Podcasts about Morgan Stanley

Our Chief U.S. Economist Michael Gapen and Global Head of Macro Strategy Matthew Hornbach discuss potential next steps for the FOMC and the risks to their views from the U.S. government shutdown. Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Matthew Hornbach: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Matthew Hornbach, Global Head of Macro Strategy.Michael Gapen: And I'm Michael Gapen, Morgan Stanley's Chief U.S. Economist.Matthew Hornbach: The October FOMC meeting delivered a quarter percent rate cut as widely expected – but things are more complicated, and policy is not on a preset path from here.It's Friday, November 7th at 10am in New York.So, Mike, the Fed did cut by 25 basis points in October, but it was not a unanimous decision. And the Federal Open Market Committee decided to end the reduction of its balance sheet on December 1st – earlier than we expected. How did things unfold and does this change your outlook in any way?Michael Gapen: Yeah, Matt, it was a surprise to me. Not so much the statement or the decision, but there were dissents. There was a dissent in favor of a 50-basis point cut. There was a dissent in favor of no cut. And that foreshadowed the press conference – where really the conversation was about, I think, a divided committee; and a committee that didn't have a lot of consensus on what would come next.The balance sheet discussion, which we can get into, it came a little sooner than we thought, but it was largely in line with our view. And I'm not sure it's a macro critical decision right now. But I do think it was a surprise to markets and it was certainly a surprise to me – how much Powell's tone shifted between September and October, in terms of what the market could expect from the Fed going forward.So, what he said in essence, the key points, you know. The policy's not on a preset path from here. Or [a] cut in December is maybe not decidedly part of the baseline; or certainly is not a foregone conclusion. And I think what that reflects is a couple of things.One is that they're recalibrating policy based on a risk management view. So, you can cut almost independent of the data, at least in the beginning. And so now I think Powell's saying, ‘Well, at least from here, future cuts are probably more data dependent than those initial cuts.' But second, and I think most importantly is the division that appeared within the Fed. I think there's one group that's hawkish, one group that's dovish, and I think it reflects the division and the tension that we have in the economic data.So, I think the hawkish crowd is looking at strong activity data, strong AI spending, an upper income consumer that seems to be doing just fine. And they're saying, ‘Why are we cutting? Financial conditions for the business community is pretty easy. Maybe the neutral rate of interest is higher. We're probably less restrictive than you think.' And then I think the other side of the committee, which I believe still that Chair Powell is in, is looking at a market slowdown in hiring a weak labor market. What that means for growth in real income for those households that depend on labor market income to consume; there's probably some front running of autos that artificially boosted growth in the third quarter.So, I think that the dissents, or I should say the division within the FOMC, I think reflects the tension in the underlying data. So, to know which way monetary policy evolves, Matt, it's essentially trying to decide: does the labor market rebound towards the activity data or does the activity data decelerate at least temporarily to the labor market?Matthew Hornbach: Mike, you talked a lot about data just now, and we're not exactly getting a lot of government data at the moment. How are you thinking about the path for the data in terms of its availability between now and the December FOMC meeting? And how do you think that may affect the Fed's willingness to move forward with another rate cut in the cycle?Michael Gapen: Right. So that's key and critical to understanding, right? We're operating under the assumption, of course the federal government shutdowns going to end at some point. We're going to get all this back data released and we can assess where the economy is or has been. I think the way markets should think about this is if the government shutdown has ended in the next few weeks, say before Thanksgiving – then I think we, markets, the Fed will have the bulk of the data in front of them and available to assess the economy at the December FOMC meeting.They may not have it all, but they should get at least some of that data released. We can assess it. If the economy has moderated and weakened a bit, the labor market has continued to cool, the Fed can cut. If it shows maybe the labor market rebounding downside risk to employment being diminished, maybe the Fed doesn't cut.So that's a world and it is our expectation the shutdown should end in the next few weeks. We're already at the longest shutdown on record, so we will get some data in hand to make the decision for December. Perhaps that's wishful thinking, Matt, and maybe we go beyond Thanksgiving, and the shutdown extends into December.My suspicion though, is if the government is still shut down in December, I can't imagine the economy's getting better. So, I think the Fed could lean in the direction of taking one more step.Matthew Hornbach: This is going to be very critical for how the markets think about the outlook in 2026 and price the outlook for 2026. The last FOMC meeting of the year has that type of importance for markets – pricing, the path of Fed policy, and the path of the economy into 2026. Because if we end up receiving a rate cut from the Fed, the dialogue in the investment community will be focused on when might the next cut arrive. Versus if we don't get that rate cut in December, the dialogue will focus on, maybe we will never see another rate cut in the cycle. And what if we see a rate hike as we make our way through the second half of 2026? So that can have a dramatic impact on the U.S. Treasury market and how investors think about the outlook for policy and the economy.Michael Gapen: So, I think that's right. And as you know, our baseline outlook is at least through the first quarter, if not into the second quarter. The private sector will still be attempting to pass through tariffs into prices. And I think in the meantime, demand for labor and the hiring rate will remain low.And so, we look for additional labor market slack to build. Not a lot, but the unemployment rate moving to more like 4.6, maybe 4.7 – and that underpins our expectation the Fed will be reducing rates in in 2026. But I think as you note, and as I mentioned earlier, there is this tension in the data and it's not inconceivable that the labor market accelerates. And you get, kind of, an animal spirits driven 2026; where a combination of momentum in the data, AI-related business spending, wealth effects for upper income consumers and maybe a larger fiscal stimulus from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, lead the economy to outperform.And to your point, if that is happening, it's not farfetched to think, well, if the Fed put in risk management insurance cuts, perhaps they need to take those out. And that could build in a way where that expectation, let's say towards the second half or the fourth quarter maybe of 2026, maybe it takes into 2027. But I agree with you that if the Fed can't cut in December because the economy's doing well and the data show that, and we learn more of that in 2026, you're right.So, it would… And may maybe to put it more simply, the more the Fed cuts, the more you need to open both sides of the rate path distribution, right? The deeper they cut, the greater the probability over time, they're going to have to raise those rates. And so, if the Fed is forced to stop in December, yeah, you can make that argument.Matthew Hornbach: Indeed, a lot of the factors that you mentioned are factors that are coming up in investor conversations increasingly. The way I've been framing it in my discussions is that investors want to see the glass as half full today, versus in the middle of this year the glass was looking half empty. And of course, as we head into the holiday season, the glass will be filled with something perhaps a bit tastier than water. And so…Michael Gapen: Fill my glass please.Matthew Hornbach: Indeed. So, I do think that we could be setting up for a bright 2026 ahead. And so, with that, Mike, look forward to seeing you again in December – with a glass of eggnog perhaps. And a decision in hand for the meeting that the Fed holds then. Thanks for taking the time to talk.Michael Gapen: Great speaking with you, Matt.Matthew Hornbach: And thanks for listening. If you enjoy Thoughts on the Market, please leave us a review wherever you listen and share the podcast with a friend or colleague today.

Earlier this week, the U.S. Supreme Court heard a case challenging the current administration's tariff policy. Our Head of Fixed Income Research and Public Policy Research explains the potential magnitude of the case's outcome for markets.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Michael Zezas, Global Head of Fixed Income Research and Public Policy Strategy.Today, we discuss the challenge against tariffs at the Supreme Court and how it might affect markets.It's Thursday, Nov 6th at 11am in New York.This week, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments about the legality of most of the tariffs implemented by the Trump administration. Investors are paying close attention because if the Supreme rules against the administration, it could undo much of the four-five times tariff increase that's taken place in the U.S. this year. That would seem to set up this hearing, and a subsequent ruling which could come as early as this month, as a clear market catalyst. But, like many policy issues affecting the economic and markets outlook, the reality is more complicated. Here's what you need to know.First, there's ample debate among experts about how the court will rule. That may seem surprising given the court's makeup. Three of the nine judges were appointed by President Trump, and six of the nine by Republican Presidents. But it's not clear they'll agree that the President used his executive power in a way consistent with the law that granted the executive branch this particular power. That law is the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA. And, without getting into too much detail, the law appears to have been designed to deal with economic crises and foreign adversaries, which the court might argue is not evident when considering tariffs levied against traditional allies.But, the next important point is that a ruling against the Trump administration might not actually change much around U.S. tariff levels. How is that possible? It's because the administration has other executive tariff powers it can deploy if needed, and ones that are arguably more durable. For example, Section 301 gives a President wide latitude to designate a trading partner as undertaking unfair trade practices. So this authority could be swapped in for IEEPA. That could take time, as Section 301 requires a study to be submitted, but there are other temporary authorities that could bridge the gap. So the U.S. can likely ensure continuity of current tariff levels if it wants – keeping tariffs more of a constant than a variable in our outlook.Of course, we have to consider ways we could be wrong. For example, the administration could use a ruling against it to re-focus instead on product specific tariffs through Section 232. That likely would result in U.S. effective tariff rates drifting a bit lower, alleviating some of the pressure our economists see on the consumer and corporate importers, adding more support to risk assets. But that scenario might come with some volatility along the way if the administration feels the need to float larger product specific tariff levels before settling on more palatable levels – similar to what happened in April.So bottom line, there's more tariff policy noise to navigate this year. It could bring some market volatility, and maybe even a bit of upside, but the most likely outcome is that we circle back to the approximate levels we are today. Setting up for 2026, that means other debates – like how companies respond to tariffs and capital spending incentives – are probably more important to the outlook than the level of tariffs themselves. We're digging in on all that and will keep you in the loop.Thanks for listening. If you enjoy Thoughts on the Market, please leave us a review and tell your friends about the podcast. We want everyone to listen.

Is the recent AI unwind the start of something bigger? We discuss with Partners Group's Anastasia Amoroso, Neuberger Berman's Shannon Saccocia and Wilmington Trust's Meghan Shue. Plus, shares of Qualcomm fell despite better-than-expected Q4 results and a strong forecast. We discuss that move with star analyst Stacy Rasgon. And, Morgan Stanley's Lisa Shalett tells what she is expecting from stocks – amid an ugly day for the broad market.  Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Links & ResourcesFollow us on social media for updates: ⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠Check out our recommended tool: ⁠⁠Prop Stream⁠⁠Thank you for listening!

Reprezentanții a două mari bănci de investiții americane au tras un semnal de alarmă. Prezenți la un eveniment al liderilor financiari din întreaga lume, desfășurat la Hong Kong, directorii generali ai Morgan Stanley și Goldman Sachs au avertizat asupra posibilității ca piețele bursiere să înregistreze o scădere. Motivul ar fi acela al unei supraevaluări a domeniului tehnologic. Directorul Morgan Stanley a spus chiar că o scădere a prețurilor cu 10% sau 15% ar fi o corecție moderată și binevenită chiar, după ce indicii bursieri înregistrează maxime istorice. De altfel, o scădere a prețului acțiunilor este considerată chiar benefică însemnând o revenire la niveluri mai sustenabile. Nu este prima dată când analiștii atrag atenția asupra sectorului tehnologic. Cel mai des s-a făcut comparația între momentul de astăzi și bula „dot com” din anii 2000, atunci când companiile legate de internet s-au devalorizat puternic. David Solomon, CEO al Goldman Sachs, vorbește despre ciclurile de creștere, despre schimbarea traiectoriei și despre faptul că niciunul dintre bancherii de pe Wall Street nu poate vedea momentul scăderii până nu se întâmplă. În același timp, trebuie spus că recomandările sau opiniile liderilor din sectorul financiar au influențat piața, în sensul că a fost suficient ca bancherii de investiții să afirme, după o analiză a indicatorilor economici ai unei companii, că acțiunile nu sunt recomandate pentru cumpărare pentru ca prețul să scadă. Deci, în multe cazuri, prognozele managerilor de pe Wall Street ajung să fie profeții auto-împlinite. Piața americană de capital are și un așa-numit indicator al fricii care a urcat la un nivel maxim, în timp ce indicii bursieri au scăzut ușor. Bancherii văd că multiplii de evaluare ai companiilor de tehnologie (indicatori pe baza cărora se calculează valoarea unei firme) sunt întinși puternic. Este un sector supraîncălzit despre care analiștii financiari cred că se va corecta, adică prețul acțiunilor va scădea. Cu cât prețul acțiunilor companiilor de tehnologie crește, cu cât entuziasmul pentru inteligența artificială este mai mare, cu atât crește îngrijorarea în rândul directorilor din finanțele americane. În octombrie a.c., Jamie Dimon, șeful J.P. Morgan a avertizat asupra riscului unei corecții semnificative a prețurilor pe Bursa de la New York în următorii doi ani. Există multe zone de incertitudine la nivel mondial, precum tensiunile geopolitice, cheltuielile guvernamentale, deficitul, gradul de îndatorare al SUA, dar și noul val de remilitarizare la nivel global. Evident, cu această ocazie apar și o serie de specialiști care de-a lungul timpului au prezis diverse crize, precum cea financiară din anul 2008. Entuziasmul pentru inteligența artificială generativă a alimentat creșterea unor companii implicate în această industrie, precum Nvidia sau Microsoft. De exemplu, Nvidia a ajuns la o valoare de piață amețitoare, de 5.000 de miliarde de dolari. De asemenea, sunt analize care arată că nivelul cheltuielilor cu infrastructura legată de inteligența artificială va crește în următorii ani până la 2.800 miliarde de dolari. Recent, Open AI și Amazon au semnat un acord pe șapte ani pentru servicii de cloud în valoare de 38 miliarde de dolari. Ce ne arată aceste cifre? Că există o frenezie a finanțărilor pentru companii care au legătură cu noile tehnologii, fie că este vorba despre inteligență artificială, infrastructură tehnologică, microprocesoare sau cloud. Sunt investiții enorme care se vor derula în următorii ani. Întrebarea este: există riscul spargerii bulei companiilor de tehnologie? Părerile sunt împărțite, dar analiștii financiari observă că spre deosebire de anii 2000, companiile au profituri solide și operațiuni comerciale profitabile. Ceea ce le pune la adăpost de crize majore.

L'euphorie autour des valeurs technologiques et de l'intelligence artificielle touche-t-elle à sa fin ? Alors que les indices boursiers tutoient des sommets, plusieurs poids lourds de Wall Street – Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, et même Michael Burry, le célèbre investisseur du "Big Short", tirent la sonnette d'alarme. Valorisations excessives, essoufflement de l'enthousiasme malgré des résultats spectaculaires, et prévisions de corrections allant jusqu'à 20 % : sommes-nous à l'aube d'un nouveau cycle ou au bord d'une bulle façon années 2000 ? L'analyse de John Plassard, responsable de la stratégie d'investissement et associé de la banque Cité Gestion. Ecorama du 6 novembre 2025, présenté par David Jacquot sur Boursorama.com Hébergé par Audion. Visitez https://www.audion.fm/fr/privacy-policy pour plus d'informations.

I know this keeps a lot of us up at night: When do we speak? What do we say? What if we get it wrong? And honestly, I've been wrestling with it too… From letting my actions speak louder than my words for years, to finding my voice in ways that feel more direct and meaningful now. Here's what we're covering today: the real trade-offs of using your platform, how to discern what's actually yours to carry, why "staying in your lane" might mean something completely different than you think, and what it looks like to lead imperfectly while building bridges instead of walls. If you've been wrestling with when or how to speak up about the things that break your heart, this conversation is for you. Click play to learn how to speak up about your beliefs without losing yourself or your people! Goal Digger Facebook Community: https://www.facebook.com/groups/goaldiggerpodcast/ Goal Digger Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/goaldiggerpodcast/ Goal Digger Show Notes: https://jennakutcherblog.com/ Thanks to our Goal Digger Sponsors: Sign up for your $1/month Shopify trial period at http://shopify.com/goaldigger. Find a co-host today at http://airbnb.com/host. Check out What Should I Do With My Money? from Morgan Stanley. Listen now at https://mgstnly.lnk.to/bqe8HiAC!GD.  Visit http://www.spectrum.com/freeforlife to learn how you can get Business Internet Free Forever. Experience the power of a Dell PC with Intel Inside®, backed by Dell's price match guarantee. Shop now at https://www.dell.com/deals. Your dream wardrobe's one click away. Visit https://www.revolve.com/goaldigger for 15% off your first order with code GOALDIGGER.

