>> inflation statistics continue to look extremely elevated. >> we are talking about inflation inlet. -- inflation in materials and logistics. >> i think we will be having a very different conversation around inflation and demand. >> evidence tells us we are going to see that turn. >> i think we are going to see it plummet like a rock. >> this is "bloomberg surveillance" with tom keene, jonathan ferro, and lisa abramowicz. tom: good morning, everyone. thrilled you're with us here on radio and television. a follow one from a stunning

friday. i am watching the u.s. 10 year inflation-adjusted yield, and it has a persistence to go to a lesser negative number. jonathan: looking ahead to cpi on thursday, the high estimate 7.6. most of the street expecting the 7% again in america. there's a new ingredient in this recipe for a bond market selloff, and it is europe. there's a big shift taking place in the european debt market. tom: you mentioned italy with jordan rochester of nomura. we mentioned belgium, rounded up 7.6% inflation. i know it is a one-off statistic , but what if we only come back so far and embed 3% inflation? jonathan: the ecb has got some work to do. this 57 basis point move on the u.s. to year year to date has felt like a big move. we have had the same amount in italy and six training sessions.

we hear more and more banks price in more and more hikes from this ecb. tom: i read a lot this weekend. really leaned over after the soccer friday. lisa abramowicz, your observation after the labor shock on friday. lisa: trying to understand the balance sheets. how much does quantitative tightening actually mean a rise in yields we cannot prepare for because it will happen all at once? the other issue is will they go through with it. we have been talking about the fed put, the ecb put, and there's this feeling that a lot of companies have extended their maturities long enough, they have enough capital that they can withstand this, which means we can see more tightening than we ever have before in history. tom: to get to our guest, that is that linkage between full faith and credit sovereign analysis and the credit analysis you do so well. jonathan: corporate credits getting a little bit more fragile at a time when the equity market is looking more

resilient. we are up 50 on the nasdaq 100, of 0.3%. on the nasdaq, up 0.2%. a lift in the equity market. a mild one, but it is there. euro-dollar unchanged at 1.1453. crude at $91.43. we come back 1%, but we have had a monster move year to date. tom: crude had a resilient $92 to breakthrough, as hobbies bloss -- as javier blas suggests would be interesting. shahid ladha, head of g10 rates strategy at bnp paribas. i know the migration from four to six rate hikes in the united states. what do you need to see to go from six to eight rate hikes? shahid: thank you for having

the. i think we have been on the hawkish side for some time and really opening up the distribution more. there is a question of runway, and i think that question is even more asks now with the ecb on the bank of england being more aggressive on an exit plan. the fed needs to move. the fed needs to move quickly. clearly behind the curve. fixed rate hikes may be more the center of the distribution. we could see one every meeting, and we don't rule out 50 or a fed funds rate closer to 2% for year end. jonathan: build on what you just said. does it make it 80 your -- doesn't make it easier or harder that they are all trying to do this at the same time? shahid: we've heard from powell this time is different, and how this time is different we think is with velocity. the pace of the recovery, the pace of the exit on both the

fiscal and the monetary side. this synchronization between the fiscal and monetary forces, both heading for the exit because of the pandemic, but also the synchronization between different central banks moving at the same time. ultimately, i think it might be more difficult for asset markets and the global economy as central banks move increasingly together on both the balance sheet and the level of rates. jonathan: that's why i think it is important to call it regime change because in the previous regime, we would see a bond market selloff, and it was self-limiting because central banks would have to back away. when we think about a change in regime, you are thinking about maybe that that dynamic does not exist anymore. shahid: now actually, i think we can get to where we are going quicker, which is the velocity part, but i don't think the destination in itself has necessarily changed. we don't think a new normal for

the long-term or neutral rate is above 3%. we still feel like higher yields of some were capped below 3%, probably at two per -- at 2.5% and below. we are not convinced we go above. there remains a lot of liquidity in the system, lots of fixed income duration and demand, which we think comes in if and when central banks reach their peak, perhaps quicker than before. lisa:lisa: what you're describing sounds like it is screaming yield curve going negative for the first time in a long time. in version. excuse me. it is a monday. i'm having trouble. how much is that a concern, that you are saying the fed is behind the curve, and that seems clear to you? why are we not forecasting a recession sooner if that really is your base case? shahid: it is a concern. we do have curve flattening. we certainly see twos-tens flattened basically to zero

