negative one point five percent year over
year for revenue per available room. Domestic air travel is down,
Spending on services is down as much as it is
(13:42):
because if there is any goods inflation, they're simply you
can't squeeze blood out of a rock. There's only so
much in a household budget when inflation adjusted earnings are falling,
which they are. And underemployment is just off the Richter scale.
So these are very real phenomena, and I promise you
the FIT is deliberating about all of them.
Speaker 6 (14:02):
You said unemployment is off the rich underemployment.
Speaker 1 (14:05):
Okaycter employment just a few years ago.
Speaker 8 (14:08):
If you were going from where my mother lives in
College Station to the Bush Airport in Houston. An Uber
driver is making ninety dollars for that particular ride. Now
they're making thirty five forty dollars for the same exact drive.
Speaker 3 (14:20):
Why.
Speaker 8 (14:20):
Because the gig economy is saturated with individuals who have
exhausted their unemployment benefits. Right, your exhaustion rate for continuing
claimants continuing jobless claimants is thirty nine point six percent.
That means it thirty nine point six percent of people
who are among the almost two million continuing job as
claimants have run through what the states pay. You better
be driving for Uber or door Dash.
Speaker 6 (14:40):
I had this, this exact conversation that Daniel's outlining with
a lift driver in San Diego when we were there, Carol.
He had been out of work since the pandemic, highly
qualified to work in I believe, aeronautical engineering, and could
not find a job.
Speaker 1 (14:56):
Look who would have said that two years ago.
Speaker 6 (15:00):
So again, this is an anecdote coming from me.
Speaker 8 (15:01):
It's an anecdotomy, I understand. But I have a rising
college senior. I cannot tell you how many of his
friends are coming to me and saying I can't get
a job.
Speaker 6 (15:11):
I can't get a job. I can't get a job.
Speaker 8 (15:13):
I couldn't get an into my internship was canceled. There's
a hiring freeze. I mean, there is a class of
twenty twenty four. The only thing that's better about it
is that it's better than the class of twenty twenty five.
Speaker 1 (15:23):
Yeah, I know, it's interesting anecdotal because I've seen the
reporting too, and I too have a daughter who just
graduated and she's got a job, thankful, and has since
last fall. And all of our peers they have gotten jobs.
So it's like, I don't know, I'm trying to understand
exactly where this economy is. The Atlanta Fedge is coming
out and upping its GDP forecasts. I mean that export
number is higher than we thought it was going to be.
Speaker 8 (15:43):
I mean that's like GDP trade math. But who's not
going to be paying attention to consumption when we see
GDP in the morning.
Speaker 1 (15:49):
But net, net, how do you see the Trump administration policies?
Are they stimulative? They are certainly sold as being good
back for the US economy. That's your original question. Than
Mike concern is or I think many would say their
concern is that the Fed's got to be really careful.
Speaker 8 (16:04):
So the assumption is that the horse that we lead
to water is going to drink right, because the only
the thrust of the bill is preventing a negative income
shock such that the tax cuts do not expire at
the end of this year.
Speaker 1 (16:16):
So you're preventing a negative income shock.
Speaker 8 (16:18):
You're certainly not sending money out into the economy in
the sense that it was in the post pandemic era
the Cares Act.
Speaker 1 (16:25):
That's not happening.
Speaker 8 (16:26):
So I mean, maybe uber and lyft drivers are going
to get a lift right because they're not going to
get taxed on those on the tips that they make.
But again, we are seeing consistent and persistent declines in
capital expenditure plans, and so you.
Speaker 1 (16:41):
Can lead the horse to water, but can you make
that horse drink? So just fifteen seconds. So the valuations,
the record after record that we've seen the S and
P five hundred, do you think that's not warranted? Considering
it sounds like I don't is hope a strategy? So
you would say, no, we're overvalued, and it's I would
certainly think, so, all right, going to leave it there.
Fun to have you here, Danielle de Martin. You know Booth.
She's CEO and chief strategiest of QI Research, joining us here.
Speaker 2 (17:05):
This is the Bloomberg Business Week Daily Podcast. Listen live
each weekday starting at two pm Eastern on Apple car
Play and the Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App.
You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our
flagship New York station Just Say Alexa played Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 6 (17:22):
Carol summed up well on our editorial call this morning
when she said, let's get Brook Sutherland on to talk planes,
trains and automobiles.
Speaker 1 (17:29):
And so Brook, we all love to know this space.
Speaker 6 (17:32):
That's why she's here with us. I just want to
give everyone an idea of the planes part of this.
Boeing almost halted its cash burn in the second quarter
and I reported a smaller than expected loss. The trainsportion
of this is Union Pacific a green to acquire Norfolk
Southern in a seventy two billion dollar cash and stock transaction.
And automobiles. We have to stretch this one a little bit,
(17:52):
I know. So Okay ups shares tumbled after the company
said economic volatile, they continues to roil its operations, but hey,
they got a lot of trucks Carol think it's fair
to say it counts as automobiles, all right, So let's
get to it.
Speaker 1 (18:02):
Let's get to Brook Sutherland. She's Bloomberg News Boston Bureau,
chief writer of the Bloomberg Industrial Strength newsletter, and she
joins us from the Boston bureau. Brook, we do want
to start with trains mega merger. Why is this the
right time for a deal, especially in a day when
Norfolk their shares are down, they lowered their outlook for
full year revenue growth. I mean, is this combination going
(18:25):
to make it better?
Speaker 7 (18:27):
That's certainly the hope. And you know, frankly, I really
think the railroad industry is out of better ideas to
grow at this point. You know, we've really seen stagnating
or even declining volumes in the rail industry in recent years,
just given the competition from the trucking industry in particular.
If you think about it, trucks can go pretty much
wherever they want. There's your automobile reference there, but you
(18:51):
versus trains are really limited to the tracks that they have,
and that does put them at a bit of a
competitive disadvantage, even though there are advantages in other respects.
For you know, they tend to be more energy efficient,
they tend to be less costly, and so, you know,
I think the railroads are thinking to really chip away
at that market sharehold that the trucking industry has. They
(19:12):
have to make things more efficient for their customers, and
the idea would be that if you could set up
a network that's truly coast to coast from California to
New York, that that would take out some of those
pain points that turned customers off from the railroad industry.
Speaker 6 (19:24):
I was struck on Friday when we spoke to Kyle
Porter and I read his piece on this book that
this would be the only US transcontinental railroad. It would,
It would, And that's a result of you know, the
past what one hundred and fifty plus years of anti
trust action?
Speaker 7 (19:39):
Is that why, you know, there's really been a lot
of consolidation in the railroad industry. Who've just more recently
sort of been in this period of pause, partly just
because it had consolidated so much. But you did see,
you know a little bit of a step forward with
Canadian Pacific ultimately buying Kansas City Southern, and that I guess,
(20:00):
you know, sort of has started the wheels grinding again
in terms of could even more consolidation be possible in
this industry? You know, I do still think that that's
a bit of an open question of how regulators will
respond to this deal. That Kansas City Southern deal was
approved under sort of a loophole to these tougher two
thousand and one merger rules that the rail industry's primary
(20:23):
regulator has adopted that requires any merger to benefit the
public interest. So it's done enough just to show that
you are preserving competition. You will have to actually enhance
competition and provide proof that you're actually benefiting communities and
the greater public interests. And so that's a very high
bar that hasn't yet not actually been met. And so
(20:43):
you know, Union Pacific and Northern Southern are betting on,
you know, a more welcoming regulatory landscape that might finally
allow a deal like this to come to fruition. But
we really don't know.
Speaker 1 (20:54):
It ain't done until it's done, right, all right, let's
go to UPS just because shares have been tumbling after
the company said economic volatility continues to roil its operations.
UPS is another great indicator on the US economy so
I'm trying to make sense of economy versus company specific.
