Speaker 1Welcome to the Saxo Market Call. Before we get started, it's important we emphasize that the views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the hosts and guests and do not constitute investment advice or recommendations. All information provided is for educational and entertainment purposes only. Hey everyone, it's Tuesday, 10th of November, 2026. What a comeback day for markets yesterday. An incredible rally and a very broad one. Unlike some of these really divergent days where either it was the AI trade rallying and the rest of the market was not and vice versa, just about everything was up. Only 77 decliners on the S&P 500. I'll get to all that as well as some feedback on the podcast and curious what people think. I'll get to all that later, but I've got you in the studio, Ole Hansen, on commodities. It's been too long. And I'm glad to have you here. First of all, let's dive into what is really moving at the moment and I think has really had profound effects into that comeback in sentiment. And that is the big markdown in crude oil prices. You see some alarming headlines there dribbling along in the background, but the market has really sold this thing down. What's your take on how fair that is and what are you looking for next?
Speaker 2I think it's quite fair, John, because we've had quite a significant, I would say, change since the midterms. We had a midterm election last week where we did see the biggest drop in crude prices, I believe, since 2020. So the market is pricing in some kind of a solution trade. Negotiations are ongoing. Trump said after a meeting with the Qatari representative, there's no need to further do further bombing. So the market really likes this outlook. So we're trading just above $90 now. Brent, we are obviously waiting for the US dollar to go up. We have a very good outlook for the so far elusive deal between the two, but it looks like we're getting close, at least we hope so. And that's driving down other prices as well. We're seeing an increased flow of LNG from Qatar. That's also weighing a little bit of gas price, even though it's still very, very high relative to what we've seen in the last few years. We've also seen, and that's really what's important, that some of the refined products are starting to come down as well, because that's really ultimately what will determine the level of inflation that we're going to see. It's not really whether crude trades 110 or 90. It's whether we can get the refined products down, because that's really the input to the economy. And it also boasts some interesting analysis ahead of today's CPI print, because even if it makes a price on the upside, the market will basically move forward already and say, well, November is going to see a big drop in energy price and food price come down as well. So they'll trigger a weaker reading next month. So yeah, I think at this point in time, John, it's justified, but we obviously need to see a deal being backed by both sides.
Speaker 1Yeah. And that's what just gives me pause and thinking that I know anything that's going on. I have a completely open mind to any scenario. Some voices out there saying, look, you can just forget all about this idea that there are talks, even see a couple of headlines I've seen. And I don't know if it's because there are different parts of the Iranian regime that are saying different things, or there is no Iranian regime that's the official voice. But at least the one source I saw saying that this is fantastic, it's a fantasy talk, the US side talking about negotiations. I guess on the good side, though, on the good side, meaning what's bringing down oil prices, not good from a judgment sense, but it looks like this, what's his name, Eisenkot, this opposition figure in Israel after these elections, looking to cobble together at least one headline I saw, a coalition with the ultra-Orthodox side. And I assume that might be on this military service bit. And this would be, of course, putting Netanyahu out of power. Who is the main aggressor and prosecutor, or in favor at least, of further action against Iran, supposedly calling Trump every day to speak his case. But still, I'm really confused here where this is headed. If the US strategic aim here is to disrupt oil supplies from Iran, period, full stop, and to disrupt supplies to China no matter what, then I don't know where this heads. So just put that out there. And then there's the Ukraine Russia talks. I don't know how much to put into that either. I just saw the headline. How serious should we even take that item? But obviously, that would be something else to focus on.