through the rates cycle and the rate cycle ends at zero. clearly, the risk is to flatten under this scenario. but a counter is what has worked , a flat or slightly invested curve were a steep serve because inflation becomes much more of a long-term risk and fear than a relatively short term price. so i think the flat curve is not ideal for the fed, and i think it is perhaps a better people than a very steep curve with credit implications as well. lisa: you are talking about consumer sentiment. how much that that play into the ecb perspective as well? we heard about their concern about oil prices are get the labor market is not quite the same. how much of the trying to get ahead of people believing in inflation they have not seen in decades? shahid: the ecb and to some

extent the boj are in a very extreme level of monetary policy . i'm talking about negative interest rate policy. that comes with a bunch of caution and consequences. to some extent, i think the ecb should embrace the ability to get through negative rates back into quantitative territory. we think they get to zero at the end of this year and positive next year. clearly we have seen from belgium this week, germany last week, and across the euro zone in recent months, inflation is not a figment of the ecb or anyone else's imagination. it is real. the market is different. it will take time probably for wage growth in europe, but we think it is coming. therefore, the ecb needs to be someone on the forefront of exiting and at least getting back to zero or positive rates. jonathan: you have just finished

on something that i think it's really important. we spent a long time since the ecb went into negative territory eight years ago in the summer of 2014 discussing how beneficial that was actually for the ecb to do so for the european economy. what do you think to the argument that maybe this might help the eurozone economy, getting back to zero, getting back to positive territory? shahid: i think it can help. some inflation, a much better labor market, wage growth. i think it would change all we have hoped and feared, a shift in inflation in europe, to a better place. hopefully we can see the same in japan over time, too. yes, we are worried about inflation, and in the u.s. and the u.k. it is extremely high. perhaps it will be more of a challenge to bring it down. but inflation has gone years or decades without positive inflation and without a positive

central-bank rate, this is, we think, a positive outcome, a good evolution. jonathan: fantastic, as always. supersmart, and great to catch up with you, sir. bnp paribas looking for 50 basis point of rate hikes from the ecb this year. another 50 basis point through 2023. lisa: really pointing out the conundrum. are we really getting out of the low growth, low inflation paradigm over the longer period of time, or is this just how we get there? are they too far behind the curve to orchestrate something that gets there softly without some sort of downturn? jonathan: i thought the way goldman framed it a little earlier this morning was correct. you thing about the source, the level, the speed. the source, the ecb. the speed, superfast. the level, i don't and we got a problem just yet. what bnp paribas are talking about is synchronization.

it is not just the fed and the treasury market. it is not just the bank of england and gilts. it is now the ecb on the euro zone debt market as well. that is something we have got to think about in a way we have not been able to for a long time because the ecb set out the less rate hiking cycle. tom: all of that is correct, but i would do a behavioral overlay of the percentage of people involved in the game who have never experienced this. i think that is highly unusual coming off before the volcker era and along the great moderation as well. tom: i remember -- jonathan: i remember sitting down with ubs before the last rate hiking cycle and asking the average age of the trading floor and how many have actually seen fed rate hikes. at the same question of any trading floor in europe right now. it was july 2011. president draghi, eight years on the job come no rate hikes. there are a lot of people who

have never seen this, to your point. this is bloomberg. ♪ ritika: with the first word news, i'm ritika gupta. russia's vladimir putin and france's emmanuel macron meet today in moscow. it does not expect a breakthrough. russia has repeatedly denied that it plans to attack ukraine. the u.s. and the u.k. say there are now almost 130,000 russian troops close to the ukrainian border. in the u.k., in a confidence vote on prime minister boris johnson could come as soon as this week. a minimum of 54 conservative members of parliament would have to support a vote, and "the sunday times" reports that some predict the total is approaching that. one conservative lawmaker tells "the observer," it is going to

result in him going over the weekend. a state of emergency has been declared in canada's capital over a protest against vaccine mandates and covid restrictions. hundreds of trucks have been parked in downtown ottawa near the canadian parliament. the city mayor says increasingly rowdy demonstrations pose a threat to safety and security of residence. frontier airlines has agreed to buy spirit. the price, $2.9 billion in cash and stock. the private equity firm indigo partners owns a majority st ake in frontier and is the largest shareholder in wizz air. i'm ritika gupta. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ >> this is a molecule crisis. we are out of everything. oil, gas, coal, copper, you name it. we are out of it. i have never seen markets like this. jonathan: that is jeff currie of goldman sachs. you pay attention. tom: there's no question about it. a huge statement. there's a lot of big thinkers on this. excuse the pun, it is incredibly fluid right now with the race to $93 brent crude. jonathan: without a doubt. futures positive this monday morning, up 0.25% on the s&p. yields higher in italy, up more than 10 basis points at the front end and through much of the curve. up on treasuries to 1.1559.

