October 6, 2025 • 26 mins
- Paul Donovan, Chief Economist, UBS Global Wealth Management
- Jordan Rochester, FICC Strategy Head at Mizuho
- Lindsey Piegza, Chief Economist at Stifel
- Jay Goldberg, Senior Analyst at Seaport Research Partners
Paul Donovan, Chief Economist at UBS Global Wealth Management, discusses the economic implications of possible government shutdown-related layoffs. Jordan Rochester, Head of FICC Strategy at Mizuho, shares his take on what the near-certain elevation of pro-stimulus lawmaker Sanae Takaichi as Japan’s next prime minister means for financial markets. Lindsey Piegza, Chief Economist at Stifel, breaks down the US economic data that markets watchers will - and will not - get as the US government shutdown enters its second week. Jay Goldberg, Senior Analyst at Seaport Research Partners, reacts to news that AMD will partner with OpenAI.
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 (00:00):
Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Jonathan Ferrow, along
with Lisa Bromwitz and Amrie Hordernt. Join us each day
for insight from the best in markets, economics, and geopolitics
from our global headquarters in New York City. We are
live on Bloomberg Television weekday mornings from six to nine
am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or
anywhere else you listen, and as always on the Bloomberg
(00:34):
Terminal and the Bloomberg Business App. To extend the conversation.
Joining us now is Jordan Rochester of Mazoo. Jordan, Welcome
to the program, sir. Let's get into this. This could
be a big moment, and I think the market's trying
to work out what kind of moment. Is this an
r Bay like type moment for the FX market or
dare I say a trust like moment for the bond market?
Speaker 3 (00:52):
Which one it's not trus but it could be. Is
what the market's saying. This is sanaomics, This is the
new Verde of arbonomics, is what the market's thinking. But
I think John, we need to have some level of
caution's what politicians say, and there's what they do. And
what she can do with this current setup is pretty
difficult because the Arbe Nomics faction, the Arbe faction of
(01:13):
the LDP is much weaker after a lot of election
defeats in their seats, so roughly half the size of
what they were a year ago. So the message we've
been giving clients just now, this morning and over the
weekend is that Takeichi whilst she stands for a lot
of the policies that Arbinomics had, so that would lead
to looser monetary policy for sure than what should be
(01:34):
the case, and that would lead to a WEEKI yin
It's not really clear cut to me, because in order
to win the LDP election, she needed other factions to
help her get over the line, and a key part
of that was the Asso faction, who are more fiscally prudent,
and the intervention from the former Prime Minister Asso himself
to arguing to respect of the party member vote where
(01:55):
Takeichi overwhelmingly.
Speaker 4 (01:56):
Won, is the key reason why she won this weekend.
Speaker 3 (01:59):
But it also means that she'll probably have to point
appoint a finance minister who might actually see the market
move the of way, John, we might see the end
sell off and the sort of long end sell off
in Jdb's relax a bit once we know who the
finance minister is, if they are fiscally prudent and a
sort of continuation candidate for that role from the previous administration.
Speaker 5 (02:20):
Jordan, how high is your conviction level that what she
does is somewhat different from what she says? Meaning are
you recommending the clients that they buy the yend here
with the dollar at one point fifty, surpassing that one
to fifty level versus the Japanese currency.
Speaker 3 (02:35):
I'd say it depends on the timeline, so medium to high.
I'd say high conviction that with the current setup in
the Parliament, the LDP don't have a mandate, they don't
have a majority, They rely on a coalition part to
comito that doesn't even get them over the line. So
they're entering into coalition talks. So I've got a pretty
high conviction she can't suddenly do very large, bold policies
(02:56):
because she might lose members of her own party or
make those code talks quite difficult. For example, the consumption
tax cut, which is all the talk last time around,
in the elections last year. When it comes to take
Eachi's own beyond that watered down significantly. So I don't
think we're going to have a big fiscal agenda, that is,
until we see her polling.
Speaker 4 (03:16):
Once we see the polling.
Speaker 3 (03:18):
If the LDP shoots up to something of a forty
to fifty handle, if you see her own personal ratings improve,
then we can't rule out elections. And once she if
that happens, Lisa, if we get an election this time
or early next year, let's say, then I can't rule
that out.
Speaker 5 (03:34):
It feels so much different though, even than a Liz
Trust moment Jordan, or potentially what could become a Liz
Trust moment, because this is global, this is Japan, this
is France, this is the United States. For the government
to shut down, where a lot of governments are showing
a real reluctance to climb down on deficits that have
been climbing.
Speaker 1 (03:51):
They want to still lean on that deficit lever.
Speaker 5 (03:54):
Which is the reason why you see bond yields creeping higher,
particularly in the thirty year denomination. At what point does
the collective story taken on a life of its own.
Speaker 3 (04:03):
It already is I think it is happening right now.
So as you mentioned, the US with its own fiscal issuance,
Germany with its own fiscal issuance, and now France of
course has been with the largest death sit in the
euro area or flagging that point. So the only one
that stands out as not actually joining in with the
party is the UK because of the fiscal rules that
the chance has thrown on themselves. But Japan is very
(04:23):
acutely aware of this problem. The Ministry of Finance has
been reducing the auction sizes in the long end to
try and deal with that. But what's changed in the
sort of functioning of the Japanese JGB market is the
demand from life insurance insurers for long end jgbs has
collapsed versus what it used to be. And actually the
majority of the trading volumes in jgbs from the ten
(04:44):
year onwards is from foreigners, and so this means that
you get these sort of big moves as you've seen
today thanks to foreigners being the overwhelmingly large share of
trading volume in ultra long end jgb's, but also around
the tenure bucket onwards as well. So all in all,
when everyone's suing at the same time, something will break.
I'm not sure how when politicians will take note, but
(05:05):
I think they are already, and I think that's why
the LDP's fiscal prudence wing has played a large influence
in Takhi's changed in her opinions Jordan.
Speaker 2 (05:13):
In addition to that, the role of the central bank,
I think there's a big question up in the air
about that, so let's discuss it. Traditionally, if this was
the United States, we'd be talking about a pro fiscal
stimulus party or leader. We'd be talking about title monetary
policy to offset some of dan. That wasn't a conversation
in Japan overnight. In fact, the pricing of rate hikes
in the future actually came in now Jord And I wonder,
(05:34):
is this really a unique independent central bank? What is
going on with a central bank story in the relationship
between the government and the BOJ.