Concluding a two-part roundtable discussion, our global heads of Research, Thematic Research and Firmwide AI focus on the human impacts of AI adoption in the workplace.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Kathryn Huberty: Welcome to Thoughts in The Market, and to part two of our conversation on AI adoption. I'm Katy Huberty, Morgan Stanley's Global Head of Research. Once again, I'm joined by Stephen Byrd, Global Head of Thematic Research, and Jeff McMillan, Morgan Stanley's Head of Firm-wide AI. Today, let's focus on the human level. What this paradigm shift means for individual workers. It's Wednesday, November 5th at 10am in New York. Kathryn Huberty: Stephen, there's a lot of simultaneous fear and excitement around widespread AI adoption. There's obviously concern that AI could lead to massive job losses. But you seem optimistic about this paradigm shift. Why is that? Stephen Byrd: Yeah, as I mentioned in part one, this is the most popular discussion topic with my children. And I would say younger folks are quite concerned about this. There's a lot of angst among young folks thinking about what is that job market really going to look like for them. And admittedly, AI could be quite disruptive. So, we don't want to sugarcoat that. There's clearly going to be impacts across many jobs. Our work showed that around 90 percent of jobs will be impacted in some way. Oh, in the long term, I would guess nearly every job will be impacted in some way. The reason we are more optimistic is that what we see is a range of what we would think of as augmentation, where AI can essentially help you do something much better. It can help you expand your capabilities. And it will result in entirely new jobs. Now with any new technology, it's always hard to predict exactly what those new jobs are. But examples that I see in my world of energy would be smart grid analysis, predictive maintenance, managing systems in a much more efficient way. Systems that are so complicated that they're really beyond the capability of humans to manage very effectively. So, I'm quite excited there. I'm extremely excited in the life sciences where we could see entire new approaches to curing some of the worst diseases plaguing humankind. So, I am really very excited in terms of those new areas of job creation. In terms of job losses, one interesting analysis that a lot of investors are really focused on that we included in our Future of Work report was the ratio – within a job – of augmentation to automation. The lower the ratio, the higher the risk of job loss in the sense that that shows a sign that more of what AI is going to do, is going to replace that type of human work. Examples of that would be in professional services. As I mentioned, you know, one of my former professions, law would be an example of an area where you could see this. But essentially, tasks that don't require a lot of proprietary data, require less creativity. Those are the types of tasks that are more likely to be automated. Kathryn Huberty: One theme I hear both in Silicon Valley and in our industry is the value of domain expertise goes up. So, the lawyer that's very good in the courtroom or handling a really complicated situation because they have decades of experience, the value of that labor and talent goes up. And so, when my friends ask me what their kids should pursue in school and as a career, I tell them it's less about what job they pursue. Pick a passion and become a domain expert really quickly. Stephen Byrd: I think that's excellent advice. Kathryn Huberty: Jeff, how do you see AI changing the skills we'll need at Morgan Stanley and the way that people should think about their careers? Jeff McMillan: I think you have to break this down into three pieces – and Stephen sort of alluded to it. One, you have to look at the jobs that are likely to disappear. Two, you have to look at the jobs that are going to change. And then finally, you have to look at the new jobs that are going to actually emerge from this phenomena. You should be thinking right now about how you are going to prepare yourself with the right skills around learning how to prompt and learning how to move into those functions that are not going to be eliminated. In terms of jobs that are changing, they're going to require a far, far greater sense of collaboration, creativity. And again, prompting; prompt engineering is sort of the center of that. And I would highly encourage every single person who's listening to this to become the single best prompt engineer in their group, in their friend[s group], in their organization. And then in terms of the jobs that are being created, I'm actually pretty optimistic here. As we build agents, there's actually a bull case that we're going to create so much complexity in our environment that we're going to need more people to help manage that. But the skills are not going to be repetitive linear skills. They're going to require real time decision-making, leadership skills, collaboration skills. But again, I would go back to every single person: learn how to talk to the machine, learn how to be creative, and practice every day your engagement with this technology. Kathryn Huberty: So then how are companies balancing the re-skilling with the inevitable culture shifts that come with any new paradigm? Jeff McMillan: So, first of all, I think if you think about this as a tool, you've already lost the plot. I think that number one, you have to remind yourself what your strategy is; whatever that strategy is, this is an enabler of your strategy. The second point I'd make is that you have to go from both – the top down, in terms of leadership messaging that this change is here, it's important and it needs to be embraced. And then it's a bottoms-up because you have to empower people with the right tools and the technology to transform their own work. Because if you're trying to tell people that this is the path that they have to follow. You don't get the buy-in that you need. You really want to empower people to leverage these tools. And what excites me most is when people walk into my office and say, ‘Hey Jeff, let me show you what I built today.' And it could be some 22-year-old who; it's their first month on the job. And what's exciting about this technology is you do not need a technology background. You need to be smart; you need to be creative. And if you've got those skills, you can build things that are really innovative. And I think that's what's exciting. So, if you can combine the top down that this is important and the bottoms up with giving people the skills and the technology and the motivation – that's the secret sauce. Kathryn Huberty: Jeff, what's your advice for the next generation college students, recent college graduates as they're thinking about navigating the early parts of their career in this environment? Jeff McMillan: Well, Katy, I first of all, I'd agree with what you say. You know, everyone's like, ‘What should I study?' And the answer is – I don't actually know the answer to that question. But I would study what you care about. I would do something that you're passionate about. And the second point, and I hate to be a broken record on this. But I would be the single best user of GenerativeAI at your college. Volunteer with some nonprofit, build a use case with your friends. When you walk into your first job, impress in your interview that you are able to use this technology in really effective ways – because that will make a difference, in your first job. Kathryn Huberty: And I'm curious, are there areas where you think humans will always beat AI, whether it's in financial services or other industries? Jeff McMillan: I like to think that we are human and that gives us the ability to build trust and emotional relationships. And I think not only are we going to be better at that than machines are. But I think that's something that we as humans will always want. I think that there may be some individuals in the society that may feel differently. But I think as a general rule, the human-to-human relationship is something that's really important. And I like to think that it will be a differentiator for a long time to come. So, Katy, from where you sit as the Head of Global Research, how has GenAI changed the way research is being done? Kathryn Huberty: With the help of your team, Jeff, we have now embedded AI through the life cycle of investigating a hypothesis, doing the analysis, writing the research in a concise, effective way. Pushing that through our publishing process, developing digital content in our analysts' voice, in the local language of the client. And now we're working on a client engagement tool that helps direct our research team's time. And so, the impact here is it reduces the time to market to get a alpha generating idea to our clients and, you know, and it's freeing up time for our teams. Stephen Byrd: So, Katy, I want to build on that. Productivity is a big theme. And away from the research itself, from a management perspective, how are you and your team using AI? And what do you see as the benefits? And how are you spending the extra time that's freed up by AI? Kathryn Huberty: I like to say that the research AI strategy is less about the tools. I mean, those are critical and foundational. But it's more about how we're evolving workflow and how our teams are spending time. And so, the savings are being reinvested in actually your area – thematic research – which takes a lot more coordination, collaboration. A global cross-asset view, which just takes more time to develop, and test a hypothesis, and debate internally, and get those reports to market. But it's critical for our core strategy, which is to help our clients generate alpha. When you look at equity markets over the past 30 years, a very small number of stocks drive all of the alpha. And they tend to link to themes. And so, we're reinvesting time in identifying those themes earlier than the market to allow our clients to capture that alpha. And then the other piece is when we look at our analyst teams, they spend about a quarter of their time with clients because they have to meet with experts in the industry. They need to do the analysis, they have to build the financial forecast, manage their teams. You know, we have internal activities, build culture. And with the ability to leverage these tools to speed up some of those tasks, we think we can double the amount of time that our analysts are spending with clients. And if we're putting thought-provoking, you know, often thematic global collaborative content into the market, our clients want to spend more time with us. And so, that's the ultimate impact. On a personal level, and I think both of you can relate. I think a lot of the freed-up time right now is just following the fast pace of change in AI and keeping up with the latest technology, the latest vendors. But long term, my hope is that this frees up time for more human activities on a personal level. Learning the arts, staying active. So, this could be potentially very beneficial to society if we reinvest that time in both productive activities that have impact in business. But also productive, rewarding activities outside of the office.As we wrap up, it's clear that the influence of AI is expanding rapidly, not just in digital- and knowledge-based sectors, but increasingly in tangible real-world applications. As these innovations unfold, the way we interact with both technology and our environments will continue to evolve – both on the job and elsewhere in our lives. Jeff, Stephen, thank you both for sharing your insights. And to our listeners, thank you for joining us. If you enjoy the show, please leave us a review wherever you listen, and share Thoughts on the Market with a friend and colleague today.

Martina Alvarez, Directora de Ventas para Iberia de Janus Henderson, analiza el mercado, poniendo el foco en la renta fija, la deuda, los bonos y en la última reunión de los Bancos Centrales. “A veces nos escondemos detrás del ruido y no vemos la foto completa”, asegura la invitada. Para ella “si nos centramos en la foto completa lo que se está viendo es un contexto sólido, con economías resilientes, creciendo de forma moderada pero creciendo”. La experta apunta a que hay que alejarse de los titulares negativos. Unos titulares que han venido de dos de las compañías más influyentes del planeta. Ted Pick, CEO de Morgan Stanley, ha afirmado que los mercados se encaminan hacia una corrección. Prevé una caída de entre el 10 y el 15%, algo similar a los que piensa David Solomon, consejero delegado de Goldman Sachs, que prevé una caída del 10 y 20% en los próximos 12 y 14 meses. También se acerca la última reunión de los Bancos Centrales. “Los Bancos Centrales han podido actuar, han tenido margen de actuación y lo han hecho”, afirma la Directora de Ventas para Iberia de Janus Henderson. Además, apunta que “a ambos lados del Atlántico se han hecho programas de estímulo para impulsar la economía, si nos alejamos del ruido y los titulares vemos unas Bolsas en positivo”. Martina Alvarez analiza cómo afecta el actual ciclo de interés en las oportunidades en renta fija, tanto en Europa como en Estados Unidos. “La renta fija no es solo un activo refugio, es una fuente de rentabilidad”, asegura la invitada. Además apunta que “hay margen, los tipos de interés en Estados Unidos están entre el 3,75% y el 4% y en Europa el 2%, donde es posible que se esté tocando suelo mientras que en Estados Unidos hay más margen para que sigan bajando esos tipos de interés”.

Nvidia og Palantir setter stadig nye rekorder på Wall Street. Nå satser «Big Short»-legenden Michael Burry milliarder på at festen snart er over. Har han rett denne gangen – eller roper han «ulv» igjen?I ukens episode av Finansredaksjonen, en podkast som lages av DN, snakker vi om de ekstreme verdsettelsene av amerikanske teknologiselskaper – særlig Nvidia og Palantir – og hvordan investoren Michael “Big Short” Burry - som tjente grovt på kollapsen i det amerikanske boligmarkedet under finanskrisen - igjen satser på et markedsfall. Hør episoden her:Palantir - som utvikler programvare som hjelper organisasjoner med å samle og analysere data fra mange forskjellige kilder - har steget over 150 prosent hittil i år og verdsettes til 85 ganger omsetningen – høyest i S&P 500.Nvidia har steget nesten 50 prosent , og er blant de mest verdsatte selskapene globalt.Burry hevder at prisingen er helt løsrevet fra realøkonomiske fundamenter, og at vi befinner oss i en ny type AI-boble. Han advarer på X (Twitter):“Sometimes, the only winning move is not to play.”Amerikanske aksjer prises nå høyere mot salgsinntekter enn noen gang tidligere – også over nivåene fra dot.com-boblen.Flere på Wall Street, inkludert topper hos Goldman Sachs og Morgan Stanley, mener markedet trenger en 10–15 prosent korreksjon. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Et cette fois, il revient... avec un short massif sur les stars de l'IA. Résultat : panique à Wall Street, Nasdaq en vrac, et les investisseurs qui redécouvrent la gravité.

Two-time Emmy and three-time NAACP Image Award-winning television Executive Producer Rushion McDonald interviewed Sonia Balfour-Fears.

Two-time Emmy and three-time NAACP Image Award-winning television Executive Producer Rushion McDonald interviewed Sonia Balfour-Fears.

In the first of a two-part roundtable discussion, our Global Head of Research joins our Global Head of Thematic Research and Head of Firmwide AI to discuss how the economic and labor impacts of AI adoption.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript ----- Kathryn Huberty: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Katy Huberty, Morgan Stanley's Global Head of Research, and I'm joined by Stephen Byrd, Global Head of Thematic Research, and Jeff McMillan, Morgan Stanley's Head of Firm-wide AI.Today and tomorrow, we have a special two-part episode on the number one question everyone is asking us: What does the future of work look like as we scale AI?It's Tuesday, November 4th at 10am in New York.I wanted to talk to you both because Stephen, your groundbreaking work provides a foundation for thinking through labor and economic impacts of implementing AI across industries. And Jeff, you're leading Morgan Stanley's efforts to implement AI across our more than 80,000 employee firm, requiring critical change management to unlock the full value of this technology.Let's start big picture and look at this from the industry level. And then tomorrow we'll dig into how AI is changing the nature of work for individuals.Stephen, one of the big questions in the news – and from investors – is the size of AI adoption opportunity in terms of earnings potential for S&P 500 companies and the economy as a whole. What's the headline takeaway from your analysis?Stephen Byrd: Yeah, this is the most popular topic with my children when we talk about the work that I do. And the impacts are so broad. So, let's start with the headline numbers. We did a deep dive into the S&P 500 in terms of AI adoption benefits. The net benefits based on where the technology is now, would be about little over $900 billion. And that can translate to well over 20 percent increased earnings power that could generate over $13 trillion of market cap upon adoption. And importantly, that's where the technology is now.So, what's so interesting to me is the technology is evolving very, very quickly. We've been writing a lot about the nonlinear rate of improvement of AI. And what's especially exciting right now is a number of the big American labs, the well-known companies developing these LLMs, are now gathering about 10 times the computational power to train their next model. If scaling laws hold that would result in models that are about twice as capable as they are today. So, I think 2026 is going to be a big year in terms of thinking about where we're headed in terms of adoption. So, it's frankly challenging to basically take a snapshot because the picture is moving so quickly.Kathryn Huberty: Stephen, you referenced just the fast pace of change and the daily news flow. What's the view of the timeline here? Are we measuring progress at the industry level in months, in years?Stephen Byrd: It's definitely in years. It's fast and slow. Slow in the sense that, you know, it's taken some companies a little while now and some over a year to really prepare. But now what we're seeing in our CIO survey is many companies are now moving into the first, I'd say, full fledged adoption of AI, when you can start to really see this in numbers.So, it sort of starts with a trickle, but then in 2026, it really turns into something much, much bigger. And then I go back to this point about non-linear improvement. So, what looks like, areas where AI cannot perform a task six months from now will look very different. And I think – I'm a former lawyer myself. In the field of law, for example, this has changed so quickly as to what AI can actually do. So, what I expect is it starts slow and then suddenly we look at a wide variety of tasks and AI is fairly suddenly able to do a lot more than we expect.Kathryn Huberty: Which industries are likely to be most impacted by the shift? And when you broke down the analysis to the industry and job level, what were some of the surprises?Stephen Byrd: I thought what we would see would be fairly high-tech oriented sectors – and including our own – would be top of the list. What I found was very different. So, think instead of sectors where there's fairly low profit per employee, often low margin businesses, very labor-intensive businesses. A number of areas in healthcare staples came to the top. A few real estate management businesses. So, very different than I expected.The very high-tech sectors actually had some of the lowest numbers, simply because those companies in high-tech tend to have extremely high profit per employee. So, the impact is a lot less. So that was surprising learning. A lot of clients have been digging into that.Kathryn Huberty: I could see why that would've surprised you. But let's focus on banking for a moment since we have the expert here. Jeff, what are some of the most exciting AI use cases in banking right now?Jeff McMillan: You know, I would start with software development, which was probably the first Gen AI use case out of the gate. And not only was it first, but it continues to be the most rapidly advancing. And that's probably; mostly a function of the software, you know, development community. I mean, these are developers that are constantly fiddling and making the technology better.But productivity continues to advance at a linear pace. You know, we have over 20,000 folks here at Morgan Stanley. That's 25 percent of our population. And, you know, the impact both in terms of the size of that population and the efficiencies are really, really significant.So, I would start there. And then, you know, once you start moving past that, it may not seem, you know, sexy. It's really powerful around things like document processing. Financial services firms move massive amounts of paper. We take paper in, whether it be an account opening, whether it be a contract. Somebody reads that information, they reason about it, and then they type that information into a system. AI is really purpose built for that.And then finally, just document generation. I mean, the number of presentations, portfolio reviews, you know, even in your world, Katy, research reports that we create. Once again, AI is really just – it's right down the middle in terms of its ability to generate just content and help people reduce the time and effort to do that.Kathryn Huberty: There's a lot of excitement around AI, but as Stephen mentioned, it's not a linear path. What are the biggest challenges, Jeff, to AI adoption for a big global enterprise like Morgan Stanley? What keeps you up at night?Jeff McMillan: I've often made the analogy that we own a Ferrari and we're driving around circles in a parking lot. And what I mean by that is that the technology has so far advanced beyond our own capacity to leverage it. And the biggest issue is – it's our own capacity and awareness and education.So, what keeps me up at night? it's the firm's understanding. It's each person's and each leader's ability to understand what this technology can do. Candidly, it's the basics of prompting. We spend a lot of time here at the firm just teaching people how to prompt, understanding how to speak to the machine because until you know how to do that, you don't really understand the art of the possible. I tell people, if you have $100 to spend, you should start spending [$]90, on educating your employee base. Because until you do that, you cannot effectively get the best out of the technology.Kathryn Huberty: And as we look out to 2026, what AI trends are you watching closely and how are we preparing the firm to take advantage of that?Jeff McMillan: You and I were just out in Silicon Valley a couple of weeks ago, and seemingly overnight, every firm has become an agentic one. While much of that is aspirational, I think it's actually going to be, in the long term, a true narrative, right? And I think that step where we are right now is really about experimentation, right? I think we have to learn which tools work, what new governance processes we need to put in place, where the lines are drawn. I think we're still in the early stage, but we're leaning in really hard.We've got about 20 use cases that we're experimenting with right now. As things settle down and the vendor landscape really starts to pan out, we'll be down position to fully take advantage of that.Kathryn Huberty: A key element of the agentic solutions is linking to the data, the tools, the application that we use every day in our workflow. And that ecosystem is developing, and it feels that we're now on the cusp of those agentic workflow applications taking hold.Stephen Byrd: So, Katy, I want to jump in here and ask you a question too. With your own background as an IT hardware analyst, how does the AI era compare to past tech or computing cycles? And what sort of lessons from those cycles shape your view of the opportunities and challenges ahead?Kathryn Huberty: The other big question in the market right now is whether an AI bubble is forming. You hear that in the press. It's one of the questions all three of us are hearing regularly from clients. And implicit in that question is a view that this doesn't look like past cycles, past trends. And I just don't believe that to be the case.We actually see the development of AI following a very similar path. If you go back to mainframe and then minicomputer, the PC, internet, mobile, cloud, and now AI. Each compute cycle is roughly 10 times larger in terms of the amount of installed compute.The reality is we've gone from millions to billions to trillions, and so it feels very different. But the reality is we have a trillion dollars of installed CPU compute, and that means we likely need $10 trillion of installed GPU compute. And so, we are following the same pattern. Yes, the numbers are bigger because we keep 10x-ing, but the pattern is the same. And so again, that tells us we're in the early innings. You know, we're still at the point of the semiconductor technology shipping out into infrastructure. The applications will come.The other pattern from past cycles is that exponential growth is really difficult for humans to model. So, I think back to the early days when Morgan Stanley's technology team was really bullish, laying the groundwork for the PC era, the internet era, the mobile era. When we go back and look at our forecasts, we always underestimated the potential. And so that would suggest that what we've seen with the upward earnings revisions for the AI enablers and soon the AI adopters is likely to continue.And so, I see many patterns, you know, that are thread across computing cycles, and I would just encourage investors to realize that AI so far is following similar patterns.Jeff McMillan: Katy, you make the point that much of the playbook is the same. But is there anything fundamentally different about the AI cycle that investors should be thinking about?Kathryn Huberty: The breadth of impact to industries and corporates, which speaks to Stephen's work. We have now four times over mapped the 3,700 companies globally that Morgan Stanley research covers to understand their role in this theme.Are they enabling AI? Are they adopting? Are they disrupted by it? How important is it to the thesis? Do they have pricing power? It's very valuable data to go and capture the alpha. But I was looking at that dataset recently and a third of those nearly 4,000 companies we cover, our analysts are saying that AI has an impact on the investment thesis. A third. And yet we're still in the early innings. And so, what may be different, and make the impact much bigger and broader is just the sheer number of corporations that will be impacted by the theme.Let's pause here and pick up tomorrow with more on workforce transformation and the impact on individual workers.Thank you to our listeners. Please join us tomorrow for part two of our conversation. If you enjoy the show, please leave us a review wherever you listen and share Thoughts on the Market with a friend or colleague today.

Two-time Emmy and three-time NAACP Image Award-winning television Executive Producer Rushion McDonald interviewed Sonia Balfour-Fears.