to see it in the 90's again, $91 $.45 on wti -- $91 40 have since on wti -- $91.45 on to beauty i. tom: of jp morgan, christyan malek joins us, with a blistering note on opec+. i really need to start with this. i think it is so important. if russia do something odd in oil, that gets you may be due $150 a barrel oil. how do you weigh that likelihood? christyan: it is interesting, when we last spoke we talk about the risk premia of when spare capacity falls. when we broke the report on speculative assets, we talked about not necessarily the how,

but what happens when speculative equity falls. this is analogous to this, the situation where if we see oil potentially redirected towards the east and/or russia's spare capacity disappointing, whether it is voluntary or strategic, the bottom line is that increased roughly $20, $30 above where the clearing price of oil is, that is how we think about it. tom: because of the events at the white house today, annmarie hordern at the white house will discuss ukraine, russia, and other topics, you and your team are expert on the natural gas dynamics of continental europe. what is your single brief to our american listeners and viewers about how nat gas in europe is different? christyan: net gas is different in a few ways. first of all, you are very close

to asian markets, where there is a lot of liquefied gas, which is essentially the liquid version of natural gas. the reason that is important is you can send it through ships, and it can be used in europe, which is traditionally almost a dumping ground. the second point is you have a lot of piped gas available for russia. i think those two things combined means that we think european gas will ultimately, while it will stay tight, we don't think european gas is going to be threatened by major outages, even if it is strategic or linked to the russia-ukraine crisis. where we see risk is potentially through oil as opposed to a big gas piece within europe. lisa: this is probably the elephant in the room keeping prices from going higher, today notwithstanding. what is the downside to oil prices if this issue does resolve without a conflict, and

the oil from the plus keeps on flowing? christyan: think about this on the risk premia. we are probably only around the low single digits on what the russia-ukraine crisis implies. if it all passes, the result is still tightness in the market as a result of opec, not opec+ disappointing on production. i don't see risk premia completely disappear. with earnings month on month, we have seen the numbers continue to disappoint as we see pent-up demand. if anything, we may end up having another perfect storm where we have massive pent-up demand into q2, just at a time of production where it creates this tightness. when we think about risk premium , it is very difficult to pin down exactly where they could emerge from. it could be any geopolitical

problem that ultimately continues to check out the risk premia. lisa: which oil major in your view stands to benefit most from this tightness you see? christyan: in a nutshell, it has the highest gas exposure -- in a nutshell, shell. it has the highest exposure in europe. it can provide lng at scale. it is not very high margins. with the benefit that they are looking to return as much cash as they possibly can, so you've got exposure to the rising tightness in the macro with a lot of conversion into cash and cash return back to shareholders. very good on value, particularly for a u.s. and global investor. jonathan: great call. the last time we caught up with

you at the start of december, brent was at $69. it is $93 now. christyan malek of jp morgan, thank you very much. andy three dollars. he doubted the quepasa -- $93. he doubted the capacity of some of these opec+ carriers. tom: i would suggest the balance between economic policy and economic growth, commodities will be the unexpected. my radar is up on that. jonathan: to hear people like christian, like jeff currie speak like this, that quote, "this is a molecule crisis. we are out of everything. i've never seen markets like this." lisa: "you name it, we are out of it." how much does this show the limits of a world dependent on just-in-time delivery and driving vehicles filled with

stuff? jonathan: the stoxx doing ok. the nasdaq 100 up 0.4%. the s&p up 0.25%. tom: the report is it is a fractional lift, but it is a carryforward of the shock of friday. we can't say it enough, friday was stunning. jonathan: it was stunning, and this move in europe has been stunning as well. the selloff in the italian debt market is fading a little bit here. we were up 10 basis points plus on the italian to, now up just five. on tends, -- on tens, now up nine. lisa: how much is this a bet that the ecb is not going to take as much action our people pricing and, and how much is it people taking a look at the fundamentals and saying things are not changing that much? the ecb is not getting that much more hawkish. they are just getting concerned about inflation. jonathan: they are still doing

qe, and so is the federal reserve. so hard to get your mind around all of this. futures up 12 on the s&p, up 0.2%. yields behave on tends, 1.9540 -- 1.4940%.