Speaker 3 (05:42):
All these independent central banks all they are, for example,
the FED, they answer to Congress, so there is a
political sort of influence on all of them.
Speaker 4 (05:50):
A Bank of England, ECB, etc.
Speaker 3 (05:52):
When it comes to the BOJ, there is a pretty
strong level of political cooperation. It's written into the bank
Coajapan's charter. Now this we've seen this before. Arbenomics is
a clear case of this, where most people assume that
Arbenomics was both fiscal easing and monetary Sure, it was,
but Arbenenomics actually leaned heavily on the monetary policy side
(06:13):
of that story, and we saw the Bank Japan expand
the QE and so forth, eventually going negative rates too.
So there is the potential for Takeiachi to play a
large role. If you think back to last year, Prime
Minister sheba this history behind this. John one day after
becoming Prime minister, he said now is probably not the
right time for the BOJA to raise rates, and they
delayed that rate hike from October through to January.
Speaker 4 (06:35):
So tak Each you might say the same thing.
Speaker 3 (06:37):
We've only had one tweet from her and one victory
speech so far, and so we haven't got enough information.
But what I will say is it's very different to Arbonomics.
When inflation was that near zero. Inflation has been above
two for the past two to three years in Japan,
and the aim of this government is to try and
bring inflation down. You don't really achieve that by stopping
the Bank Japan from raising rates, So John, I think
they still raise rates.
Speaker 4 (06:58):
October is clearly.
Speaker 3 (06:59):
Much less likely now because the BOJ might want to
wait and see what the budget will be. So that
makes December or January still live meetings. But if you're
to ask me, John, I'd be paid the October meeting.
I think the risk reward is still there. The Bank
Japan has lined up loads of speeches this month. We'll
hear from Governor you Wade to himself later this week
as well. The data is strong in Japan. It all
(07:19):
adds up to a rate hike. John, Apart from the
politics and the uncertainty.
Speaker 1 (07:25):
Stay with us.
Speaker 2 (07:26):
More Bloomberg surveillance coming up after this. Another week of
economic data at risk as the government shut down enters
it's sixth day. Paul Donovan of UBS Global Wealth Management
right in the following. The problem is that alternatives like
(07:47):
sentiment surveys are even worse, and that's all the markets
will be left to work with. Paul joined us now
for more. Paul, you're one of our favorites. It's great
to finally catch up with you after a period of time. Paul,
I wanted to get your opinion on this. I've heard
a lot of people's say, we're flying blind without the data.
Were we flying blind already?
Speaker 6 (08:05):
We were flying blind, we were perhaps flying quite a
thick fog. So for about fifteen years, economists have been
complaining about the deteriorating quality of economic data. Nobody fills
in surveys anymore. Structural change means that we're missing parts
of the economy. You know, where in the employment report
(08:25):
is the TikTok content creator and parties and bias. The
political bias in the States is getting extreme, and people
are answering according to their political views, not according to
what's happening actually happening in their lives. So we've had
this problem for some time. But the official data did
the best of a bad job. It did the best
(08:46):
that it could in order to filter out some of
this noise and give us an idea about where the
economy was performing in real time.
Speaker 1 (08:55):
So how does it.
Speaker 5 (08:56):
Change going forward that we don't even have that right
that we end up in the realm of speculation and
rumor at a time where people just take all of that,
put it together and say, well, stocks have to just
keep going up.
Speaker 6 (09:08):
So this is where I think things do start to
get tricky. Pads a little bit less for the equity
market than for the bond market. Because of course, corporate data,
as long as companies are honest, is going to be
still reliable. So the earnings reports that come out, the
corporate announcements that are legally obliged the companies are legally
obliged to put out, that should all be okay. But
(09:30):
the bigger macro picture is getting more confused, and some
of it is reliant on what we're seeing elsewhere in
the world. You know, how do we judge US trade data? Well,
let's see what other countries are saying when they're talking
about exports to the States, for example, we're having to
back out data some of the time.
Speaker 5 (09:48):
You made a really good point, Paul in your recent
notes that right now the market is treating the shutdown
it's going on in Washington, DC as negligible, something that
will maybe cause a loss of economic activity.
Speaker 4 (09:59):
It will just be hooped.
Speaker 5 (10:00):
Potentially in a couple weeks, in months time. Why do
you think this time really could be different?
Speaker 6 (10:07):
So as a baseline, I don't think it is going
to be different. We get this with every shutdown, you
get a period where data economic activity is suppressed and
then you get a period where you rebound, the back
pay is paid back, that kind of thing. The only
real difference this time is that US President Trump has
(10:30):
talked about possibly firing some more government employees.
Speaker 1 (10:34):
Now that is.
Speaker 6 (10:35):
Different because then, of course you're not getting the rebound
from those employees. You are also potentially creating some fear
of unemployment amongst people both in and outside the government sector.
That would be a more troubling situation because you would
get the slowdown, but the rebound that we normally would
see would be a lot more muted. I would regard
(10:57):
that very much as the risk case, not as the
base case. The base case, I think is this is
going to be like every other shutdown, you know, down
in week one, up in week two, that kind of thing.
But there is that risk if some employees are going
to lose their jobs permanently as a result of the shutdown.
Speaker 2 (11:14):
Paul, I think we all hope you're absolutely right and
we do bounce back and just get back to work,
get back to business, and this economy grows. The other
thing we wanted to talk to you about was inflation,
market based expectations of inflation, how the FED measures things,
and ultimately how consumers experience it. Paul, I've heard you
in the past talk about frequency bias. Could you explain
that as a concept in economics and why that's important
(11:34):
to the difference between how consumers feel and what the
FED is tracking.
Speaker 1 (11:40):
So this is a very important point.
Speaker 6 (11:43):
Everybody is guilty of frequency bias. That is to say,
you know, you remember the price is the Snickers bar
you buy every day. You do not remember the price
of a television you buy every three, four or five years.
