i'm sara eisen with carl quintanilla. we are live on the floor of the new york stock exchain. setting the agenda, former managing pimco director paul

mccully. why he is fighting with the market over the fed for now. maxine waters is with us as congressional hearings on the collapse of silicon valley bank kick off today. later, two takes on the consumer, the ceos of both mccormick and tapestry join us this hour. as for the market day, relatively muted. dow is basically flat. s&p having trouble getting above 4k. got some tier 2 ecodata. yesterday was the tightest s&p range and lightest volume we've had since the banking crisis began. in a way, it's a bit of a pause that's refreshing, in a sense. >> because the back drop is, two straight weeks of gains for stocks, led by technology, the s&p growth value hit the highest rate since october because treasury yields plunged on the view that the fed is going to be cutting sooner rather than later and will be cutting interest rates. now we see if the market feels confident about that situation. the latest economic data we've

gotten is kind of inconclusive. we did get the march numbers on consumer confidence. better than expected. if you look around, there are signs of disinflation popping up everywhere. >> certainly the home price data we got today. although, the january print looking month-on-month declines. that conference board number was taken before the banking crisis reached its pinnacle. >> that's the bank. >> we'll see how much was relevant. let's look at the wide gap we're seeing between the fed and the market when it comes to rate expectations. blackrock, as you may know, siding with the fed saying they see a more nuanced phase of cushing inflation but no rate cuts. rbc starting with the market, maintaining their call for two cuts in the second half of the year, even amid all this uncertainty. our next guest siding with the market on that debate. that is, as sara said, former pickco chief economist paul mccully. good to have you back. >> good morning, carl.

>> we've had a few days to digest last week's decision. there was some debate about whether it was a dovish hike or not. what is your view on that? >> i think it was a dovish hike. i don't think there was any reason to do the hike. it was gratuitous hike, but it was dovish because chair powell recognized that effectively back on march 10th, we got a disinflationary shock. a profound disinflationary shock, that will feed through tightening of credit conditions for main street, not just wall street, through the impact on the banking system. so, essentially i think the fed's in a situation right now that the consequence of their hair on fire tightening campaign on the banking system actually is going to produce the extra disinflationary dividend. >> right. do you think the next move is, in fact, a cut? if it is, what are they going to

point to justify it? >> yes. i think it will be a cut. and i think they can point to the stress in the banking system and the fact it's a disinflationary impulse. i think they can also point to the fact that inflation is coming down. the fed has basically said, we got the goods side, we got the housing side. the last thing is services. so, essentially, i think they can declare victory that disinflation is in train, even though it's not as fast as they would like because of this new shock that's disinflationary to the banking system. >> i think they recognize, paul, that it's disinflationary to the banking system, harmful to the economy. we heard as much from powell. the thing he and nobody really knows is what the magnitude of that is. how painful is this banking

shock going to be to the economy overall? so, how can we make a call about the fed making its next move cutting without knowing that? >> i think it's absolutely true, we don't know the order of magnitude. there's a huge amount of uncertainty, as fed chair powell has pounded the table about. what we do know unambiguously is the direction. and the direction of the impact of the banking shock on inflation is down. so, therefore, if you are accelerating what has been a sticky downward path, then i think that gives you the justification for not only stopping but easing, particularly in the context of the fact that an inverted yield curve itself is deflationary to the banking system. >> but, paul, isn't that further complicated by the fact that the european central bank doesn't appear to be done raising

interest rates? they've still got a pretty crazy inflation situation there and a single mandate. bank of england, we'll see if they pause. but you think the fed should start cutting all by itself? isn't that going to make exchange rates go crazy? >> it could make exchange rates volatile. but the bottom line is the fed is the custodian of the global reserve currency. it doesn't have to follow other people. other people have to follow the fed. >> those out there, i'm looking at jpmorgan last night, the average cpi rate is running a full tenth ahead of the average from q4. is that not a cause for concern? do we think it's going to reverse? >> i think that would probably be a cause for concern if we didn't have the banking system shock because we would be looking at way to the right of the decimal point on this disinflationary process. but quite frankly, right now,