Speaker 2Yeah, absolutely. Because, again, part of the diesel problem about the distilled fuel tightness we've seen is also due to attacks, Ukraine attacks on Russian refineries. I've just seen in the headline today that Zelensky is arriving in Copenhagen today. That's why most of Copenhagen has been sealed off. No flies sooner. I didn't know that. No flies on everything. And the Nordic leaders are coming down as well. I'd love to have them here on the podcast, but I guess that's not going to happen. And I think we just saw Merz in Germany also saying without a shared burden of the cost to Ukraine, there will be no budget. So it's a tricky time for Ukraine. And Russia may sense they have a slight upper hand here. And so these negotiations are going to be quite interesting. Also, as far as I can see, there's no European presentation. And that's a good thing. And that makes the potential success of these negotiations, I would say, or reduce the potential for success. So plenty of talks going on. And I think, I suppose, at the end of the day, John, talking is better than fighting. So as long as talks continue, then there's obviously hope for solutions.
Speaker 1And then there's the whole, I guess, connecting in a little bit of a segue here from the Ukraine-Russia talks. There's been this whole issue in the Black Sea, Russia effectively shutting down Ukrainian exports by sea, as far as I understand. I don't know what the situation on the seas is at the moment. And there's been this idea that, first of all, it's been remarkably good for global food prices from the perspective of the consumer, maybe not for the Ukrainian farmer, obviously, in that specific instance, that the prices have come down. So they haven't had this concern, certainly not linked to El Nino or anything else. But is there a forward curve saying anything? I've even heard talks about the prices going down. I think there's a lot of talk about the prices going down. I think there's a lot of talk on a podcast. It was at Louis Vincent-Gabert, somebody saying that, look, some of these fertilizer prices that have been so high at times over the last year because of the Iran war crisis have meant that some people have simply not applied fertilizer, and we might see reduced yields. Maybe it doesn't impact things this year, but going forward, so maybe next year we have a bigger impact. So any thought on the whole forward curve, if at all, and grain prices here?
Speaker 2Yeah, it's most certainly interesting that we're seeing this, the weekly change in the El Nino forecast continue to rise. I think we are probably approaching a peak now, but at the same time, we've seen a near collapse in food prices, especially the key commodity, food commodities. And part of that was mostly driven by the surge in speculative interest we had back in August, where simply we hit record numbers, both in grains and in soft commodities. And the market's really been suffering from a hangover ever since. Selling of these has really weighed on prices. So wheat has come down quite significantly. Well, we now have a new fresh net short position in corn. That was a massive long just a couple of months ago. So traders have really been perplexed about the developments. And you can argue, as we head into autumn, we're also heading into the harvest season, so there will be harvest pressure adding, weighing on prices. But regarding wheat in the Black Sea, again, just like oil prices are looking for a deal, it looks like wheat prices are also trying to price in some kind of a deal between Russia and Ukraine on passage of food supplies through the Black Sea. So again, it's all about negotiations there. All right. Let's
Speaker 1switch over to the metals, namely gold and silver. We've staged a recovery here just in the nick of time, or beyond the nick of time, if that's an expression, because we did break down through that key price level into new territory. I'm forgetting how far back that was, the scale of the low versus that prior low. And especially in silver, it was quite deep. And now we've sort of reversed back above. So gold back above the, obviously, 4,000 level, even testing about 4,100. What are the drivers, to you? What are you looking for to give you the sense that we've put in a proper low here? And then the only thing unfortunate for me is, when I look at the chart, there's just a huge upper shadow from that prior sell down. It's going to take quite a bit more rallying to get a sense that, OK, the time is for a significant new leg higher versus, OK, at least we stopped going down, but it doesn't necessarily mean we're staging a massive advance here again.
Speaker 2No, that's true, John. And I think we were probably almost safe to have saved by the bell. In this case, the bell was a midterm election that we saw a very strong rebound. So I think on the last podcast, I talked about this, the battle between short and long-term focused traders. There's no doubt, as you also say, if you look at the chart without the data in it or just looking at the actual bars, it looks negative. And that's also why the leverage funds, the CTAs, they were attacking it quite aggressively recently when it broke below this 4,000 level. We came down and paused, and then we had this big run-up, which I would say for now has been driven by short covering. It seems like CTAs are really the determining factor right now. And as the short has been scaled back, it just looks like we're running out of juice again on the upside. So 4,200, I'd like to see a clean breakthrough. Just looking at the Fibonacci levels, we haven't even retraced 38.2 of the sell-off from the August highs. So there's still quite a lot of work to do. But again, if we start to sense that inflation is rolling over, we start to see perhaps a focus away from rate hikes, then ultimately that will start to. Then the long-term focus, I think, will return. And we've seen central banks have been stepping up their activity in the third quarter. And also the ETF demand has actually been been holding up very steady, even though we've seen this recent weakness below 4,000.
