Bloomberg Surveillance: Airline Industry Confidence

Helane Becker, TD Cowen Sr. Research Analyst, remains confident in the airline industry despite the recent Boeing in-flight safety incident. Lori Calvasina, RBC Capital Markets Head of US Equity Strategy, says sentiments around the equity market got carried away at the end of 2023 . Claudia Sahm, Sahm Consulting Founder & Bloomberg Opinion Writer, says December's jobs data points to a healthy labor market. Isaac Boltansky, BTIG Director of Policy Research, discusses Congress' agreement on a spending-cap deal as well as Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin's unannounced stay in the hospital . Barton Crockett, Rosenblatt Securities Managing Director, details the reasons behind his firm's neutral outlook on Apple this year. Get the Bloomberg Surveillance newsletter, delivered every weekday. Sign up now: https://www.bloomberg.com/account/newsletters/surveillance Full Transcript: This is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keane, along with Jonathan Farrow and Lisa Abramowitz. Join us each day for insight from the best an economics, geopolitics, finance and investment. Subscribe to Bloomberg Surveillance on demand on Apple, Spotify and anywhere you get your podcasts, and always on Bloomberg dot Com, the Bloomberg Terminal, and the Bloomberg Business app. Helene Becker joins now senior research analyst at TD Cowen, and we're thrilled that she could be with us today. Helene, January twenty second. I guess we get an earnings report from United, the others will lined up. What is their urgency to act, not so much off the Boeing accident, but their urgency to act because of the topsy turvy markets they're in now. I think that we have a situation where we're expecting, or we saw fourth quarter traffic was pretty good. The further we get away from twenty twenty, the more we'll see managed corporate travel come back. I think the trip where you have maybe a one day trip isn't coming back anytime soon. I feel like it's a lot like after nine to eleven tom when the really short haul trips went away, and we expect that to continue really now. But the longer haul trips. People need to get out, they need to see their clients. We've been talking about this for about a year now and we're seeing that. We're seeing that increase in managed travel, and we think that we'll continue into the rest of this year. With the Boeing accident, with the rivets, the fasteners, whatever, we're going to see in the coming weeks of that analysis, even months, I should say, of that analysis, what does it mean for the dynamic of refleeting A word I discovered last week. I think Helene Becker, you know, refleeting is going out and buying the bright, shiny new thing accelerated. Yeah, well yes, and no American did their refleeting in the last decade, so they're on the downside of that. United is doing it now and into twenty thirty two. Delta is in the middle of it. But Delta has a different and Southwest actually have different viewpoints on the way they refleet. They kind of spend about ten percent revenue on capex, somewhere between eight and ten percent every year, so they're continually refleeting, so we view that fairly favorably. I don't think anything changes. There's a lot of pressure on the industry to lower their carbon footprint. I know aviation only makes up two percent of total transportation carbon, but others are doing the whole reduction carbon faster, so aviation over time will become a bigger percentage of it. So there's a lot of pressure to fly young are more fully efficient aircraft oleane. I can't get past this comment from George ferguson words you never want to hear, when he basically came out and said it's not as safe as it was before the pandemic, talking about the safety of flying at a time when we did just have this incident with Alaska Airlines, also the incident that we saw in Japan, Questions around the competency and staffing levels at some of the agencies. Are you concerned? Do you feel like that is an accurate statement that it is not as safe to fly today as pre pandemic. No, no, no, I disagree with that completely. The fact that there were no casualties on the japan Air A three thirty is hugely significant. They were able to evacuate that entire aircraft without any incident, with half the doors being half the emergency doors being unusable because of fire. So I think that's one thing to consider. I think from an aviation perspective and a safety perspect that every time there's an incident, there's an investigation. There is no cover up. You never see that as you would in some as you may in some other industries. There have it. I mean, not to cha the industry, but there really haven't been any major accidents. The fact that Alaska air pilots were able to declare any emergency turnaround land safely with no injuries is hugely significant. And I think aviation is still the sepest form of transportation. No other industry does the deep dive into accidents that aviation does, and then aviation trains for every accident, and I think I think it's I think aviation is still very safe. I think that a lot of people will point to what happened in Japan and point out that that plane that everyone did manage to get out of I believe was an air bus and not a poet. But nevertheless, Yeah, So going forward, though, I'm