Speaker 7 (21:16):
You know, I think it's a mix of both. I
think if you look at UPS's business in particular, they
are uniquely affected by some of the trade dynamics that
we've seen, particularly you know, the alterations have been made
to that deminimous exemption. And then on the other hand,
there really are struggling in their business. I mean, this
is an area that really boomed during the pandemic as
(21:37):
people were at home and we're ordering so much stuff,
and you had you know, UPS em FedEx really trying
to add capacity to meet that demand. And then now
we're on the other side of that, as consumers have
shifted their spending back to services. UPS is trying to
cut cost to be competitive after that labor deal that
it struck earlier. And you know, I think you're really
seeing sort of a confluence of events that that's really
(21:59):
pressuring UPS from multiple angles.
Speaker 1 (22:01):
So no forecast for the year. I mean, that's it
is a massive lack of visibility.
Speaker 7 (22:07):
It is unusual, although we have heard, you know, similar
comments from other companies talking about just how hard it
is to get your hands around what that demand picture
looks like in the back of the year, you know,
a lot of reticence in terms of committing to that
growth doubt. Look, we have seen, you know, companies go
ahead and put guidance out there, but I do think,
you know, to UPS's credit, there are a number of
unknowns remaining in the back half of the year, and
(22:29):
they're taking more of a wait and see approach. Yeah.
Speaker 6 (22:31):
I was particularly surprised about this one, Brook because we
did have the airlines come out about a quarter ago,
and you know, we talked about Delta and then of
course United as well, and then you know, three months later,
they've essentially turned a corner and they're talking about how
great things are. Yet we're not seeing that or hearing
that from Carol Tomey over at UPS. Look, these are
(22:51):
apples and oranges when we talk about the businesses here.
But what is unique about UPS's business that they don't
have visibility that other companies do.
Speaker 3 (22:58):
Well.
Speaker 7 (22:59):
I don't know, you I don't think everything is great
for the airlines either. You know, they've been willing to
put guidance back out there, but the guidance that they
have moved forward with is lower than what they were expecting.
Before tariffs came into the picture. And you know, of course,
we did see that demand pull back in the immediate
after math of the tariffs, and some of the airlines,
particularly those with businesses that cater more to premium flyers
(23:22):
or business travelers, are expecting more of a rebound in
the back half of the year. But that uncertainty is
still there and is still impacting the airlines, just in
different ways. And so, you know, I think to UPS's point,
there are a number of different factors here, and their
business is uniquely affected by terriffs because it's much more direct.
With airlines what you're looking at as sort of more
(23:43):
indirect consequences. Does consumers feel the pain from inflation and
goods and maybe rethink that trip that they were planning
to take?
Speaker 6 (23:50):
All right? Well, speaking of airlines, let's talk about one
company that provides those narrow and wide body jets, and
that is Boeing. Shares down four percent today, Johnson reporting
that Boeing almost halted its cash burn in the second quarter,
indicating a turnaround initiated by Kelly Ortberg a year ago
is paying off as the company delivers more aircraft. One
(24:11):
thing that I've noticed about Boeing over the last few
months is the way they're being used as this bargaining
chip when it comes to trade negotiations. And I'm wondering,
Brook in your view, how much of a boon could
that be for the company that's trying to turn itself around.
Speaker 7 (24:25):
It's definitely a benefit. And what's interesting is that, you know,
in Trump's last trade war, Boeing frequently complained about being
used as a pawn. We saw China, you know, more
or less halt new orders of Boeing planes as a
way of exerting leverage in those trade negotiations. And now
you know, the shoe is someone on the other foot,
and we see countries more or less tripping over themselves
(24:45):
to you know, trumpet their purchases of Boeing planes. This
is one of the highest value exports that the US has,
and so as a means of sort of chipping away
at that trade deficit, a big blowing Boeing airplane purchase
can really go a long ways.
Speaker 1 (25:00):
So Boeing, I mean every time I feel like, I mean,
the stock's down four percent today. Thoughts in terms of
the outlook and what we kind of need to continue
to focus on with this one. Is it all just
about orders? It's also about making sure I no other
issues with their planes.
Speaker 7 (25:14):
Your thoughts on this, I mean, I think that might
be a little bit of profit taking here. We have
seen a pretty good rally and Boeing shares heading into earnings.
I mean, this was a very good quarter for them,
especially just given all of the cashlow challenges that they had.
And I can think you now, you know, the question
is they've got to keep doing this. They've got to
keep chugging along. But is this the best stock to
(25:35):
own in aerospace right now or are there potentially other
opportunities out there? And I think that's some of what's
playing out in investor's lines right now.
Speaker 1 (25:42):
Yeah, definitely a good point. I mean, the stock is
up nearly thirty percent year to date, so it really
has had quite a bounce back after having a really
tough time for a while. Brook, thank you so much.
We did it around the world when it comes to transportation,
and then some Brooks Southerland of course. Bloomberg News Boston
Bureau chief joining us there from our Boston bureau.
Speaker 2 (26:01):
You are listening to the Bloomberg Business Weekdaily podcast. Catch
us live weekday afternoons from two to five pm Eastern.
Listen on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg
Business app, or watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 1 (26:15):
For US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Junior,
he has suggested that psychedelic therapy for depression and trauma
has the Trump administration support. This actually was in a
report by the Associated Press earlier this month that the
Secretary recently talked to members of Congress about and we're
guessing that it may have caught the attention of the
team over at the publicly traded small cap company Compass Pathways.
(26:39):
We wanted to know more, and let's get to Kabir Noth.
He's chief executive officer of Compass Pathways, and he joins
us here in studio. Kabir, welcome, Welcome. Remind our audience
about the work you are doing and your synthetic psilocybin
experimental drug for treatment resistant depression. Tell us about where
you are, what this drug is, and what it has shown.
Speaker 3 (27:00):
To do so far.
Speaker 9 (27:01):
Thanks very much, Carol on Tim and it's great to
join you here. So yes, a Compass Pathways, we're a
company in the final stages of developing synthetic psilocybin as
a potential treatment for treatment resistant depression, or what we
call patients living with persistent depression. That's a big problem,
affecting some three million people in the US, and it's debilitating.
(27:24):
Many of them are unable to work. The majority will
have had some sort of suicidal thoughts in the course
of their depressive illness. So we're a leading psychedelic company
and potentially the closest to regulatory approval.
Speaker 6 (27:38):
You've used the word potential twice. You said it's a
potential treatment and then you said potentially you're a leading
company there when it comes to FDA approval. Is it unproven?
Speaker 9 (27:48):
We have generated robust evidence now from two studies. The
first was published a couple of years ago, and then
just last month we released more data from the first
of our final stage studies. What can I tell you
about that first safety this we didn't see any unexpected
safety signals in this treatment of patients living with persistent depression.
(28:09):
And secondly, after just a single treatment, after six weeks,
we saw a significant reduction in depressive symptoms. And just
to emphasize that, because you'll be aware of the kind
of the typical paradigm of antidepressants, something you take daily.
This was a single treatment and with the effect measured
after six weeks. Now we have already are two for
(28:33):
two in terms of these trials clinical trials that we've conducted.
But we're continuing to see more evidence generated, first in
one of these late stage trials, and second we have
another study ongoing where we're also looking at the impact
potentially of another treatment.
Speaker 1 (28:49):
We should point out that about a month ago, in
that study came out, the stock your shares tumbled almost
fifty percent, hitting a record low. What I guess I
want to understand, so it was below what Wall Street expected.
It did meet your goal from what I understand, your
company goal, but Wall Street was very disappointed. Tell us
(29:09):
how this works. How does one psilocybin treatment kind of
cure depression? Persistent depression.