jonathan: another important week with cpi this thursday. with tom and lisa abramowicz, i'm jonathan ferro. futures with the left. on the s&p, up .25%. the drama on the bond market comes down eight italy and in the united states. 1.9140 on tens. on two, 1.29. tom: we have the advantage of the bloomberg terminal. i just got a $93 print on brent crude. real yield -- things are ebbing and flowing with an equity left. jonathan: anyone working -- anyone waking up worried about italy, we have seen a massive move on the front end of the

italian bond market. on 10, up by 10 basis points, still a left. tom: it is interesting to see. right now we will get a clinic. every house is different. hsbc has a unique responsibility with the london and hong kong heritage. stephen king and janet henry with an interesting look. janet henry there global chief economist joins us this morning. i want to go to the idea that inflation is elevated and it will come down. do you have a framework that it reversed to something we knew or is there a new higher level of inflation we need to get used to? janet: i think it comes down but i do not think it goes back to pre-pandemic rates. not in that sense of fully transitory. it is not just about when it comes down or how much it comes down.

it is what happens in between and how much policy tightening has to be delivered in order to bring it back down. there is what you saw on the bank of england, where you had five members voting for 50 basis points, five members for 25. the four members took the view you need to reaffirm more swiftly to keep it from becoming a wage price dynamic and they were prepared to take the consequences by voting for a more aggressive response at an earlier stage. tom: i would suggest across finance and investment there'll be a lot of discussion in your world about where the new neutral rate is. do you, phd's at the fed, does anyone have a clue at where the new neutral rate is? janet: i am sure people have a lot of thoughts, but there is so

much pandemic uncertainty, changing behavior in labor market, we are all trying to get to grips with what the structural influence of energy transition costs are and the longer-term implications of the breadth of central bank mandates we now have in some of the inflation risk premium that might be associated with that if central banks are focusing not just on labor markets but financial stability and income inequality and climate change itself. in terms of the long-term neutral rate, i do not think anyone has a firm handle on where it is. a lot of it comes down to where you see long-term potential growth. do you think as a consequence of the pandemic long-term potential growth has risen or has it fallen and if so how much has it fallen? that is what contributes to the

long-term neutral rate. lisa: everyone is trying to out hawk each other talking about how the new normal be different from the old normal. i think about your colleague, steve major, who still has a 1% target for the 10 year treasury. can you talk about why negative real rates will not disappear so quickly as a lot of people think. janet: they can in the short-term but they might not over the longer-term. this is where we are at the moment. when central banks set policy rates they are thinking how this influence demand. that is what central banks do. they try to analyze periods of cyclical weakness or cyclical strength to bring it in line with where they see the potential supply of the economy. when they see the potential supply in a world of extreme bottlenecks and some of these

relate to energy, some of these relate to labor markets, is that going to be more persistent or will we, once the pandemic has eased, and maybe people have used up their financial persistr will cushion, whether that is through government handouts or bitcoin trading come if that fiscal push has come back, we will see people return to the labor market. this is the issue about the long-term supply issues might be quite different to what we face currently. the current picture is actually in the short-term demand has been stronger-than-expected, the supply constraints have been worse than expected, and monetary conditions are too loose. therefore we need slightly more aggressive tightening? we think the bank of england will be done in august, if not before in terms of policy rate tightening. it does not mean the long-term terminal rate is necessarily higher. it just means monetary

conditions need to get there more quickly. lisa: what would you have to see to think inflation is more entrenched than what you are describing? janet: increasingly, if inflation does continue to build and wages respond to it, the question will be to central banks play catch up? are they willing to offset a much sharper downturn in growth, possibly something worse than a slowdown in growth. we know a lot of tightening cycles typically end in some kind of contraction in gdp, or do they sit back and take it gradually and we see the wage pressure start to build. the risks are the fed does have to move more aggressively than the ecb. i think the ecb has more time on his hands and arguably the market is already pricing in too much in the near term in terms of interest rate rises to have to play catch up regarding

bringing monetary conditions back in line with what needs to happen to lower inflation. tom: with immense respect, i want to stop the show and ask you something inside baseball. this is for global wall street listening on radio and listening on television. i think back to steve roach and the way he built morgan stanley economics and all of their research capability and you have done the same thing with stephen king at hsbc. i want you to explain how you and hsbc economics synthesize the fixed income call of steve major in hong kong. for our global wall street audience, this is of critical importance, to talk about how a given house has such interesting research, not controversial, but thought-provoking as major looks for lower rates. talk about that. janet: we discussed everything