curious what about some of the air traffic control issues and some of these other things. How important is it for airlines to do some sort of pr job, if nothing else, to assuage some of the concerns of neurotic people like myself. Where you're looking at this and thinking like, I don't know, well, I think you have to think aviation is safe number one. Number two, Yes, we do need to address the air traffic control situation, and the fact that we now have a permanent administrator is hugely important. That's another, you know, another thing that we view favorably. The FAA is certified to March eighth, so the government needs to really step up its efforts and get it certified permanently. My views are different than some of my peer group. I personally think the government should be responsible for safety and security, and I think your traffic control should be a separate corporation that's public that's paid for everybody. Right now, General Aviation, TOLUM and least in John don't pay for using air traffic control system. Helen, this is I wish we had another hour to cover this because I think each and every listener and viewer want to know about Back to the Reagan uproar and unions of years ago. How different is our transportation safety structure versus other major developing countries. Yeah, so euro Control runs Europe and that's a public company and Canada's public company and Canada it's just run differently. And I'm not saying it's better. I'm not saying it's worse. I'm just saying it's different, and you don't have the puts and starts that you have here. I've been talking about next gen since I started covering the industry four decades ago, and we're still talking about it. It's years behind schedule, it's over budget. Air traffic control, to your point, Tom, the Reagan administration fired all the air traffic controllers. They retrained them NAT because the union that represents them. They're they're well trained, but they're overworked, they're fatigued. We don't have enough of them to handle what we're doing right now, and so the aviation system will slow down. You won't be able to We'll see growth through replacing smaller aircraft with larger aircraft. We don't think we'll see the same level of pilot hiring in twenty four and twenty five that we saw in twenty one, two and three. That from that perspective. As we move further into the decade and people have more experience, that will be beneficial. But we're not going to grow as fast as we grow in prior decades because we just don't have the experience, and we can push the air traffic controllers to too much over time because it's a very taxing job to begin with, and we don't want any accidents to occur in the US because we want to continue to be able to say it's the safest form of transportation. Helen, I've got sixty seconds left on a clock top pic if ivor trade this year? What is it? Oh? Yeah, our favorite trade this year is Delta after United was our face for trade for the past two years. Why the change? The difference in capex, frankly is the biggest difference. I think United will continue to do well, but they're going to borrow a lot of money, sick. They have a sixty billion dollar capex program between now and twenty thirty two, and Deltas is not nearly as big, so you won't see the stress and the balance sheet that you may see at United. Interesting, Helene, thank you, thanks for the up date and lane backing there of td count, Thank you very much. Starting in the conversation this morning with Lori Cavassino, the head of US screty strategy at RBC Capital Markets, Loury, Good morning to you. This line jumped down from your most recent note, the week's start in January is just the beginning of a phase of turbulence. How concerned are you about that? Well, well, Johnny, I was talking to one of my traders last week and we were discussing the CFTC data. We're starting to see it's really just looking very very stretched, and I said, this looks scary, and I think we need to keep in mind that sentiment has been oscillating very very quickly over the last six months, so this isn't necessarily something that has to derail a call for the year. Maybe damp an enthusiasm just a little bit, but really what we've started to see the CFTC data on institutional investor positioning line up with what we're seeing on the retail survey for aaii, and both are looking very very stretched right now. I think there are a number of things that could come in and trip this market up a bit, but usually it's something the market doesn't see coming, So I think we need to focus here on the idea that sentiment itself just got carried away at the end of last year. Laurie Mike Wilson has been cautious on the markets. Over at Morgan Stanley has a brilliant paragraph parketing to nominal growth could be the surprise this year. It's one of his more optimistic constructions of where we're heading in the mystery of twenty twenty four, what do mid caps and small caps do? If we get legitimate animal spirit, we get legitimate nominal GDP. So what we've done typically seen is that when GDP and we tend to look at it in real terms as opposed to nominal terms. But if you're looking at real GDP above two point six percent, and two point six percent has been the long term average since the late seventies, we typically see that small caps and value stocks outperform in