And so as a result, when prices change in high
frequency purchases, it sort of sticks in your mind. And
(12:04):
every time I go to the vending machine at work,
I think, oh, that price has gone up. I remember
when it used to cost seventy pence and now it's
costing me ninety pence, And it sticks in your mind,
and that then colors the view of inflation that you have.
The fact that the television is twenty percent cheaper than
the last one you bought seven years ago, you don't
(12:26):
remember that because you can't remember what you paid in
the past.
Speaker 1 (12:29):
So the problem that.
Speaker 6 (12:31):
We have is that when you see basically rising food
and rising fuel prices, those are prices that consumers will
remember and that will create a sense of dissatisfaction when
you have food and fuel inflation. If you have an
overall fairly benign inflation environment and there's something weird going
(12:51):
on with food supply, that can create a peculiar situation
where the central banker is saying, no, inflation isn't a
problem at all, and the consumer saying, no, the cost
of living goes up. Look how much I had to
pay the supermarket this week. So that's really the issue.
Speaker 2 (13:06):
Paul, is that the situation now is that how you
describe things and does it shape consumer behavior?
Speaker 6 (13:12):
Well, what we've got at the moment, it's quite interesting.
It's sort of a reverse of what happened under the
last administration. So in the last administration, inflation was coming down,
nobody really believed it because food price inflation was very high.
There was an episode of profit led inflation from food retail.
What has been happening this year until recently, his fuel
(13:34):
prices have been subdued. Food prices until recently have not
been a particularly big problem, but durable goods prices have
gone from falling to rising. And so you've got the
reverse problem there that you've got inflation that people are
not necessarily.
Speaker 1 (13:50):
So aware of.
Speaker 6 (13:51):
But what we've been seeing more recently in the States
is food price inflation has been ticking up. Things like
the price of beef, for example, has gone up very
very dramatically. Coffee prices are soaring, and that is going
to be more visible. So I think the noise from
consumers about inflation, the political anxiety about inflation is likely
(14:13):
to be ramping up as we see these higher food
prices starting to emerge.
Speaker 2 (14:18):
Stay with us more Bloomberg Surveillance coming up after this.
Speaker 1 (14:31):
Sick in wit tech.
Speaker 2 (14:32):
Jake Goldberg of Seaport calling the recent moves in AI
bubble like behavior. Jake Goldberg joins us now for more. Jay,
Welcome to the program, sir. You've got a rare soar
rating on Nvidia. Let's just talk about that line bubble
like behavior. Does the announcement from AMD and open Ai
speak to some of that for you?
Speaker 7 (14:51):
Absolutely, It's quite an interesting thing to wake up to
this morning. We have a company that's giving away ten
percent of its start to to a startup that doesn't
have positive free cash flow to buy tens.
Speaker 1 (15:05):
Of billions of dollars of their products.
Speaker 7 (15:06):
Somewhere down the line, and that company's stock is up
thirty percent. You know, on the face of it, I
haven't had time to parse it, but it looks like
a great, good deal for AMD over the long term.
But it just, you know, the market reaction seems to
be looking at only the positives and applying a zero
(15:27):
percent discount rate to future events, not looking through the
whole deal.
Speaker 5 (15:31):
At the same time, Jay, in the past, we've seen
earnings outperform again and again and again from these companies,
and a lot of people will come on and say,
if you look at the price to the actual income level,
you've seen multiples come down, not go up, even with
prices going up significantly. What about that story doesn't work
for you in the same way that it did, say
(15:53):
three years ago.
Speaker 7 (15:55):
So I think, Look, I'm not a bear on AI
and general. I think AI has the potential to be
very important. But no technology gets adopted in a straight line.
They're always going to be fits and starts. We saw
that with the Internet, we saw that with with mobile.
These things go up and down, they don't just keep
running forever. And I think just assuming drawing straight lines,
(16:18):
extrapolating from where we are today into some sort of
never ending future.
Speaker 1 (16:23):
That's not how things are going to work.
Speaker 7 (16:25):
And I think we need just a little degree of
caution around some of this stuff, where a lot of
these things are getting very extended, just based on what
the actual deployments are looking like and returns that the
hyperscalers are getting on their investments.
Speaker 5 (16:41):
What do you think is the most speculative at this point, Jay,
I know that your call is on in Video, which
is notable given all of the buy ratings that we
see on it, But beyond that is in Vidia the
biggest defender right now in your mind?
Speaker 1 (16:53):
Well, I think the whole thing.
Speaker 7 (16:55):
We have this sort of massive AI spend taking place
right now, but if you boil it all down, it's
really six companies that are driving all of that. Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Meta,
open Ai, Microsoft, and.
Speaker 1 (17:12):
I understand that their.
Speaker 7 (17:13):
Imperatives and why they're doing this, but I think it
is worth reflecting on that it's just six companies and
none of them actually have a very clear return on
their investment even in the works. They're sort of spending
it because everyone else is spending. And then you have
open Ai, who who is an incredibly capable company coming
(17:35):
with great models, but at the same time, you know
they're free, casual, and negative. So I think that sort
of calls in the question the sustainability of all this.
Speaker 2 (17:43):
And J's bringing in multiple sectors. It's energy, it's the
capital providers, it's tech. I know based on some of
your writing that you think this could exacerbate problems further
down the road. Could you build on that just a
little bit, that the concentration exacerbates the downside risk.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
I think that's that's absolutely the case.
Speaker 7 (18:01):
Where you know, when I hear my colleagues on the
morning call talk about energy and pipelines and materials, you know,
and they all talk about the AI element to their
stocks growth, that just makes me pause. Like I've been
covering semiconductors for over twenty years now, and I've always
had good relationships with my peers, but we usually never
talk about each other's stocks. There's never been a lot
(18:22):
of overlap, and here we have everybody talking about the
same themes.
Speaker 1 (18:29):
It makes me wonder, Jane.
Speaker 2 (18:31):
The energy piece of it is interesting. There has been
a broader conversation people acknowledge the potential for constraints. Do
you think that's going to be the first constraint the
thing that shakes this up quickly.
Speaker 7 (18:41):
Absolutely right, I mean, and I look at in video
like I'm cautious on in video. I think if my
rating here is more of an underperformed than a cell,
I wouldn't short in video. But the issue is at
this point in videos is kind of all the good
news is priced into in video and none of the
potential downside is priced in. There are a lot of
things that can go go wrong that are beyond their control,
(19:02):
and you know top of that list is electricity.