what's going on in the financial system, as a consequence of the dramatic tightening episode, which inverted the curve, is more important than a tick one way or the other on monthly core or super core cpi. >> do you have a view as to what the entire banking episode is equivalent to in hikes? that's been a fun parlor game the last few days. >> yeah, it has been a fun parlor game. i don't know. i don't think anybody else knows. what we do know, and this is where i really come down strong, we know the direction that whatever interest rate forecast you thought was necessary to deal with the inflation problem before the shock is lower now than it was then. whether or not it's 50 basis points or 150 basis points, i

don't know. we know the direction. and good forward-looking monetary policy will look at the direction of the shock as opposed to naval gazing about a tick one way or the other on the cpi. >> i mean, that's the key point, right, which is they need to be forward-looking and not backward-looking and they need to be anticipatory and they need to not stay too long too high because they can make things a lot worse. we haven't really gotten into the inflation -- i mean, the unemployment question. the jobs numbers have not turned in a negative way. i do wonder if you expect that to happen, or need to see that happen before you're predicting fed cuts? >> i expect to see it happen. i don't think it needs to happen, but i do think it will happen because employment is very much a lagging indicator so you shock the system and it works through the system.

so, i see a slowdown in growth. some loosening of the labor market. but i don't think that's the critical motive, if you will, for declaring the end of the tightening cycle and preparing the market and the rhetoric for the beginning of an easing cycle. so, yes, i think there will be pain on main street. how quickly it unfolds, i don't know. and i don't think that's the critical variable in the fed's decision-making matrix. >> that's going to be weird to have the jobs number out, i think, as the markets close on good friday, right, sara? >> yeah. markets close on good friday. >> paul, it's going to be fascinating. got another week to wait for that one. it's good to talk to you, as always. >> good to see you. >> you too, paul. coming up on the show, congressional hearings into the collapse of silicon valley bank currently under way in washington in the senate. house takes it up tomorrow.

maxine waters' leadership there and that leadership joins us next. we're taking a look at cruise stocks. carnival, second best performer in the s&p 500. this is a delayed reaction to earnings yesterday. remember the ceo on this show telling us that bookings have hit record level even as prices continue to rise. something he's seeing into march and exects top

let's get to our chart of the day. apollo showing consumer inflation expectations are falling pretty quickly. the one-year expected inflation rate heading back towards 4%. the three-year rate nearing 2.5%. that's close to the fed's two-point goal. giving the fed more reason to turn dovish, according -- we were just talking to paul mcculley as what they would use as rhetorical ammo for cut. >> it's been notable. there are other areas, you can look at the baltic dry shipping index, shipping rates have come down sharply. hearing comments from management and ceo how prices aren't going up to the same extent. look at oil prices. they have come down big. they were in the 60s last week. come back a little bit this week. they're still signalling lower

inflation. oil's been a proxy for inflation, gas prices. if you look at where the marketplaces inflation, energy stocks, material stocks have been weak in the past few weeks. the market is telling you this disinflation story is happening. the point is, is the fed going to look at it? >> pretty good stuff out of the new york fed as well, asking respondents about home price expectations. the expectation now is 2.6 in a year. that was a 7% number not too long ago. it's actually the lowest number for the new york fed survey since '14 when the survey began. >> there's also evidence the wage component is coming down as well, which is something we know the fed was worried about earlier on this inflation-fighting journey, the wage price spiral thing. if wages come down, that would be the key for not having to see the unemployment rate go up too high to a painful spot for the federal reserve to stop. >> we'll keep an eye on that. of course, we'll get claims later in the week.