Andy Brenner says investors are bracing for a pullback after Goldman Sachs' (GS) David Solomon and Morgan Stanley's (MS) Ted Pick warned of a potential 10-20% correction, and Michael Burry revealed a $1 billion short against Nvidia (NVDA) and Palantir (PLTR). Brenner believes the recent selloff is a short-term wobble, but if it gains steam, it could lead to margin calls by Thursday.======== Schwab Network ========Empowering every investor and trader, every market day. Subscribe to the Market Minute newsletter - https://schwabnetwork.com/subscribeDownload the iOS app - https://apps.apple.com/us/app/schwab-network/id1460719185Download the Amazon Fire Tv App - https://www.amazon.com/TD-Ameritrade-Network/dp/B07KRD76C7Watch on Sling - https://watch.sling.com/1/asset/191928615bd8d47686f94682aefaa007/watchWatch on Vizio - https://www.vizio.com/en/watchfreeplus-exploreWatch on DistroTV - https://www.distro.tv/live/schwab-network/Follow us on X – https://twitter.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/schwab-network/ About Schwab Network - https://schwabnetwork.com/about

This week on Purple Political Breakdown, we sit down with Adam Mizel, co-founder of US United, a not-for-profit media collective that's challenging the narrative of American division through grassroots action and community engagement.Adam's story is anything but typical. After a 30-year career spanning Morgan Stanley, private equity, hedge funds, and running public companies, he found himself at a turning point in May 2020. Like many Americans, he was screaming at his TV as the country seemed to tear itself apart following George Floyd's murder and amid pandemic chaos. But when his wife Taunya told him, "No one's hearing you if you scream at the TV," Adam decided to transform his frustration into action.What followed was a series of unexpected connections that led him to Sheriff Chris Swanson of Flint, Michiganthe sheriff who made global headlines when he and his officers removed their riot gear to march with George Floyd protesters, reaching 3.2 billion people worldwide. Together, they co-founded US United in 2021, building a movement that now includes nearly 100 sheriffs committed to fostering unity in their communities.LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/adammmizel/Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/USUnitedOrgInstagram - https://www.instagram.com/us_united_org/Twitter - https://twitter.com/US_United_OrgWebsite - https://www.us-united.org/Standard Resource Links & RecommendationsThe following organizations and platforms represent valuable resources for balanced political discourse and democratic participation: PODCAST NETWORKALIVE Podcast Network - Check out the ALIVE Network where you can catch a lot of great podcasts like my own, led by amazing Black voices. Link: https://alivepodcastnetwork.com/ CONVERSATION PLATFORMSHeadOn - A platform for contentious yet productive conversations. It's a place for hosted and unguided conversations where you can grow a following and enhance your conversations with AI features. Link: https://app.headon.ai/Living Room Conversations - Building bridges through meaningful dialogue across political divides. Link: https://livingroomconversations.org/ BALANCED NEWS & INFORMATIONOtherWeb - An AI-based platform that filters news without paywalls, clickbait, or junk, helping you access diverse, unbiased content. Link: https://otherweb.com/ VOTING REFORM & DEMOCRACYEqual Vote Coalition & STAR Voting - Advocating for voting methods that ensure every vote counts equally, eliminating wasted votes and strategic voting. Link: https://www.equal.vote/starFuture is Now Coalition (FiNC) - A grassroots movement working to restore democracy through transparency, accountability, and innovative technology while empowering citizens and transforming American political discourse FutureisFutureis. Link: https://futureis.org/ POLITICAL ENGAGEMENTIndependent Center - Resources for independent political thinking and civic engagement. Link: https://www.independentcenter.org/ Get Daily News: Text 844-406-INFO (844-406-4636) with code "purple" to receive quick, unbiased, factual news delivered to your phone every morning via Informed ( https://informed.now) All Links: https://linktr.ee/purplepoliticalbreakdownThe Purple Political Breakdown is committed to fostering productive political dialogue that transcends partisan divides. We believe in the power of conversation, balanced information, and democratic participation to build a stronger society. Our mission: "Political solutions without political bias."Subscribe, rate, and share if you believe in purple politics - where we find common ground in the middle! Also if you want to be apart of the community and the conversation make sure to Join the Discord: https://discord.gg/ptPAsZtHC9

LISTEN and SUBSCRIBE on:Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/watchdog-on-wall-street-with-chris-markowski/id570687608 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/2PtgPvJvqc2gkpGIkNMR5i WATCH and SUBSCRIBE on:https://www.youtube.com/@WatchdogOnWallstreet/featured  Big firms like Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley are sounding alarms about a possible 10–20% market pullback over the next two years — and the financial media is losing its mind over it. But here's the truth: corrections happen. Always have, always will. This isn't panic-worthy news; it's just headlines trying to grab eyeballs. Instead of trying to game the system against high-frequency traders and dark-pool sharks, stick to the fundamentals: invest consistently, stay disciplined, and quit trying to beat Wall Street at its own rigged game. Be an investor, not a gambler.

Welcome back to the Alt Goes Mainstream podcast.Today's episode is with an experienced private markets and distribution executive who has been educating the wealth channel and distributing private markets investment solutions at some of the industry's largest investment platforms.We sat down in Prudential's Newark studio with PGIM's Global Head of Alternative Investments, Dominick Carlino. PGIM is the $1.4T global asset management business of Prudential Financial.At PGIM, Dominick is responsible for driving the continued development and distribution of alternative investments tailored to the firm's wealth channel investors globally.Dominick joined the firm in 2023, bringing over 20 years of experience in alternatives distribution. He was most recently MD, Head of Alternative Investments Distribution at Merrill Lynch.Dominick and I had a fascinating conversation about the intersections between insurance and asset management and the evolution of distribution. We covered:How the distribution of private markets investment solutions has evolved.The benefits of an integrated platform across insurance and asset management.Navigating the playing field of collaboration and competition between asset managers and insurance companies.The importance of education.How, why, and where evergreen funds will be adopted.Thanks Dominick for sharing your perspectives and wisdom on insurance and private markets. We hope you enjoy.A word from AGM podcast sponsor, Ultimus Fund SolutionsThis episode of Alt Goes Mainstream is brought to you by Ultimus Fund Solutions, a leading full-service fund administrator for asset managers in private and public markets. As private markets continue to move into the mainstream, the industry requires infrastructure solutions that help funds and investors keep pace. In an increasingly sophisticated financial marketplace, investment managers must navigate a growing array of challenges: elaborate fund structures, specialized strategies, evolving compliance requirements, a growing need for sophisticated reporting, and intensifying demands for transparency.To assist with these challenging opportunities, more and more fund sponsors and asset managers are turning to Ultimus, a leading service provider that blends high tech and high touch in unique and customized fund administration and middle office solutions for a diverse and growing universe of over 450 clients and 1,800 funds, representing $500 billion assets under administration, all handled by a team of over 1,000 professionals. Ultimus offers a wide range of capabilities across registered funds, private funds and public plans, as well as outsourced middle office services. Delivering operational excellence, Ultimus helps firms manage the ever-changing regulatory environment while meeting the needs of their institutional and retail investors. Ultimus provides comprehensive operational support and fund governance services to help managers successfully launch retail alternative products.Visit www.ultimusfundsolutions.com to learn more about Ultimus' technology enhanced services and solutions or contact Ultimus Executive Vice President of Business Development Gary Harris on email at gharris@ultimusfundsolutions.com.We thank Ultimus for their support of alts going mainstream.Show Notes00:00 Message from our Sponsor, Ultimus01:18 Welcome to Alt Goes Mainstream01:55 Guest Introduction: Dominick Carlino03:34 Dom's Background and Career Journey03:55 Early Career and Transition to Alternatives05:03 Experience at Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch05:18 Evolution of Private Markets Distribution07:08 Wealth Channel and Private Markets09:08 Joining Prudential and PGIM10:25 Prudential's Capabilities and Strategy12:47 Asset Liability Matching in Private Markets14:22 Liquidity Risk and Private Markets16:16 Education and Evergreen Funds17:06 Credit Risk in Private Credit18:14 Vertical Integration and Acquisitions19:35 Partnerships and Strategic Growth20:22 Market Shakeout and Scale22:09 Product Set and Innovation23:24 Advisor and Client Needs24:45 Evergreen Funds and Market Trends26:13 Specialized Strategies in Private Markets26:41 Distribution and Education28:16 Skills for Effective Distribution30:54 Organizational Alpha and Trust31:56 Brand and Stability33:11 Partnerships and Long-term Solutions33:49 Insurance and Tax-Advantaged Strategies34:12 Asset Managers and Insurance Partnerships35:42 Private Markets in Retirement Plans36:17 Future of Private Markets36:41 Keys to Winning in Private Markets37:29 Prudential's Competitive Advantages37:48 Conclusion and Guest FarewellThe opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the author and do not reflect the views or opinions of PGIM, Inc. PGIM, Inc. is not responsible, endorses nor confirms its accuracy. All trademarks and other intellectual property used or displayed are the ownership of their respective owners. Unless noted otherwise in this podcast, PGIM, Inc. is not affiliated with, nor  endorses any mentioned company or any linked third-party content. PGIM and its affiliates may develop and publish research that is independent of, and different than, the recommendations contained herein. PGIM's personnel other than the author(s), such as sales, marketing and trading personnel, may provide oral or written market commentary or ideas to PGIM's clients or prospects or proprietary investment ideas that differ from the views expressed herein.Editing and post-production work for this episode was provided by The Podcast Consultant.

Palantir kwam met 'buitenaards' goede kwartaalcijfers. Omzet en winst gingen enorm omhoog, maar toch ging het aandeel hard naar beneden. Had dat te maken met het feit dat het aandeel wel erg duur was geworden of het feit dat een beroemde shortseller zich meldt?Deze aflevering hebben we het over Michael Burry. De man waar de legendarische film Big Short op is gebaseerd. De man die de financiële crisis aan zag komen. Die man gaat nu short op Palantir (en op Nvidia). Tot woede van de baas van Palantir, die zit te schuimbekken op analisten én shortsellers. Ook hebben we het over iets bijzonders. Philips dat met goed nieuws komt! Het aandeel Philips is zelfs dé grote winnaar op de AEX. We kijken waar aandeelhouders zo blij van worden.Kijken we ook naar een concurrent van Shell, naar BP. Dat maakte een draai. Minder inzetten op duurzame energie en meer op het ouderwetse olie en gas. En dat zorgt voor kwartaalcijfers die boven de verwachting uitkomen. De cijfers van Uber en Spotify hoor je ook, net als die van Nintendo. En we moeten het over de megabonus van Elon Musk hebben. Je weet wel, die 1000 miljard dollar die hij bij Tesla kan krijgen. Die lijkt nu steeds meer uit beeld...See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Die CEOs von Morgan Stanley und Goldman Sachs warnen, während der HSBC-Chef vor überzogenen KI-Investitionen warnt. Michael Burry setzt auf fallende Kurse bei Palantir und NVIDIA. Trotz starker Zahlen stehen Palantir, Shopify und Uber unter Druck – Anleger nehmen Gewinne mit. Auch außerhalb des Tech-Sektors enttäuschen viele Unternehmen: Clorox, Eastman Chemical, Hims & Hers, Norwegian Cruise, Stanley Black & Decker, Harley-Davidson, Molson Coors und Marriott. Lichtblick: Pfizer hebt Prognose an. Nachbörslich folgen noch AMD, Arista Networks und Super Micro.Kurz gesagt: Tech-Aktien wanken, Gewinnmitnahmen nehmen zu – die Wall Street steht unter Druck. Abonniere den Podcast, um keine Folge zu verpassen! ____ Folge uns, um auf dem Laufenden zu bleiben: • X: http://fal.cn/SQtwitter • LinkedIn: http://fal.cn/SQlinkedin • Instagram: http://fal.cn/SQInstagram

Die CEOs von Morgan Stanley und Goldman Sachs warnen, während der HSBC-Chef vor überzogenen KI-Investitionen warnt. Michael Burry setzt auf fallende Kurse bei Palantir und NVIDIA. Trotz starker Zahlen stehen Palantir, Shopify und Uber unter Druck – Anleger nehmen Gewinne mit. Auch außerhalb des Tech-Sektors enttäuschen viele Unternehmen: Clorox, Eastman Chemical, Hims & Hers, Norwegian Cruise, Stanley Black & Decker, Harley-Davidson, Molson Coors und Marriott. Lichtblick: Pfizer hebt Prognose an. Nachbörslich folgen noch AMD, Arista Networks und Super Micro.Kurz gesagt: Tech-Aktien wanken, Gewinnmitnahmen nehmen zu – die Wall Street steht unter Druck. Ein Podcast - featured by Handelsblatt. +++ Alle Rabattcodes und Infos zu unseren Werbepartnern findet ihr hier: https://linktr.ee/wallstreet_podcast +++ +++ Hinweis zur Werbeplatzierung von Meta: https://backend.ad-alliance.de/fileadmin/Transparency_Notice/Meta_DMAJ_TTPA_Transparency_Notice_-_Ad_Alliance_approved.pdf +++ Der Podcast wird vermarktet durch die Ad Alliance. Die allgemeinen Datenschutzrichtlinien der Ad Alliance finden Sie unter https://datenschutz.ad-alliance.de/podcast.html Die Ad Alliance verarbeitet im Zusammenhang mit dem Angebot die Podcasts-Daten. Wenn Sie der automatischen Übermittlung der Daten widersprechen wollen, klicken Sie hier: https://datenschutz.ad-alliance.de/podcast.html Impressum: https://www.360wallstreet.de/impressum

Ejecutivos de Goldman Sachs y Morgan Stanley advierten de posibles correcciones en mercados bursátiles; Perú rompe relaciones con México; se aplaza la Cumbre de las Américas en República Dominicana por los ataques de EE.UU. contra botes; y Marcelo Rochabrún, jefe de la oficina de Bloomberg News en Lima, comenta sobre el efecto que tendrá para las AFPs la disolución de Rutas de Lima.Newsletter Cinco cosas: bloom.bg/42Gu4pGLinkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/company/bloomberg-en-espanol/Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/BloombergEspanolWhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaFVFoWKAwEg9Fdhml1lTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@bloombergenespanolX: https://twitter.com/BBGenEspanolProducción: Eduardo ThomsonSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Los presidentes ejecutivos de Morgan Stanley y Goldman Sachs, dos de los grandes bancos de Wall Street, advierten de que los mercados de renta variable podrían encaminarse hacia una caída, lo que subraya la creciente preocupación por las altísimas valoraciones. El temor a una burbuja en el mercado se da cuando el S&P 500 ha venido encadenando nuevos máximos. Hasta ahora, los mercados han obviado la preocupación por la inflación, las altas tasas de interés, la incertidumbre política derivada de los cambios en la dinámica comercial y el actual cierre del Gobierno federal, que se encuentra ya en su quinta semana. "Cuando se dan estos ciclos, las cosas pueden funcionar durante un tiempo. Pero hay cosas que alterarán la confianza y provocarán caídas, o cambiarán la perspectiva de la trayectoria de crecimiento, y ninguno de nosotros es lo suficientemente inteligente como para verlas hasta que realmente ocurren", apunta el presidente ejecutivo de Goldman, David Solomon. En Europa, los resultados de Telefónica y su nuevo plan estratégico han lastrado al Ibex 35 que dice adiós a los 16.000 puntos. El análisis, con Renta 4 Banco y en Gestión del Patrimonio, hablaremos con David Ardura, de Finaccess Value.

Palantir kwam met 'buitenaards' goede kwartaalcijfers. Omzet en winst gingen enorm omhoog, maar toch ging het aandeel hard naar beneden. Had dat te maken met het feit dat het aandeel wel erg duur was geworden of het feit dat een beroemde shortseller zich meldt?Deze aflevering hebben we het over Michael Burry. De man waar de legendarische film Big Short op is gebaseerd. De man die de financiële crisis aan zag komen. Die man gaat nu short op Palantir (en op Nvidia). Tot woede van de baas van Palantir, die zit te schuimbekken op analisten én shortsellers. Ook hebben we het over iets bijzonders. Philips dat met goed nieuws komt! Het aandeel Philips is zelfs dé grote winnaar op de AEX. We kijken waar aandeelhouders zo blij van worden.Kijken we ook naar een concurrent van Shell, naar BP. Dat maakte een draai. Minder inzetten op duurzame energie en meer op het ouderwetse olie en gas. En dat zorgt voor kwartaalcijfers die boven de verwachting uitkomen. De cijfers van Uber en Spotify hoor je ook, net als die van Nintendo. En we moeten het over de megabonus van Elon Musk hebben. Je weet wel, die 1000 miljard dollar die hij bij Tesla kan krijgen. Die lijkt nu steeds meer uit beeld...See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

• US equity markets retreated, with the Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) of investment banking giants Goldman Sachs Group Inc (up +0.68%) and Morgan Stanley (+0.22%) cautioning that equity markets could be heading for a drawdown of around 10% to 15% - Dow fell -251-points or -0.53%, with Caterpillar Inc (down -4.03%) and Nvidia Corp (-3.96%) both falling ~4%.

We live in a world where rest has been branded as lazy. Where women, especially ambitious women and entrepreneurs, are expected to do it all: run the business, raise the kids, support the family, maintain friendships, and keep it all looking effortless. But beneath the surface? So many of us are exhausted, overwhelmed, and quietly wondering if we'll ever feel “enough.” Nicola Jane Hobbs is here to challenge that narrative. Nicola is a chartered psychologist with a master's degree in sport and exercise psychology, and she's spent more than a decade supporting women's health and wellbeing through yoga, meditation, and therapeutic practice. She's also the founder of The Relaxed Woman, a movement and community dedicated to helping women recover from stress and burnout. In this episode, Nicola and I are unpacking why rest feels so hard for women, why female entrepreneurs in particular struggle to switch off, and the practical rituals and strategies we can use to finally make peace with rest. If you've ever felt guilty for slowing down, or if burnout has been lurking in the background of your business journey, this episode is for you. Goal Digger Facebook Community: https://www.facebook.com/groups/goaldiggerpodcast/ Goal Digger Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/goaldiggerpodcast/ Goal Digger Show Notes: https://jennakutcherblog.com/ Thanks to our Goal Digger Sponsors: Sign up for your $1/month Shopify trial period at http://shopify.com/goaldigger. Find a co-host today at http://airbnb.com/host. Check out What Should I Do With My Money? from Morgan Stanley. Listen now at https://mgstnly.lnk.to/bqe8HiAC!GD.  Visit http://www.spectrum.com/freeforlife to learn how you can get Business Internet Free Forever. Experience the power of a Dell PC with Intel Inside®, backed by Dell's price match guarantee. Shop now at https://www.dell.com/deals. Your dream wardrobe's one click away. Visit https://www.revolve.com/goaldigger for 15% off your first order with code GOALDIGGER.

Our CIO and Chief U.S. Equity Strategist Mike Wilson looks at buying opportunities approaching year-end, as U.S. trade policy and the Fed find middle ground. Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript ----- Mike Wilson: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Mike Wilson, Morgan Stanley's CIO and Chief U.S. Equity Strategist. Today on the podcast I'll be discussing recent macro events and third quarter earnings results.It's Monday, November 3rd at 11:30am in New York. So, let's get after it.Last week marked the passage of two key macro events: the meeting on trade between Presidents Trump and Xi and the October Fed meeting. On the trade front, the U.S. agreed to cut tariffs on China by 10 percent and delay newly proposed tech export controls for a year. In exchange, China agreed to pause its proposed export controls on rare earths, and resume soybean purchases while cracking down on fentanyl. This is a major positive relative to how developments could have gone following the sharp escalation a few weeks ago, and markets have responded accordingly.With respect to the Fed meeting, Powell suggested policy is not on a preset course which took the bond market probability of a December rate cut down from 92 percent before the meeting to 68 percent currently. It also led to some modest consolidation in equity prices while breadth remained very weak. In my view, the market is saying that if growth holds up but the Fed only cuts rates modestly, leadership is likely to remain narrow and up the quality curve.Over the next 6 to 12 months, we think moderate weakness in lagging labor data, and a stronger than expected earnings backdrop ultimately sets the stage for a broadening in market leadership. However, we are also respectful of the signals the markets are sending in the near term. This means it's still too early to press the small cap/low quality/deep cyclical rotation trade until the Fed shows a clear willingness to get ahead of the curve. Perhaps just as important for markets was the Fed's decision to end Quantitative Tightening, or QT, in December.Recently, Jay Powell has acknowledged the potential for rising stress in the funding markets and indicated the Fed could end QT sooner rather than later. Over the past month, expectations for the timing of this QT termination ranged from immediately to as late as February. Powell seemed to split the difference at last week's meeting and this could be viewed as disappointing to some market participants.In order to monitor this development, I will be watching how short-term funding markets behave. Specifically, overnight repo usage has been on the rise and if that continues along with the widening spreads between the Secured Overnight Financing Rate and fed funds, I believe equity markets are likely to trade poorly, especially in some of the more speculative areas. In short, we think higher quality areas of the market are likely to continue to outperform until this dynamic is settled.Meanwhile, earnings season is in full swing and the real standout has been the upside in revenue surprises, which is currently more than double the historical run-rate. We think this could provide further support that our rolling recovery thesis is under way which leads to much better earnings growth than most are expecting.Bottom line, we are gaining more confidence in our core view that a new bull market began in April with the end of the rolling recession and the beginning of a new cycle. This means higher and broader earnings growth in 2026 and a potentially different leadership in the equity market. The full broadening out to lower quality, smaller capitalization stocks is being held back by a Fed that continues to fight inflation; perhaps not realizing how much the private economy and average consumer needs lower rates for this rolling recovery to fully blossom. Last week's Fed meeting could be disappointing in that regard in the short run for equity markets. As a result, stay up the quality curve until we get more clarity on the timing of a more dovish path by the Fed and look for stress in funding markets as a possible buying opportunity into year end.Thanks for tuning in; I hope you found it informative and useful. Let us know what you think by leaving us a review. And if you find Thoughts on the Market worthwhile, tell a friend or colleague to try it out!