Speaker 1Yeah, that's a good point, because the people that have, you know, the investors, I guess who that is, the investors being the ETF holdings, they've been going along, going along, going along. So the question is, how much are they going to actually step up their buying when they've already been buying constantly? Whereas, as you point out, the CTAs, they've maybe gotten caught out on their shorts, but it doesn't mean that their technical indicators have turned around to suggest that they should add to long. So I guess, you know, to me, just eyeballing it, 4,400 to 4,455 is like the bigger sort of, okay, now we're properly heading into a challenging some key trend reversal levels. And by the way, that would be the upper end of that is the 200-day moving average, which will be lower by the time we got up there, if we were to go up there.
Speaker 2Yeah, I agree. So fully, I fully agree that short covering can take it to a certain level, but then ultimately they need to step into the buy side. And which they will if the price tells them that it's the right thing to do. Positioning has been really scaled back quite significantly. The silver is, I'll call it neutral. Gold is still long, but it's much reduced. And platinum is now flipped to a net short last week. Palladium is also already quite aggressively short. So the market's not priced for higher prices. So that in itself could be the trigger. But as you said, they do not move, they do not start the move. They accelerate the move. And something else needs to happen before we get to these levels that potentially push us into territory where they'll start to focus on reestablishing long positions.
Speaker 1Yeah, and then the copper trade, if there's some kind of Dr. Copper angle here, it's not doing much. Dr. Copper has been really choppy in a range for many, many months now. Certainly it makes sense that it came down recently with the come down in the AI trade. Supposedly if AI is going to all go bust, then there's not going to be the demand there for copper. But it remains a tight market, does it not? Any key things we should watch for in copper here?
Speaker 2China. China and U.S. tariffs. I think these are the two major drivers. China accounts for around 50% of global refinery capacity. And they've been paying through the nose recently to source material. So the Chinese market is really tight. Then we have all this copper strand in the U.S. And there's some speculation that the election result potentially could mean that tariffs will not be introduced. That could release some of that copper back into the market. But by no means all of it. So that has been weighing on the prices, as you mentioned, together with the AI correction we saw recently. But with all that taken into consideration, the correction has really once again been very shallow. We haven't really broken any key levels to the downside. And now we're bouncing once again, simply because the physical market is telling us that this market is tight. And with all the still stories about our expectations for AI data center rollout and demand, it's going to come from there, even if we may see a slowdown, that will still underpin prices.