coming up next, representative and ranking member, maxine waters on tomorrow's house hearing into the collapse of silicon valley bank. the senate hearing is going on right now. first, though, check out shares first, though, check out shares of you founded your kayak company because you love the ocean- not spreadsheets. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire

the senate banking hearing following the collapse of silicon valley bank and signature bank currently under way. michael barr among those testifying. he's calling the collapse, quote, a textbook case of miss management. the barr appearing alongside the fdic treasury and nellie liang. the three will also be testifying in front of the house financial services committee tomorrow and the ranking member of that committee joins us now on a first on cnbc interview. california congresswoman maxine

waters. congresswoman, welcome back to the show. it's good have you. >> thank you. delighted to be with you. >> my first question is, where is gary beckert? did you call on the ceo of svb? aren't there questions about why he he sold stock? >> i'm sure we'll have an opportunity to do that, but our first hearing is going to be with our regulators. we want to know what happened at the fed, did they pay attention? we want, of course, to have the treasury involved and fdic. first let me just say, the reason for getting them not only do they have the responsibility for the kind of oversight that, of course, could prevent these kind of collapses, but they did a fantastic job in a short period of time when they came together and they made the decisions within hours that they

would insure the uninsured that they would make sure there wasn't a run on our small banks and that it would not be contagious. we want them to come in to talk about what they know happened and what they did in order to make sure that there was not a catastrophe with a run on our banks, so we have them first. >> are you looking particularly at the fed when you're wondering whether there was a failure in oversight here? >> of course, we're going to see what the fed knew, if there were red flags, were they influenced by senate legislation, s2155. of course we'll be asking very tough questions of the fed. >> isn't your view that out of this, there will be some sort of rewrite of regulation? to address what happened here and prevent -- >> absolutely, absolutely.

>> what are you thinking, regional bank specific? >> well, s2155 had a lot to do with the regional banks. you know, moving them from, you know, the kind of oversight to 250 rather than the $50 billion that was in dodd/frank. so, yes, we're going to be looking at all of that. and there will be legislation, i guarantee you. >> legislation saying what? >> well, of course, i'm not going to try and toll you all of the legislation we will be producing, but i assure you there will be legislation that ensures what all we learn about why there was a collapse at silicon valley bank, why there was a collapse over at signature, and what's going wrong with republic. we're going to look at all of this. there will be legislation to ensure that they're

stress-testing, that some of what was done to overturn dodd/frank will be corrected. we'll be looking at everything. >> we did have you on a couple of weeks ago and we were talking about blanket fdic insurance across all deposits. i think at the time you said everything was on the table. speaker mccarthy this morning on our air argued that maybe that's not necessary. do you think we move past that moment? >> well, let me just say this. i don't know what speaker mccarthy knows about these banking issues, but i'm paying attention to the secretary of the treasury, who has not yet come to the conclusion about how insurance for those that are uninsured will be done. and so, we have a lot to unfold here. we have a lot to pay attention to. and we will follow some of what is being said to us, when she says it, from yellen, who is the secretary of the treasury and the fdic, and we'll come to some

conclusion. i don't have the answers about how the uninsured will be treated at this point. >> you know, when you were saying there will be regulation, i guarantee it, it reminded me of a quote we heard lately from patrick mchenry, chair of the house financial services committee, you can't regulate competence. if this was an issue of competence and mismanagement, why should -- why should you have to regulate the entire sector? >> well, i'm not sure that your conclusion is the right one. of course, i know that there were some concerns about risk. i do know that the silicon valley bank was the go-to bank for startups because startups were not able to get, you know, loans from traditional banks in the same way. i do know that some of the

treasuries, backed by the united states government, had lost their value, so there are a lot of things to look at here. so, it is not as if why have you got to regulate the whole industry because of mismanagement. it's really not that simple. it's a lot more complicated than that. >> have you heard from constituents, congresswoman, who have talked about being nervous about their deposits or even been attracted by the difference in returns when they switch into a money market? are you hearing that at a retail level? >> no, i'm not hearing that a lot. i do know that this president did a fantastic job working with the fed and with the treasury, with fdic, in calming and giving the confidence to the people that are needed in this country, that the banking system is safe. there was not a run on the banks because they eliminated that

possibility in the way that they straightened out this would have been crisis. so, no, i'm not hearing about people pulling out their money and putting it into stocks at this point. i'm not hearing that. >> what do you say to some of the republicans on the other side who have blamed the failure of this bank and some of the ignorance around risk management around some of the company's priorities when they call it woke issues like climate and diversity and, you know, a lot of people pointing to the diverse board and saying, see, it's not always necessarily a good thing, the fact it was a huge distraction that led this bank astray? >> oh, i think that's just a made-up excuse to try to blame democrats. they got too political with it. it is not a diverse board. there's only one black, african american, however you want to describe it, on the board, one lgbtq, that's it. that's not some blanket