about the global economy. i do not tell any fixed income strategist how bond markets work. we know at the moment we are moving into a world where we are getting different rate increases from central banks, and also talking quite calmly about the rate at which they're willing to scale back their balance sheets, as much as many of us tried to assume a certain degree of science with how these work, even the most qualified economists have a different view on how that increase in rates and that shrinkage of the balance sheet is going to operate. i suppose as a house we do not subscribe to the view that tricking the balance sheet at the same time as raising interest rates is necessarily going to be successful at pushing up long-term interest rates. the fact is if we see a lot of monetary tightening, it would not be unusual to see the yield

curve reach some kind of inversion. jonathan: awesome as always. thanks for being with us. janet henry of hsbc. going through scenarios for the year and how difficult it is to draw conclusions. i've heard from rick rieder of blackrock, marc keast all of pimco, -- the one thing they have in common, they are carrying more cash into 2022. tom: that was absently brilliant by janet henry. ira jersey has written about this at bloomberg. the linkage in dynamics between balance sheet dynamics and higher rate dynamics is complete original mystery. jonathan: the balance sheet reduction piece, no one can agree on. how big it will be and what it will achieve. lisa: the fact they are still expanding their balance sheets and we are talking about how much we are all trying to get out ahead of ourselves. i go to morgan stanley's andrew

sheets saying $2 trillion combined for the four major market banks. they will reduce their balance sheets by that much by the middle of 2023. the implications of that are hard to know, especially if you have this backdrop of a lot of liquidity and growth. jonathan: and 70 people think they cannot achieve it. tom: this is the heart of the matter. john and lisa, what you agree the way to solve that is to go longer, x axis out. lisa: shirt. the problem is the path matters a lot in terms of what you want to own. looking at people already forecasting going back and attack in the second half of the year, how long does it take before we get the slow down and enough data to say we are no longer write about inflation? jonathan: i am not saying it is wrong, i'm saying it is cute to separate the year that way.

you can see why people are making that call that growth starts to slow and the growth scale becomes the bigger fear. therefore we are allocated to equities and that is where you want to be. there so much of the year to go. when we close down last year where were we on the two year and how much have we done in just a month. tom: i'm lose track of where we are. it is the second week of february. it feels like the fourth week of april. jonathan: it does feel that way. the things the central banks have on their side, the calendar is on their side. tom: i hate to say this, but abramowitz nailed this in her column. tantrum is the emotion everybody fears. jonathan: capture column on bloomberg.com in the bloomberg terminal. we will keep pushing this will stop published every sunday. lisa: on the open michael purves is joining us. jonathan: is it nice to feel

that partnership? that is beautiful. are you going to sing? tom: singing the australian national anthem for their curling for great. jonathan: just don't do your curling impression ever again. tom: you should see me on the moguls. jonathan: i broke my sternum on moguls a long time ago. brutal. ritika: president biden's top advisers are repackaging his economic message to the american public. that comes at a time his approval ratings are seeking and his legislative agenda stalls in congress. the president has put more emphasis on growth in wages, union jobs, domestic manufacturing and giving less weight to areas that are sore points for voters such as inflation and the strike over covid. -- 25 basis point increase is

likely. a second rate hike can then take place in the spring of 2023. he is considered one of the ecb's most hawkish officials. the been democrat and china's efforts to control it are damaging domestic spending. spending during the just ended lunar new year break are down from 2021 levels. fever from china made 207 trips during the holiday, that is down from last year and a 26% drop from 2019. global news 24 hours a day, on air and on quicktake by bloomberg, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries. i am ritika gupta. this is bloomberg. ♪

>> we are still working to discourage the russians from making the wrong choice of

choosing confrontation. we will continue to work on a diplomatic solution but at the same time we know the russians continue to prepare and we will be working to address the security issues. jonathan: the ambassador -- tom: the ambassador of the united states the united nations and managing the message. angela stent joins us, nonresident senior fellow at brookings, holds court at georgetown as well and is our definitive voice on mr. putin. her book of a number of years ago was definitive on reframing the early vladimir putin to the later vladimir putin. now with the putin doctrine in foreign affairs magazine, she holds our high ground on the analysis of this moment. thank you for joining us this morning. i want to talk about a single sentence in your "the putin doc

trine." this is his fifth president. i found that extraordinary. explain the prudent longevity. -- explain the putin longevity. angela: he has seen presidents come and go. he has become cynical on a lot of things. he has of the point where he looks at the u.s. and throws down the gauntlet, these two ultimatums at the u.s. and nato and we are dancing to his tune. we are responding to his agenda. we have diplomatic activity going on all the time and he is watching us as we scramble to try to avoid a major war in europe. tom: you brilliantly reviewed the three choices.