Speaker 1 (19:05):
Right.
Speaker 7 (19:05):
We don't know to the extent to which Open Aye
is going to be able to deliver on all these
all these electricity numbers they put out there, and like
in just the last week they've talked about adding sixteen
gigawatts of compute capacity. I don't think anyone knows exactly
where all that power is going to come from. They
have maybe some rough ideas, but I don't think all
(19:25):
those are are a lock and that that's a real
that's a real problem. I think it's going to pause
things somewhere down the road, Jay, how far are.
Speaker 5 (19:33):
We from some sort of energy related constraint on how
much the promises of expansion can really meet reality.
Speaker 7 (19:40):
I think it's a little a little beyond my my scope,
like I'm just a humble semiconductor analyst, But I do
think we start to see more concerned about that in
next year.
Speaker 5 (19:52):
At what point do you see this also being a
question of the US versus China, especially given deep seek
I mean, do you think that that kind of issue
is going to come to the four that there could
be some new innovation that renders some of the big
tech companies more obsolete in short order?
Speaker 1 (20:11):
Well, I think that is.
Speaker 7 (20:12):
It's this weird dichotomy we have where the US has
chips but not all of electricity. China has all the
electricity they need but not enough chips. So both sides
face their own constraints. But I do think there are
going to be some pretty significant I don't want to
say breakthroughs, but sort of advances in China as companies
(20:34):
like Huawei find new ways to build their own domestic
supply chain that gets.
Speaker 1 (20:40):
Them out from under these US restrictions.
Speaker 7 (20:42):
They probably won't be as good as the best at
Nvidia and amb have to offer, but they may be
good enough for them to push ahead. There's a lot
of an immense amount of AI talent in China.
Speaker 1 (20:53):
I don't want to overstate it.
Speaker 7 (20:54):
I think the US still has a pretty big lead
in terms of just sort of fundamental foundational models, but
there's an incredible amount of talent in China, and I
think they're not as constrained as the US government might think.
Speaker 2 (21:06):
Jay, just to finish on that, when you frame it
in the following terms, when you say that China has
the electricity, not the chips, that the US has the
chips but maybe has the energy constraints, which problem is
easier to fix?
Speaker 7 (21:19):
I think it's going to be China getting around US
sanctions one way or another, probably by building their own
supply chain.
Speaker 1 (21:27):
Stay with US.
Speaker 2 (21:28):
More Bloomberg Surveillance coming up after this. Lindsay px RA
stif will joined US now for more Lindsay, we didn't
get payrolls. We're still waiting for that. We might not
get CPI. We will get a FED meeting at the
end of the month. I'm told they're essential. If they meet,
(21:50):
Lindsay and they don't have CPI and they don't have payrolls,
do they make the decision to cut interest rates?
Speaker 8 (21:56):
Well, I think even without an updated look at the data.
I think the conversation is going to be very fierce
in the sense that we do have this growing number
of FED officials that is increasingly concerned about the lingering
level of inflation, that elevated level of inflation, and those
that are focused more on the weakness of employment. So
even without a new data point, I think this conversation
(22:16):
is going to intensify and complicate the ability for the
FED to justify any further movement, and the lack of data,
I think is going to reinforce the need for a
more patient, cautious approach to policy from here.
Speaker 5 (22:30):
What date are you watching right now, lindsay, given that
the gold standard data, which is flawed, yes, but also
is probably the best that we've got, what are you
focusing on instead?
Speaker 8 (22:40):
Well, I think right now, again, we still have a
lot of information on the price side. We're still waiting
to see whether or not we see an updated CPI
and PPI report, but we have a lot of information
coming down the pipeline to suggest that inflation is not
necessarily headed back to that two percent price level. We
see some of the Fed's preferred measures of inflation, the
piece the core PC still up near three percent, with
(23:03):
the most recent reports suggesting some upward momentum in the pipeline.
So again, I think it's very important that the FED
stays focused on that mandate for price stability, even with
early signs of a cooling in top line hiring. The
FED should not completely abandon that price stability component, which
it's failed to reinstate years now post the pandemic.
Speaker 5 (23:24):
At the same time, we did see that job openings
per unemployed people that ratio felt to the lowest in
twenty twenty one in the recent JOLT survey. We did
see the non farm payrolls in August that was highly
concerning to some people, and we did see pretty significant
download re visions to the overall payrolls figures for the
year ended in March. At what point do you give
(23:44):
credence to the idea that there really is a significant
shift in the labor market that does also warrant attention
by the Fed.
Speaker 8 (23:51):
Well, we also see that jobless claims, while volatile, are
still in a very low tight range. We also see
the unemployment rate is still stubbornly down near four percent.
So I think at the very least, the labor market
data are not all pointing in the same direction, which
isn't to say we ignore the data points that are
on the weaker side, but it's to say it's not
an alarm bell quite yet. It's something to watch, it's
(24:13):
something to be aware of. That being said, this is
a very aged recovery, and I would expect, particularly given
the reduction in international flows, that the need for top
lying hiring to slow. As we heard from Chair Powell,
he previously noted that full employment was roughly around one
hundred and twenty five one hundred and fifty thousand in
terms of payrolls. Well, he has significantly rised that lower,
(24:35):
and I think that's a more reasonable expectation for top
line growth, not necessarily an expanding labor market, but certainly
enough to keep stability in place in today's labor market.
Speaker 2 (24:46):
Lindsay, can we pay that view with what's happening in
stock markets and more broadly financial conditions. Do you think
the feeder reserve is risking misplacing its anchor around the
labor market, around the step down in payrolls, and ultimately
fueling financial accesses and pockets of let's call it exuberance
right now? Is that a financial stability concern that needs consider.
Speaker 8 (25:09):
It really is, and this is something that we've seen before.
We look at investors and they seem to be trading
up on good data. That means the economy is relatively solid,
trading up on bad data as well. Because this is
that FED put the expectation that the FED will jump
in and provide monetary policy support with additional policy easing,
even at the expense of maintaining still elevated inflation. And
(25:32):
so I do think that the market has become complacent
that the FED will continue to support the economy regardless
of the balance in terms of the risks on both
sides of the mandate tilting to one side or the other.