that environment. When GDP is running cool below trend, that's when large caps and growth tend to outperform. So it goes back to this question of leadership and rotation in the market. We've got GDP forecasts sitting at about one point three percent this year. That's up from about one percent back in November, so they're moving in the right direction. But if we really want to get a lasting, sustainable, durable leadership rotation away from the megacap growth stocks and into basically everything else in the market, you need to see GDP expectations move up quite a bit more from where they are right now. I mean, okay, well, the GDP's got to come up. I get that, But what do we do right now? I mean, you're deploying cash to small you know they've pulled back. You deploying cash this morning to small caps and mid caps. So I still like them, I don't like them quite as much as I did, you know, say four or five weeks ago when we last spoke. One of the things we've seen is that, in addition to sentiment getting a little frothy at the broader market, if you look at small cap positioning on the CFTC data, we're at important crossroads. We're basically at the three year highs, but we're not at all time highs. So we're going to know pretty soon whether or not small caps are really able to power through and take things up another leg of we's also still seeing that small caps look very cheap relative to large But if you look at a Russell two thousand and forward pe, it's back to average. Now that's not usually where things top out at, but it is telling us that maybe we have made a lot of the easy money in small caps already. So do I like them? Yes? Do I like them as much as I did a month ago? Not quite? This sounds all kind of negative, and yet you just upgraded your forecast for year end twenty twenty four to a fifty one fifty. That's a ten percent upside from here. If it's not small caps what leads. So I think that the value stocks in particular are something to keep an eye on. From here. We've seen the financials act quite well now I'm actually a little bit nervous about that heading into reporting season, but we've started to see some more favorable views emerge on the industrials as well. So I think we're going to get some interesting clues in this reporting season. But I do think sector composition is very, very tough right now. I do think, Lisa, if you kind of go back to our target, we were anticipating about a ten percent return, and we put that target out in early our mid November we were on sort of the earlier side of putting targets out. We trued up all of our you know, sort of models for year end. We did have this big, ferocious run in December, and now where we're sitting today, even with this upgrade on the fifty one to fifty, it's only about an eight percent return on the year, So it's not necessarily getting more bullish. It's just kind of truing up our model for the year ahead based on the moves that we had in December. You mentioned banks, and I find this interesting. How important is Friday going to be as JP Morgan kicks off earnings to give a sense of what the landscape is for banks? Or is it just JP Morgan's world and everybody else is living in it? So I think they all matter, Lisa. You know, I don't think it's just any one particular bank. I know some get more attention than others, especially the one that come at the beginning. But I tell you what I think is important for the banks is one, are those sort of strong numbers that we've seen in terms of performance going to hold up. Sometimes we do see, you know, sort of the banks give back when they've had a strong lead into reporting season, So are the numbers going to be good enough to really justify sustaining some of the better trends we've seen recently. I think that's one thing. But also I think for someone like me who's not a specialist in the financials, we really go in and look at the financials for clues on the plumbing of the economy, on the health of the consumer. And I think that's probably going to be the most important thing coming out of the next kind of week or so with those banks earnings, the real headline over the weekend coming into this morning a positive surprise in Washington, d C. Laurie this story congressional leaders announcing a deal on top line spending for the current fiscal year. Laurie, I was speaking to Wemy with Silverman in the last week and we talked about your line that talking about politics the election this year specifically is like staring at the sun. Is it that bad this year for you and the team? Yeah, it's pretty awful, John. I mean it's interesting that line comes from my conversations with US based investors who are like, Okay, it's time to write our outlooks. You know, this is kind of thinking back the last month or so, you know, what do we say about this? And we kind of walk people through data, We get through it quickly, and then we move on European and Canadian investors. I mean, you could easily spend a whole meeting on this. It's like it's like a spectator sport for them at this point. But I do think it's a major source of uncertainty. And I'll tell you what it was interesting to me last week when I was working through some of the data we saw at the end of the year in the beginning of this year, is that you are starting to see money flows improve or turn positive to Japan, to