Morgan Stanley Chief US Equity Strategist Mike Wilson talked to Bloomberg's Jonathan Ferro, Lisa Abramowicz, and Annmarie Hordern about why the Federal Reserve “is way behind the curve on rates” and slowing the “rolling recovery” in place in the US.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Welcome to the DFO Rundown with Jason Gregor and Jeff Marek!We start the show with a quick look at the World Series, where the Dodgers defeated the Blue Jays in extra innings on Saturday. Would you rather get swept or lose in OT?Then we dive into the NHL, discussing luxury teams and dynasties. Is the definition of a dynasty changing in today's league, where teams don't dominate like they used to?Next, we examine the Eastern Conference, where every team is currently over .500 in points percentage. Is the league tighter than before, and is that good for the NHL?Matthew Schaefer continues to impress, scoring a hat trick on Sunday and totaling 5 goals in 12 games. Could he challenge the record for most goals by a defenseman in their first NHL season? (Brian Leetch had 23 in 1989.)We also review Evgeni Malkin's slash on Morgan Stanley and discuss whether it warrants a suspension.Later, we play some “Buy or Sell”, covering Schaefer's hot start, the World Series playing on the scoreboard in Edmonton, and whether the Flames are overplaying Dustin Wolf.To wrap up, we talk about the struggling Nashville Predators and the possibility of Barry Trotz returning as head coach. Could it happen?Want to hear more from Jason and the entire DFO team? Subscribe to our YouTubeYou can get involved with all the NHL futures action over on bet365 by using the promo code NATION at bet365.comConnect with us on ⬇️TwitterInstagramWebsiteDaily Faceoff Merch Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Our Japan Financials Analyst Mia Nagasaka discusses how the country's new stablecoin regulations and digital payments are set to transform the flow of money not only locally, but globally.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Mia Nagasaka, Head of Japan Financials Research at Morgan Stanley MUFG Securities. Today – Japan's stablecoin revolution and why it matters to global investors. It's Friday, October 31st, at 4pm in Tokyo. Japan may be late to the crypto market. But its first yen-denominated stablecoin is just around the corner. And it has the potential to quietly reshape how digital money moves across the country and globally. You may have heard of digital money like Bitcoin. It's significantly more volatile than traditional financial assets like stocks and bonds. Stablecoins are different. They are digital currencies designed to maintain a stable value by being pegged to assets such as the yen or U.S. dollar. And in June 2023, Japan amended its Payment Services Acts to create a legal framework for stablecoins. Market participants in Japan and abroad are watching closely whether the JPY stablecoin can establish itself as a major global digital currency, such as Tether. Stablecoins promise to make payments faster, cheaper, and available 24/7. Japan's cashless payment ratio jumped from about 30 percent in 2020 to 43 percent in 2024, and there's still room to grow compared to other countries. The government's push for fintech and digital payments is accelerating, and stablecoins could be the missing link to a truly digital economy. Unlike Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies, stablecoins are designed to suppress price volatility. They're managed by private companies and backed by assets—think cash, government bonds, or even commodities like gold. Industry watchers think stablecoins can make digital payments as reliable as cash, but with the speed and flexibility of the internet. Japan's regulatory approach is strict: stablecoins must be 100 percent backed by high-quality, liquid assets, and algorithmic stablecoins are prohibited. Issuers must meet transparency and reserve requirements, and monthly audits are standard. This is similar to new rules in the U.S., EU, and Hong Kong. What does this mean in practice? Financial institutions are exploring stablecoins for instant payments, asset management, and lending. For example, real-time settlement of stock and bond trades normally take days. These transactions could happen in seconds with stablecoins. They also enable new business models like Banking-as-a-Service and Web3 integration, although regulatory costs and low interest rates remain hurdles for profitability.Or think about SWIFT transactions, the backbone of international payments. Stablecoins will not replace SWIFT, but they can supplement it. Payments that used to take days can now be completed in seconds, with up to 80 percent lower fees. But trust in issuers and compliance with anti-money laundering rules are critical. There's another topic on top of investors' minds. CBDCs – Central Bank Digital Currencies. Both stablecoins and CBDCs are digital. But digital currencies are issued by central banks and considered legal tender, whereas stablecoins are private-sector innovations. Japan is the world's fourth-largest economy and considered a leader in technology. But it takes a cautious approach to financial transformation. It is preparing for a CBDC but hasn't committed to launching one yet. If and when that happens, stablecoins and CBDCs can coexist, with the digital currency serving as public infrastructure and stablecoins driving innovation. So, what's the bottom line? Japan's stablecoin journey is just beginning, but its impact could ripple across payments, asset management, and even global finance. Thanks for listening. If you enjoy the show, please leave us a review wherever you listen and share Thoughts on the Market with a friend or colleague today.