diversity. so, that doesn't make good sense. i think it's easy to turn this into a political argument. it's all about, are we going to regulate in a way that keeps the investors and depositors safe, or are we going to always have to fight deregulation? and will those on the opposite side of the aisle, for the most part, carry the arguments for deregulation? for those who were in support of 2155, they should be looking at what they did to support deregulation. i am out as ranking member of the financial services committee to make sure our banking is safe and sound and that we do not have the kind of deregulation that will get them into trouble. >> just to be clear, there's been a lot of analysis about even if they hadn't rolled back the 2018 dodd/frank stress test rules for the regional banks, that this wouldn't have been

caught. that's not necessarily what the stress test looks at here. >> well, let me just say that i do know that silicon valley bank did not have a chief in charge of risk management. that's a problem. certainly, that's the kind of problem that we have to make sure that the regulators know and understand because they're keeping watch on what is going on. so, we have to make sure that we have the kind of stress testing that is needed in order to avoid a mistake. that's -- that's something i know we have to take care of. >> congresswoman, thank you very much. stay close. we'll be watching the testimony in the hearing tomorrow. congresswoman maxine waters. >> thank you very much. let's get a news update with our bertha coombs. hey, bertha. >> hey, carl. grim news at this hour. at least 39 people were killed in a fire that broke out at a migrant center in mexico near the u.s. border.

29 more have been taken to the hospital with serious injuries. the fire was started by up on the -- occupants in protest of their pending deportation. nashville police have released surveillance footage from yesterday's school shooting. the video shows 28-year-old shooting through the glass doors to gain entry. the city's chief police said the shooter may have had some resentment for having to attend the covenant school. meantime, the tragedy has rocked the local community. residents holding several vigils last night to grieve the loss of the six victims who have been identified as three 9-year-old students and three adult employees in their 60s, including the head of the school, a school custodian and a substitute teacher. and the world health organization is now recommending high-risk groups receive an additional covid-19 vaccine 12 months after their last booster.

it will be one of those things that we'll be

(funky electronic music) (narrator) invest in. believe in. move in.

grow in. build in. thrive in. all in north carolina. ranked america's top state for business. (funky electronic music) (narrator) breathe in. jump in. strap in. live in. join in. thrive in. if you're all in, it's all in north carolina. ranked america's top state for business.

clarm gruenberg, what about you, do you agree with president biden that we need to strengthen our banking rules? >> i do agree, senator. >> good. and now undersecretary liang, do you agree with the president on this? >> senator, i agree that we do need to prevent these types of bank failures. >> well, i'm asking you -- of course we need to prevent them, but -- >> and supervision -- >> but that's not by simply wishing it. it's by stronger regulation, is that right? >> i agree, senator. >> okay, good. we need better laws here in congress, but let's also talk about how we can strengthen the rules today, even before congress acts. under current law, the federal reserve has the discretion to apply stronger prudential

standards on banks with assets between $100 billion and $250 billion. exactly the size of silicon valley bank. that authority is not being used right now. vice chair barr, will you use your authority to strengthen rules for the largest banks in this country? as you use your authority to strengthen the rules for the largest banks in this country, will you be reaching banks with assets of at least $100 million -- $100 billion? >> senator, we, of course, would need to go through a notice and comment rule-making -- >> i understand. >> -- in this process, but i anticipate the need to strengthen capital and liquidity for banks over $100 million. >> this is the area we're going to look at. we're going to push further down in terms of the greater scrutiny. chairman gruenberg, let me turn to you. once the fed began torching rule

after rule in 2018 for big banks, the fdic under your predecessor joined in on the fun and also started weakening fdic rules across the board. capital and liquidity requirements, stress tests, you name it. in fact, your predecessor explicitly told these banks that if fdic bank examiners were asking too many questions that they should, quote, let us know, end quote. there's a banking regulator who makes it clear that she's there to serve the big banks instead of the american public. chairman gruenberg, will you commit to using your authority to undue the rollbacks your predecessor initiated and strengthen the rules and supervision for banks with greater than $100 billion in assets? >> senator, i think you know i was a member of the board at