Speaker 9 (29:18):
Psilocybin you can think of as if you like a key,
a key that unlocks a door or a set of
doors in the brain, and while those doors are open,
that enables the patient to work through some of their
fixed negative thinking and potentially have relief from their depressive symptoms.
To do that, there is a profound subjective experience, so
(29:41):
there is a psychedelic experience that lasts six to eight hours,
and as I say, during the course of that the
drug is working in such a way that it unlocks
these doors and allows the person, the patient to engage
with some of those negative thoughts and potentially, as I say,
get relief for those depressive symptoms. The fact is, as
(30:02):
I say, we've seen and what's amazing, that one single
treatment can show sustained effects at least through to six
weeks and potentially longer. In our earlier trial, our earlier
clinical study that we did, we saw that for many
patients that were sustained out to twelve weeks.
Speaker 1 (30:19):
What's many? How many? Forgive me tim, like, I'm just
curious how many.
Speaker 9 (30:22):
So that was a study of around two hundred and
thirty patients of whom a significant number were on what
we call the active dose of the medication, and what
we saw was a quarter of them had from that
single dose they were actually sustained freer depression out to
twelve weeks. And in this population of people who have
typically tried multiple treatments and for whom very little is
(30:44):
any longer working, that was a remarkable response.
Speaker 6 (30:47):
When patients do take this single dose. What is the
environment that they're in during that six to eight hours,
and are they guided in some way by therapists of sorts.
Speaker 9 (30:56):
It's a physically it's a calm, comfortable setting. They have
the option of ey shades, there's music playing, and there
are appropriate safety safeguards in place. Psilocybin is a very
inner directed mechanism, so what actually happens is the patient
has this profound influence, but where there is somebody in
(31:18):
the room, it's largely silent. There is not directed therapy
in the course of that intervention.
Speaker 6 (31:24):
How do you run an effective clinical trial for a
drug that the experience is such that the person knows
they've taken this drug rather than a placebo. Somebody who
takes a placebo is not going to have a psychedelic
reaction to the placebo.
Speaker 9 (31:40):
At Compass, we thought about this before we even started
our studies. So our prior big study, the one I
reference with two hundred and thirty patients, we design that
in such a way that there was the choice of
three different doses of psilocybin. One was a low dose,
a second was an intermediate dose, and in patients who've
(32:00):
never had this experience, before. That's truly confounding in terms
of they cannot tell whether they got a medium dose
or a high dose of that drug. This is important because,
as you say, otherwise it will be very obvious. But
that design was very effective for that earlier stage study
we did, and we've replicated that design in one of
our late stage studies.
Speaker 1 (32:20):
We're talking with Kabir Andathi's chief executive officer of Compass
Pathways here in studio. You keep saying synthetic. What's the
difference between synthetic and naturally occurring?
Speaker 9 (32:28):
So we are manufacturing a pill to the highest standards
of purity, no contamination. We know exactly what is in
the pill. This is a manufactured pill that we are
treating with.
Speaker 1 (32:39):
So that you know exactly in terms of dosage. Is
that what I'm saying, So if naturally occurring is different.
Speaker 9 (32:45):
Potentially it is naturally occurring whereas well as is synthetic.
So we know exactly what's in it, We know the
exact pill. What will it cost It's primeriture to speculate
on that at the moment we're still conducting these final
stages of our studies.
Speaker 1 (32:59):
But expensive and would it be something I mean if
you get a approval, is it safe to make the
assumption that it would be covered.
Speaker 9 (33:07):
The whole premise for founding Compass Pathways was to enable
that form of broad access. So the reason that the
company has gone through doing these rigorous, robust clinical studies
so that we is exactly so that we can discuss
that with the FDA potential for regulatory approval, and then
if we're fortunate enough to get there, the chance to
(33:28):
negotiate with both commercial insurers and government pairs. Let's remind
ourselves that these three million people that I referred to,
they are relying on insurers, commercial insurers and government pairs
to actually cover their drugs. I believe we will be
able to demonstrate significant value given how different this is
from other treatments available today in depression.
Speaker 6 (33:49):
Kabir Carol mentioned that the Associated Press reported earlier this
month that RFK Junior recently talked to members of Congress
about psychedelic therapy for depression and trauma. Apart from that,
have you seen any real signs of support for the
administration for this new class of drugs or type of
type of treatment.
Speaker 9 (34:09):
We have had support from the FDA throughout our development process.
We have breakthrough designation.
Speaker 6 (34:14):
Before Robert F. Kennedy Junior took over ASH, and we
have had.
Speaker 9 (34:17):
A motivated and engaged agency. We're excited to see the
voices from HHS from Veterans Affairs today suggesting that they
also see the potential for this class, and we're very
happy to work to see how we could potentially accelerate
access while at the same time ensuring that we continue
to generate really good, robust, good evidence that these are
(34:39):
safe and effective.
Speaker 1 (34:41):
Talk to us about timeline, though, is it I feel
like we've been I know Blimberg has been reporting on
this class of drugs and treatments, and I think we've
all seen pieces that yours right for a long time
that for people who or other treatments don't seem to
be making a change for them. So I don't know,
is is it another few years, is it the end
(35:02):
of this year, is it the end of next year?
And is it that the Trump administration could somehow settle
this through much more quickly.
Speaker 9 (35:12):
I think there are clearly people in the current administration who,
as I say, see the potential of this. Well, we
want to make sure we do this right as well,
So we want to make sure we do that in
the right way, with the right rigor.
Speaker 8 (35:22):
And so on.
Speaker 9 (35:23):
We are conducting, as I say, the final stages of studies.
We have two ongoing of which the second will wrap
up in the second half of next year. The data
we released last month, though it hasn't yet been reviewed
by the FDA, we have a meeting planned with them
where we'll discuss with them and we'll discuss the potential
for any acceleration of a filing and a regulatory process.
Speaker 1 (35:43):
Do you also think about other usages, whether it's PTSD
and other applications, And I'm just curious where what you
might be exploring in that world.
Speaker 9 (35:53):
Our next priority beyond persistent depression is indeed PTSD. That
is something with very high prevalence, some thirteen million in
the US, for which there are only two very old
drugs approved, and unfortunately recently there have been two advisory
committees recommending against new drugs in that space. So yes,
we see PTSD as a key area. We generated some
(36:14):
data last year and we will be announcing the design
of another late stage trial for PTSD immanently.
Speaker 6 (36:20):
I know the USFDA is the gold standard for going
through the regulatory process to be viewed by the world
as a credible treatment for something. But these days, is
it worth going after approval in another country to try
to do this on a smaller scale to prove that yes,
it indeed works.
Speaker 9 (36:39):
We will be exploring approval in a range of countries.
So our studies have been international, US, Canada, Europe as well.
We have taken advice over the years from the European
regulatory authorities. We're a UK based company as well, so
we've been speaking to the MHRA, the regulatory authority in
the UK. So yes, this is a problem for patients
(37:00):
across the world and we would look to exploit it
where we cat.
Speaker 1 (37:03):
Kabir just got about thirty forty seconds. We're actually me
talking with the CEO of Astra Zeneca right after this.
I'm just curious in terms of big Farmer, have you
had any preliminary discussions with larger, larger pharmaceutical partners interested
in commercialization, co commercialization or distribution.
Speaker 9 (37:21):
What I know is the big farmer is tracking this
space closely, and what's been great is to see the
re entry of some big farmer back into psychiatry over
the last couple of years. So I know they watched
this space. But we at Compass are determined that we
can do this ourselves and are excited about the opportunity
to bring this potential new treatment to patients who so
clearly need it.
Speaker 1 (37:41):
So no strategic alignment that you would consider. You plan
on doing this alone.
Speaker 9 (37:45):
That's our plan.
Speaker 1 (37:47):
Okay, great stuff, Stay in touch. Thank you, let us
know how things are going. I really appreciate it. Kiberer,
be well. Kiberath, He's chief executive officer of Compass Pathways,
joining us right here in studio.