Speaker 1Okay. Thanks for the run-through, Ola. Thank you. We'll see how things develop. All right. Now let's get back to the market wrap. Again, just an amazing day for the market. We've kind of erased. Basically, this is the leg that erases the last Thursday leg. So we get the knee-jerk off the weird delayed knee-jerk, parenthetically, the weird delayed knee-jerk off the U.S. midterm election on Thursday. Friday mixed. Tried to rally, kind of failed yesterday. We pretty much smashed it back to where we were before that Thursday meltdown. We're still very much in the shadow of the larger sell-off. If we focus on the AI trade side of things, the NASDAQ 100 side of things, yesterday's high almost exactly to the point on the cash index, the NASDAQ 100, to the 200-day moving average, which was just above 28,000, if memory serves. We ended the day at 27,907. What's the next? Yeah. So, you know, objective, obviously, 200-day moving average close above. That helps out. But I would say, more technically speaking, given we had that 15%-plus meltdown into the Thursday lows last week, that we start doing the classic Fibonacci retracements, and the bar is around the 61.8% as the ultimate sort of upside pivot area. And that coincides nicely as coming in just below 30,000. So let's call it a full recovery into 30,000-plus and dropping volatility. And lower daily trading ranges would be a help as we approach that if we really are in a full reversal, year-end Christmas rally, what have you. I'm not calling that. I'm just saying that's what's needed to convince the – for the technics to look more convincing that we are getting out from under the shadow of this. The 61.8%, by the way, comes in at 29,544. So given we closed below 28,000, that's still a pretty chunky 1,500-plus points. In advancing, that's 5%-ish with some very rough maths done right there. So that's where we are. The S&P 500 itself also up. Again, the whole market was up in broad terms, 2.35%. There was even an FT article talking about this rotation into defensive stocks. We noted that with the broadening out, the outperformance of the S&P 500 equal weight. But even something like – I just pulled up the Consumer Staples ETF. It was up – I don't know what it was up, 2%, something like that. So, I mean, just there was – everything was positive yesterday. Russell 2000 up 3% plus. S&P 500 equal weight, obviously, also up near the same as the market cap weighted. SOX up almost 7%. The key stock – and then just to round out, Asia up 2.87% on the Nikkei all the way. Although it's not quite back to its 200-day moving average there. So there's still a hole to be dug out of in the Nikkei as well. KOSPI up over 4%. The Europe has never – well, it did get a sell-off. It was more of a gentle sell-off. I think it linked a little bit to sovereign debt concerns, the oil price markup, and especially the gas prices – when I say gas, natural gas prices for Europe also advancing. So its sell-off was timed in a very different way and has not been particularly deep. And it's never fully challenged below the 200-day moving average in some of the bigger or broad European indices. So opening, obviously, positive on the day. Now, the key stock in focus has been NVIDIA with this scandal with the CEO, Jensen Huang. And I'll get to Huang in a minute. Why am I overpronouncing it? I'll get to that in a second. Still down over 4%. A very ugly look given the positive performance of the SOX at almost 7% on the day. But was solidly off the lows. So people happy that bought on the lows yesterday. Still think they're massive. I mean, we have questions looming around this company. How much can its fortunes be separated from its CEO? What will happen in terms of meeting out some kind of official response to this wrist slap because he's managed to work the Trump-patriotic network well enough, Jensen Huang? Or is something more profound because the institutions are in charge and there's been a serious dereliction of duty and you're breaking the rules? If you sent all these – knowingly sent all of these GPUs to China against the rules at the time. So there's all of that. And then, of course, then the key thing being really it's not just about NVIDIA. NVIDIA is so massive and its presence is so important. It's a key part of the whole circular trade. For example, some argue that CoreWeave, which is a problem child here in the data center buildout, it's large and it's potentially systemic if it starts to multiply beyond CoreWeave. If, let's say, CoreWeave can't sustain its liquidity and suffers a seizure because of the need to – and its finances that – and NVIDIA is sufficiently large to just sort of sweep that one under the rug and keep this thing going for a while. That ability could be, of course, constrained in the event that there's extra pressure on the company. It feels a bit strange talking about all this when everything staged such a stunning comeback yesterday. But it's just – that's something just to consider in the mix here. Now, there's another thing on this. And I was just – this was triggered by – it was very first-order coverage I gave yesterday in the podcast on what this meant for Huang himself and the company. But a bit more second-order thinking is why? Why was this leaked? Let's consider that this story