emerging markets, to China, and to Europe. US flows are still holding up, but we are starting to see non US geographies really attract, you know, some better flows. And I think part of that has to do with the election. Based on what I'm hearing from the non US investors, Laurie answer a question for OURBC clients watching listening, which is, jeez, we started the year week and that signals a terrible year ahead. Is there any valid to that emotion? So I tend to be very skeptical of you know, these seasonal, you know kind of studies. Whenever we do this on this day, we do this for the rest of the week. I think that those kinds of studies can be massaged frankly, you know, change your starting point to show whatever you want to show. I've been actually looking at seasonality over the last ten years. We've had some good ones, we've had some stinkers, but we have seen that January has been pretty much a mixed bag. There have been some difficult ones if you especially look over the last five years. So it would be sort of keeping with a recent seasonality to have a rough start to the year. Does that necessarily tell you that you have to run away for the rest of the year. I don't think so. And I go back to what we talked about at the top of the show. Sentiment has been oscillating so quickly. We were basically overbought in August, oversold in November, overbought in December again, and that all round tripped off of oversold conditions last October and post SVB. So I think that sentiment helps you tactically. I don't think you can use it that much to make a really kind of longer term view. At this point, Laurie. Wonderful to get your views this morning. Thanks Obama. This lor Convasaye of the vampy seat capital market. Claudia sam will be up all night watching a football game as well. Claudia for the Department of Economics at Michigan, all that heritage. What does blue football actually mean? Do you completely ignore it? Or are you at the fifty yard line for every game? Well, they don't. Let the grad students have very good seats. But we went. You know, it's it's Michigan, Go Blue, Go Blue. We'll see tonight. Thank you so much for joining Claudia. Barry rid Oldson. You had a great idea out there that in our hysteria right now of single statistics, we have denominator blindness. Let's take the national debt the interest expense of that, and we forget how large our economy is or how large our labor force is. How is hysterical are we right now? And do we need to calm down? Well, we've needed to calm down for decades. This is not a new conversation. The debt has to be put in context, not just of our GDP. That's a flow that we get that every year. We need to think about in terms of their wealth, which is multiples of what that debt is. And I also a firm believer, and we need to look under the hood and what are we spending our money on. There's good ways to do it investment R and D, and there's ways that aren't as good, maybe really high income tax cuts. So that's where we need to have a conversation, not just throwing around big numbers. Is the FED throwing around big numbers? Are they having a conversation as they move out into twenty twenty four that you would consider appropriate and rational in terms of the debt or in terms of what they're doing in terms of what they're going to do with their monetary policy? Excuse me? Yeah, no, I mean the FED is trying to do the impossible. Well, right now, my heart goes out to them, and we will play a parlor game for the next year or two and what their next move is. And yeah, they've got the eye on the prize, right. They work through financial markets, but they really don't care about financial markets. It's about getting inflation down, it's about keeping people with jobs. And we're well on our way, but it's going to be tough. To know when they're there and can say, okay, we can back off. Let's do an anatomy of what happened on Friday, because it was some confusing data that I tried to parse through and continue to and read more reports, and I'm just as confused. Which data screams the truest to you at a time where we got stronger than expected headline number, some real shows of strength, and then real signs of weakness, particularly in services. Employment. Big picture of Friday's payrolls was a good day. We had unemployments staying at three point seven percent. We're averaging a little under two hundred thousand jobs in recent months. If you think about what the labor market is buffering, we have a five percentage point more than that increase in the federal funds rate. This is a labor market. Now. You can go under the hood. You can do this in almost any month and say, ugh, that doesn't look so good now. Granted, there were some real science things to keep an eye on, you know, and we always need to, but this was not a flashing red We're going over the cliff. I mean, come on, we've been under the one employer it's been under four percent for the longest stretch since the nineteen sixties. Well, it's good. What about the services ISM data. That's fact that hiring fell the most, the sort of sub index for that particular data point came in the most going back to twenty twenty at the height of the pandemic. Does this make you feel like we're at a tipping point? Even if no, we're not heading into the abyss that we are cooling off in a much more material