Speaker 2 (37:59):
This is the Blueloomberg Business Week Daily podcast, available on Apple, Spotify,
and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live weekday
afternoons from two to five pm Eastern on Bloomberg dot com,
the iHeartRadio app, tune In, and the Bloomberg Business App.
You can also watch us live every weekday on YouTube
(38:19):
and always on the Bloomberg terminal
Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
This is Bloomberg business Week Daily reporting from the magazine
that helps global leaders stay ahead with insight on the people, companies,
and trends shaping today's complex economy. Plus global business, finance
and tech news as it happens. The Bloomberg Business Weekdaily
Podcast with Carol Masser and Tim Stenebek on Bloomberg Radio.
Speaker 1 (00:32):
We US and Chinese negotiators have concluded their latest round
of talks, a trade talks, of course, that were underway
in Stockholm, with an agreement to extend their tart truth
truth or so it seems. We have some questions here.
US Treasury Secretary Scott Besson and US Trade Representative Jamison
Greer holding a press conference last hour in Stockholm, the
Treasury Secretary saying an extension not a done deal.
Speaker 3 (00:55):
If we boomerang back to the April second level, if
they would go to thirty four. I noticed as the
earlier question said that the Chinese Deputy minister did say
that we had agreed on a pause. We have not.
Nothing is agreed until we speak with President Trump. He's
(01:18):
on Air Force one, I believe, doing a press conference
right now, and we will be seeing him in the
Oval tomorrow to go over the deal with him, and
then he'll decide if the pause continues.
Speaker 1 (01:32):
As is all right. That, of course, was US Treasury
Secretary Scott bess And earlier in Stockholm with more on
where we are. Bloomberg News correspondent Oliver Crook was in
the room where it happened in Stockholm, where that press
conference was went underway just about thirty thirty five minutes ago.
Oliver pause, no pause. I think we're all still kind
of scratching our head to understand exactly what was agreed to.
Speaker 4 (01:54):
Yeah, I think we were too a little bit, and
that was helpful for the Secretary of the Treasury to
give a little cast, a little bit more light on that.
You know, far be it from Donald Trump to withhold
any suspense from us. Basically, the two days of negotiations
that we had by the Chinese Vice Premier, the US
Treasury Secretary I'm the ambassador on trade, Jamison Greer ended
a couple hours ago. Then they briefed the media and
(02:15):
it ended, it seemed initially by the Chinese saying that
they basically a ninety day pause. The continuation of the
truce between the United States and China that that would
continue for another period of time.
Speaker 5 (02:25):
They didn't specify the period of time.
Speaker 4 (02:27):
Then we started to hear from the Americans with a
slightly different story that basically this is still conditional to
Donald Trump's approval. We understand that Scott Befson did speak
with Donald Trump after the conversations before he gave that
press briefing, but he's going to give a more complete
briefing a little bit tomorrow in the Oval Office in
the White House in order to get the final sign
off from Donald Trump, who may you know, change his mind,
(02:48):
may demand something else. But again, we the deadline that
we're facing here is August the twelfth, when these terrif
rates will shoot.
Speaker 5 (02:53):
Right back up.
Speaker 4 (02:54):
So for the market, this is really a crucial thing
to get over the line.
Speaker 6 (02:56):
Interestingly enough, at least the equity market not reacting much
to this news. Perhaps it was priced in, perhaps there
was the expectation that there would be some sort of
extension here. I want to go to rare Earth, specifically
Oliver and what we learned about the way that rare earths,
not just today but really over the last few months,
have taken center stage when it comes to these negotiations,
what do we know about that?
Speaker 4 (03:17):
Well, what I think is interesting is that there were
concessions on rare earth. There were concessions in exchange for that,
on the Age twenty chips by Nvidia, by the United States,
the allowing of selling them into China. And we should
say that one could interpret this as a sort of
act of goodwill on both sides in order to try
to make progress. But the reality of the situation is
that for each of these economies, they're dependent on the other.
There is no alternative for these technologies. This is not
(03:40):
just an act of good will. This is the leverage
that China holds over the United States. It is the
leverage that the United States holds over China. And they
did manage to make some breakthroughs on that. And again
this is something that was active in the discussions with
the delegation from China and the United States.
Speaker 5 (03:54):
Today we heard from Jamison.
Speaker 4 (03:55):
Greer saying that I don't want to talk about magnets basically. Ever, again,
as far as they're concerned, the magnets should be flowing.
Speaker 5 (04:01):
They are flowing now, and.
Speaker 4 (04:02):
That this should be a close topic and that they
can then put that aside in order to make progress
on the many other issues that are sort of large
issues between the China and the United States, they'd like
to basically put into it, and as far as they're concerned,
they hope it's done all right, Oliver.
Speaker 1 (04:16):
Back in June, President she of China, we know, invited
President Trump to Beijing. Are the two leaders talking at
all during these talks? Are they just waiting until I
don't know the final terms. What's what's kind of going
on behind the scenes here?
Speaker 4 (04:30):
Yeah, I mean our impression is that the last time
that they spoke, this came up during the press conference,
was in the call that they held in June. We
understand that Shijiping did invite Donald Trump and the first
Lady Millennia Trump to China at some point. There has
been some discussions today. I think there was a Donald
Trump truth saying that basically he's not seeking a discussion
with President Jijenping, but he has been invited. But this
(04:50):
is really at the crux of the issue here, right.
The Chinese, in the last few decades have been building
out their economy, have been building out.
Speaker 5 (04:56):
Their status on the global stage.
Speaker 4 (04:58):
They don't want to be seen sort of bowing theatrically
to the United States on these trade issues. The Europeans
have much less of a problem with that. They're being
much more pragmatic about these sorts of things. But for
the Chinese, this is not just about trade. This is
about their status on the global stage. And I'll remind
you that in Trump won the first Trump administration, these
trade negotiations between the Chinese and the United States, they
(05:18):
were held in Washington, d C. These discussions today are
being held in Geneva, the United Kingdom, and Stockholm in
neutral sort of third party places. And we've seen what
China's appetite is to escalate this trade where if they
have to, they shot the tariff up to one hundred
and twenty five percent, which is how we got to
this truce. But that is the sort of dynamic going
into this. Both leaders want to appear strong and need
to exert their leverage on the other.
Speaker 6 (05:40):
What are the questions that remain unanswered at this point
in terms of the details, the nitty gritty and what
really needs to be hashed out here.
Speaker 4 (05:49):
Yeah, so, I mean, there are a panoply of different issues.
For example, there's the issue of TikTok right, there is
a buyer potentially for TikTok in the United States, so
says Donald Trump, the Chinese still need to give a
nod to sell that. That is apparently something that did
not come up in these conversations. There is the question
of fentanyl Bess and says that he is not pleased
with sort of how things have been progressing there.
Speaker 5 (06:09):
China could still be doing more.
Speaker 4 (06:10):
I mean, there is the issue of Russia, which increasingly
we've seen Donald Trump change his position on Russia and
Vladimir Putin, and we had a large discussion apparently between
the two delegations today on the question of Russia and
Scott Besson again airing their displeasure at the continued buying
of fossil fuels both from Russia and China, but also
that dual use military technology that they're seeing increasingly on
(06:32):
the battlefield in Ukraine. So these were active discussions. And
then there's also this question of the secondary sanctions that
Trump is now talking about imposing on people who buy
crude oil from Russia if Putin does not come to
the negotiating table in the next ten days.
Speaker 5 (06:45):
This came up in the.
Speaker 4 (06:47):
Press conference and when asked you know whether or not
the Chinese position had altered. Scott Besson said, basically, the
Chinese take their sovereignty very seriously.
Speaker 5 (06:54):
They don't really want to be told what to do.