What does it take to keep a family business thriving for generations? In this episode of Unstoppable Mindset, I talk with Jan Southern, a seasoned business advisor who helps family-owned companies build long-term success through structure, trust, and clarity. We explore why so many family firms lose their way by the third generation—and what can be done right now to change that story. Jan shares how documenting processes, empowering people, and aligning goals can turn complexity into confidence. We unpack her “Three Ps” framework—People, Process, and Product—and discuss how strong leadership, accountability, and smart AI adoption keep growth steady and sustainable. If you've ever wondered what separates businesses that fade from those that flourish, this conversation will show you how to turn structure into freedom and process into legacy. Highlights: 00:10 – Why unexpected stories reveal how real businesses grow. 01:39 – How early life in Liberal, Kansas shaped a strong work ethic. 07:51 – What a 10,000 sq ft HQ build-out teaches about operations. 09:35 – How a trading floor was rebuilt in 36 hours and why speed matters. 11:21 – Why acquisitions fail without tribal knowledge and culture continuity. 13:19 – What Ferguson Alliance does for mid-market family businesses. 14:08 – Why many family firms don't make it to the third generation. 17:33 – How the 3 Ps—people, process, product—create durable growth. 20:49 – Why empowerment and clear decision rights prevent costly delays. 33:02 – The step-by-step process mapping approach that builds buy-in. 36:41 – Who should sponsor change and how to align managers. 49:36 – Why process docs and succession planning start on day one. 56:21 – Realistic timelines: six weeks to ninety days and beyond. 58:19 – How referrals expand projects across departments. About the Guest: With over 40 years of experience in the realm of business optimization and cost-effective strategies, Jan is a seasoned professional dedicated to revolutionizing company efficiency. From collaborating with large corporations encompassing over 1,000 employees to small 2-person offices, Jan's expertise lies in meticulously analyzing financials, processes, policies and procedures to drive enhanced performance. Since joining Ferguson Alliance in 2024, Jan has become a Certified Exit Planning Advisor and is currently in the process of certification in Artificial Intelligence Consulting and Implementation, adding to her ability to quickly provide businesses with an assessment and tools that will enhance their prosperity in today's competitive landscape. Jan's forte lies in crafting solutions that align with each client's vision, bolstering their bottom line and staffing dynamics. Adept in setting policies that align with company objectives, Jan is renowned for transforming challenges into opportunities for growth and longevity. With a knack for unraveling inefficiencies and analyzing net income, Jan is a go-to expert for family-owned businesses looking to extend their legacy into future generations. Ways to connect with Jan: Email address : Jan@Ferguson-Alliance.com Phone: 713 851 2229 LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/jansouthern cepa Website: https://ferguson alliance.com About the Host: Michael Hingson is a New York Times best-selling author, international lecturer, and Chief Vision Officer for accessiBe. Michael, blind since birth, survived the 9/11 attacks with the help of his guide dog Roselle. This story is the subject of his best-selling book, Thunder Dog. Michael gives over 100 presentations around the world each year speaking to influential groups such as Exxon Mobile, AT&T, Federal Express, Scripps College, Rutgers University, Children's Hospital, and the American Red Cross just to name a few. He is Ambassador for the National Braille Literacy Campaign for the National Federation of the Blind and also serves as Ambassador for the American Humane Association's 2012 Hero Dog Awards. https://michaelhingson.com https://www.facebook.com/michael.hingson.author.speaker/ https://twitter.com/mhingson https://www.youtube.com/user/mhingson https://www.linkedin.com/in/michaelhingson/ accessiBe Links https://accessibe.com/ https://www.youtube.com/c/accessiBe https://www.linkedin.com/company/accessibe/mycompany/ https://www.facebook.com/accessibe/ Thanks for listening! Thanks so much for listening to our podcast! If you enjoyed this episode and think that others could benefit from listening, please share it using the social media buttons on this page. Do you have some feedback or questions about this episode? Leave a comment in the section below! Subscribe to the podcast If you would like to get automatic updates of new podcast episodes, you can subscribe to the podcast on Apple Podcasts or Stitcher. You can subscribe in your favorite podcast app. You can also support our podcast through our tip jar https://tips.pinecast.com/jar/unstoppable-mindset . Leave us an Apple Podcasts review Ratings and reviews from our listeners are extremely valuable to us and greatly appreciated. They help our podcast rank higher on Apple Podcasts, which exposes our show to more awesome listeners like you. If you have a minute, please leave an honest review on Apple Podcasts. Transcription Notes: Michael Hingson ** 00:00 Access Cast and accessiBe Initiative presents Unstoppable Mindset. The podcast where inclusion, diversity and the unexpected meet. Hi, I'm Michael Hingson, Chief Vision Officer for accessiBe and the author of the number one New York Times bestselling book, Thunder dog, the story of a blind man, his guide dog and the triumph of trust. Thanks for joining me on my podcast as we explore our own blinding fears of inclusion unacceptance and our resistance to change. We will discover the idea that no matter the situation, or the people we encounter, our own fears, and prejudices often are our strongest barriers to moving forward. The unstoppable mindset podcast is sponsored by accessiBe, that's a c c e s s i capital B e. Visit www.accessibe.com to learn how you can make your website accessible for persons with disabilities. And to help make the internet fully inclusive by the year 2025. Glad you dropped by we're happy to meet you and to have you here with us.   Michael Hingson ** 01:20 Well, hi everyone. I want to welcome you to unstoppable mindset where inclusion, diversity and the unexpected meet. But the neat thing about it is we don't usually deal with inclusion or diversity. We deal with everything, but that because people come on this podcast to tell their own stories, and that's what we get to do today with Jan southern not necessarily anything profound about inclusion or diversity, but certainly the unexpected. And I'm sure we're going to figure out how that happens and what's unexpected about whatever I got to tell you. Before we started, we were just sitting here telling a few puns back and forth. Oh, well, we could always do that, Jan, well, welcome to unstoppable mindset. We're glad you're here. Thank you so much. Glad to be here. Any puns before we start?   Jan Southern ** 02:09 No, I think we've had enough of those. I think we did it   Michael Hingson ** 02:11 in, huh? Yes. Well, cool. Well, I want to thank you for being here. Jan has been very actively involved in a lot of things dealing with business and helping people and companies of all sizes, companies of all sizes. I don't know about people of all sizes, but companies of all sizes in terms of becoming more effective and being well, I'll just use the term resilient, but we'll get into that. But right now, let's talk about the early Jan. Tell us about Jan growing up and all that sort of stuff that's always fun to start with.   Jan Southern ** 02:50 Yes, I grew up in Liberal Kansas, which is a small town just north of the Oklahoma border and a little bit east of New Mexico kind of down in that little Four Corners area. And I grew up in the time when we could leave our house in the morning on the weekends and come home just before dusk at night, and our parents didn't panic, you know. So it was a good it was a good time growing up. I i lived right across the street from the junior high and high school, so I had a hugely long walk to work, I mean,   Michael Hingson ** 03:28 to school,   Jan Southern ** 03:30 yeah, and so, you know, was a, was a cheerleader in high school, and went to college, then at Oklahoma State, and graduated from there, and here I am in the work world. I've been working since I was about 20 years old, and I'd hate to tell you how many years that's been.   Michael Hingson ** 03:51 You can if you want. I won't tell   03:55 nobody will know.   Michael Hingson ** 03:57 Good point. Well, I know it's been a long time I read your bio, so I know, but that's okay. Well, so when you What did you major in in college psychology? Ah, okay. And did you find a bachelor's degree or just bachelor's   Jan Southern ** 04:16 I did not. I got an Mrs. Degree and had two wonderful children and grew up, they've grown up and to become very fine young men with kids of their own. So I have four grandchildren and one great grandchild, so   Michael Hingson ** 04:33 Wowie Zowie, yeah, that's pretty cool. So when you left college after graduating, what did you do?   Jan Southern ** 04:40 I first went to work in a bank. My ex husband was in pharmacy school at Oklahoma, State University of Oklahoma, and so I went to work in a bank. I was the working wife while he went to pharmacy school. And went to work in a bank, and years later, became a bank consultant. So we we lived in Norman, Oklahoma until he was out of school and and as I began having children during our marriage, I went to work for a pediatrician, which was very convenient when you're trying to take care of kids when they're young.   Michael Hingson ** 05:23 Yeah, and what did you What did you do for a pediatrician?   Jan Southern ** 05:27 I was, I was her receptionist, and typed medical charts, so I learned a lot about medicine. Was very she was head of of pediatrics at a local hospital, and also taught at the university. And so I got a great education and health and well being of kids. It was, it was a great job.   Michael Hingson ** 05:51 My my sister in law had her first child while still in high school, and ended up having to go to work. She went to work for Kaiser Permanente as a medical transcriber, but she really worked her way up. She went to college, got a nursing degree, and so on, and she became a nurse. And eventually, when she Well, she didn't retire, but her last job on the medical side was she managed seven wards, and also had been very involved in the critical care unit. Was a nurse in the CCU for a number of years. Then she was tasked. She went to the profit making side of Kaiser, as it were, and she was tasked with bringing paperless charts into Kaiser. She was the nurse involved in the team that did that. So she came a long way from being a medical transcriber.   Jan Southern ** 06:51 Well, she came a long way from being a single mom in high school. That's a great story of success.   Michael Hingson ** 06:56 Well, and she wasn't totally a single mom. She she and the guy did marry, but eventually they they did divorce because he wasn't as committed as he should be to one person, if it were,   Speaker 1 ** 07:10 that's a familiar story. And he also drank and eventually died of cirrhosis of the liver. Oh, that's too bad. Yeah, that's always sad, but, you know, but, but she coped, and her her kids cope. So it works out okay. So you went to work for a pediatrician, and then what did you do?   Jan Southern ** 07:31 Well, after my husband, after he graduated, was transferred to Dallas, and I went to work for a company gardener, Denver company at the time, they've been since purchased by another company. And was because of my experience in banking prior to the pediatrician, I went to work in their corporate cash management division, and I really enjoyed that I was in their corporate cash management for their worldwide division, and was there for about four years, and really enjoyed it. One of my most exciting things was they were moving their headquarters from Quincy, Illinois down to Dallas. And so I had been hired. But since they were not yet in Dallas, I worked with a gentleman who was in charge of putting together their corporate offices. And so we made all the arrangements. As far as we had a got a 10,000 square foot blank space when we started. And our job was to get every desk, every chair, every pen and pencil. And so when somebody moved from Quincy, Illinois, they moved in and they had their desk all set up. Their cuticles were cubicles were ready to go and and they were they could hit the ground running day one, so that,   Michael Hingson ** 09:02 so you, you clearly really got into dealing with organization, I would would say, then, wouldn't, didn't you?   Jan Southern ** 09:11 Yes, yes, that was my, probably my first exposure to to the corporate world and learning exactly how things could be more efficient, more cost effective. And I really enjoyed working for that company.   Michael Hingson ** 09:30 I remember, after September 11, we worked to provide the technology that we were selling, but we provided technology to Wall Street firms so they could recover their data and get set up again to be able to open the stock exchange and all the trading floors on the 17th of September. So the next Monday. And it was amazing, one of the companies was, I think it was Morgan Stanley. Finally and they had to go find new office space, because their office space in the World Trade Center was, needless to say, gone. They found a building in Jersey City that had a floor, they said, about the size of a football field, and from Friday night to Sunday afternoon, they said it took about 36 hours. They brought in computers, including IBM, taking computers from some of their own people, and just bringing them into to Morgan Stanley and other things, including some of the technology that we provided. And within 36 hours, they had completely reconstructed a trading floor. That's amazing. It was, it was absolutely amazing to see that. And you know, for everyone, it was pretty crazy, but Wall Street opened on the 17th and and continued to survive.   Jan Southern ** 10:57 That's a great story.   Michael Hingson ** 10:59 So what did you do? So you did this, this work with the 10,000 square foot space and other things like that. And then what?   Jan Southern ** 11:08 Well, once, once everyone moved into the space in Dallas. Then I began my work in their in their corporate cash management area. And from there, my next job was working in a bank when my my husband, then was transferred back to Tulsa, Oklahoma, and I went back to work in banking. And from that bank, I was there about three to four years, and I was hired then by John Floyd as a as a consultant for banks and credit unions, and I was with that company for 42 years. My gosh, I know that's unusual these days, but I really enjoyed what I did. We did re engineering work and cost effectiveness and banks and credit unions for those 42 years. And so that was where I really cut my teeth on process improvement and continuous improvement, and still in that industry. But their company was bought by a an equity firm. And of course, when that happens, they like to make changes and and bring in their own folks. So those of us who had been there since day one were no longer there.   Michael Hingson ** 12:26 When did that happen?   Jan Southern ** 12:27 That was in 2022   Michael Hingson ** 12:32 so it's interesting that companies do that they always want to bring in their own people. And at least from my perspective, it seems to me that they forget that they lose all the tribal knowledge that people who have been working there have that made the company successful   Jan Southern ** 12:51 Absolutely. So I guess they're still doing well, and they've done well for themselves afterwards, and but, you know, they do, they lose all the knowledge, they lose all of the continuity with the clients. And it's sad that they do that, but that's very, very common.   Michael Hingson ** 13:13 Yeah, I know I worked for a company that was bought by Xerox, and all the company wanted was our technology. All Xerox wanted was the technology. And they lost all of the knowledge that all the people with sales experience and other kinds of experiences brought, because they terminated all of us when the company was fully in the Xerox realm of influence.   Jan Southern ** 13:39 So you know what I went through? Yeah.   Michael Hingson ** 13:42 Well, what did you do after you left that company? After you left John Floyd,   Jan Southern ** 13:47 I left John Floyd, I was under a I was under a non compete, so I kind of knocked around for a couple of years. I was of age where I could have retired, but I wasn't ready to. So then I found Ferguson Alliance, and I'm now a business advisor for family owned businesses, and so I've been with Ferguson just over a year, and doing the same type of work that I did before. In addition to that, I have become a certified Exit Planning advisor, so that I can do that type of work as well. So that's that's my story in a nutshell. As far as employment,   Michael Hingson ** 14:26 what is Ferguson Alliance?   Jan Southern ** 14:29 Ferguson Alliance, we are business advisors for family owned businesses. And the perception is that a family owned business is going to be a small business, but there are over 500,000 family owned businesses in the United States. Our market is the middle market, from maybe 50 employees up to 1000 20 million in revenues, up to, you know, the sky's the limit, and so we do. Do a lot of work as far as whatever can help a family owned business become more prosperous and survive into future generations. It's a sad statistic that most family owned businesses don't survive into the third generation.   Michael Hingson ** 15:16 Why is that?   Jan Southern ** 15:19 I think because they the first the first generation works themselves, their fingers to the bone to get their their business off the ground, and they get successful, and their offspring often enjoy, if you will, the fruits of the labors of their parents and so many of them, once they've gone to college, they don't have an interest in joining the firm, and so they go on and succeed on their own. And then their children, of course, follow the same course from from their work. And so that's really, I think, the primary reason, and also the the founders of the businesses have a tendency to let that happen, I think. And so our coaching programs try to avoid that and help them to bring in the second and third generations so that they can, you know, they can carry on a legacy of their parents or the founders.   Michael Hingson ** 16:28 So what do you do, and what kinds of initiatives do you take to extend the longevity of a family owned business then,   Jan Southern ** 16:39 well, the first thing is that that Rob, who's our founder of our family owned business, does a lot of executive coaching and helps the helps the people who are within the business, be it the founder or being at their second or third generations, and he'll help with coaching them as to how to, hey, get past the family dynamics. Everybody has their own business dynamics. And then you add on top of that, the family dynamics, in addition to just the normal everyday succession of a business. And so we help them to go through those types of challenges, if you will. They're not always a challenge, but sometimes, if there are challenges, Rob's coaching will take them through that and help them to develop a succession plan that also includes a document that says that that governance plan as to how their family business will be governed, in addition to just a simple succession plan, and my role in a lot of that is to make sure that their business is ready to prosper too. You know that their their assessment of as far as whether they're profitable, whether they are their processes are in place, etc, but one of the primary things that we do is to help them make certain that that if they don't want to survive into future generations, that we help them to prepare to either pass it along to a family member or pass it along to someone who's a non family member, right?   Michael Hingson ** 18:34 So I've heard you mentioned the 3p that are involved in extending longevity. Tell me about that. What are the three P's?   Jan Southern ** 18:41 Well, the first p is your people. You know, if you don't take care of your people, be they family members or non family members, then you're not going to be very successful. So making certain that you have a system in place, have a culture in place that takes care of your people. To us, is very key. Once you make sure that your people are in a culture of continuous improvement and have good, solid foundation. In that regard, you need to make sure that your processes are good. That's the second P that that you have to have your processes all documented, that you've authorized your people to make decisions that they don't always have to go to somebody else. If you're a person in the company and you recognize that something's broken, then you need to have empowerment so that your people can make decisions and not always have to get permission from someone else to make certain that those processes continuously are approved improved. That's how to you. Could have became so successful is they installed a product. They called it, I say, a product. They installed a culture. They called it kaizen. And so Kaizen was simply just continuous improvement, where, if you were doing a process and you ask yourself, why did I do it this way? Isn't there a better way? Then, you know, you're empowered to find a better way and to make sure that that that you can make that decision, as long as it fits in with the culture of the company. Then the third P is product. You know, you've got to have a product that people want. I know that you've seen a lot of companies fail because they're pushing a product that nobody wants. And so you make certain that your products are good, your products are good, high quality, and that you can deliver them in the way that you promise. And so those are really the 3p I'd like to go back to process and just kind of one of the things, as you know, we had some horrendous flooding here in Texas recently, and one of the things that happened during that, and not that it was a cause of it, but just one of the things that exacerbated the situation, is someone called to say, Please, we need help. There's flooding going on. It was one of their first responders had recognized that there was a tragic situation unfolding, and when he called into their system to give alerts, someone says, Well, I'm going to have to get approval from my supervisor, with the approval didn't come in time. So what's behind that? We don't know, but that's just a critical point as to why you should empower your people to make decisions when, when it's necessary.   Michael Hingson ** 21:56 I'm sure, in its own way, there was some of that with all the big fires out here in California back in January, although part of the problem with those is that aircraft couldn't fly for 36 hours because the winds were so heavy that there was just no way that the aircraft could fly. But you got to wonder along the way, since they are talking about the fact that the electric companies Southern California, Edison had a fair amount to do with probably a lot a number of the fires igniting and so on, one can only wonder what might have happened if somebody had made different decisions to better prepare and do things like coating the wires so that if they touch, they wouldn't spark and so on that they didn't do. And, you know, I don't know, but one can only wonder.   Jan Southern ** 22:53 It's hard to know, you know, and in our situation, would it have made any difference had that person been able to make a decision on her own? Yeah, I was moving so rapidly, it might not have made any any difference at all, but you just have to wonder, like you said,   Michael Hingson ** 23:10 yeah, there's no way to, at this point, really know and understand, but nevertheless, it is hopefully something that people learn about for the future, I heard that they're now starting to coat wires, and so hopefully that will prevent a lot, prevent a lot of the sparking and so on. I'd always thought about they ought to put everything underground, but coating wire. If they can do that and do it effectively, would probably work as well. And that's, I would think, a lot cheaper than trying to put the whole power grid underground.   Jan Southern ** 23:51 I would think so we did when I was with my prior company. We did a project where they were burying, they were putting everything underground, and Burlington Vermont, and it was incredible what it takes to do that. I mean, you just, we on the outside, just don't realize, you know, there's a room that's like 10 by six underground that carries all of their equipment and things necessary to do that. And I never realized how, how costly and how difficult it was to bury everything. We just have the impression that, well, they just bury this stuff underground, and that's all. That's all it takes. But it's a huge, huge undertaking in order to do that   Michael Hingson ** 24:36 well. And it's not just the equipment, it's all the wires, and that's hundreds and of miles and 1000s of miles of cable that has to be buried underground, and that gets to be a real challenge.   Jan Southern ** 24:47 Oh, exactly, exactly. So another story about cables. We were working in West Texas one time on a project, and we're watching them stretch the. Wiring. They were doing some internet provisioning for West Texas, which was woefully short on in that regard, and they were stringing the wire using helicopters. It was fascinating, and the only reason we saw that is it was along the roadways when we were traveling from West Texas, back into San Antonio, where flights were coming in and out of so that was interesting to watch.   Michael Hingson ** 25:28 Yeah, yeah. People get pretty creative. Well, you know, thinking back a little bit, John Floyd must have been doing something right to keep you around for 42 years.   Jan Southern ** 25:40 Yes, they did. They were a fabulous country company and still going strong. I think he opened in 1981 it's called advantage. Now, it's not John Floyd, but Right, that was a family owned business. That's where I got to cut my teeth on the dynamics of a family owned business and how they should work and how and his niece is one of the people that's still with the company. Whether, now that they're owned by someone else, whether she'll be able to remain as they go into different elements, is, is another question. But yeah, they were, they were great.   Michael Hingson ** 26:20 How many companies, going back to the things we were talking about earlier, how many companies when they're when they buy out another company, or they're bought out by another company, how many of those companies generally do succeed and continue to grow? Do you have any statistics, or do more tend not to than do? Or   Jan Southern ** 26:40 I think that more tend to survive. They tend to survive, though, with a different culture, I guess you would say they they don't retain the culture that they had before. I don't have any firm statistics on that, because we don't really deal with that that much, but I don't they tend to survive with it, with a the culture of the newer company, if they fold them in, yeah.   Michael Hingson ** 27:15 Well, and the reality is to be fair, evolution always takes place. So the John Floyd and say, 2022 wasn't the same as the John Floyd company in 1981   Jan Southern ** 27:31 not at all. No, exactly, not at all.   Michael Hingson ** 27:34 So it did evolve, and it did grow. And so hopefully, when that company was absorbed elsewhere and with other companies, they they do something to continue to be successful, and I but I think that's good. I know that with Xerox, when it bought Kurzweil, who I worked for, they were also growing a lot and so on. The only thing is that their stock started to drop. I think that there were a number of things. They became less visionary, I think is probably the best way to put it, and they had more competition from other companies developing and providing copiers and other things like that. But they just became less visionary. And so the result was that they didn't grow as much as probably they should have.   Jan Southern ** 28:28 I think that happens a lot. Sometimes, if you don't have a culture of continuous improvement and continuous innovation, which maybe they didn't, I'm not that familiar with how they move forward, then you get left behind. You know, I'm I'm in the process right now, becoming certified in artificial intelligent in my old age. And the point that's made, not by the company necessarily that I'm studying with, but by many others, is there's going to be two different kinds of companies in the future. There's going to be those who have adopted AI and those who used to be in business. And I think that's probably fair.   Michael Hingson ** 29:13 I think it is. And I also we talked with a person on this podcast about a year ago, or not quite a year ago, but, but he said, AI will not replace anyone's jobs. People will replace people's jobs with AI, but they shouldn't. They shouldn't eliminate anyone from the workforce. And we ended up having this discussion about autonomous vehicles. And the example that he gave is, right now we have companies that are shippers, and they drive product across the country, and what will happen to the drivers when the driving process becomes autonomous and you have self driving vehicles, driving. Across country. And his point was, what they should do, what people should consider doing is not eliminating the drivers, but while the machine is doing the driving, find and give additional or other tasks to the drivers to do so they can continue to be contributors and become more efficient and help the company become more efficient, because now you've got people to do other things than what they were used to doing, but there are other things that AI won't be able to do. And I thought that was pretty fascinating,   Jan Southern ** 30:34 exactly. Well, my my nephew is a long haul truck driver. He owns a company, and you know, nothing the AI will never be able to observe everything that's going on around the trucking and and you know, there's also the some of the things that that driver can do is those observations, plus they're Going to need people who are going to program those trucks as they are making their way across the country, and so I'm totally in agreement with what your friend said, or your you know, your guests had to say that many other things,   Michael Hingson ** 31:15 yeah, and it isn't necessarily even relating to driving, but there are certainly other things that they could be doing to continue to be efficient and effective, and no matter how good the autonomous driving capabilities are, it only takes that one time when for whatever reason, the intelligence can't do it, that it's good To have a driver available to to to to help. And I do believe that we're going to see the time when autonomous vehicles will be able to do a great job, and they will be able to observe most of all that stuff that goes on around them. But there's going to be that one time and that that happens. I mean, even with drivers in a vehicle, there's that one time when maybe something happens and a driver can't continue. So what happens? Well, the vehicle crashes, or there's another person to take over. That's why we have at least two pilots and airplanes and so on. So right, exactly aspects of it,   Jan Southern ** 32:21 I think so I can remember when I was in grade school, they showed us a film as to what someone's vision of the country was, and part of that was autonomous driving, you know. And so it was, it was interesting that we're living in a time where we're beginning to see that, yeah,   Michael Hingson ** 32:41 we're on the cusp, and it's going to come. It's not going to happen overnight, but it will happen, and we're going to find that vehicles will be able to drive themselves. But there's still much more to it than that, and we shouldn't be in too big of a hurry, although some so called profit making. People may decide that's not true, to their eventual chagrin, but we shouldn't be too quick to replace people with technology totally   Jan Southern ** 33:14 Exactly. We have cars in I think it's Domino's Pizza. I'm not sure which pizza company, but they have autonomous cars driving, and they're cooking the pizza in the back oven of the car while, you know, while it's driving to your location, yeah, but there's somebody in the car who gets out of the car and brings the pizza to my door.   Michael Hingson ** 33:41 There's been some discussion about having drones fly the pizza to you. Well, you know, we'll see,   Jan Southern ** 33:50 right? We'll see how that goes. Yeah,   Michael Hingson ** 33:53 I haven't heard that. That one is really, pardon the pun, flown well yet. But, you know, we'll see. So when you start a process, improvement process program, what are some of the first steps that you initiate to bring that about? Well, the first   Jan Southern ** 34:11 thing that we do, once we've got agreement with their leadership, then we have a meeting with the people who will be involved, who will be impacted, and we tell them all about what's happening, what's going to happen, and make certain that they're in full understanding. And you know, the first thing that you ever hear when you're saying that you're going to be doing a re engineering or process improvement is they think, Oh, you're just going to come in and tell me to reduce my staff, and that's the way I'm going to be more successful. We don't look at it that way at all. We look at it in that you need to be right. Have your staff being the right size, and so in in many cases, in my past. I we've added staff. We've told them, you're under staffed, but the first thing we do is hold that meeting, make certain that they're all in agreement with what's going to happen, explain to them how it's going to happen, and then the next step is that once management has decided who our counterparts will be within the company. Who's going to be working with us to introduce us to their staff members is we sit down with their staff members and we ask them questions. You know, what do you do? How do you do it? What do you Did someone bring it to you. Are you second in line or next in line for some task? And then once you finish with it, what happens to it? Do you give someone else? Is a report produced? Etc. And so once we've answered all of those questions, we do a little a mapping of the process. And once you map that process, then you take it back to the people who actually perform the process, and you ask them, Did I get this right? I heard you say, this? Is this a true depiction of what's happening? And so we make sure that they don't do four steps. And they told us steps number one and three, so that then, once we've mapped that out, that gives us an idea of two of how can things be combined? Can they be combined? Should you be doing what you're doing here? Is there a more efficient or cost effective way of doing it? And we make our recommendations based on that for each process that we're reviewing. Sometimes there's one or two good processes in an area that we're looking at. Sometimes there are hundreds. And so that's that's the basic process. And then once they've said yes, that is correct, then we make our recommendations. We take it back to their management, and hopefully they will include the people who actually are performing the actions. And we make our recommendations to make changes if, if, if it's correct, maybe they don't need to make any changes. Maybe everything is is very, very perfect the way it is. But in most cases, they brought us in because it's not and they've recognized it's not. So then once they've said, yes, we want to do this, then we help them to implement.   Michael Hingson ** 37:44 Who usually starts this process, that is, who brings you in?   Jan Southern ** 37:48 Generally, it is going to be, depending upon the size of the company, but in most cases, it's going to be the CEO. Sometimes it's the Chief Operating Officer. Sometimes in a very large company, it may be a department manager, you know, someone who has the authority to bring us in. But generally, I would say that probably 90% of our projects, it's at the C   Michael Hingson ** 38:19 level office. So then, based on everything that you're you're discussing, probably that also means that there has to be some time taken to convince management below the CEO or CEO or a department head. You've got to convince the rest of management that this is going to be a good thing and that you have their best interest at heart.   Jan Southern ** 38:43 That is correct, and that's primarily the reason that we have for our initial meeting. We ask whoever is the contract signer to attend that meeting and be a part of the discussion to help to ward off any objections, and then to really bring these people along if they are objecting. And for that very reason, even though they may still be objecting, we involve them in the implementation, so an implementation of a of a recommendation has to improve, has to include the validation. So we don't do the work, but we sit alongside the people who are doing the implementation and guide them through the process, and then it's really up to them to report back. Is it working as intended? If it's not, what needs to be changed, what might improve, what we thought would be a good recommendation, and we work with them to make certain that everything works for them. Right? And by the end of that, if they've been the tester, they've been the one who's approved steps along the way, we generally find that they're on board because they're the it's now. They're now the owners of the process. And when they have ownership on something that they've implemented. It's amazing how much more resilient they they think that the process becomes, and now it's their process and not ours.   Michael Hingson ** 40:32 Do you find most often that when you're working with a number of people in a company that most of them realize that there need to be some changes, or something needs to be improved to make the whole company work better. Or do you find sometimes there's just great resistance, and people say no, there's just no way anything is bad.   Jan Southern ** 40:53 Here we find that 90% of the time, and I'm just pulling that percentage out of the air, I would say they know, they know it needs to be changed. And the ones typically, not always, but typically, the ones where you find the greatest resistance are the ones who know it's broken, but they just don't want to change. You know, there are some people who don't want to change no matter what, or they feel threatened that. They feel like that a new and improved process might take their place. You know, might replace them. And that's typically not the case. It's typically not the case at all, that they're not replaced by it. Their process is improved, and they find that they can be much more productive. But the the ones who are like I call them the great resistors, usually don't survive the process either. They are. They generally let themselves go,   Michael Hingson ** 42:01 if you will, more ego than working for the company.   Jan Southern ** 42:05 Yes, exactly, you know, it's kind of like my mom, you know, and it they own the process as it was. We used to laugh and call this person Louise, you know, Louise has said, Well, we've always done it that way. You know, that's probably the best reason 20 years in not to continue to do it same way.   Michael Hingson ** 42:34 We talked earlier about John Floyd and evolution. And that makes perfect sense. Exactly what's one of the most important things that you have to do to prepare to become involved in preparing for a process, improvement project? I think   Jan Southern ** 42:52 the most important thing there's two very important things. One is to understand their culture, to know how their culture is today, so that you know kind of which direction you need to take them, if they're not in a continuous improvement environment, then you need to lead them in that direction if they're already there and they just don't understand what needs to be done. There's two different scenarios, but the first thing you need to do is understand the culture. The second thing that you need to do, other than the culture, is understand their their business. You need to know what they do. Of course, you can't know from the outside how they do it, but you need to know that, for instance, if it's an we're working with a company that cleans oil tanks and removes toxins and foul lines from oil and gas industry. And so if you don't understand at all what they do, it's hard to help them through the processes that they need to go through. And so just learning, in general, what their technology, what their business is about. If you walk in there and haven't done that, you're just blowing smoke. In my mind, you know, I do a lot of research on the technologies that they use, or their company in general. I look at their website, I you know, look at their LinkedIn, their social media and so. And then we request information from them in advance of doing a project, so that we know what their org structure looks like. And I think those things are critical before you walk in the door to really understand their business in general.   Michael Hingson ** 44:53 Yeah, and that, by doing that, you also tend to. To gain a lot of credibility, because you come in and demonstrate that you do understand what they're doing, and people respond well to that, I would think   Jan Southern ** 45:10 they do. You know, one of our most interesting projects in my past was the electric company that I mentioned. There was an electric company in Burlington, Vermont that did their own electric generation. We've never looked at anything like that. We're a bank consultant, and so we learned all about how they generated energy with wood chips and the, you know, the different things. And, you know, there were many days that I was out watching the wood chips fall out of a train and into their buckets, where they then transferred them to a yard where they moved the stuff around all the time. So, you know, it was, it's very interesting what you learn along the way. But I had done my homework, and I knew kind of what they did and not how they did it in individual aspects of their own processes, but I understood their industry. And so it was, you do walk in with some credibility, otherwise they're looking at you like, well, what does this person know about my job?   Michael Hingson ** 46:20 And at the same time, have you ever been involved in a situation where you did learn about the company you you went in with some knowledge, you started working with the company, and you made a suggestion about changing a process or doing something that no one had thought of, and it just clicked, and everybody loved it when they thought about it,   Jan Southern ** 46:42 yes, yes, exactly. And probably that electric company was one of those such things. You know, when they hired us, they they told us. We said, We don't know anything about your business. And they said, Good, we don't want you to come in with any preconceived ideas. And so some of the recommendations we made to them. They were, it's kind of like an aha moment. You know, they look at you like, Oh my gosh. I've never thought of that, you know, the same I would say in in banking and in family businesses, you know, they just, they've never thought about doing things in a certain way.   Michael Hingson ** 47:20 Can you tell us a story about one of those times?   Jan Southern ** 47:24 Yes, I would say that if you're, if you're talking about, let's talk about something in the banking industry, where they are. I was working in a bank, and you, you go in, and this was in the days before we had all of the ways to store things electronically. And so they were having a difficult time in keeping all of their documents and in place and knowing when to, you know, put them in a destruction pile and when not to. And so I would say that they had an aha moment when I said, Okay, let's do this. Let's get a bunch of the little colored dots, and you have big dots and small dots. And I said, everything that you put away for 1990 for instance, then you put on a purple dot. And then for January, you have 12 different colors of the little dots that you put in the middle of them. And you can use those things to determine that everything that has a purple dot and little yellow.in the middle of that one, you know that that needs to be destructed. I think in that case, it was seven years, seven years from now, you know that you need to pull that one off the shelf and put it into the pile to be destructed. And they said, we've never thought of anything. It was like I had told him that, you know, the world was going to be struck, to be gone, to begin tomorrow. Yeah, it was so simple to me, but it was something that they had never, ever thought of, and it solved. They had something like five warehouses of stuff, most of which needed to have been destroyed years before, yeah,   Michael Hingson ** 49:21 but still they weren't sure what, and so you gave them a mechanism to do that,   Jan Southern ** 49:27 right? Of course, that's all gone out the window today. You don't have to do all that manual stuff anymore. You're just, you know, I'd say another example of that was people who were when we began the system of digitizing the files, especially loan files in a bank. And this would hold true today as well, in that once you start on a project to digitize the files, there's a tendency to take the old. Files first and digitize those. Well, when you do that, before you get to the end of it, if you have a large project, you don't need those files anymore. So you know, our recommendation is start with your latest. You know, anything that needs to be archived, start with the newest, because by the time that you finish your project, some of those old files you won't even need to digitize, just shred them. Yeah, you know, it's, it's just little simple things like that that can make all the difference.   Michael Hingson ** 50:32 When should a family business start documenting processes? I think I know that's what I thought you'd say,   Jan Southern ** 50:40 yes, yes, that is something that is near and dear to my heart. Is that I would even recommend that you maybe do it before you open your doors, if potential is there, so that the day you open your business, you need to start with your documenting your processes, and you need to start on your succession planning. You know, those are the days that once you really start working, you're not going to have time. You know, you're going to be busy working every day. You're you're going to be busy servicing your customers, and that always gets pushed to the back when you start to document something, and so that's the time do it when you first open your doors.   Michael Hingson ** 51:29 So when we talk about processes, maybe it's a fair question to ask, maybe not. But what are we really talking about when we talk about processes and documenting processes? What are the processes?   Jan Southern ** 51:41 Well, the processes are the things that you do every day. Let's take as an example, just when you set up your your files within your SharePoint, or within your computer, if you don't use SharePoint, your Google files, how you set those up, a process could also be during your accounting, what's the process that you go through to get a invoice approved? You know, when the invoice comes in from the vendor, what do you do with it? You know, who has to approve it? Are there dollar amounts that you have to have approvals for? Or can some people just take in a smaller invoice and pay it without any any approvals? We like to see there be a process where it's approved before you get the invoice from the customer, where it's been approved at the time of the order. And that way it can be processed more more quickly on the backside, to just make sure that it says what the purchase order if you use purchase orders or see what your agreement was. So it's the it's the workflow. There's something that triggers an action, and then, once gets triggered, then what takes place? What's next, what's the next steps? And you just go through each one of the things that has to happen for that invoice to get paid, and the check or wire transfer, or or whatever you use as a payment methodology for it to go out the door. And so, you know what you what you do is you start, there's something that triggers it, and then there's a goal for the end, and then you fill in in the center,   Michael Hingson ** 53:38 and it's, it's, it's a fascinating I hate to use the word process to to listen to all of this, but it makes perfect sense that you should be documenting right from the outset about everything that you do, because it also means that you're establishing a plan so that everyone knows exactly what the expectations are and exactly what it is that needs to be done every step of the way,   Jan Southern ** 54:07 right and and one of the primary reasons for that is we can't anticipate life. You know, maybe our favorite person, Louise, is the only one who's ever done, let's say, you know, payroll processing, or something of that sort. And if something happens and Louise isn't able to come in tomorrow, who's going to do it? You know, without a map, a road map, as to the steps that need to be taken, how's that going to take place? And so that's that's really the critical importance. And when you're writing those processes and procedures, you need to make them so that anybody can walk in off the street, if necessary, and do what Louise was doing and have it done. Properly.   Michael Hingson ** 55:00 Of course, as we know, Louise is just a big complainer anyway. That's right, you said, yeah. Well, once you've made recommendations, and let's say they're put in place, then what do you do to continue supporting a business?   Jan Southern ** 55:20 We check in with them periodically, whatever is appropriate for them and and for the procedures that are there, we make sure that it's working for them, that they're being as prosperous as they want to be, and that our recommendations are working for them. Hopefully they'll allow us to come back in and and most do, and make sure that what we recommended is right and in is working for them, and if so, we make little tweaks with their approvals. And maybe new technology has come in, maybe they've installed a new system. And so then we help them to incorporate our prior recommendations into whatever new they have. And so we try to support them on an ongoing basis, if they're willing to do that, which we have many clients. I think Rob has clients he's been with for ever, since he opened his doors 15 years ago. So   Michael Hingson ** 56:19 of course, the other side of that is, I would assume sometimes you work with companies, you've helped them deal with processes and so on, and then you come back in and you know about technology that that they don't know. And I would assume then that you suggest that, and hopefully they see the value of listening to your wisdom.   Jan Southern ** 56:41 Absolutely, we find that a lot. We also if they've discovered a technology on their own, but need help with recommendations, as far as implementation, we can help them through that as well, and that's one of the reasons I'm taking this class in AI to be able to help our customers move into a realm where it's much more easily implemented if, if they already have the steps that we've put into place, you can feed that into an AI model, and it can make adjustments to what they're doing or make suggestions.   Michael Hingson ** 57:19 Is there any kind of a rule of thumb to to answer this question, how long does it take for a project to to be completed?   Jan Southern ** 57:26 You know, it takes, in all fairness, regardless of the size of the company, I would say that they need to allow six weeks minimum. That's for a small company with a small project, it can take as long as a year or two years, depending upon the number of departments and the number of people that you have to talk to about their processes. But to let's just take an example of a one, one single department in a company is looking at doing one of these processes, then they need to allow at least six weeks to for discovery, for mapping, for their people to become accustomed to the new processes and to make sure that the implementation has been tested and is working and and they're satisfied with everything that that is taking place. Six weeks is a very, very minimum, probably 90 days is a more fair assessment as to how long they should allow for everything to take place.   Michael Hingson ** 58:39 Do you find that, if you are successful with, say, a larger company, when you go in and work with one department and you're able to demonstrate success improvements, or whatever it is that that you define as being successful, that then other departments want to use your services as well?   Jan Southern ** 59:00 Yes, yes, we do. That's a very good point. Is that once you've helped them to help themselves, if you will, once you've helped them through that process, then they recognize the value of that, and we'll move on to another division or another department to do the same thing.   Michael Hingson ** 59:21 Word of mouth counts for a lot,   Jan Southern ** 59:24 doesn't it? Though, I'd say 90% of our business at Ferguson and company comes through referrals. They refer either through a center of influence or a current client who's been very satisfied with the work that we've done for them, and they tell their friends and networking people that you know. Here's somebody that you should use if you're considering this type of a project.   Michael Hingson ** 59:48 Well, if people want to reach out to you and maybe explore using your services in Ferguson services, how do they do that?   Jan Southern ** 59:55 They contact they can. If they want to contact me directly, it's Jan. J, a n, at Ferguson dash alliance.com and that's F, E, R, G, U, S, O, N, Dash alliance.com and they can go to our website, which is the same, which is Ferguson dash alliance.com One thing that's very, very good about our our website is, there's a page that's called resources, and there's a lot of free advice, if you will. There's a lot of materials there that are available to family owned businesses, specifically, but any business could probably benefit from that. And so those are free for you to be able to access and look at, and there's a lot of blog information, free eBook out there, and so that's the best way to reach Ferguson Alliance.   Michael Hingson ** 1:00:52 Well, cool. Well, I hope people will take all of this to heart. You certainly offered a lot of interesting and I would say, very relevant ideas and thoughts about dealing with processes and the importance of having processes. For several years at a company, my wife was in charge of document control and and not only doc control, but also keeping things secure. Of course, having the sense of humor that I have, I pointed out nobody else around the company knew how to read Braille, so what they should really do is put all the documents in Braille, then they'd be protected, but nobody. I was very disappointed. Good idea   Speaker 2 ** 1:01:36 that is good idea that'll keep them safe from everybody. Yeah.   Michael Hingson ** 1:01:39 Well, I want to thank you for being here, and I want to thank to thank all of you for listening today. We've been doing this an hour. How much fun. It is fun. Well, I appreciate it, and love to hear from all of you about today's episode. Please feel free to reach out to me. You can email me at Michael H i@accessibe.com or go to our podcast page. Michael hingson, M, I, C, H, A, E, L, H, I N, G, s, O, n.com/podcast, but wherever you're listening, please give us a five star rating. We value your thoughts and your opinions, and I hope that you'll tell other people about the podcasts as well. This has been an interesting one, and we try to make them all kind of fun and interesting, so please tell others about it. And if anyone out there listening knows of anyone who ought to be a guest, Jan, including you, then please feel free to introduce us to anyone who you think ought to be a guest on unstoppable mindset. Because I believe everyone has a story to tell, and I want to get as many people to have the opportunity to tell their stories as we can. So I hope that you'll all do that and give us reviews and and stick with us. But Jan, again, I want to thank you for being here. This has been a lot of fun.   Jan Southern ** 1:02:51 It has been a lot of fun, and I certainly thank you for inviting me.   Michael Hingson ** 1:03:00 You have been listening to the Unstoppable Mindset podcast. Thanks for dropping by. I hope that you'll join us again next week, and in future weeks for upcoming episodes. To subscribe to our podcast and to learn about upcoming episodes, please visit www dot Michael hingson.com slash podcast. Michael Hingson is spelled m i c h a e l h i n g s o n. While you're on the site., please use the form there to recommend people who we ought to interview in upcoming editions of the show. And also, we ask you and urge you to invite your friends to join us in the future. If you know of any one or any organization needing a speaker for an event, please email me at speaker at Michael hingson.com. I appreciate it very much. To learn more about the concept of blinded by fear, please visit www dot Michael hingson.com forward slash blinded by fear and while you're there, feel free to pick up a copy of my free eBook entitled blinded by fear. The unstoppable mindset podcast is provided by access cast an initiative of accessiBe and is sponsored by accessiBe. Please visit www.accessibe.com . AccessiBe is spelled a c c e s s i b e. There you can learn all about how you can make your website inclusive for all persons with disabilities and how you can help make the internet fully inclusive by 2025. Thanks again for Listening. Please come back and visit us again next week.