that time. >> i do. >> and voted against those measures. i certainly think it's appropriate for us to go back and review those actions in light of the recent episode and consider what changes should be -- >> i have to say, review sounds a little wishy here. you didn't think they were good rules to begin with. >> my views haven't changed, senator. >> all right. so you still think they were a bad idea? >> i do. >> got it. each of you at this table has authority that you could exercise right now to strengthen rules for big banks and to ensure that our banking system and our economy are safer. i urge you to use that authority and i urge my colleagues here in congress to do our part to protect american families and small businesses from yet another banking crisis. thank you. >> thank you. >> if you would allow me to

speak to the tragedy that occurred at the covenant school in nashville, tennessee, yesterday. >> q&a from senator elizabeth warren there, back and forth with the fed's vice chair of supervision, michael barr. basically getting all the regulators, the fdic, the treasury and the fed to agree that regulation is needed. and he agreed he was against the rollbacks of some of the rules around dodd/frank for some of these banks. and it sounds like the consensus there is more needs to be done and they have to go back and look at some of those rollbacks and see if they need to put them back on. it's not clear what it solved. >> i was going to say, it's not just positive this would not have happened in the first place, maybe an aggravating factor but necessarily a cure-all if that bill had not passed. >> that's her issue, being tough on the banks. we expected that. doesn't sound like she got many challenges from the regulators. it will be interesting if she gets a chance to question bank

executives that lobbied for that. we'll continue to monitor that senate banking hearing with the financial regulaors on the collapse of svb and signature. look at mccormick, a top gainer in the s&p 500 after delivering an earnings beat in the first quarter, reporting record sales and reaffirming guidance for the year ahead. rebounding from a miss across the board last quarter. join us on an cnbc exclusive interview, mccormick ceo. great to have you back on the show. >> thanks for having me today. >> i think wall street viewed this quarter as a big sigh of relief when it came to pricing and sales growth you saw. how do you frame what happened here and the reaction, which is very positive? >> well, we're really pleased with the results, obviously. it is only the first quarter of the year, but it does give us confidence in our outlook for the whole year. we had solid growth across our consumer and flavored solution

segment. we made great progress on cost containment. i think analysts are as excited as we were and investors are reacting to the incredible innovation we've got coming up the rest of the year. >> but the growth that you mention, wasn't it all pricing? volumes didn't grow. >> volumes actually didn't grow during that time, but, you know, we're still lapping some pretty big impacts from a year ago that weigh on the volumes. a year ago we still had omicron in the u.s. and europe. we exited russia, so we're lapping that. and one of our biggest markets outside the u.s. is china, which, of course, was in lockdown or having an epidemic during that time. so, you know, these are really strong results. and i say that the strength of volume, at the same time we did have significant pricing action, really shows price elasticity

isn't a major factor for us. >> which we've heard over and over again from the consumer staples and the consumer companies at the same too many. and yet we're wondering as consumer when food inflation comes down. are you still raising prices? what is your outlook on that? >> our cost inputs go up, we have to pass that on. for mccormick, i think one of the things that was good news for investors on the call was that for the most part, we've got our pricing for this year done. you know, most of our pricing is in place. and we're able to have much more productive conversations with our customers about growth opportunities around our innovation program and around promotional activity and that sort of thing. >> it's been fascinating. sara gets to the question of how much price you can take when volumes are negative.