Speaker 4 (06:56):
And if they want to pay one hundred percent tariffs
as a consequence of buying Russian oil, than they will.
Speaker 1 (07:01):
Secretary of the Treasury Scott Essen said, we understand China's
agenda much better. What is really the Chinese agenda? What
is really the US agenda? Is it just for both
to kind of get wins here ultimately.
Speaker 4 (07:12):
Well, what's interesting is again what we see in the
dynamic with the European Union.
Speaker 5 (07:16):
And the United States.
Speaker 4 (07:16):
You have a situation with Japan, the UK, the EU
where they almost want to appear to be giving more
to Trump than they are sort of potentially giving these
sort of you know, big, sort of sweeping statements of
committing to buying you know, seven hundred and fifty billion
dollars of energy, you know, investment pledges of six hundred billion.
These are sort of big concessions. But again, there is
a lot of room to fudge these sorts of things.
(07:37):
With China, you have sort of the opposite dynamic where
the Chinese do not want to appear to be giving more.
They want to appear to be giving less. And I
think that really is the tone in these discussions. And
I think that again, what this meeting was supposed to
do is to kick the can down the road another
ninety days. You didn't get that today. I think that
everyone is hopeful, and we should say overall, the tone
that we got from this press conference from the ambassador,
(07:58):
from the Treasury Secretary, they were saying, these were very,
very constructive discussions, and even if we didn't get a
deal today, they're sort of were signalings maybe why you're
seeing modest reaction in the market that they will get
it over the line, right, And.
Speaker 1 (08:08):
We know another thing that will be a focal point
is the Treasury Secretary say that they'll meet with the
President in the Oval Office tomorrow. All Right, Gonna leave
it there, Oliver, Thank you so much. Oliver Crook, Bloomberg
News out there in Stockholm.
Speaker 2 (08:19):
You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Weekdaily Podcast. Catch us
live weekday afternoons from two to five pm Eastern Listen
on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app,
or watch us live on YouTube, Mac.
Speaker 1 (08:36):
I'll about you.
Speaker 5 (08:37):
Let me drive.
Speaker 6 (08:37):
Oh no, no, no, no, this is not a toy, honey.
Speaker 4 (08:42):
Please.
Speaker 1 (08:45):
Lest I want to drive. It's a good question. This
is the drive to the clothes plunks for me.
Speaker 2 (08:56):
Well, Ja don on Bloomberg Radio.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
All right, TikTok, everybody, just about eighteen minutes to go
until we wrap up the trade on this Tuesday. It's
kind of fomcee because we know.
Speaker 6 (09:06):
The Fed is fed Tuesday.
Speaker 1 (09:09):
For it is kind of ish. They began their two
day meeting today.
Speaker 6 (09:12):
Yeah.
Speaker 7 (09:13):
For J.
Speaker 6 (09:14):
Powell, every day is a FED day.
Speaker 1 (09:15):
Yeah, I guess it is.
Speaker 6 (09:17):
Some days, Mike's key. Every day is a FED day.
Speaker 1 (09:20):
Some days a construction day. Some days I mean a
pressure day.
Speaker 6 (09:23):
We'll talk about that.
Speaker 1 (09:23):
We do have stocks hovering near their loads of the session.
We did see yields ticking down a little bit. We
had a lot of economic news that came our way.
Let's get to it with Danielle di Martino Booth. She
is CEO and chief strategist of QI Research, formerly at
the Dallas Fed. Back here in our Bloomberg Interactive Brokers studio.
Nice to have you here. How are you. I'm doing
(09:44):
very well today.
Speaker 8 (09:45):
How are you doing okay to be here, counting my blessings, happy,
my children are healthy, all of those things.
Speaker 1 (09:50):
Yeah, I agree, right like every day. Those are the
things that certainly matter and make us feel much better.
Having said that, we're thinking about the FED and kind
of the late that lays ahead of them, or that
they're considering right now, the plate of economic data, anecdotal
data news from the White House a day where we
(10:12):
think there's an extension between US China talks, but it
sounds like that hasn't been confirmed quite yet. What do
you think is top of mind for the FED as
they are sitting and meeting. You know, there's a lot
going on.
Speaker 8 (10:23):
I think there's probably a sense of despondency and regret
right now.
Speaker 1 (10:27):
At the FED.
Speaker 8 (10:27):
I think that the full array of data would have
them cutting rates tomorrow if not for you know, the
constancy of the humiliation coming out of the White House. So,
I mean, you don't see the labor differential in the
Consumer Confidence report decline for seven months, which it did today,
Jobs hard to get rose up to the highest since
(10:49):
March of twenty twenty one. You don't see that outside
of We've never seen it outside of recession.
Speaker 6 (10:54):
So what I'm hearing you say is that the pressure
from the White House is to ky rates is having
the exact opposite effect on the Federal Reserve.
Speaker 1 (11:01):
It absolutely is.
Speaker 8 (11:02):
I mean, at this point it's kind of a matter
of integrity because you don't want to appear that you're
cow towing, acquiessing, whatever you want to call it. But
it's to the detriment of the of the real economy.
And that's exactly what we're seeing, and for heaven's sake,
it's on both sides of the dual mandate. When we
had case Shiller hit this morning, three months ago, the
three month annualized rate was plus one point six percent.
(11:23):
This morning, the three month annualized rate was negative three
point seven three percent. There is a fast decline in
shelter inflation going on, and that is the biggest input
to CPI. So the Fed is winning big on the
inflation front and it is losing on the labor front.
Speaker 6 (11:38):
So if the Fed can't cut tomorrow as a result
of politics fifty basis points in September and signal that
they're doing that.
Speaker 1 (11:47):
From Jackson Hall, is it twenty twenty four.
Speaker 6 (11:51):
It's not. It's twenty twenty five.
Speaker 8 (11:52):
I know, but that would be an exact repeat, now,
wouldn't it.
Speaker 6 (11:54):
It would be it would be do you think they
should do that?
Speaker 1 (11:57):
I think they're going to end up doing that.
Speaker 8 (12:00):
And you know, I'll add another little tidbit on politics.
Just because Waller and Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman are
Trump appointees, I don't think that should necessarily negate their
expected descents tomorrow.
Speaker 3 (12:15):
Well. J.
Speaker 6 (12:15):
Powell is a Trump appointing, of course he was.
Speaker 8 (12:18):
Of course he was, and to thumping Senate votes that
were even almost as thumping when he was reconfirmed. So
he's very much a bipartisan type of FED chair. Again,
it's a shame. It's a shame that they're not able
to act tomorrow.
Speaker 1 (12:35):
Danielle, do you think the presidential policies and certainly how
they were presented in terms of tax cuts and spending,
that they would be good for the economy? And we
certainly had a guest on yesterday who thinks that there
will be somewhat stimulative and that the FED doesn't necessarily
(12:56):
need to be cutting rates at this point. To be fair,
we do have an extension on this US China trade deal,
so we don't know exactly what this is going to
play out. And to be fair, we do know that
tariffs are going to be higher they already have been,
So why wouldn't it be smart for the Fed to
maybe hold back until they really know what they're dealing with,
(13:20):
because it would be terrible right to.
Speaker 8 (13:21):
Have the Fed cut and they have to raise rates again.
It would be Arthur Burns all over again and the reducs.
And I completely understand that. But your vacation intentions are falling.
Hilton just announced negative one point five percent year over
year for revenue per available room. Domestic air travel is down,
Spending on services is down as much as it is
(13:42):
because if there is any goods inflation, they're simply you
can't squeeze blood out of a rock. There's only so
much in a household budget when inflation adjusted earnings are falling,
which they are. And underemployment is just off the Richter scale.
So these are very real phenomena, and I promise you
the FIT is deliberating about all of them.
Speaker 6 (14:02):
You said unemployment is off the rich underemployment.