entirely came or was entirely sourced in U.S. intelligence that was being done. He was obviously being – his behavior or his actions were being tracked through this. And this was not something that had to come. It wasn't something that had to come out into the public. It wasn't as if journalists had discovered this. This was leaked to journalists from somebody inside U.S. intelligence. And I'll send a link to – in the podcast episode description, it was Arnaud Bertrand, very much a pro-China and anti-West, by the way. You have to put that filter on top of everything he says. Who says, you know, qui bono, who benefits? And it was a conversation between him and also very pro-China but still very interesting to listen to, Louis Vincent Gave and who benefits. And the argument. The argument is that perhaps somebody like Rubio or at least a U.S. defense hawk has ordered this leaked rather than it just sort of seeped out by some underling that somebody higher up in charge said, yeah, go ahead, leak this on the notion or on the logic that there's still way too much of a sieve here allowing things through to the Chinese and we need to go super critical on limiting our technology transfer to China. Some kind of crackdown coming, more harsh bans on whatever. Of course. on GPUs, high-end memory, who knows what. That's, I think, a likely angle on this, at least. Something to consider, too, here. And by the way, as they're arguing back and forth, Gov brings out this, I think I've come across it in the past, but I'd forgotten what it meant, this Hanlon's razor. And I love these different expressions. You have Occam's razor, which is that, you know, usually it's the simplest explanation that is the right one. Don't get all, you know, wild into your crazy conspiracy theories. If there's a simple reason for something to happen, that's the most likely one, the most probable one. Hanlon's razor is never a tribute to malice, that which could just be explained by stupidity or ineptitude. So I think that's a possible operative thing here as well. And then I just want to get back to the pronunciation of CEO Huang. I've been lazy. I've been just saying Wang. I do know how his name is pronounced, perhaps better than one person reaching out to be said. And, you know, sent a very long email trying to educate me on the pronunciation. I'm quite aware of how it's pronounced. So thanks for that. It was interesting. It is Huang with a second tone, which does mean yellow in Mandarin Chinese. And the reason he's gone with the first name Jensen is that if you pronounce his first name in Mandarin Chinese, nobody would be able to pronounce it outside of China. Renxun, I think is the approximation of, or my attempt to pronounce it the correct way, that after having had one semester of Chinese, funny enough, in college, 20, 30, no, 35 years ago, it is now. Enough on that. Jensen, I think, is a little bit easier. And if I say Huang, it may sound like Wong, but I'm trying to say Huang, and it just may get swallowed in my speech from going so fast. All right, enough on that. The other feedback from this same individual, and it's something I've actually thought about before. It must be super annoying. You know, this is a daily podcast, essentially, although I will be off the next two days, ironically enough, after just saying that, and I'll reiterate that at the end of the podcast. But the intro, I've tried to cut it down as much as possible. I did want to put the compliance stuff up front. We have a huge focus on being compliant here at Saxo in every way we can. And I just felt like, you know, you have to balance, okay, somebody coming in for the first time has to get an impression. There's a little bit of production value here. What is this all about? And they get, of course, the compliance message. And it is, I'm sure, annoying to listen to that every single day when you already know what I'm going to say, and it's the same thing. But I'm familiar with this from other podcasts myself, and I just zip through the, you know, do the fast-forward thing, trying to find when they begin talking anyway on just about every podcast I listen to. I hope you do the same. But if I have an avalanche of voices coming in saying, please, dear God, John, get that thing off there. It's driving me nuts, and I don't like to have to fast-forward. I'll consider shortening it down, somehow. And by the way, you know, I keep talking about, oh, I want to do this, I want to do that, and we're pretty much fixed on the same format for a very long time now. I need to fix this music issue. I couldn't get the AI to bring me something that I found satisfactory for replacing what I think is the cool theme at the beginning. Maybe I should just drop that effort. I do think for production value, first-time listeners need to get a sense that there's a little bit of production going on here, that it's not just some random dude speaking into a microphone. So I wanted to fix that. I do want to bring it to YouTube to bring in visuals on occasion when necessary. Again, the idea being that you don't absolutely have to have the visuals at any time, that it can be audio-only for those, and there are many of you out there that do this on the go, as I mostly do as well, even when there are presentations that are