way. It's been like case last year. We needed to rebounce. We needed to get to a place that was expansionary but not red hot. I mean, we were coming out of a really bad labor market with COVID. So we do need to see things normalizing slowing, not just this pace that's been so strong, because we want to get to a sustainable place and there are going to be all signs. Frankly, I take a lot more out of the payrolls data than I do the ISM and we need to look at everything. And yet we've gotten a lot of mixed signals from the data you know so far. So we adres a Samrell for us right now? How many states are in a miserable situation, doctor Son? So I haven't looked at every state recently. One that has stood out, and I imagine is still in the same place as California. That's a really good example of how you can have an industry that's having a tough time. I mean, tech in the Bay Area is legitimately having some tough times, and yet we have seen no signs of its spreading because it's an industry issue, it's not like a broad based contraction. And I will say at the national level, the samrull went back down to two tenths of a percentage point, So looking good so far. Coldly, I just want to weigh in on some of the politics, and I don't want to beg you too much, but whenever I listen to you talk about the labor market, you offer clarity where clarity can be found, and why there isn't any It leaves the question open. It's ready digestible, very very intuitive. Why do you think this administration is struggling with the messaging so much around what's happening with this economy? For a long time, Democrats have really put an emphasis on being the adult in the room. When I saw the jobs number, I had a gift that I use as like boom. You know, it's like, come on, let's get excited about this. Yes, there's more to do, and yet when I look at all it has been accomplished in the last four years and even during the Trump administration, the big push with CARES Act we really help people. Is not perfect, but like, don't hide behind what you've done, like go out and say we did agree. Job Okay, Then why can't they do that? I mean, John brings up an incredibly important point. Claudie sim You've been in the trenches. Why can't somebody just come out not say, you know, Rosie Morning in America and all that, but say, look, we understand the agonies out there, but boy has this worked out from COVID versus many other countries and continents. I really don't know. I mean, I have come across the fact that across the democratic spectrum there's just so much anger at each other. I mean, I've gotten the worst feedback from far left, and you know center isn't exactly happy with me either. So it's just it's so strange, right, But you know, I don't know. I hate politics. I really don't understand it. I just keep doing my work and trying to explain and trying to learn from what people are going through, and we value your work. Clodia, thank you as always, just fantastic to hear from you. Todi Samda of some consulting right now on your Washington. Isaac Multanski joints Director of Policy Research at BTIG. Isaac, I got to go with the lead a headline, which is, I guess all clear in Congress we've actually passed a budget. Is that true? Absolutely not. That couldn't be farther from the truth. We now have top line agreement on what we can spend for the fiscal year. That's great, it's wonderful, and that just means that the hard work gets to begin now. You know, I think you're two points to highlight. Number one is you've got to notice how angry the far right flank of the House GOP is this morning. We need to understand that the speaker, Speaker Johnson is operating with no room for error and he will almost certainly need democratic support to pass his bill. That's something that former Speaker McCarthy didn't want to do, ended up doing and then got thrown out from the speakership. And the number two is there are so many points of departure between Democrats and Republicans when it comes to the specifics of the spending agreement. There are upwards of forty different poison pills some groups have counted that could shut down the talks around this. So look, I think the temperature has been taken down. The risk of a shutdown is slightly lower this morning. But there's still a lot of work that needs to be done over the next eleven days. So what's the primary to do list arking over the next eleven days. Yeah, So what I'm looking looking at is I can get movement on the other issues around the spending bill. So it's good that we've got this, and now I think the appropriators will slink back into their offices and you'll see some backroom negotiation and maybe not much on that. I'm interested in the border deal, Tom, because we've got to keep in mind, the spending agreement is just part of this three D chess game that we have going on. The other part is the supplemental spending measures, and here I'm talking about border security, and then of course funding for Taiwan, Ukraine and Israel. That's the other part of it. And we'll Lynch. All of that is the border security deal that we're now expecting to come later this week. You mentioned the international security concerns, big foreign policy issues. We've got to talk about the curious case of the missing Defense Secretary now Isaac. First of all, we wish him all a speedy recovery