Speaker 1 (14:05):
Okaycter employment just a few years ago.
Speaker 8 (14:08):
If you were going from where my mother lives in
College Station to the Bush Airport in Houston. An Uber
driver is making ninety dollars for that particular ride. Now
they're making thirty five forty dollars for the same exact drive.
Speaker 3 (14:20):
Why.
Speaker 8 (14:20):
Because the gig economy is saturated with individuals who have
exhausted their unemployment benefits. Right, your exhaustion rate for continuing
claimants continuing jobless claimants is thirty nine point six percent.
That means it thirty nine point six percent of people
who are among the almost two million continuing job as
claimants have run through what the states pay. You better
be driving for Uber or door Dash.
Speaker 6 (14:40):
I had this, this exact conversation that Daniel's outlining with
a lift driver in San Diego when we were there, Carol.
He had been out of work since the pandemic, highly
qualified to work in I believe, aeronautical engineering, and could
not find a job.
Speaker 1 (14:56):
Look who would have said that two years ago.
Speaker 6 (15:00):
So again, this is an anecdote coming from me.
Speaker 8 (15:01):
It's an anecdotomy, I understand. But I have a rising
college senior. I cannot tell you how many of his
friends are coming to me and saying I can't get
a job.
Speaker 6 (15:11):
I can't get a job. I can't get a job.
Speaker 8 (15:13):
I couldn't get an into my internship was canceled. There's
a hiring freeze. I mean, there is a class of
twenty twenty four. The only thing that's better about it
is that it's better than the class of twenty twenty five.
Speaker 1 (15:23):
Yeah, I know, it's interesting anecdotal because I've seen the
reporting too, and I too have a daughter who just
graduated and she's got a job, thankful, and has since
last fall. And all of our peers they have gotten jobs.
So it's like, I don't know, I'm trying to understand
exactly where this economy is. The Atlanta Fedge is coming
out and upping its GDP forecasts. I mean that export
number is higher than we thought it was going to be.
Speaker 8 (15:43):
I mean that's like GDP trade math. But who's not
going to be paying attention to consumption when we see
GDP in the morning.
Speaker 1 (15:49):
But net, net, how do you see the Trump administration policies?
Are they stimulative? They are certainly sold as being good
back for the US economy. That's your original question. Than
Mike concern is or I think many would say their
concern is that the Fed's got to be really careful.
Speaker 8 (16:04):
So the assumption is that the horse that we lead
to water is going to drink right, because the only
the thrust of the bill is preventing a negative income
shock such that the tax cuts do not expire at
the end of this year.
Speaker 1 (16:16):
So you're preventing a negative income shock.
Speaker 8 (16:18):
You're certainly not sending money out into the economy in
the sense that it was in the post pandemic era
the Cares Act.
Speaker 1 (16:25):
That's not happening.
Speaker 8 (16:26):
So I mean, maybe uber and lyft drivers are going
to get a lift right because they're not going to
get taxed on those on the tips that they make.
But again, we are seeing consistent and persistent declines in
capital expenditure plans, and so you.
Speaker 1 (16:41):
Can lead the horse to water, but can you make
that horse drink? So just fifteen seconds. So the valuations,
the record after record that we've seen the S and
P five hundred, do you think that's not warranted? Considering
it sounds like I don't is hope a strategy? So
you would say, no, we're overvalued, and it's I would
certainly think, so, all right, going to leave it there.
Fun to have you here, Danielle de Martin. You know Booth.
She's CEO and chief strategiest of QI Research, joining us here.
Speaker 2 (17:05):
This is the Bloomberg Business Week Daily Podcast. Listen live
each weekday starting at two pm Eastern on Apple car
Play and the Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App.
You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our
flagship New York station Just Say Alexa played Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 6 (17:22):
Carol summed up well on our editorial call this morning
when she said, let's get Brook Sutherland on to talk planes,
trains and automobiles.
Speaker 1 (17:29):
And so Brook, we all love to know this space.
Speaker 6 (17:32):
That's why she's here with us. I just want to
give everyone an idea of the planes part of this.
Boeing almost halted its cash burn in the second quarter
and I reported a smaller than expected loss. The trainsportion
of this is Union Pacific a green to acquire Norfolk
Southern in a seventy two billion dollar cash and stock transaction.
And automobiles. We have to stretch this one a little bit,
(17:52):
I know. So Okay ups shares tumbled after the company
said economic volatile, they continues to roil its operations, but hey,
they got a lot of trucks Carol think it's fair
to say it counts as automobiles, all right, So let's
get to it.
Speaker 1 (18:02):
Let's get to Brook Sutherland. She's Bloomberg News Boston Bureau,
chief writer of the Bloomberg Industrial Strength newsletter, and she
joins us from the Boston bureau. Brook, we do want
to start with trains mega merger. Why is this the
right time for a deal, especially in a day when
Norfolk their shares are down, they lowered their outlook for
full year revenue growth. I mean, is this combination going
(18:25):
to make it better?
Speaker 7 (18:27):
That's certainly the hope. And you know, frankly, I really
think the railroad industry is out of better ideas to
grow at this point. You know, we've really seen stagnating
or even declining volumes in the rail industry in recent years,
just given the competition from the trucking industry in particular.
If you think about it, trucks can go pretty much
wherever they want. There's your automobile reference there, but you
(18:51):
versus trains are really limited to the tracks that they have,
and that does put them at a bit of a
competitive disadvantage, even though there are advantages in other respects.
For you know, they tend to be more energy efficient,
they tend to be less costly, and so, you know,
I think the railroads are thinking to really chip away
at that market sharehold that the trucking industry has. They
(19:12):
have to make things more efficient for their customers, and
the idea would be that if you could set up
a network that's truly coast to coast from California to
New York, that that would take out some of those
pain points that turned customers off from the railroad industry.
Speaker 6 (19:24):
I was struck on Friday when we spoke to Kyle
Porter and I read his piece on this book that
this would be the only US transcontinental railroad. It would,
It would, And that's a result of you know, the
past what one hundred and fifty plus years of anti
trust action?
Speaker 7 (19:39):
Is that why, you know, there's really been a lot
of consolidation in the railroad industry. Who've just more recently
sort of been in this period of pause, partly just
because it had consolidated so much. But you did see,
you know a little bit of a step forward with
Canadian Pacific ultimately buying Kansas City Southern, and that I guess,
(20:00):
you know, sort of has started the wheels grinding again
in terms of could even more consolidation be possible in
this industry? You know, I do still think that that's
a bit of an open question of how regulators will
respond to this deal. That Kansas City Southern deal was
approved under sort of a loophole to these tougher two
thousand and one merger rules that the rail industry's primary
(20:23):
regulator has adopted that requires any merger to benefit the
public interest. So it's done enough just to show that
you are preserving competition. You will have to actually enhance
competition and provide proof that you're actually benefiting communities and
the greater public interests. And so that's a very high
bar that hasn't yet not actually been met. And so
(20:43):
you know, Union Pacific and Northern Southern are betting on,
you know, a more welcoming regulatory landscape that might finally
allow a deal like this to come to fruition. But
we really don't know.
Speaker 1 (20:54):
It ain't done until it's done, right, all right, let's
go to UPS just because shares have been tumbling after
the company said economic volatility continues to roil its operations.
UPS is another great indicator on the US economy so
I'm trying to make sense of economy versus company specific.
Speaker 7 (21:16):
You know, I think it's a mix of both. I
think if you look at UPS's business in particular, they
are uniquely affected by some of the trade dynamics that
we've seen, particularly you know, the alterations have been made
to that deminimous exemption. And then on the other hand,
there really are struggling in their business. I mean, this
is an area that really boomed during the pandemic as
(21:37):
people were at home and we're ordering so much stuff,
and you had you know, UPS em FedEx really trying
to add capacity to meet that demand. And then now
we're on the other side of that, as consumers have
shifted their spending back to services. UPS is trying to
cut cost to be competitive after that labor deal that
it struck earlier. And you know, I think you're really
seeing sort of a confluence of events that that's really
(21:59):
pressuring UPS from multiple angles.