Our analysts Ariana Salvatore and Erin Wright explain the pivotal role of healthcare in negotiations to end the government shutdown.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Ariana Salvatore: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Ariana Salvatore, Morgan Stanley's U.S. Public Policy Strategist. Erin Wright: And I'm Erin Wright, U.S. Healthcare Services Analyst. Ariana Salvatore: Today we'll talk about what the U.S. government shutdown means for healthcare. It's Thursday, October 30th at 12pm in New York. Thus far, it seems like markets haven't really been paying too much attention to the government shutdown. Obviously, we're aware of the cumulative economic impact that builds every week that it lasts. But we haven't seen any movement from the political front either this week or last, which signals that it could be going on for a while longer. That being said, the end of this month is an important catalyst for a few reasons. First of all, you have the potential rollover of SNAP benefits. You have another potential missed military paycheck. And most importantly, the open enrollment period for healthcare plans. Polling is still showing neither side coming out on top with a clear advantage. Absent that changing, you probably need to see one of two things happen to have any movement forward on this front. Either more direct involvement from President Trump as he wraps up the APEC meeting or some sort of exogenous economic event, like a strike from air traffic controllers. Those types of events obviously are difficult to predict this far in advance. But up until now we know that President Trump has not really been involved in the debate. And the FAA seems to be operating a little bit with delays, but as usual. So, Erin, let's pivot to what's topical in here from a healthcare policy perspective. What are investors that you speak with paying the most attention to? Erin Wright: You bring up some important points Ariana. But from a policy perspective, it's very much an always top of mind for healthcare investors here. Right now, it is a key negotiating factor when it comes to the government shutdown. So, the shutdown debate is predominantly centered around the Affordable Care Act or the healthcare exchanges. This was a part of Obamacare. It was a program where individuals can purchase standalone health insurance through an exchange marketplace.The program has been wildly popular. It's been wildly popular in recent years with 24 million members. Growing 30 per cent last year, particularly with enhanced subsidies that are being offered today. So those subsidies are expected to expire at the end of this year, and those exchange members could be left with some real sticker shock – especially when we're going to see premium increases that could, on average, increase about 25 to 30 percent, in some states even more. So, folks are really starting to see that now. November 1st will be a key date here as open enrollment period begins. Ariana Salvatore: Right. So, as you mentioned, this is pretty key to the entire shutdown debate. Republicans are in favor of letting the expanded subsidies roll off. Democrats want to restore them to that COVID level enhancement. Of course, there's probably some middle path here, and we have seen some background reporting indicating that lawmakers are talking about a potential middle path or concession. So, talk me through what's on the table in terms of negotiating a potential compromise or extension of these subsidies. Erin Wright: So, we could see a permutation of outcomes here. Maybe we don't get a full extension, but we could see something partial come through. We could see something in terms of income caps, which restrict, kind of, the level of participants in the AC exchanges. You could see out-of-pocket minimums, which would eliminate some of those shadow members that we've been seeing and have been problematic across the space. And then you could also grandfather in some existing members that get subsidies today. So, all of those could offer some degrees of positive. And some degrees of relief when it comes to broader healthcare services, when it comes to insurance companies, when it comes to others that are participating in this program, as well as the individuals themselves. So, it's really a patient dynamic that's getting real here. A lot is on the table, but a lot is at stake with the potential for the sunsetting of these subsidies to drive 4 million in uninsured lives. So, it is meaningful, and I think that that's something we have to kind of put into perspective here.So, would love to know Ariana though, beyond healthcare, what are some of those key debates in terms of the negotiations around the shutdown? Ariana Salvatore: Healthcare really is central to this debate. So aside from just the ACA subsidies that we talked about, some Democrats have also been pushing for a repeal or rollback of some of the pieces of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that passed earlier this year. That was the fiscal bill of Republicans passed through the reconciliation process – that included some cuts to Medicaid down the line. So, there's been talk around that front. I think more of a clear path on the subsidies front, because that seems to be something that Republicans are treating as an absolute no-go. Some of the other really key debates are around just kind of how to keep the ball rolling while we're still in the shutdown. So, I mentioned SNAP at first, the potential release of some contingency funds there. Again, the military paychecks are really critical. And, of course, what this all means for incoming data, which is really important – not just for investors but also for the Fed, as it kind of calibrate[s] their next move. In particular, as we head into the December meeting. I think we got a little bit of a hawkish surprise in yesterday's meeting, and that's something that investors were not expecting. So, obviously the longer that this goes on, the more those risks just continue to grow, and this deadline that we're talking about is a really critical one. It's coming up soon. So we should have a sense of how our prognosis pans out in the coming days. Thanks for the conversation, Erin. Erin Wright: Great talking to you, Ariana. Ariana Salvatore: And to our audience, thanks for listening. Let us know what you think by leaving us a review wherever you listen. And if you like Thoughts on the Market, tell a friend or colleague about the podcast today.

Guy Adami and Dan Nathan are joined by Mike Wilson, CIO and Chief US Equity Strategist at Morgan Stanley. They discuss the complexities of the current market landscape, including key topics such as the impact of the Fed's recent rate cuts, the significance of US-China relations, and the importance of Nvidia in the market. The conversation also delves into the broader economic strategies being employed, including deregulation, the rebalancing of the economy, and the implications of small business growth. Mike shares his thoughts on potential inflation, wage growth, and the future of energy and healthcare sectors. The discussion highlights indicators of potential market corrections, the risks associated with AI investment, and the evolving nature of financial markets. —FOLLOW USYouTube: @RiskReversalMediaInstagram: @riskreversalmediaTwitter: @RiskReversalLinkedIn: RiskReversal Media

This Day in Legal History: October ManifestoOn October 30, 1905, Tsar Nicholas II of Russia issued the October Manifesto in response to mounting unrest and revolutionary fervor sweeping the Russian Empire. The 1905 Revolution had erupted earlier that year following the Bloody Sunday massacre, in which unarmed protesters were gunned down by imperial guards. Strikes, peasant revolts, and mutinies within the military and navy intensified public pressure for reform. The October Manifesto promised several liberalizing measures: the creation of a legislative Duma (parliament), expansion of civil liberties including freedom of speech, assembly, and conscience, and a commitment that no law would be enacted without the Duma's consent.Though revolutionary factions remained skeptical, the manifesto temporarily quelled widespread unrest and led to the formation of Russia's first constitutional structure. It marked the first time autocratic power in Russia was publicly limited by law, at least in theory. However, the tsarist regime maintained significant control: Nicholas retained the right to dissolve the Duma at will and manipulate election laws. Conservative forces viewed the manifesto as a concession made under duress, while radicals criticized it as too limited and unenforceable.The October Manifesto also split opposition forces. Some liberals, known as Octobrists, supported working within the new constitutional framework. Others, including the Bolsheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries, dismissed the document as a façade and continued to push for broader revolution. In legal terms, the manifesto introduced the concept of legislative consent into Russian governance, establishing a precedent for popular representation in lawmaking. Although the Duma's actual power remained constrained, the October Manifesto set the stage for future political conflicts that would culminate in the Russian Revolutions of 1917.The Trump administration's recent approvals for oil and gas leasing in Alaska and road development projects are drawing scrutiny from environmental groups, who say the decisions were made opaquely during a government shutdown, limiting their ability to challenge them in court. These projects include reopening leasing in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), issuing permits for the 211-mile Ambler Road to mining sites, and approving a controversial land exchange to allow road construction through the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge wilderness. Environmental attorneys argue that key documents and analyses justifying these decisions remain unavailable, complicating legal strategies.The Interior Department, operating with a reduced staff, has only offered links to decision documents, providing little insight into environmental protections or regulatory compliance. Although these projects have been previously contested in court, the lack of transparency surrounding the latest approvals hinders further action. Some legal experts suggest potential conflicts of interest—such as the U.S. acquiring a stake in a company tied to the Ambler Road—could be grounds for future lawsuits. Additionally, the Izembek land swap may face legal challenges for bypassing required congressional approval.Environmental Groups Challenged in Fighting Trump's Alaska MovesThree former Morgan Stanley financial advisers are suing the U.S. Department of Labor over a recent advisory opinion that they argue unlawfully shields the bank from arbitration claims related to unpaid deferred compensation. Filed in Manhattan federal court, the lawsuit alleges that the Labor Department's September 9 finding—that Morgan Stanley's deferred compensation plan does not qualify as an employee benefit pension plan under ERISA—conflicts with two prior court rulings that said it does.The plaintiffs, Steve Sheresky, Jeffrey Samsen, and Nicholas Sutro, say the opinion was “arbitrary and capricious” and would undermine their efforts, and those of other former employees, to arbitrate claims over canceled or unpaid compensation. They also claim Morgan Stanley is already using the Labor Department's stance to dismiss ongoing claims and seek reimbursement of legal costs.Though Morgan Stanley is not a defendant in the suit, the plaintiffs argue the agency overstepped its authority and are asking the court to revoke the advisory opinion under the Administrative Procedure Act. The case, Sheresky et al v. U.S. Department of Labor, raises broader questions about administrative agencies issuing legal interpretations that can influence private litigation outcomes without proper judicial or legislative review.Former Morgan Stanley advisers sue US Labor Department | ReutersEli Lilly has announced a new partnership with Walmart to offer its weight-loss drug Zepbound at discounted, direct-to-consumer prices through Walmart pharmacies nationwide. This marks the first time customers using the LillyDirect platform can pick up the medication in person at a retail location. The lowest dose of Zepbound will be available for $349 per month for self-paying patients.The move is part of Lilly's broader strategy to expand access and boost market share in the competitive obesity drug space, currently valued at around $150 billion. Zepbound competes directly with Novo Nordisk's Wegovy, but recent data suggests Lilly has pulled ahead in prescriptions, despite Novo's earlier market entry.Lilly reported that around 35% of Zepbound prescriptions in Q2 came from cash-paying customers using LillyDirect. Both Lilly and Novo have also made their weight-loss drugs available through various telehealth platforms, further expanding patient access.Lilly, Walmart launch first retail pick-up option for weight-loss drug | ReutersA piece I wrote for Forbes earlier this week looks at the escalating tensions surrounding digital services taxes (DSTs), with France once again moving to raise its DST—from 3% to 15%—primarily targeting U.S. tech giants like Google, Meta, and Amazon. The U.S. has responded with familiar threats of tariffs and trade retaliation, repeating a now well-worn pattern of diplomatic pushback without addressing the underlying issue. That issue is structural: the global tax framework was built around physical presence, but today's digital economy allows companies to generate profits in countries where they have no offices, employees, or infrastructure.As frustration builds in countries watching tech firms reap profits without corresponding local tax contributions, DSTs have become a tool to reclaim taxing rights. In response, nearly 140 countries have worked through the OECD to build a two-pillar international solution. Pillar One aims to reallocate taxing rights based on where users are located; Pillar Two introduces a global minimum tax. Yet, while other countries move forward, the U.S. continues to resist fully embracing Pillar One—out of concern for political optics and revenue loss.That resistance is counterproductive. By refusing to commit to a multilateral framework, the U.S. is guaranteeing the very outcome it opposes: a fragmented global tax landscape where each country sets its own rules. The current whac-a-mole strategy—reacting to every unilateral move with threats—offers no long-term protection for U.S. companies and only heightens global instability. It's time for the U.S. to stop playing defense and help finalize a framework that reflects the realities of the digital economy.Whac-A-Mole Taxation Battles Will Persist Without A Global Deal This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