from what none of us sink to know the detail. According to our reporting, Lloyd Austin underwent an elective procedure in late December, didn't tell his staff they should notify others when he was admitted to Walter Reed Medical Center on New Year's Day after experiencing severe pain at the same time as chief of staff was ill with the flu, and failed to notify anyone, the person said that we've been speaking to. According to our source, that Austin's military aid quickly put Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks in charge of running the Pentagon, although she wasn't informed of the reason for this decision, and the President seemingly for days didn't have a clue. I say, what was going on? What is going on? This is one of the weirder stories you're going to come across in the Biden administration, which by and large has been pretty tame when it comes to these personnel stories, especially compared to the previous four years. But it's deeply unsettling, right, I know that the secretary is an incredibly personal excuse me, an incredibly private person, and that this is something that all the staff have highlighted about him. Don't get to be this private when you're sixth in line in the presidential line of succession, and so, Look, this is deeply unsettling, especially given that transparency is one of the pillars of our political system. But ultimately, this too shall pass, and I think it just reminds you of some of the stories of personnel volatility that we saw during the Trump administration, which is going to be one of the campaign trail considerations as well. You said volatility. Do you expect him to step down? No, Look, I think that, depending on health, of course, that he is going to be fine. I mean, the President has not made any comment that suggests that the Defense Secretary won't will leave here, so I think he will stay. I wouldn't be surprised if he's replaced if the President Biden does win reelection, though, I think this is the type of thing that doesn't get you reappointed. Well, this raises a question though, in general about foreign policy and also the platform for President Biden going forward. There were a list of asks that people are talking about his new platform, all of which you're going to get red and are dead in the water. Is he going to basically be running on the anti Trump candidacy once again at a time when Trump is consolidating a lot of popular support. Yeah. Look, I mean there's obviously you've heard that line a thousand times that you campaign in poetry, but you govern in pros I don't think anyone's going to like the poetry we see from a campaign trail this time around. It is truly going to be a fear driven campaign. It is fear of the other side. It is fear of reversal, is fear of retribution. I don't seem to think that we're going to see much hope and excitement coming from the campaign trail over the next few months. Isaac, you know the polarity of the states with Ohio and Ohio Wesleyan, I'm absolutely fascinating of the polarity in the Iowa caucuses. What is the distinctive tension as we begin the political season in Iowa. I mean, looking, presidential primaries are about retail politics, and they're about and they're about personal preference more so than any national old pole could ever understand. And then when we think about Iowa, we've got to think about President Trump having a thirty two point leaked and we've got to think about also, and I think this is important. Tom DeSantis went all in on Iowa. This is it for him. And if he comes in second and loses by thirty points, which the polls are suggesting, pretty hard to imagine him being considered a serious contender going to New Hampshire where he's clearly third at far behind Haley. And so really this is to me, Iowa is a little assess for the DeSantis campaign. If he loses as badly as it looks, I think that his campaign, which already been floundering, will effectively be over. And it's really a question then of how strongly Nikki Haley can look in New Hampshire a week later. But to that point, Isaac, if he loses and he has to drop out, who does he back? Where do those votes go? Look? I think it will be incredibly difficult for him to back anyone. I think that he will remain in the background. My bet though, is that those bets, those vote's actually split somewhat to Haley and the rest stay home from the primary. But my point to clients say is Trump is going to be the nominee. That is very clear right now. He is the likely nominee. Those votes weren't trying to figure out where they're going. They're going to him in the general election. And so that's the important point here. There's still so many clients and so many people in DC who don't want it to be Trump v. Biden, and I understand that. But all indications are it's Trump vi Bide, and that's what the market and DC folks need to start wrapping their heads around when we think about the politics and the policy of it all. Isaac, thank you, sir, isa Boltanski then of b tch bot, a Crockett senior research analyst that rusn't black securities join just not for more. But and let's talk about that the prospective. Say I was picking up for the iPhone and what's been holding them back over the last year. Well, look, I think that you know, we downgraded Apple in August early August. We currently have one hundred and eighty nine