Speaker 2 (25:45):
This is the Bloomberg Seventans podcast, bringing you the best
in markets, economics, antiopolitics. You can watch the show live
on Bloomberg TV weekday mornings from six am to nine
am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or
anywhere else you listen, and as always on the Bloomberg
Terminal and the Bloomberg Business app.
Speaker 3 (26:08):
Mm hmm.
Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Jonathan Ferrow, along
with Lisa Bromwitz and Amrie Hordernt. Join us each day
for insight from the best in markets, economics, and geopolitics
from our global headquarters in New York City. We are
live on Bloomberg Television weekday mornings from six to nine
am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or
anywhere else you listen, and as always on the Bloomberg
(00:34):
Terminal and the Bloomberg Business App. To extend the conversation.
Joining us now is Jordan Rochester of Mazoo. Jordan, Welcome
to the program, sir. Let's get into this. This could
be a big moment, and I think the market's trying
to work out what kind of moment. Is this an
r Bay like type moment for the FX market or
dare I say a trust like moment for the bond market?
Speaker 3 (00:52):
Which one it's not trus but it could be. Is
what the market's saying. This is sanaomics, This is the
new Verde of arbonomics, is what the market's thinking. But
I think John, we need to have some level of
caution's what politicians say, and there's what they do. And
what she can do with this current setup is pretty
difficult because the Arbe Nomics faction, the Arbe faction of
(01:13):
the LDP is much weaker after a lot of election
defeats in their seats, so roughly half the size of
what they were a year ago. So the message we've
been giving clients just now, this morning and over the
weekend is that Takeichi whilst she stands for a lot
of the policies that Arbinomics had, so that would lead
to looser monetary policy for sure than what should be
(01:34):
the case, and that would lead to a WEEKI yin
It's not really clear cut to me, because in order
to win the LDP election, she needed other factions to
help her get over the line, and a key part
of that was the Asso faction, who are more fiscally prudent,
and the intervention from the former Prime Minister Asso himself
to arguing to respect of the party member vote where
(01:55):
Takeichi overwhelmingly.
Speaker 4 (01:56):
Won, is the key reason why she won this weekend.
Speaker 3 (01:59):
But it also means that she'll probably have to point
appoint a finance minister who might actually see the market
move the of way, John, we might see the end
sell off and the sort of long end sell off
in Jdb's relax a bit once we know who the
finance minister is, if they are fiscally prudent and a
sort of continuation candidate for that role from the previous administration.
Speaker 5 (02:20):
Jordan, how high is your conviction level that what she
does is somewhat different from what she says? Meaning are
you recommending the clients that they buy the yend here
with the dollar at one point fifty, surpassing that one
to fifty level versus the Japanese currency.
Speaker 3 (02:35):
I'd say it depends on the timeline, so medium to high.
I'd say high conviction that with the current setup in
the Parliament, the LDP don't have a mandate, they don't
have a majority, They rely on a coalition part to
comito that doesn't even get them over the line. So
they're entering into coalition talks. So I've got a pretty
high conviction she can't suddenly do very large, bold policies
(02:56):
because she might lose members of her own party or
make those code talks quite difficult. For example, the consumption
tax cut, which is all the talk last time around,
in the elections last year. When it comes to take
Eachi's own beyond that watered down significantly. So I don't
think we're going to have a big fiscal agenda, that is,
until we see her polling.
Speaker 4 (03:16):
Once we see the polling.
Speaker 3 (03:18):
If the LDP shoots up to something of a forty
to fifty handle, if you see her own personal ratings improve,
then we can't rule out elections. And once she if
that happens, Lisa, if we get an election this time
or early next year, let's say, then I can't rule
that out.
Speaker 5 (03:34):
It feels so much different though, even than a Liz
Trust moment Jordan, or potentially what could become a Liz
Trust moment, because this is global, this is Japan, this
is France, this is the United States. For the government
to shut down, where a lot of governments are showing
a real reluctance to climb down on deficits that have
been climbing.
Speaker 1 (03:51):
They want to still lean on that deficit lever.
Speaker 5 (03:54):
Which is the reason why you see bond yields creeping higher,
particularly in the thirty year denomination. At what point does
the collective story taken on a life of its own.
Speaker 3 (04:03):
It already is I think it is happening right now.
So as you mentioned, the US with its own fiscal issuance,
Germany with its own fiscal issuance, and now France of
course has been with the largest death sit in the
euro area or flagging that point. So the only one
that stands out as not actually joining in with the
party is the UK because of the fiscal rules that
the chance has thrown on themselves. But Japan is very
(04:23):
acutely aware of this problem. The Ministry of Finance has
been reducing the auction sizes in the long end to
try and deal with that. But what's changed in the
sort of functioning of the Japanese JGB market is the
demand from life insurance insurers for long end jgbs has
collapsed versus what it used to be. And actually the
majority of the trading volumes in jgbs from the ten
(04:44):
year onwards is from foreigners, and so this means that
you get these sort of big moves as you've seen
today thanks to foreigners being the overwhelmingly large share of
trading volume in ultra long end jgb's, but also around
the tenure bucket onwards as well. So all in all,
when everyone's suing at the same time, something will break.
I'm not sure how when politicians will take note, but
(05:05):
I think they are already, and I think that's why
the LDP's fiscal prudence wing has played a large influence
in Takhi's changed in her opinions Jordan.
Speaker 2 (05:13):
In addition to that, the role of the central bank,
I think there's a big question up in the air
about that, so let's discuss it. Traditionally, if this was
the United States, we'd be talking about a pro fiscal
stimulus party or leader. We'd be talking about title monetary
policy to offset some of dan. That wasn't a conversation
in Japan overnight. In fact, the pricing of rate hikes
in the future actually came in now Jord And I wonder,
(05:34):
is this really a unique independent central bank? What is
going on with a central bank story in the relationship
between the government and the BOJ.
Speaker 3 (05:42):
All these independent central banks all they are, for example,
the FED, they answer to Congress, so there is a
political sort of influence on all of them.
Speaker 4 (05:50):
A Bank of England, ECB, etc.