Speaker 1 (22:01):
So no forecast for the year. I mean, that's it
is a massive lack of visibility.
Speaker 7 (22:07):
It is unusual, although we have heard, you know, similar
comments from other companies talking about just how hard it
is to get your hands around what that demand picture
looks like in the back of the year, you know,
a lot of reticence in terms of committing to that
growth doubt. Look, we have seen, you know, companies go
ahead and put guidance out there, but I do think,
you know, to UPS's credit, there are a number of
unknowns remaining in the back half of the year, and
(22:29):
they're taking more of a wait and see approach. Yeah.
Speaker 6 (22:31):
I was particularly surprised about this one, Brook because we
did have the airlines come out about a quarter ago,
and you know, we talked about Delta and then of
course United as well, and then you know, three months later,
they've essentially turned a corner and they're talking about how
great things are. Yet we're not seeing that or hearing
that from Carol Tomey over at UPS. Look, these are
(22:51):
apples and oranges when we talk about the businesses here.
But what is unique about UPS's business that they don't
have visibility that other companies do.
Speaker 3 (22:58):
Well.
Speaker 7 (22:59):
I don't know, you I don't think everything is great
for the airlines either. You know, they've been willing to
put guidance back out there, but the guidance that they
have moved forward with is lower than what they were expecting.
Before tariffs came into the picture. And you know, of course,
we did see that demand pull back in the immediate
after math of the tariffs, and some of the airlines,
particularly those with businesses that cater more to premium flyers
(23:22):
or business travelers, are expecting more of a rebound in
the back half of the year. But that uncertainty is
still there and is still impacting the airlines, just in
different ways. And so, you know, I think to UPS's point,
there are a number of different factors here, and their
business is uniquely affected by terriffs because it's much more direct.
With airlines what you're looking at as sort of more
(23:43):
indirect consequences. Does consumers feel the pain from inflation and
goods and maybe rethink that trip that they were planning
to take?
Speaker 6 (23:50):
All right? Well, speaking of airlines, let's talk about one
company that provides those narrow and wide body jets, and
that is Boeing. Shares down four percent today, Johnson reporting
that Boeing almost halted its cash burn in the second quarter,
indicating a turnaround initiated by Kelly Ortberg a year ago
is paying off as the company delivers more aircraft. One
(24:11):
thing that I've noticed about Boeing over the last few
months is the way they're being used as this bargaining
chip when it comes to trade negotiations. And I'm wondering,
Brook in your view, how much of a boon could
that be for the company that's trying to turn itself around.
Speaker 7 (24:25):
It's definitely a benefit. And what's interesting is that, you know,
in Trump's last trade war, Boeing frequently complained about being
used as a pawn. We saw China, you know, more
or less halt new orders of Boeing planes as a
way of exerting leverage in those trade negotiations. And now
you know, the shoe is someone on the other foot,
and we see countries more or less tripping over themselves
(24:45):
to you know, trumpet their purchases of Boeing planes. This
is one of the highest value exports that the US has,
and so as a means of sort of chipping away
at that trade deficit, a big blowing Boeing airplane purchase
can really go a long ways.
Speaker 1 (25:00):
So Boeing, I mean every time I feel like, I mean,
the stock's down four percent today. Thoughts in terms of
the outlook and what we kind of need to continue
to focus on with this one. Is it all just
about orders? It's also about making sure I no other
issues with their planes.
Speaker 7 (25:14):
Your thoughts on this, I mean, I think that might
be a little bit of profit taking here. We have
seen a pretty good rally and Boeing shares heading into earnings.
I mean, this was a very good quarter for them,
especially just given all of the cashlow challenges that they had.
And I can think you now, you know, the question
is they've got to keep doing this. They've got to
keep chugging along. But is this the best stock to
(25:35):
own in aerospace right now or are there potentially other
opportunities out there? And I think that's some of what's
playing out in investor's lines right now.
Speaker 1 (25:42):
Yeah, definitely a good point. I mean, the stock is
up nearly thirty percent year to date, so it really
has had quite a bounce back after having a really
tough time for a while. Brook, thank you so much.
We did it around the world when it comes to transportation,
and then some Brooks Southerland of course. Bloomberg News Boston
Bureau chief joining us there from our Boston bureau.
Speaker 2 (26:01):
You are listening to the Bloomberg Business Weekdaily podcast. Catch
us live weekday afternoons from two to five pm Eastern.
Listen on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg
Business app, or watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 1 (26:15):
For US Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Junior,
he has suggested that psychedelic therapy for depression and trauma
has the Trump administration support. This actually was in a
report by the Associated Press earlier this month that the
Secretary recently talked to members of Congress about and we're
guessing that it may have caught the attention of the
team over at the publicly traded small cap company Compass Pathways.
(26:39):
We wanted to know more, and let's get to Kabir Noth.
He's chief executive officer of Compass Pathways, and he joins
us here in studio. Kabir, welcome, Welcome. Remind our audience
about the work you are doing and your synthetic psilocybin
experimental drug for treatment resistant depression. Tell us about where
you are, what this drug is, and what it has shown.
Speaker 3 (27:00):
To do so far.
Speaker 9 (27:01):
Thanks very much, Carol on Tim and it's great to
join you here. So yes, a Compass Pathways, we're a
company in the final stages of developing synthetic psilocybin as
a potential treatment for treatment resistant depression, or what we
call patients living with persistent depression. That's a big problem,
affecting some three million people in the US, and it's debilitating.
(27:24):
Many of them are unable to work. The majority will
have had some sort of suicidal thoughts in the course
of their depressive illness. So we're a leading psychedelic company
and potentially the closest to regulatory approval.
Speaker 6 (27:38):
You've used the word potential twice. You said it's a
potential treatment and then you said potentially you're a leading
company there when it comes to FDA approval. Is it unproven?
Speaker 9 (27:48):
We have generated robust evidence now from two studies. The
first was published a couple of years ago, and then
just last month we released more data from the first
of our final stage studies. What can I tell you
about that first safety this we didn't see any unexpected
safety signals in this treatment of patients living with persistent depression.
(28:09):
And secondly, after just a single treatment, after six weeks,
we saw a significant reduction in depressive symptoms. And just
to emphasize that, because you'll be aware of the kind
of the typical paradigm of antidepressants, something you take daily.
This was a single treatment and with the effect measured
after six weeks. Now we have already are two for
(28:33):
two in terms of these trials clinical trials that we've conducted.
But we're continuing to see more evidence generated, first in
one of these late stage trials, and second we have
another study ongoing where we're also looking at the impact
potentially of another treatment.
Speaker 1 (28:49):
We should point out that about a month ago, in
that study came out, the stock your shares tumbled almost
fifty percent, hitting a record low. What I guess I
want to understand, so it was below what Wall Street expected.
It did meet your goal from what I understand, your
company goal, but Wall Street was very disappointed. Tell us
(29:09):
how this works. How does one psilocybin treatment kind of
cure depression? Persistent depression.
Speaker 9 (29:18):
Psilocybin you can think of as if you like a key,
a key that unlocks a door or a set of
doors in the brain, and while those doors are open,
that enables the patient to work through some of their
fixed negative thinking and potentially have relief from their depressive symptoms.
To do that, there is a profound subjective experience, so
(29:41):
there is a psychedelic experience that lasts six to eight hours,
and as I say, during the course of that the
drug is working in such a way that it unlocks
these doors and allows the person, the patient to engage
with some of those negative thoughts and potentially, as I say,
get relief for those depressive symptoms. The fact is, as
(30:02):
I say, we've seen and what's amazing, that one single
treatment can show sustained effects at least through to six
weeks and potentially longer. In our earlier trial, our earlier
clinical study that we did, we saw that for many
patients that were sustained out to twelve weeks.