dollars price target neutral rating, And you know, our concern at that time is that you had a combination of a muted growth trajectory really across much of the company, including the iPhone, certainly factoring prominently into that, and a high valuation. So that combination, in our mind was not compelling, not something you needed to be overweight on. I think the issue with the iPhone is the feature set, innovation and the consumer pocketbook and some question about China, and I think all of those things have you know, given us data points that are very supportive of the notion that you're in a very muted place right now for iPhone. And I think given that that's something like fifty percent of sales, very difficult for that stock to have a lot of excitement. I think if there's not a lot of excitement in the iPhone marton, the basic idea here I guess for the bulls is they're running it for profit. If you look at the Evada margin from COVID twenty nineteen, they've moved from twenty nine cents on the dollar up to thirty three cents in the dollar. Even if they get a Barton krack at sales lassitude. Can they maintain margins? You know? The company I think can maintain margins, you know, but I don't know that that's type of story, you know, nickel and diming margins, muted growth is something that's going to be really compelling at currently about twenty ape thirty PE when we downgrade it, I think the certainly, it's a great company. It's a good company that you could want to own at the appropriate price. But I think you've got to be price sensitive. I think it's a maturing company, and you can't buy it at any multiple, and you can't sit back and predict blue sky multiple expansion and perpetuity with this type of business as we see it right now. I look at the center tendency of a long term chart when you say a pullback, how much would that be if you do get some negative news out of China, et cetera. Is this from one to eighty down to one sixty, which is a center distribution? You know, certainly we would feel more comfortable with a healthy double digit return to our price target. You know, I do have some comfort with our estimates and with the street consensus. I do believe that you know, people have baked in the idea of a very muted iPhone. You know, this is a company you can own at the right price, but it's a mature company price. It's not a growth multiple. I think, Martin, is this an Apple problem or is this a big tech problem? More broadly, you know, I think this is much more Apple. I mean, we look at some other big tech companies in our coverage and we see a really great confluence of things developing lower interest rates, certainly supporting multiples, expansion, certainly favoring scarce growth, which you don't have it Apple, but you do have it things like Amazon, And I think there's been a reset in the Internet model. People have understood that you can run these businesses with much better margins, much more efficiently. You know. So while you're nickel and diming some mar improvement at Apple, you're seeing explosive margin improvement at Amazon, at Meta, Pinterest, at Spotify. You know, those that I think are much more interesting opportunities in this environment. I've never thought that people would say Pinterest in Spotify would trump Apple when it came to potential opportunities. Is it negative enough in your view for them to really drop out of the mag seven for this to be defined by a very different narrative that Apple is just not included in in twenty twenty four. Well, you know, I mean max seven certainly, that's kind of, you know, a term of art. I guess the thing with Apple is, I think it's a CpG company. I think that, you know, it's a company that you'd like to own at the right price, you know, in a certain macro environment where perhaps it's defensive, if the economy is slowing, maybe it's more interesting. But you don't need to be overweight Apple in every environment. You should pick and choose your places. I always wonder what the appropriate multiple on that name actually is. You've got the core good, the iPhone going ex grow, You've got a multiple that still looks pretty growthy as the revenue mix starts to shift towards services. I'm ordering from your perspective, what most part did you put on that business? Well, look, I mean I think that it's trading at about one point four times or so the market multiple. You know, I think a lesser premium is appropriate. You know, you can give it some premium given the strength of its franchise, the strength of its brand, the durability you know, the iPhone's not going away, and they've got good cash flow and good share repurchase. So to think that this could be a load image twenties multiple makes more sense to me than a thirty multiple. Bana, Thank you, sir for your insight. The update to a new year. Bona Crockett there of Rosenblat Securities. Subscribe to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast on Apple, Spotify, and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live every weekday starting at seven am Eastern. Bloomberg dot Com, the iHeartRadio app, tune In, and the Bloomberg Business app you can watch us live. I'm Bloomberg Television and always I'm the Bloomberg Terminal. Thanks for listening. I'm Tom Keen and this is Bloomberg See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.