Speaker 3 (05:52):
When it comes to the BOJ, there is a pretty
strong level of political cooperation. It's written into the bank
Coajapan's charter. Now this we've seen this before. Arbenomics is
a clear case of this, where most people assume that
Arbenomics was both fiscal easing and monetary Sure, it was,
but Arbenenomics actually leaned heavily on the monetary policy side
(06:13):
of that story, and we saw the Bank Japan expand
the QE and so forth, eventually going negative rates too.
So there is the potential for Takeiachi to play a
large role. If you think back to last year, Prime
Minister sheba this history behind this. John one day after
becoming Prime minister, he said now is probably not the
right time for the BOJA to raise rates, and they
delayed that rate hike from October through to January.
Speaker 4 (06:35):
So tak Each you might say the same thing.
Speaker 3 (06:37):
We've only had one tweet from her and one victory
speech so far, and so we haven't got enough information.
But what I will say is it's very different to Arbonomics.
When inflation was that near zero. Inflation has been above
two for the past two to three years in Japan,
and the aim of this government is to try and
bring inflation down. You don't really achieve that by stopping
the Bank Japan from raising rates, So John, I think
they still raise rates.
Speaker 4 (06:58):
October is clearly.
Speaker 3 (06:59):
Much less likely now because the BOJ might want to
wait and see what the budget will be. So that
makes December or January still live meetings. But if you're
to ask me, John, I'd be paid the October meeting.
I think the risk reward is still there. The Bank
Japan has lined up loads of speeches this month. We'll
hear from Governor you Wade to himself later this week
as well. The data is strong in Japan. It all
(07:19):
adds up to a rate hike. John, Apart from the
politics and the uncertainty.
Speaker 1 (07:25):
Stay with us.
Speaker 2 (07:26):
More Bloomberg surveillance coming up after this. Another week of
economic data at risk as the government shut down enters
it's sixth day. Paul Donovan of UBS Global Wealth Management
right in the following. The problem is that alternatives like
(07:47):
sentiment surveys are even worse, and that's all the markets
will be left to work with. Paul joined us now
for more. Paul, you're one of our favorites. It's great
to finally catch up with you after a period of time. Paul,
I wanted to get your opinion on this. I've heard
a lot of people's say, we're flying blind without the data.
Were we flying blind already?
Speaker 6 (08:05):
We were flying blind, we were perhaps flying quite a
thick fog. So for about fifteen years, economists have been
complaining about the deteriorating quality of economic data. Nobody fills
in surveys anymore. Structural change means that we're missing parts
of the economy. You know, where in the employment report
(08:25):
is the TikTok content creator and parties and bias. The
political bias in the States is getting extreme, and people
are answering according to their political views, not according to
what's happening actually happening in their lives. So we've had
this problem for some time. But the official data did
the best of a bad job. It did the best
(08:46):
that it could in order to filter out some of
this noise and give us an idea about where the
economy was performing in real time.
Speaker 1 (08:55):
So how does it.
Speaker 5 (08:56):
Change going forward that we don't even have that right
that we end up in the realm of speculation and
rumor at a time where people just take all of that,
put it together and say, well, stocks have to just
keep going up.
Speaker 6 (09:08):
So this is where I think things do start to
get tricky. Pads a little bit less for the equity
market than for the bond market. Because of course, corporate data,
as long as companies are honest, is going to be
still reliable. So the earnings reports that come out, the
corporate announcements that are legally obliged the companies are legally
obliged to put out, that should all be okay. But
(09:30):
the bigger macro picture is getting more confused, and some
of it is reliant on what we're seeing elsewhere in
the world. You know, how do we judge US trade data? Well,
let's see what other countries are saying when they're talking
about exports to the States, for example, we're having to
back out data some of the time.
Speaker 5 (09:48):
You made a really good point, Paul in your recent
notes that right now the market is treating the shutdown
it's going on in Washington, DC as negligible, something that
will maybe cause a loss of economic activity.
Speaker 4 (09:59):
It will just be hooped.
Speaker 5 (10:00):
Potentially in a couple weeks, in months time. Why do
you think this time really could be different?
Speaker 6 (10:07):
So as a baseline, I don't think it is going
to be different. We get this with every shutdown, you
get a period where data economic activity is suppressed and
then you get a period where you rebound, the back
pay is paid back, that kind of thing. The only
real difference this time is that US President Trump has
(10:30):
talked about possibly firing some more government employees.
Speaker 1 (10:34):
Now that is.
Speaker 6 (10:35):
Different because then, of course you're not getting the rebound
from those employees. You are also potentially creating some fear
of unemployment amongst people both in and outside the government sector.
That would be a more troubling situation because you would
get the slowdown, but the rebound that we normally would
see would be a lot more muted. I would regard
(10:57):
that very much as the risk case, not as the
base case. The base case, I think is this is
going to be like every other shutdown, you know, down
in week one, up in week two, that kind of thing.
But there is that risk if some employees are going
to lose their jobs permanently as a result of the shutdown.
Speaker 2 (11:14):
Paul, I think we all hope you're absolutely right and
we do bounce back and just get back to work,
get back to business, and this economy grows. The other
thing we wanted to talk to you about was inflation,
market based expectations of inflation, how the FED measures things,
and ultimately how consumers experience it. Paul, I've heard you
in the past talk about frequency bias. Could you explain
that as a concept in economics and why that's important
(11:34):
to the difference between how consumers feel and what the
FED is tracking.
Speaker 1 (11:40):
So this is a very important point.
Speaker 6 (11:43):
Everybody is guilty of frequency bias. That is to say,
you know, you remember the price is the Snickers bar
you buy every day. You do not remember the price
of a television you buy every three, four or five years.
And so as a result, when prices change in high
frequency purchases, it sort of sticks in your mind. And
(12:04):
every time I go to the vending machine at work,
I think, oh, that price has gone up. I remember
when it used to cost seventy pence and now it's
costing me ninety pence, And it sticks in your mind,
and that then colors the view of inflation that you have.
The fact that the television is twenty percent cheaper than
the last one you bought seven years ago, you don't
(12:26):
remember that because you can't remember what you paid in
the past.
Speaker 1 (12:29):
So the problem that.