Speaker 1 (30:19):
What's many? How many? Forgive me tim, like, I'm just
curious how many.
Speaker 9 (30:22):
So that was a study of around two hundred and
thirty patients of whom a significant number were on what
we call the active dose of the medication, and what
we saw was a quarter of them had from that
single dose they were actually sustained freer depression out to
twelve weeks. And in this population of people who have
typically tried multiple treatments and for whom very little is
(30:44):
any longer working, that was a remarkable response.
Speaker 6 (30:47):
When patients do take this single dose. What is the
environment that they're in during that six to eight hours,
and are they guided in some way by therapists of sorts.
Speaker 9 (30:56):
It's a physically it's a calm, comfortable setting. They have
the option of ey shades, there's music playing, and there
are appropriate safety safeguards in place. Psilocybin is a very
inner directed mechanism, so what actually happens is the patient
has this profound influence, but where there is somebody in
(31:18):
the room, it's largely silent. There is not directed therapy
in the course of that intervention.
Speaker 6 (31:24):
How do you run an effective clinical trial for a
drug that the experience is such that the person knows
they've taken this drug rather than a placebo. Somebody who
takes a placebo is not going to have a psychedelic
reaction to the placebo.
Speaker 9 (31:40):
At Compass, we thought about this before we even started
our studies. So our prior big study, the one I
reference with two hundred and thirty patients, we design that
in such a way that there was the choice of
three different doses of psilocybin. One was a low dose,
a second was an intermediate dose, and in patients who've
(32:00):
never had this experience, before. That's truly confounding in terms
of they cannot tell whether they got a medium dose
or a high dose of that drug. This is important because,
as you say, otherwise it will be very obvious. But
that design was very effective for that earlier stage study
we did, and we've replicated that design in one of
our late stage studies.
Speaker 1 (32:20):
We're talking with Kabir Andathi's chief executive officer of Compass
Pathways here in studio. You keep saying synthetic. What's the
difference between synthetic and naturally occurring?
Speaker 9 (32:28):
So we are manufacturing a pill to the highest standards
of purity, no contamination. We know exactly what is in
the pill. This is a manufactured pill that we are
treating with.
Speaker 1 (32:39):
So that you know exactly in terms of dosage. Is
that what I'm saying, So if naturally occurring is different.
Speaker 9 (32:45):
Potentially it is naturally occurring whereas well as is synthetic.
So we know exactly what's in it, We know the
exact pill. What will it cost It's primeriture to speculate
on that at the moment we're still conducting these final
stages of our studies.
Speaker 1 (32:59):
But expensive and would it be something I mean if
you get a approval, is it safe to make the
assumption that it would be covered.
Speaker 9 (33:07):
The whole premise for founding Compass Pathways was to enable
that form of broad access. So the reason that the
company has gone through doing these rigorous, robust clinical studies
so that we is exactly so that we can discuss
that with the FDA potential for regulatory approval, and then
if we're fortunate enough to get there, the chance to
(33:28):
negotiate with both commercial insurers and government pairs. Let's remind
ourselves that these three million people that I referred to,
they are relying on insurers, commercial insurers and government pairs
to actually cover their drugs. I believe we will be
able to demonstrate significant value given how different this is
from other treatments available today in depression.
Speaker 6 (33:49):
Kabir Carol mentioned that the Associated Press reported earlier this
month that RFK Junior recently talked to members of Congress
about psychedelic therapy for depression and trauma. Apart from that,
have you seen any real signs of support for the
administration for this new class of drugs or type of
type of treatment.
Speaker 9 (34:09):
We have had support from the FDA throughout our development process.
We have breakthrough designation.
Speaker 6 (34:14):
Before Robert F. Kennedy Junior took over ASH, and we
have had.
Speaker 9 (34:17):
A motivated and engaged agency. We're excited to see the
voices from HHS from Veterans Affairs today suggesting that they
also see the potential for this class, and we're very
happy to work to see how we could potentially accelerate
access while at the same time ensuring that we continue
to generate really good, robust, good evidence that these are
(34:39):
safe and effective.
Speaker 1 (34:41):
Talk to us about timeline, though, is it I feel
like we've been I know Blimberg has been reporting on
this class of drugs and treatments, and I think we've
all seen pieces that yours right for a long time
that for people who or other treatments don't seem to
be making a change for them. So I don't know,
is is it another few years, is it the end
(35:02):
of this year, is it the end of next year?
And is it that the Trump administration could somehow settle
this through much more quickly.
Speaker 9 (35:12):
I think there are clearly people in the current administration who,
as I say, see the potential of this. Well, we
want to make sure we do this right as well,
So we want to make sure we do that in
the right way, with the right rigor.
Speaker 8 (35:22):
And so on.
Speaker 9 (35:23):
We are conducting, as I say, the final stages of studies.
We have two ongoing of which the second will wrap
up in the second half of next year. The data
we released last month, though it hasn't yet been reviewed
by the FDA, we have a meeting planned with them
where we'll discuss with them and we'll discuss the potential
for any acceleration of a filing and a regulatory process.
Speaker 1 (35:43):
Do you also think about other usages, whether it's PTSD
and other applications, And I'm just curious where what you
might be exploring in that world.
Speaker 9 (35:53):
Our next priority beyond persistent depression is indeed PTSD. That
is something with very high prevalence, some thirteen million in
the US, for which there are only two very old
drugs approved, and unfortunately recently there have been two advisory
committees recommending against new drugs in that space. So yes,
we see PTSD as a key area. We generated some
(36:14):
data last year and we will be announcing the design
of another late stage trial for PTSD immanently.
Speaker 6 (36:20):
I know the USFDA is the gold standard for going
through the regulatory process to be viewed by the world
as a credible treatment for something. But these days, is
it worth going after approval in another country to try
to do this on a smaller scale to prove that yes,
it indeed works.
Speaker 9 (36:39):
We will be exploring approval in a range of countries.
So our studies have been international, US, Canada, Europe as well.
We have taken advice over the years from the European
regulatory authorities. We're a UK based company as well, so
we've been speaking to the MHRA, the regulatory authority in
the UK. So yes, this is a problem for patients
(37:00):
across the world and we would look to exploit it
where we cat.
Speaker 1 (37:03):
Kabir just got about thirty forty seconds. We're actually me
talking with the CEO of Astra Zeneca right after this.
I'm just curious in terms of big Farmer, have you
had any preliminary discussions with larger, larger pharmaceutical partners interested
in commercialization, co commercialization or distribution.
Speaker 9 (37:21):
What I know is the big farmer is tracking this
space closely, and what's been great is to see the
re entry of some big farmer back into psychiatry over
the last couple of years. So I know they watched
this space. But we at Compass are determined that we
can do this ourselves and are excited about the opportunity
to bring this potential new treatment to patients who so
clearly need it.
Speaker 1 (37:41):
So no strategic alignment that you would consider. You plan
on doing this alone.
Speaker 9 (37:45):
That's our plan.
Speaker 1 (37:47):
Okay, great stuff, Stay in touch. Thank you, let us
know how things are going. I really appreciate it. Kiberer,
be well. Kiberath, He's chief executive officer of Compass Pathways,
joining us right here in studio.
Speaker 2 (37:59):
This is the Blueloomberg Business Week Daily podcast, available on Apple, Spotify,
and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live weekday
afternoons from two to five pm Eastern on Bloomberg dot com,
the iHeartRadio app, tune In, and the Bloomberg Business App.
You can also watch us live every weekday on YouTube
(38:19):
and always on the Bloomberg terminal
Hosts And Creators
Tim Stenovec
Carol Massar
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.