available. And I'm hoping to get some kind of studio upgrade to make that video, when it's me in the frame and not just the graphs, et cetera, a bit more compelling. Again, it adds to production, it adds to production value, it adds to potentially widening and broadening in the listenership, which is something that's a little bit more difficult to do these days than it was five, six years ago when there were about 80% fewer podcasts out there. So I won't promise too much, but that's my intention and my hope on where this is all headed. I got such overwhelmingly strong feedback on the long-form midterm election one that I did just before the midterms that I will strongly consider doing those on occasion. I mean, they take a lot of effort to put those together, but I think they're rewarding. And then sometimes I have kind of a canned presentation ready because I've just been on this trip and can just really do a repeat of that, but I can do it to all of my listeners rather than to a smaller audience in a live venue. And I will consider doing so reasonably soon, actually, because I am traveling next week and will be presenting in both Geneva and Zurich. So I'll consider maybe the week after, but I'll be brushing up the slides a bit and presenting that on the podcast. All right, let's drop all of that and go back to the markets. So let's have a look over at, well, I think one thing that's interesting is Bitcoin pretty much out of, just completely out of phase with what's going on across other markets. I'm really interested. This thing just doesn't have a pulse, people. I'm curious what it is that gives it a pulse, if anything. I'm so conflicted. I have this sort of gut, dislike of the whole space while knowing that I need to keep an open mind around it, especially the whole stable coins issue, this notion that we're going to see the U.S. supersizing the dollar's dominance through the use of stable coins that they could come to replace some currencies out there as a unit of storage of value and that could help to back the U.S. treasury market. All this stuff, there's some other intriguing ways that that could play out and I'll totally keep myself, you know, up to date on the potential there. But for now, it's just, to me, it's a screaming, what the heck, that it is trading where it is. Has not really fully broken down. I mentioned the, it did break down below that key low. What was it? 74,900 something. And it's, but it's got the 200-day moving a little bit lower than where it is. So it hasn't found any momentum on that break of the range and the 200-day moving average is sort of there in sight. Let's see what happens. And I'll do my best to not be too jaded on crypto. I think it's something that we should never write off anything. I even put it in the 2026 example portfolio, much to my chagrin going into this year, because to be honest at the time, and I hope I expressed why, I felt like 2026 could be a year where we see a liquidity event due to some pressures in the treasury market that would end up seeing some kind of official intervention where you could see the beginnings of whatever the future, you know, innovation is to keep everything, moving forward, not like the old boss or QE, but like the new boss or QE, whatever that looks like. And that whatever it looks like is going to happen at some point. That is, how do we get out from under all of this debt? What do we do when there's a market seizure the next time around? And I do think that's coming at some point and now I'll have to punt it forward to 2027, I guess, but will crypto play a key role there? Don't know. Getting way too far out into long-term stuff here. Let's zoom it back into what's going on today. And in markets, currencies just, they're so dead. I think part of it is the dollar-yen volatility being artificially constrained by the risk of official Japanese intervention. But there's some cross-currents as well, you know, for the dollar, which is always the key focus. That's just meaning we're not, we're not getting directional, directional trade here. Outside of a few little subplots, the Kiwi comeback is super interesting. I think there's some more potential there. I think Australia is suffering under the yoke of these very big markets. Very high yields. Confidence is going to be waning there from falling housing prices. But, you know, there could be some metal stuff that supports Aussie. But I still think Aussie versus Kiwi is an interesting trade. 120 potential, maybe lower. The Swedish Krona also, as long as this energy trade remains sidelined and we sort of get to, you know, marking the Euro a little bit higher here, Swedish Krona does quite well versus the Norwegian Krona. That trade is coming in. Lower as well today. But yeah, so the dollar a bit, a bit sideways to say the least. It was, it was lower, of course, and we did the same reversal. So the dollar rallied on late last week and then it sort of erased that. So now we're sort of back to neutral. Let's see if it can gin up something. The bears, I should say, could gin up something more to the downside. Certainly dollar yen is also stuck in the range. Euro dollar needs to vault above 112.70 for relevance on dollar downside. We had Waller out today. Doing his best to push against that development with some hawkish