There are things I've never said on this podcast… not because they're secrets, but because no one's ever asked. Today, I'm going to open that door, and my hope is that in hearing my answers, you'll think differently about your own. Some of these questions come from curiosity, some from criticism… But all of them crack open a piece of where I'm at right now, and where I'm going next. So let's go “off script” together, shall we? Click play to hear the 10 questions, and my answers that may surprise you! Goal Digger Facebook Community: https://www.facebook.com/groups/goaldiggerpodcast/ Goal Digger Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/goaldiggerpodcast/ Goal Digger Show Notes: https://jennakutcherblog.com/questions-I-wish-you-asked    Thanks to our Goal Digger Sponsors: Sign up for your $1/month Shopify trial period at http://shopify.com/goaldigger. Find a co-host today at http://airbnb.com/host. Shop SKIMS Fits Everybody collection at http://skims.com/goaldigger! Create your sanctuary of comfort with Boll & Branch. Get 20% off your first sheet set plus free shipping at https://www.bollandbranch.com/goaldigger. Check out What Should I Do With My Money? from Morgan Stanley. Listen now at https://mgstnly.lnk.to/bqe8HiAC!GD.  Experience the power of a Dell PC with Intel Inside®, backed by Dell's price match guarantee. Shop now at https://www.dell.com/deals. Visit http://www.mercury.com/ to apply online in 10 minutes. Mercury is a financial technology company, not a bank. Banking services provided through Choice Financial Group, Column N.A., and Evolve Bank & Trust; Members FDIC.

Our Head of Corporate Credit Research Andrew Sheets explains why the recent revival of M&A activity has room to accelerate.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Andrew Sheets: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Andrew Sheets, Head of Corporate Credit Research at Morgan Stanley. Today – a discussion of merger and acquisition activity or M&A. Last year, we had a view that this activity would pick up significantly. We think we're seeing that increase now. It has further to go. It's Wednesday, October 29th at 2pm in London. We have been firm believers at Morgan Stanley in a significant multi-year uplift in global merger and acquisition activity or M&A. That conviction remains. The incentives for this type of action are strong in our view; activity still lags what fundamentals would suggest, and supportive regulatory shifts are real. M&A has now returned, and importantly, we think there's much further to go. Indeed, M&A is very closely linked to corporate confidence, and we think investors need to consider the possibility that we'll see an even bigger surge in this confidence – or a boom. First, policy uncertainty is declining as U.S. tax legislation has now passed, and tariff rates get finalized. It's the relative direction of this uncertainty that we think matters most for corporate confidence. Second, interest rates are declining with the Fed, European Central Bank, and Bank of England all set to cut rates further over the next 12 months. Third, bank capital requirements may decline in the view of Morgan Stanley analysts, which would unlock more lending for these types of transactions. Fourth, and very importantly, the regulatory backdrop is becoming more accommodative in both the U.S. and in Europe. Indeed, we think that companies may think that this is going to be the most permissive regulatory window for transactions that they might get for some time. Fifth, private equity, which is a big driver of M&A activity, is sitting on over $4 trillion of dry powder in our view – at a time when credit markets look very wide open for financing their transactions. And finally, we're seeing a surge in capital expenditure on Morgan Stanley estimates, which we see as a sign of rising corporate confidence, and importantly an urgency to act – with corporates far less content to simply sit back and repurchase their stock. All of these favorable conditions together argue for activity to push even higher. We forecast global M&A volumes to increase by 32 percent this year, an additional 20 percent next year, and reach $7.8 trillion in volume in 2027. This is a global story with M&A rising across regions, especially in Japan. It has cross-asset implications with M&A already being one of the biggest drivers of bond outperformance within the U.S. high-yield market. And this is also a story where we see a lot of value in bringing together macro and micro perspectives. While we think the top-down conditions look favorable for all the reasons I just mentioned, we also see a very encouraging picture bottom up. We polled a large number of Morgan Stanley sector analyst teams and asked them about M&A conditions in their sector. A large majority of them see more activity. So, where could these more specific implications lie? Well, as you heard on yesterday's episode, Healthcare and Biotech may see an uptick in activity. In the U.S., we also think that Banking and Media stand out. In Europe, Business Services, Metals and Mining, and Telecom seem most ripe for more M&A. Aerospace and Defense is an interesting sector that may see more M&A within multiple regions, including the U.S. and Europe, as companies look for scale. And with smaller companies trading at a valuation discount to their larger peers across the world, Morgan Stanley analysts generally see the strongest case for activity in larger companies acquiring these smaller ones. Thank you as always for your time. If you find Thoughts on the Market useful, let us know by leaving a review wherever you listen, and also tell a friend or colleague about us today.

Today, we're joined by Mark Crandall, one of the founding fathers of the modern trading house and the commodities sector as we know it today. Mark started his career at Morgan Stanley, where he helped launch its commodities desk, before joining Marc Rich & Co. Mark went on the have a pivotal role in, and ring-side seat to, the machinations that lead to the founding of Glencore and Trafigura. In Part 1, we cover his early career leading up to the famous split at Marc Rich & Co. We discuss the rise of the Wall Street Refiners and what made Marc Rich special and the company he founded shape the industry even today.

Meet Barry Garapedian. His WHY.os is Right Way - Better Way - Contribute. Barry Garapedian spent nearly 40 years at Morgan Stanley before launching MAG7 Consulting, where he now mentors teens and young adults on habits that build confidence, discipline, and success. He's proof that hard work and structure still win in a world chasing shortcuts. In this episode, Barry and Dr. Gary Sanchez talk about what it really takes to do things the right way—and why so few people actually do.You'll learn:The truth about discipline: how structure, routines, and small daily wins create real freedom.Why grit beats talent every time: and the mindset that keeps you consistent when others quit.How to build systems that work: the same process Barry used to rise to the top on Wall Street and now teaches to young high performers.Listen to this episode to see how doing things the right way—every day—can lead to success that actually lasts.Get in Touch with Barry:LinkedIn: barry-garapedian-735a5168/Insagram: @barrygarapedian Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Our U.S. Biotech and Biopharma analysts Sean Laaman and Terence Flynn discuss the latest developments that could be positioning the healthcare sector for strong outperformance.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Sean Laaman: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Sean Laaman, Morgan Stanley's U.S. Small and Mid-Cap Biotech Analyst. Terence Flynn: And I'm Terence Flynn, Morgan Stanley's U.S. Biopharma Analyst. Sean Laaman: Today, we'll discuss how a rally in the healthcare sector is being driven by more favorable macro conditions. It's Tuesday, October 28th at 10am in New York. So, Terence, healthcare has lagged the broader market year-to-date, and valuations have been near historical lows. But recent weeks show strengthening performance. Policy headwinds have been front and center.What's changed in the regulatory environment and how is the biopharma sector adapting to these pricing and tariff dynamics? Terence Flynn: Sean, as you know, with many other sectors, tariffs were initially a focus earlier this year. But a number of companies in our space have subsequently announced significant U.S. manufacturing investments to reshore supply chains. And hence, the market's less focused on tariffs in our space right now. But the other policy dynamic and focus is what's called Most Favored Nation or MFN drug pricing. Now, this is where the President's been focused on aligning U.S. drug prices with those in other developed countries. And recently we've seen several companies announce agreements with the administration along these lines, which importantly has provided investors with more visibility here. And we're watching to see if additional agreements get announced. Sean Laaman: Got it. Another hurdle for Large-cap biopharma is a looming expiration of patents with [$]177 billion exposed by 2030. How is this shaping M&A trends and strategic priorities? Terence Flynn: For sure. I mean, as you know, Sean, patent expiry is our normal part of the life cycle of drug development. Every company goes through this at some point, but this does put the focus on company's internal pipelines to continue to progress while also being able to access external innovation via M&A. Recently we have started to see a pickup in deal activity, which could bode well for performance in SMID-cap biotech. Sean Laaman: At the same time, you believe relative valuations look compelling for Large-cap biopharma. Where are valuations versus where they've been historically? What's driving this and how should investors think about positioning? Terence Flynn: Absolutely. Look, on a price to earnings multiple, the sector's trading at about a 30 percent discount to the S&P 500 right now. Now that's in line with prior periods of policy uncertainty. But as policy visibility improves, we expect the focus will shift back to fundamentals. Now, positioning to me still feels light here, given some of the patent cliff dynamics we just discussed. Now, Sean, with the Fed moving toward rate cuts, how do you see this impacting your sector on the biotech side? Sean Laaman: Well, Terence, particularly in my space, which is Small- and Mid-cap biotech companies, they're typically capital consumers are not capital producers. They're particularly sensitive to the current rate environment.Therefore, they're sensitive to spending on pipeline. They're sensitive to M&A. So, as rates come down, we expect more spending on pipeline and more M&A activity, which is generally positive for the sector. Looking forward, biotech sector is generally the best performing sector on a six-to-12-month timeframe post the first rate cut. Terence Flynn: Great. You've also talked about this SMID to Big thesis on the biotech side. Can you explain what's driving that? Sean Laaman: Sure Terence. There's three pieces to the SMID to Big thematic. So, we in SMID-cap biotech, we cover 80 to 90 companies. About a third of those are newly, kind of profitable companies. Those companies are turning from being capital consumers to capital producers. We see about $15 billion of cash on balance sheets for 2025, going to north of 130 billion by 2030. That's the first piece. The second piece is due to regulatory uncertainty at the USFDA. We're seeing more attractive valuations amongst clinical stage names. That's the second piece. And third piece relates to your coverage, Terence. I refer back to that [$]177 billion of LOE. So, we expect generally that M&A activity will be quite high amongst our sector. Terence Flynn: And let's not forget about AI, which has implications across the healthcare space. How much is this changing the dynamic in biotech, Sean? Sean Laaman: It is changing, but we're really at the beginning. I think there's three things to think about. The first one is faster trial recruitment. The second one is faster regulatory submissions. And the third one, which is the most interesting, but we're really at the beginning of, is faster time to appropriately targeted molecules. Terence Flynn: Great. And maybe lastly, what are the key risks and catalysts for SMID-cap biotech in the current environment? Sean Laaman: As always, we're focused on pipeline failures in terms of risk. Secondly, in terms of risk, we're looking at regulatory risk at the FDA. And thirdly, we're looking at the rise in China biotech and the competitive dynamic there.Whether you're watching large cap biopharma, M&A moves, or the rise of cash-rich, SMID-cap biotechs, the healthcare sector setup is unlike anything we've seen in years.Terence, thanks for speaking with me. Terence Flynn: Always a pleasure to be on the show. Thanks for having me, Sean. Sean Laaman: And thanks for listening. If you enjoy Thoughts on the Market, please leave us a review wherever you listen and share the podcast with a friend or colleague today.

With Europe's valuations looking attractive and the euro undervalued, Morgan Stanley sees European equities outperforming U.S. markets in 2026. The experts from “Henssler Money Talks” examine that outlook, discuss ways to gain exposure to Europe, and consider how global diversification fits into a well-rounded portfolio.Original Air Date: October 25, 2025Read the Article: https://www.henssler.com/europe-in-your-portfolio-trends-risks-and-opportunities   

LISTEN and SUBSCRIBE on:Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/watchdog-on-wall-street-with-chris-markowski/id570687608 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/2PtgPvJvqc2gkpGIkNMR5i WATCH and SUBSCRIBE on:https://www.youtube.com/@WatchdogOnWallstreet/featured  A top salesman at Stifel Financial racked up 34 complaints and millions in fraud claims—and somehow stayed in business. In this episode:How a single broker's “structured notes” scam cost clients millionsWhy Wall Street firms protect rainmakers instead of investorsThe dirty truth about how big brokerages treat fraud as a “cost of doing business”What constant job-hopping between Lehman, Citi, Morgan Stanley, and Stifel really meansHow to actually find an advisor who puts your interests firstWall Street keeps rewarding the crooks who bring in cash. Don't be their next victim.

We've all been fed the idea that “more is more” when it comes to growing your brand… but what if doing less is actually the key to unlocking your next level? Mei Pak is the founder of Creative Hive, and she's built multiple 7-figure handmade businesses while completely ditching the hustle mentality. She started out making just $3/hour in her first year of business, but after shifting her strategy and simplifying her approach, she went on to build thriving businesses without relying on Etsy or social media. In today's conversation, we're pulling back the curtain on what it really looks like to grow your handmade or product-based business without burning out. You'll learn how to streamline your marketing, get visible in ways that actually work, and finally let go of the pressure to do all the things. So if you've been stuck in content creation chaos or spinning your wheels trying to get noticed, this episode is your permission slip to simplify and still succeed. Goal Digger Facebook Community: https://www.facebook.com/groups/goaldiggerpodcast/ Goal Digger Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/goaldiggerpodcast/ Goal Digger Show Notes: https://jennakutcherblog.com/how-to-make-sales-without-social-media  Thanks to our Goal Digger Sponsors: Sign up for your $1/month Shopify trial period at http://shopify.com/goaldigger. Find a co-host today at http://airbnb.com/host. Shop SKIMS Fits Everybody collection at http://skims.com/goaldigger! Create your sanctuary of comfort with Boll & Branch. Get 20% off your first sheet set plus free shipping at https://www.bollandbranch.com/goaldigger. Check out What Should I Do With My Money? from Morgan Stanley. Listen now at https://mgstnly.lnk.to/bqe8HiAC!GD.  Experience the power of a Dell PC with Intel Inside®, backed by Dell's price match guarantee. Shop now at https://www.dell.com/deals. Visit http://www.mercury.com/ to apply online in 10 minutes. Mercury is a financial technology company, not a bank. Banking services provided through Choice Financial Group, Column N.A., and Evolve Bank & Trust; Members FDIC.

Our CIO and Chief U.S. Equity Strategist Mike Wilson discusses the outlook for stocks after the preliminary U.S.-China trade agreement and ahead of the Fed meeting and big tech earnings.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Mike Wilson, Morgan Stanley's CIO and Chief U.S. Equity Strategist. Today on the podcast I'll be discussing the remaining hurdles for equities after what appears to be a preliminary trade deal with China.It's Monday, October 27th at 11:30am in New York. So, let's get after it.Over the past few weeks, trade tensions between the U.S. and China escalated once again focused on rare earths and technology transfers with each country playing its strongest card. Over the weekend, it appears that we have at least a preliminary agreement to de-escalate these tensions which means avoiding prohibitively high tariffs that were scheduled to go on at the end of this month. While we don't have many details on what has been agreed to, it appears that critical rare earths will continue to ship to the U.S. while technology transfer restrictions by the U.S. to China will ease. Presumably, Fentanyl tariffs of 20 percent on China are likely to be part of any broader agreement between Presidents Trump and Xi, if they end up meeting at the upcoming Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum.Given the sharp sell-off in stocks a few weeks ago on the news of trade tensions re-escalating, it's not surprising that stocks are rallying sharply this morning on news of a possible deal from last week's talks. Our attention now turns to the other big events this week. First, the Federal Reserve is meeting tomorrow and Wednesday to decide its next move on monetary policy. There is a broad consensus view that the Fed will cut another 25 basis points but there are very different views about how they will address its balance sheet run-off known as quantitative tightening, or QT. Based on my conversations, there is a growing consensus view for the Fed to announce the end of QT but uncertainty around the timing. Our house view is for the Fed to wait until the January meeting to make this official with an end of the program in February. Others believe the Fed could announce something as early as this week. That dispersion in expectations does create some room for disappointment from markets, especially given the recent increase in funding market spreads. More specifically, the widening in spreads suggests banking reserves may already be too low and restrictive for the pick-up in economic activity and capital spending that requires more liquidity. Second, earnings revision breadth has rolled over sharply the past few weeks. Most of this decline is due to normal seasonality and the fact that revisions breadth had reached unsustainably high levels since bottoming out in April. Therefore, a reset should be expected as we previewed over a month ago. Nevertheless, it needs to stabilize and push higher again for stocks to continue their advance in my view. Perhaps most importantly for the S&P 500 is the fact that all of the hyperscalers are reporting this week and will likely determine if revision breadth rebounds. It will also be important to see how those stocks react to what is likely to be continued aggressive guidance on AI capex plans. Since April, the hyperscaler stocks have rewarded higher guidance on spending. Should that change, we may see a different tone to how these companies discuss their spending plans. Bottom line, I remain bullish on my 12 month view for U.S. stocks based on what I believe will be better and broader growth in earnings next year. Nevertheless, the near term window remains a bit cloudy on trade, Fed policy shifts and earnings revisions breadth. Stay patient with new capital deployment and look to take advantage of downdrafts when they arise like a few weeks ago. Thanks for tuning in; I hope you found it informative and useful. Let us know what you think by leaving us a review. And if you find Thoughts on the Market worthwhile, tell a friend or colleague to try it out!