Speaker 6 (12:31):
We have is that when you see basically rising food
and rising fuel prices, those are prices that consumers will
remember and that will create a sense of dissatisfaction when
you have food and fuel inflation. If you have an
overall fairly benign inflation environment and there's something weird going
(12:51):
on with food supply, that can create a peculiar situation
where the central banker is saying, no, inflation isn't a
problem at all, and the consumer saying, no, the cost
of living goes up. Look how much I had to
pay the supermarket this week. So that's really the issue.
Speaker 2 (13:06):
Paul, is that the situation now is that how you
describe things and does it shape consumer behavior?
Speaker 6 (13:12):
Well, what we've got at the moment, it's quite interesting.
It's sort of a reverse of what happened under the
last administration. So in the last administration, inflation was coming down,
nobody really believed it because food price inflation was very high.
There was an episode of profit led inflation from food retail.
What has been happening this year until recently, his fuel
(13:34):
prices have been subdued. Food prices until recently have not
been a particularly big problem, but durable goods prices have
gone from falling to rising. And so you've got the
reverse problem there that you've got inflation that people are
not necessarily.
Speaker 1 (13:50):
So aware of.
Speaker 6 (13:51):
But what we've been seeing more recently in the States
is food price inflation has been ticking up. Things like
the price of beef, for example, has gone up very
very dramatically. Coffee prices are soaring, and that is going
to be more visible. So I think the noise from
consumers about inflation, the political anxiety about inflation is likely
(14:13):
to be ramping up as we see these higher food
prices starting to emerge.
Speaker 2 (14:18):
Stay with us more Bloomberg Surveillance coming up after this.
Speaker 1 (14:31):
Sick in wit tech.
Speaker 2 (14:32):
Jake Goldberg of Seaport calling the recent moves in AI
bubble like behavior. Jake Goldberg joins us now for more. Jay,
Welcome to the program, sir. You've got a rare soar
rating on Nvidia. Let's just talk about that line bubble
like behavior. Does the announcement from AMD and open Ai
speak to some of that for you?
Speaker 7 (14:51):
Absolutely, It's quite an interesting thing to wake up to
this morning. We have a company that's giving away ten
percent of its start to to a startup that doesn't
have positive free cash flow to buy tens.
Speaker 1 (15:05):
Of billions of dollars of their products.
Speaker 7 (15:06):
Somewhere down the line, and that company's stock is up
thirty percent. You know, on the face of it, I
haven't had time to parse it, but it looks like
a great, good deal for AMD over the long term.
But it just, you know, the market reaction seems to
be looking at only the positives and applying a zero
(15:27):
percent discount rate to future events, not looking through the
whole deal.
Speaker 5 (15:31):
At the same time, Jay, in the past, we've seen
earnings outperform again and again and again from these companies,
and a lot of people will come on and say,
if you look at the price to the actual income level,
you've seen multiples come down, not go up, even with
prices going up significantly. What about that story doesn't work
for you in the same way that it did, say
(15:53):
three years ago.
Speaker 7 (15:55):
So I think, Look, I'm not a bear on AI
and general. I think AI has the potential to be
very important. But no technology gets adopted in a straight line.
They're always going to be fits and starts. We saw
that with the Internet, we saw that with with mobile.
These things go up and down, they don't just keep
running forever. And I think just assuming drawing straight lines,
(16:18):
extrapolating from where we are today into some sort of
never ending future.
Speaker 1 (16:23):
That's not how things are going to work.
Speaker 7 (16:25):
And I think we need just a little degree of
caution around some of this stuff, where a lot of
these things are getting very extended, just based on what
the actual deployments are looking like and returns that the
hyperscalers are getting on their investments.
Speaker 5 (16:41):
What do you think is the most speculative at this point, Jay,
I know that your call is on in Video, which
is notable given all of the buy ratings that we
see on it, But beyond that is in Vidia the
biggest defender right now in your mind?
Speaker 1 (16:53):
Well, I think the whole thing.
Speaker 7 (16:55):
We have this sort of massive AI spend taking place
right now, but if you boil it all down, it's
really six companies that are driving all of that. Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Meta,
open Ai, Microsoft, and.
Speaker 1 (17:12):
I understand that their.
Speaker 7 (17:13):
Imperatives and why they're doing this, but I think it
is worth reflecting on that it's just six companies and
none of them actually have a very clear return on
their investment even in the works. They're sort of spending
it because everyone else is spending. And then you have
open Ai, who who is an incredibly capable company coming
(17:35):
with great models, but at the same time, you know
they're free, casual, and negative. So I think that sort
of calls in the question the sustainability of all this.
Speaker 2 (17:43):
And J's bringing in multiple sectors. It's energy, it's the
capital providers, it's tech. I know based on some of
your writing that you think this could exacerbate problems further
down the road. Could you build on that just a
little bit, that the concentration exacerbates the downside risk.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
I think that's that's absolutely the case.
Speaker 7 (18:01):
Where you know, when I hear my colleagues on the
morning call talk about energy and pipelines and materials, you know,
and they all talk about the AI element to their
stocks growth, that just makes me pause. Like I've been
covering semiconductors for over twenty years now, and I've always
had good relationships with my peers, but we usually never
talk about each other's stocks. There's never been a lot
(18:22):
of overlap, and here we have everybody talking about the
same themes.
Speaker 1 (18:29):
It makes me wonder, Jane.
Speaker 2 (18:31):
The energy piece of it is interesting. There has been
a broader conversation people acknowledge the potential for constraints. Do
you think that's going to be the first constraint the
thing that shakes this up quickly.
Speaker 7 (18:41):
Absolutely right, I mean, and I look at in video
like I'm cautious on in video. I think if my
rating here is more of an underperformed than a cell,
I wouldn't short in video. But the issue is at
this point in videos is kind of all the good
news is priced into in video and none of the
potential downside is priced in. There are a lot of
things that can go go wrong that are beyond their control,
(19:02):
and you know top of that list is electricity.
Speaker 1 (19:05):
Right.
Speaker 7 (19:05):
We don't know to the extent to which Open Aye
is going to be able to deliver on all these
all these electricity numbers they put out there, and like
in just the last week they've talked about adding sixteen
gigawatts of compute capacity. I don't think anyone knows exactly
where all that power is going to come from. They
have maybe some rough ideas, but I don't think all
(19:25):
those are are a lock and that that's a real
that's a real problem. I think it's going to pause
things somewhere down the road, Jay, how far are.