we are all very familiar with the collapse of the soviet union. i think lisa has important questions on that. you have the courage to go back to yalta and say there was a try puller out, of the yalta system -- there was a tripolar outcome of the yalta system. explain what a shock that would be to see russia, china, and america with their own part of the world. angela: we have just seen putin and xi jinping together in beijing. this would be a shock. we thought this has ended with the system of spheres of influence and domination by the great powers. this is precisely what vladimir putin would like to restore. if you ask the japanese are the koreans are a of other countries how they would feel about that, you can imagine what they would say. certainly east european

countries do not want to go back to being in the russian sphere of influence. lisa: how close are the allies in terms of coordinating to try to counteract the kind about, vladimir putin is looking for? angela: the biden administration has done very well. we have the german chancellor in washington today hoping to get him on board with sanctions. president macron is in moscow today trying to talk him down. apparently he is in close contact with the white house. the coronation is good. the difference in interest between the european countries and the u.s., particular he about sanctions. lisa: is vladimir putin winning? angela: at the moment it looks as if he is. he has more escalation. we read 70% of the troops needed

for an invasion are already amassed at the border and we are all running around trying to find a solution to this. he has china's back. he and xi jinping put out the next ordinary statement in beijing that said china will support russia in whatever it does. it looks as if he is winning. lisa: this is concerning considering your concluded paragraph of your essay was putin's aim is to reverse the consequences of the soviet collapse and renegotiate the geographic settlement that ended the cold war. can you game out what type of altercation would lead to his goals being achieved? angela: it is highly unlikely that he will achieve the goals of nato saying will never enlarge and getting back is fear of influence, including in countries like poland.

if there is a major incursion, this would be terribly destructive for europe, it is hard to see that ending in giving him what he wants. nato would resist that. tom: are we at the point of negotiation now? diplomacy is us talking to ourselves and may be vladimir putin talking to himself and the guy over in china as well. is there any dialogue actually going on? angela: there is dialogue going on. we have responded to the demands and said let's talk about troop deployments in europe, let's talk about other things in which we can rebuild. let's revitalize nato and russia. the russians have responded.

there are communications going on and there is dialogue between the u.s. and russia on other issues. tom: angela stent, thank you so much. writing in foreign affairs. i cannot say enough about the s8 the putin doctrine. i thought this was great and the idea of the back-and-forth and the huge and over the daily rhetoric we see out of different capitals and particularly out of washington and the denials of russia where they are saying this is what we have said or not said. the confusion of messaging is extraordinary. lisa: the new york times report over the weekend saying russia has established about 70% of the troops they need for a full out invasion. russia says they are not going to, but talking about what the goals are. is it just they are concerned

about ukraine joining nato or is this trying to reorder the world, which is the reason people are focusing on vladimir putin meeting with xi jinping of china and prolonging a conflict until after the olympics? michael: -- tom: this goes back to our international relations and we will try to bring you a lot of competing theories. one thing we did not get to the presumption there was any form of upset. the refugee crisis would be substantial. that was in the zeitgeist this week as well. lisa: and the concern about what would happen to those people, and the market story. this idea of $150 a barrel of oil. oil might be more affected the natural gas if you take the plus out of opec-plus. tom: what we need to do is round up a data check to get radio and television on their way into the morning. read on the screen earlier.

futures update. desk -- futures up eight. the 10 year yield moving to a lower negative rate in the last 10 minutes. stay with us. this is bloomberg. ♪

yep, it's go time with wireless on the most reliable network. ok, that jump was crazy! but what's crazier? you get unlimited for just 30 bucks. nice! but mine has 5g included. wait! 5g included? yup, even these guys get it. nice ride, by the way. and the icing on the cake? saving up to 400 bucks? exactly. wait, shouldn't you be navigating? xfinity mobile. it's wireless that does it all and saves a lot. like a lot, a lot.

jonathan: looking to add to the biggest weekly gain of the year so far. your equity market up .2%. the countdown to the open starts

right now. >> everything you need to get step -- to get set for the start of u.s. trading. this is "the open" with jonathan ferro. ♪ michael: -- jonathan: we begin with the bait issue. the beginning of the end of easy money. >> we have a new regime underway. >> where at a turning point. >> monetary policy is tightening. >> we have largely priced in a more aggressive fed. >> they confirmed tapering would end on schedule in march. >> talking about five or six or seven hikes. >> the fed is further behind and they will have to catch up. >> they have a difficult