Our U.S. Software Analyst Sanjit Singh explains how AI is reshaping software development and why the future for the sector may be brighter – and busier – than ever.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Sanjit Singh, the U.S. Software Analyst at Morgan Stanley.Today: how AI is transforming software and what that means for developers.It's Friday, October 24th, at 10am in New York.There's been a lot of news stories and anecdotal accounts about AI taking over jobs, especially in the software industry. You may have heard of vibe coding, where people can use natural language prompts, guiding AI to build software applications. So yes, AI is creating a world where software writes itself. But at the same time, the demand for human creativity only grows.The introduction of AI coding assistants has dramatically expanded what software can do, fueling a surge in both the volume of code and the complexity of projects. But instead of shrinking the developer workforce, AI is actually supporting continued growth in developer headcount, even as productivity soars.We're estimating the software development market will grow at a 20 percent compound annual growth rate, reaching $61 billion by 2029. And that's up from $24 billion in 2024. And in terms of the developer population, [research] firms like IDC expect it to jump from 30 million paid developers in 2024 to 50 million by 2029 – that's a 10 percent annual growth rate. Even the most conservative estimates, like those from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, see developer jobs growing roughly 2 percent per year through 2033, outpacing overall employment growth.So, what does this mean for people behind the code? AI isn't replacing developers. It's redefining them. Routine tasks are increasingly handled by AI agents, and this frees up developers to become curators, reviewers, architects, and most important problem-solvers.The upshot? Companies may need fewer developers for repetitive work, but the overall demand for skilled engineers remains robust. As AI lowers the barrier to entry, the pool of people who can build software applications expands dramatically. But at the same time, the complexity and ambitions of projects rise, keeping experienced developers in high demand.No doubt, AI coding tools are delivering real productivity gains. Some teams are reporting nearly doubling their code capacity and cutting pull request times in half after adopting AI assistants. Test coverage has increased sharply, resulting in 20 percent fewer production incidents for some organizations. But there is a catch with all this AI-generated code. It's creating significant new bottlenecks downstream.An example of this is code review, which is becoming a major pain point. Many organizations are experiencing pull request fatigue, with developers rubber-stamping changes just to keep up. Some teams now require three reviewers for AI-generated change, compared to just one before. And in terms of automated testing, systems are getting overwhelmed because every change made with AI sets off a complete round of test.Now we estimate productivity gains from AI in software engineering at about 15–20 percent. But in complex projects, the gains are much lower, as the volume of new code often means more bugs and more rework – and hence more human developers.So where do we go from here? In our view, the future isn't about fully autonomous software development. Instead, large enterprises are likely to favor an integrated approach, where AI agents and human developers work side by side. AI will automate more of the software development lifecycle. And that not only includes coding – which, coding typically accounts for 10-20 percent of the software development effort – but other areas like testing, security, and deployment. But humans will remain in the loop for oversight, design, and decision-making. And as software gets cheaper and faster to build, organizations won't just do the same work with fewer people – they likely will do more.In short, the need for skilled developers isn't going away. But it's definitely evolving. And in the age of AI, it's not about man versus machine. It's about man with machine. And so with more software, we see more developers.Thanks for listening. If you enjoy the show, please leave us a review wherever you listen and share Thoughts on the Market with a friend or colleague today.

Our Head of Corporate Credit Research Andrew Sheets wades into the debate around whether the boom in artificial intelligence investment is a warning sign for credit markets. Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript ----- Andrew Sheets: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Andrew Sheets, Head of Corporate Credit Research at Morgan Stanley.Today – the debate about whether elevated capital expenditure and AI technology is showing classic warning signs of overbuilding and worries for credit.It's Thursday, October 23rd at 2pm in London.Two things are true. AI related investment will be one of the largest investment cycles of this generation. And there is a long history of major investment cycles causing major headaches to the credit market. From the railroads to electrification, to the internet to shale oil, there are a number of instances where heavy investment created credit weakness, even when the underlying technology was highly successful.So, let's dig into this and why we think this AI CapEx cycle actually has much further to run.First, Morgan Stanley has done a lot of good collaborative in-depth work on where the AI related spend is coming from and what's still in the pipeline. And importantly, most of the spending that we expect is still well ahead of us. It's only really ramping up starting now.Next, we think that AI is seen as the most important technology of the next decade by some of the biggest, most profitable companies on the planet. We think this increases their willingness to invest and stick with those investments, even if there's a lot of uncertainty around what the return on all of this expenditure will ultimately be.Third, unlike some other major recent capital expenditure cycles – be they the internet of the late 1990s or shale oil of the mid 2010s, both of which were challenging for credit – much of the spending that we're seeing today on AI is backed by companies with extremely strong balance sheets and significant additional debt capacity. That just wasn't the case with some of those other prior investment cycles and should help this one run for longer.And finally, if we think about really what went wrong with some of these prior capital expenditure cycles, it's often really about overcapacity. A new technology – be it the railroads or electricity or the internet – comes along and it is transformational.And because it's transformational, you build a lot of it. And then sometimes you build too much; you build ahead of the underlying demand. And that can lower returns on that investment and cause losses.We can understand why large levels of AI capital investment and the history of large investment cycles in the past causes understandable concern. But when tying these dynamics together, it's important to remember why large investment cycles have a checkered history. It's usually not about the technology not working per se, but rather a promising technology being built ahead of demand for it and resulting in excess capacity driving down returns in that investment, and the builders lacking the financial resources to bridge that gap.So far, that's not what we see. Data centers are still seeing strong underlying demand and are often backed by companies with exceptionally good resources. We need to watch if either of these change.But for now, we think the AI CapEx cycle has much further to go.Thank you as always for your time. If you find Thoughts on the Market useful, let us know by leaving a review wherever you listen. And also tell a friend or colleague about us today

What if your life ran like your business? What if you had streamlined workflows, clear responsibilities, and built-in rest and rhythm not just in your work, but in your actual daily life? As an entrepreneur with ADHD, I've spent years building incredible systems in my business. Launch calendars run like clockwork. Podcast workflows practically manage themselves. My business hums like a well-oiled machine. But at home? Pure chaos. That is, until my friend Natalie Ellis introduced me to the concept of a "life operating system," and it completely changed my perspective. What if we borrowed what's working in our businesses and applied it to our real lives? Click play to find out how I did it, and you can too! Goal Digger Facebook Community: https://www.facebook.com/groups/goaldiggerpodcast/ Goal Digger Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/goaldiggerpodcast/ Goal Digger Show Notes: https://jennakutcherblog.com/adhd-home-organization-systems  Thanks to our Goal Digger Sponsors: Sign up for your $1/month Shopify trial period at http://shopify.com/goaldigger. Find a co-host today at http://airbnb.com/host. Shop SKIMS Fits Everybody collection at http://skims.com/goaldigger! Create your sanctuary of comfort with Boll & Branch. Get 20% off your first sheet set plus free shipping at https://www.bollandbranch.com/goaldigger. Check out What Should I Do With My Money? from Morgan Stanley. Listen now at https://mgstnly.lnk.to/bqe8HiAC!GD.  Experience the power of a Dell PC with Intel Inside®, backed by Dell's price match guarantee. Shop now at https://www.dell.com/deals. Visit http://www.mercury.com/ to apply online in 10 minutes. Mercury is a financial technology company, not a bank. Banking services provided through Choice Financial Group, Column N.A., and Evolve Bank & Trust; Members FDIC.

Our analysts Brian Nowak, Keith Weiss and Matt Bombassei break down the most important tech insights from Morgan Stanley's Spark Private Company Conference and industry shifts that will likely shape 2026 and beyond. Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript ----- Brian Nowak: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Brian Nowak, Morgan Stanley's Head of U.S. Internet Research. I'm joined today by Keith Weiss, Head of U.S. Software Research and Matt Bombassei from my team.Today we're going to talk about private companies and technology – and how they're showing us the direction of travel for disruptive technologies and emerging investment opportunities.It's Wednesday, October 22nd at 10am in New York.Keith and Matt, we just returned from Morgan Stanley's Spark Private Company Conference last week in Los Angeles. It had over 85 private tech companies, 150 plus investor firms. There were a lot of themes that were discussed across the entire tech space impacting a lot of different sectors, including energy, healthcare, financial services, and cybersecurity.Keith, what were some of the biggest takeaways you took away from Spark this year?Keith Weiss: I'd say just to start off with, the Spark Conference is one of my favorite conferences of the year. It's a more intimate conference where you really get to spend time with both the private company executives and founders, as well as investors from the VC community and public company investors. And the conversations are more broad ranging; they're more about the thematics in the industry. They're more long term in nature.So, it's not just a conversation about what's next quarter going to look like, or what data points are you drumming up. You're having these thoughtful conversations about what's going on in the industry and how that's going to impact business models, how it's going to impact innovation cycles, how it's going to impact pricing models, within these companies. So, it tends to be a very interesting conference for me to attend.So, for me, some of the key takeaways. Typically, when we're in these innovation cycles, it feels like everybody's rowing in the same direction. We all understand where the technology's heading, we're all understanding how it's going to be delivered, and it's a race to get there. And you're having a conversation about who's doing best in that race, who's best positioned, who's got a better motor in their race car, if you will.So, to me, one of the big takeaways was we don't have that agreement today, right? There's different players that are looking at this market evolution differently. On one side of the equation, the application vendors – and a lot of this debate is in SaaS based applications. They see SaaS based applications having a very big role in taking these models that are inherently in-determinative and making them to be more determinative and useful within an enterprise context.Bringing them the data that they need to get the job done and the right data; bringing them the context of the business process being solved; bringing the governance that's necessary to use in an enterprise environment. But most importantly, to make it effective and efficient for the large enterprise.On the other side of the equation, you have venture capital investors and more early-stage investors who are looking at this as a huge phase shift, right? This is going to fundamentally change how we build software, how we utilize software, and they worry about a deprecation of that SaaS application layer. They think the model itself is going to start to encompass, it's going to start to subsume a lot more of that application functionality, a lot more of that analytics. And they see a lot more disruption going forward.So that debate within the marketplace, that's something that's interesting to me. It's something that we don't typically see in these innovation cycles. So that's takeaway number one.Takeaway number two, we're still really early days, and that's a little bit implied in in the first statement; I definitely hear a lot of it when I talk to the end customer. When I talk to CIOs. This wasn't necessarily at Spark, but earlier in the week, I was at a CIO conference, there was 150 CIOs in the room. One of the gentlemen on stage asked a question. ‘Who in the room has a good understanding of what we're talking about when we mean Agentic AI, when we mean agentic computing within our enterprise.' Of the 150 CIOs, four raised their hands. Still very early days in understanding how this is going to evolve, how we're going to actually deliver these capabilities into the enterprise.And the last takeaway I would say is more excitement about the federal government becoming a better customer for software companies overall. People are more interested in new avenues into that federal government. There's been some very successful companies that have opened the door to getting into these federal government contracts without going through the primes, without doing the typical federal government procurement cycles.And that's very interesting to the startup community, which tends to move faster, which tends to drive on innovation versus relationship building; versus being in an existing kind of incumbent prime. So, I thought that opening was – it was pretty interesting as well.Brian Nowak: it sounds like it's still very early, there are a lot of different points of view and no real consensus as to where technologies could go next. However, one theme with an enterprise software – [it] does seem like cybersecurity has a little more of a unified view.So maybe walk us through what you learned from a cybersecurity perspective and what should we be focused on there?Keith Weiss: Yeah, absolutely. If there is a consensus, the consensus is that generative AI and these innovations and the fast pace of innovation is going to be a positive for cybersecurity spending, right? The reason being, there's three main factors that are driving that overall spending.One is expansion of surface area, right? Cybersecurity in one dimension, you can think of how much is there to be protected, right? And if we think about the major themes that we're talking about, we're going to be developing a lot more software, right? The code generation tools are improving software developer productivity. You have an expanding capability of what you can actually automate.We'll be building a lot more software. That software needs to be protected, right? We have new entities that are going to be operating inside of enterprises, and that's the agents. So, CIOs are thinking about this future state where you have tens, thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of agents operating in the environment, doing work on behalf of end users, but having permissions and having ability to execute business processes. How do we secure that side of the equation? We're talking about outside of just the four walls of the large enterprise, going into more operational technologies, being able to automate more of that work. That needs to be secured as well.So, an expanding surface area is definitely good for the cybersecurity budget. You can almost think of cybersecurity as a tax on that surface area. We generally think about it; somewhere between 4 and 6 percent of IT spend is going to be spent on overall security. So, that's one big driver.The second big driver is the elevated threat environment. So, while we're excited to get our hands on these extended capabilities of generative AI, the bad guys are already there, right? They're taking advantage of this. The sophistication, the volume and the velocity of these attacks is all increasing. That makes a harder job for the existing infrastructure to keep up, and it's going to likely necessitate more spending on cybersecurity to tackle these newer challenges; the newer dynamism within the cybersecurity threat appropriately. So, you're going to have to use generative AI to counter the generative AI.And then the last component of it; the last driver would be the regulatory environment. Regulatory tends to have some cybersecurity angles. If we think about it here, we're seeing it in terms of data governance is probably the big one. Where does this data go when it goes into the model? Are we putting the right controls around it? Do we have the right governance on it? So that's a big area of concern.A lot of complaining going on at the conference about the lack of consistency in that regulatory environment. All these different initiatives coming up from the state – really creates a challenging environment to navigate. But that's all good-ness for cybersecurity vendors that can help you get into compliance with these new regulations that are coming up. So overall, a lot of positivity around cybersecurity spending and startups definitely look to take advantage of that.Brian Nowak: Matt, so Keith says there's lack of consensus and boats being rode in every direction on what should be adopted first. And only 3 percent of CIOs know what agentic AI means. What did you learn about early signal on adoption? And some of the barriers to adoption? And hurdles that companies are talking about that they need to overcome to really adopt some of these new tools?Matt Bombassei: Yeah. Well, to Keith's point, it is really early, right? And that was a consistent theme that we heard from our companies at the conference. They are seeing early signs of cost efficiency, making employees more productive as opposed to maybe broad scale layoffs. But it's the deployment of these model technologies into specific sub-verticals – so accounting, legal engineering – where that adoption is driving greater efficiency within the organization.These companies are also adopting models that are smaller and a bit more fine tuned to their specific work product. And so that comes at a lower cost. We heard companies talking about costs at 1/50 of the cost of the broader foundational models when they're deploying it within the organization. And so, cost efficiency is something that we're seeing.At the same time, to speak to how early it is, one of the biggest hurdles here is change management and actually adoption. Getting people to use these products, getting them to learn the new technologies, that is a big hurdle. You know, you can lead a horse to water, you can't make it drink, right? And so, getting people to actually deploy these technologies is something that organizations are thinking through. How do we approach [it]?Brian Nowak: And you make an autonomous car drive? I know you've been doing a lot of work on autonomous driving more broadly. There were some autonomous driving and autonomous driving technology companies at Spark. What were your takeaways on autonomous driving from last week?Matt Bombassei: Yeah, well, not only can you make an autonomous car drive, you can make a truck drive and a bunch of other physical equipment. I think that was one of the takeaways here was that these neural nets that are powering autonomous vehicles are actually becoming much more generalizable. The integration of the transformer architecture into these neural nets is allowing them to take the context from one sub-vertical and deploy it in another vertical.So, we heard that 80 to 90 percent of the software, the underlying neural net, is applicable across these verticals. So, think applicable from autonomous ride sharing to autonomous trucking, right? What that means from our point of view is that it's important to get the scale of total miles driven – to establish that kind of safety hurdle if you're these companies.But also, don't necessarily think of these companies as defined by the vertical that they're operating in. If these models truly are generalizable, a company that's successful and scaled and autonomous ride hailing can switch or navigate verticals to also become successful potentially in trucking and other industries as well. So, the generalization of these models is particularly interesting for scale, and long-term market position for these companies.Brian Nowak: It's fascinating. Well, from consumer and enterprise adoption, the future of agentic computing and autonomous driving, there will be a lot more themes we all have to stay on top of. Keith, Matt, thanks so much for taking the time today.Keith Weiss: Great speaking with you Brian.Matt Bombassei: Thanks for having us.Brian Nowak: And thanks for listening. If you enjoy Thoughts on the Market, please leave us a review wherever you listen and share the podcast with a friend or colleague today.

Our Global Head of Fixed Income Research and Public Policy Michael Zezas discuss the latest developments in U.S.-China relations and how they could affect investors.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript ----- Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Michael Zezas, Global Head of Fixed Income Research and Public Policy Strategy. Today, we're talking about the U.S. and China—why the relationship remains complicated, and what it means for markets. It's Tuesday, Oct 21st, at 12:30pm in New York. If you've been following headlines, you know that U.S.-China relations are rarely out of the news. But beneath the surface, the dynamics are more nuanced than the daily soundbytes suggest. Investors often ask: Are we headed for a decoupling of the two economies, or is there room for cooperation? The answer, as always, is—it's complicated. Let's start with the basics. The U.S. and China are deeply intertwined economically, but strategic competition has intensified. Recent years have seen tariffs, export controls, and restrictions on technology transfer. Yet, there's still plenty of trade between the two countries, and both economies are dependent on each other for growth and innovation. So what's going on now? In recent weeks, China has moved to tighten rare earth export controls and the U.S. has proposed 100 percent tariffs in return. If this came to pass, these events could mark a clear economic split. But given the interdependencies we just cited, neither Washington nor Beijing seems eager for a true split, at least not anytime soon. The economic costs would be staggering, and both sides know it. So, a truce seems more likely, perhaps with somewhat different terms than the narrow semis-for-rare earths agreement they made this spring. And longer term, this episode seems to be a part of a broader dynamic, where rolling negotiations and truces are more likely than either a durable trade peace or a hard economic decoupling. For fixed income investors, this drives some important considerations. First, U.S. industrial policy is ramping up, with clear implications for AI infrastructure. AI is an area where the U.S. views it as essential that they outcompete China. Supported by renewed CapEx incentives from the latest tax bill, it's clear to us that U.S. companies will be pushing further into AI development, where my colleagues have identified $2.9 trillion of data center financing needs over the next three years, about half of which will come from various credit markets. And for credit investors, this presents an important opportunity. Another consideration is how markets will balance near-term growth risks with an array of medium term growth possibilities. As our U.S. economics team has pointed out, the evidence suggests that corporates haven't yet been forced to make tough decisions about passing on or absorbing tariff costs, underscoring that trade-related growth pressures aren't yet in the rearview. The ongoing U.S. government shutdown doesn't help either. It's all a good argument for why bond yields could move lower in the near term. But also, we should expect yield curves could steepen more, with higher relative yields in longer maturities. This would reflect greater uncertainties around higher fiscal deficits, inflation, and economic growth. Our economists have been calling out the mixed messages in economic data, as well as a U.S. fiscal sustainability picture that appears reliant on acceleration in corporate CapEx for a manufacturing and AI-driven growth burst. In sum, the U.S.-China relationship is evolving, with global implications that don't lend themselves to easy narratives or quick fixes. Our challenge will continue to be crafting investment strategies that reflect durable policy undercurrents, the signal amid news headline noise. Thanks for listening. If you enjoy the show, please leave us a review wherever you listen and share Thoughts on the Market with a friend or colleague.

Ever bought something you loved so much, you had to tell your friends about it? What if your entire business could be built around that kind of energy; where your customers don't just shop, they stick around, support one another, and become your brand's loudest cheerleaders? That's exactly what Bianca Gates has done as the founder and president of Birdies, the stylish-yet-comfy footwear brand that's built a cult following. What started in Bianca's living room has grown into a brand loved by women everywhere… not just because of the product, but because of the feeling it gives you. Connection. Confidence. Community. In this conversation, we're talking about the real story behind Birdies' growth. How Bianca built a community-first brand from day one, how authentic storytelling shaped Birdies' success, and how you can apply her approach to your own business—even if you're starting from scratch or feel like you're late to the game. So if you've ever wondered how to rally people around your product and create a movement, not just a moment, this episode is for you. Goal Digger Facebook Community: https://www.facebook.com/groups/goaldiggerpodcast/ Goal Digger Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/goaldiggerpodcast/ Goal Digger Show Notes: https://jennakutcherblog.com/how-to-build-a-support-circle  Thanks to our Goal Digger Sponsors: Sign up for your $1/month Shopify trial period at http://shopify.com/goaldigger. Find a co-host today at http://airbnb.com/host. Shop SKIMS Fits Everybody collection at http://skims.com/goaldigger! Create your sanctuary of comfort with Boll & Branch. Get 20% off your first sheet set plus free shipping at https://www.bollandbranch.com/goaldigger. Check out What Should I Do With My Money? from Morgan Stanley. Listen now at https://mgstnly.lnk.to/bqe8HiAC!GD.  Experience the power of a Dell PC with Intel Inside®, backed by Dell's price match guarantee. Shop now at https://www.dell.com/deals. Visit http://www.mercury.com/ to apply online in 10 minutes. Mercury is a financial technology company, not a bank. Banking services provided through Choice Financial Group, Column N.A., and Evolve Bank & Trust; Members FDIC.