Speaker 5 (19:33):
We from some sort of energy related constraint on how
much the promises of expansion can really meet reality.
Speaker 7 (19:40):
I think it's a little a little beyond my my scope,
like I'm just a humble semiconductor analyst, But I do
think we start to see more concerned about that in
next year.
Speaker 5 (19:52):
At what point do you see this also being a
question of the US versus China, especially given deep seek
I mean, do you think that that kind of issue
is going to come to the four that there could
be some new innovation that renders some of the big
tech companies more obsolete in short order?
Speaker 1 (20:11):
Well, I think that is.
Speaker 7 (20:12):
It's this weird dichotomy we have where the US has
chips but not all of electricity. China has all the
electricity they need but not enough chips. So both sides
face their own constraints. But I do think there are
going to be some pretty significant I don't want to
say breakthroughs, but sort of advances in China as companies
(20:34):
like Huawei find new ways to build their own domestic
supply chain that gets.
Speaker 1 (20:40):
Them out from under these US restrictions.
Speaker 7 (20:42):
They probably won't be as good as the best at
Nvidia and amb have to offer, but they may be
good enough for them to push ahead. There's a lot
of an immense amount of AI talent in China.
Speaker 1 (20:53):
I don't want to overstate it.
Speaker 7 (20:54):
I think the US still has a pretty big lead
in terms of just sort of fundamental foundational models, but
there's an incredible amount of talent in China, and I
think they're not as constrained as the US government might think.
Speaker 2 (21:06):
Jay, just to finish on that, when you frame it
in the following terms, when you say that China has
the electricity, not the chips, that the US has the
chips but maybe has the energy constraints, which problem is
easier to fix?
Speaker 7 (21:19):
I think it's going to be China getting around US
sanctions one way or another, probably by building their own
supply chain.
Speaker 1 (21:27):
Stay with US.
Speaker 2 (21:28):
More Bloomberg Surveillance coming up after this. Lindsay px RA
stif will joined US now for more Lindsay, we didn't
get payrolls. We're still waiting for that. We might not
get CPI. We will get a FED meeting at the
end of the month. I'm told they're essential. If they meet,
(21:50):
Lindsay and they don't have CPI and they don't have payrolls,
do they make the decision to cut interest rates?
Speaker 8 (21:56):
Well, I think even without an updated look at the data.
I think the conversation is going to be very fierce
in the sense that we do have this growing number
of FED officials that is increasingly concerned about the lingering
level of inflation, that elevated level of inflation, and those
that are focused more on the weakness of employment. So
even without a new data point, I think this conversation
(22:16):
is going to intensify and complicate the ability for the
FED to justify any further movement, and the lack of data,
I think is going to reinforce the need for a
more patient, cautious approach to policy from here.
Speaker 5 (22:30):
What date are you watching right now, lindsay, given that
the gold standard data, which is flawed, yes, but also
is probably the best that we've got, what are you
focusing on instead?
Speaker 8 (22:40):
Well, I think right now, again, we still have a
lot of information on the price side. We're still waiting
to see whether or not we see an updated CPI
and PPI report, but we have a lot of information
coming down the pipeline to suggest that inflation is not
necessarily headed back to that two percent price level. We
see some of the Fed's preferred measures of inflation, the
piece the core PC still up near three percent, with
(23:03):
the most recent reports suggesting some upward momentum in the pipeline.
So again, I think it's very important that the FED
stays focused on that mandate for price stability, even with
early signs of a cooling in top line hiring. The
FED should not completely abandon that price stability component, which
it's failed to reinstate years now post the pandemic.
Speaker 5 (23:24):
At the same time, we did see that job openings
per unemployed people that ratio felt to the lowest in
twenty twenty one in the recent JOLT survey. We did
see the non farm payrolls in August that was highly
concerning to some people, and we did see pretty significant
download re visions to the overall payrolls figures for the
year ended in March. At what point do you give
(23:44):
credence to the idea that there really is a significant
shift in the labor market that does also warrant attention
by the Fed.
Speaker 8 (23:51):
Well, we also see that jobless claims, while volatile, are
still in a very low tight range. We also see
the unemployment rate is still stubbornly down near four percent.
So I think at the very least, the labor market
data are not all pointing in the same direction, which
isn't to say we ignore the data points that are
on the weaker side, but it's to say it's not
an alarm bell quite yet. It's something to watch, it's
(24:13):
something to be aware of. That being said, this is
a very aged recovery, and I would expect, particularly given
the reduction in international flows, that the need for top
lying hiring to slow. As we heard from Chair Powell,
he previously noted that full employment was roughly around one
hundred and twenty five one hundred and fifty thousand in
terms of payrolls. Well, he has significantly rised that lower,
(24:35):
and I think that's a more reasonable expectation for top
line growth, not necessarily an expanding labor market, but certainly
enough to keep stability in place in today's labor market.
Speaker 2 (24:46):
Lindsay, can we pay that view with what's happening in
stock markets and more broadly financial conditions. Do you think
the feeder reserve is risking misplacing its anchor around the
labor market, around the step down in payrolls, and ultimately
fueling financial accesses and pockets of let's call it exuberance
right now? Is that a financial stability concern that needs consider.
Speaker 8 (25:09):
It really is, and this is something that we've seen before.
We look at investors and they seem to be trading
up on good data. That means the economy is relatively solid,
trading up on bad data as well. Because this is
that FED put the expectation that the FED will jump
in and provide monetary policy support with additional policy easing,
even at the expense of maintaining still elevated inflation. And
(25:32):
so I do think that the market has become complacent
that the FED will continue to support the economy regardless
of the balance in terms of the risks on both
sides of the mandate tilting to one side or the other.
Speaker 2 (25:45):
This is the Bloomberg Seventans podcast, bringing you the best
in markets, economics, antiopolitics. You can watch the show live
on Bloomberg TV weekday mornings from six am to nine
am Eastern. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify or
anywhere else you listen, and as always on the Bloomberg
Terminal and the Bloomberg Business app.
Speaker 3 (26:08):
Mm hmm.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
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.
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.