guidance for a December hike. Will that mean that we actually see one? If we see a meltdown through the lows in the NASDAQ we saw and, you know, widening fallout on the bear side, maybe not. I think the stock market is part of the key. And as well, as Ola mentioned on the inflation, so if we see an absolute crush lower in energy prices, that could set up more questions around that December move, which coming into this morning was priced, around 85% likely. We saw a three-year treasury auction yesterday that saw very soft demand. The bidding metrics and the sort of bid to cover were quite low relative to the range. However, hidden within that, it was actually saw a record percentage taken down by direct bidders, you know, indirect bidders being often the official sources of bidding. That was kind of interesting to see that. But, you know, U.S. treasury yields came back in higher, obviously with a profound comeback in risk. Now, we do have a CPI release today. should be critical, but maybe not if oil prices continue lower. It's also a weird CPI release for the U.S. It's for October, obviously, in that, if you recall, last year, they didn't even collect the data or publish a data point for the October 2025 CPI, which means we only get a month-on-month release plus the release of the official sort of index that was started way back when. And, you know, so that may confuse some. It's just going to be a month-on-month release. We can kind of impute a year-on-year from that index, but, you know, that's the lay of land coming into that data point today. And do recall that the U.S. markets are closed, both, of course, bonds and equities and futures and others, tomorrow. All right, a couple of links for you besides that conversation around, you know, speculating why was this released on Jensen Huang. We have the CNBC with an interesting article pulling out something that I haven't talked about. And it's not really been an evidence and another indicator, which is the continuing claim. So there was a period there where, while the initial jobless claims were very low, and they're so insanely low, it's just, it feels like a broken indicator. I know there's speculation on why the gig economy and other reasons why claims, the whole structure around jobless claims is different now as opposed to the past. But there was a period where claims were still low, initial claims, but the continuing claims were, quite high. And then the latter started coming down as well, suggesting that this whole jobless claim situation is just not a problem at all. But CNBC pulling out that this sort of different data series, and we haven't seen a problematic development in the overall unemployment rate. It's come off a tiny bit off the lows, but we were in a period there post this pandemic recovery where there's a labor shortage. So the overall unemployment rate is certainly not a concern. But there's some corner of the jobless claim situation that's not a problem at all. And so, you know, I think that's something that we need to look at. And so I think that's something that we need to look at. And I think that's something that we need to look at. And that is seeing people out of work for a very long time. And it's very unusual that this indicator, the long-term unemployed, is taking up when we're not in a recession, and we're not seeing this general trend in a higher unemployment rates. I don't know what to do with it. Could be something about the age of the workforce, people that are, you know, found themselves out of a job in their 50s or early 60s, have a hard time finding a new job, you know, can't yet retire. But just thought I'd put it out there. And then I haven't listened to this, but I was really surprised to see this point. It's a, some podcast interviewing Louis Vincent Goff, who is always speaking up the Chinese case, by the way, you always have to put that filter there. But he's also just, he's a great analyst, speaks, communicates very well, has very insightful things to say about Europe as well. And I always like listening to a multitude of voices. But it puts up an interesting argument. I don't think this is the way things will go. But certainly Michael Every, I think he's going to be a great analyst. I think he's going to be a great analyst. I think would disagree, but says basically that Europe should stop trying to fight China and should embrace China as a way to help lower inflation. I'm not sure that's the way it's going to play out, whether he's right or not, but it makes some interesting points. I'm sure in this, in this podcast interview. Finally, there's one from Pippa Malmgren, not somebody I'm a booster for at all, but gives you a sense with the stuff she's putting out on X in this one post of what the sort of gaga is about. The sort of gaga is about what the sort of gaga is all about, but gives you a sense with the stuff she's putting out on X in this one post of what the sort of gaga is all about, but gives you a sense with the sort of gaga is all about, but gives you a sense of what's going on. 33 minutes and some is a wrap for today. Stay careful out there. I am away on a course tomorrow and the following day, but I should hopefully be back for the Friday podcast Health Willing with the next Saxo Market Call. ♪ ♪
PodcastTranscript AI