is there like a -- is there an industry standard as to how far volumes need to fall before a producer or manufacturer backs off on price? >> well, you know, i think you're looking at it from the wrong direction. i think a lot of this conversation around price is, frankly, overblown. you know, the price of everything seems to be going up all around us. and the price for mccormick spices is actually pretty modest compared to other factors that might be going into the consumer's consumption basket. we actually see ourselves as part of the solution to the inflation problem that consumers face. i mean, it literally only takes pennies a serving to bring great taste to a meal. that creates 90% enjoyment of the meal. >> i agree. hot sauce, i can put it on everything. >> everything's -- everything's better with a little bit of

cinnamon. >> i totally agree with that. so, what are you seeing on trends like cooking and eating at home? because everybody expected this to fall off a cliff when the economy reopened. it hasn't. it stayed high. and now they're worried about the economy and i wonder if you're seeing even more people cooking? >> there's been a long-term trend for cooking at home. millenials and gen zers prefer cooking at home, they see it as more healthy, an outlet for creativity, a chance for flavor exploration. there's going to be pressure on the consumers' pocketbook. one of the first things to go, frankly, is expensive dining out. eating at home is much more economical. so, we tend to do well whether times are good or times are hard. the consumer wants great flavor, a long-term trends are in our favor. and i think that the outlook for, you know, the consumer is

still being resilient and still cooking at home is pretty positive. >> it's been interesting. you know, we sort of look at various companies' pricing strategies in various buckets. on the one hand, you have, for example, a pepsi who earlier in the year said, we think we've taken as much price as we're going to for 2023. nestle is the opposite example where they continue to plow ahead. it sounds like you're more in the nestle camp? >> no, just in the opposite. i would say we're more in the pepsi camp. we've got, i would say, 80% of the pricing we need to do this year done. in our conversations with consumers -- sorry, with our customers are really now about innovation. we've got a great array of new products coming to market. we're doing a complete relaunch of our red cap, our everyday spice line that is really our biggest change to that product

range in 40 years. and the conversation around value with consumers is really just that. it's around value. you know, are we providing the best aroma, the best quality, the best taste, you know, that consumers can get? are we giving them value size options? we offer products at every price point so that we touch every consumer wherever their needs are and whatever their economic situation is. >> well, lawrence, good day for you and the stock, which is up at the top of the market right now. seeing some new highs on mondolese and other staples. thanks. >> thanks for having me. >> a great interview. i want to show you shares of affirm this morning. the stock is hitting some session lows. bouncing back just a touch after apple now announces it will launch apple pay later, allowing users to split purchases into four payments with zero interest

and no fees. another player in the now crowded buy now/pay later space. interesting. users can track, manage and repay their loans in one convenient location, apple says, in apple wallet. users can apply loans of 50 to $1,000. >> before the multiple collapse of these companies, when everybody was getting into buy now, pay later and affirm got hit by every competitor. we'll be interesting to see if it serves them well when giants like apple come into the space with similar offerings. the dow is up 79 points or so. we're sort of accelerating. boeing, chevron, mcdonald's contributing most. - psst! susan! with paycom, employees do their own payroll. - what's paycom? a magic payroll genie? - it's a payroll app. - payroll is way too complicated for the average person. - paycom guides them through it. missing or duplicate punches, pending expenses,

unapproved pto, on and on. - why would employees wanna do all that? - this could be a stretch, but i think it's 'cause they wanna get paid correctly. i like getting paid correctly.

i screwed up. mhm. i got us t-mobile home internet. now cell phone users have priority over us. and your marriage survived that? you can almost feel the drag when people walk by with their phones. oh i can't hear you... you're froze-- ladies, please! you put it on airplane mode when you pass our house. i was trying to work. we're workin' it too. yeah! work it girl! woo! i want to hear you say it out loud. well, i could switch us to xfinity. those smiles. that's why i do what i do. that and the paycheck.

barclays out with a new note looking at high-end consumer spending, luxury. turns out they may be shelling out less with spending on goods there down 8% year over year. one company yet to see the slowdown is tapestry. the retailer behind brands like kate spade, stuart weitzman has rallied. i spoke exclusively at the shop talk conference in vegas to the ceo about the recent uncertainty in the economy and how tapestry

is changing to the consumer. >> there's been a lot of change. the consumer is moving tremendously quickly. you can go back to, you know, how they shop, right, and, you know, when we closed all of our stores, consumers obviously had to go online, so digital became much more important, a touchpoint for your brand. we were making sure we are investing and making sure those brands and those touchpoints were meaningful and were creative and that the customer could experience the brands in really authentic ways in digital. of course, stores reopened, you know, some of the covid restrictions relaxed and customers came back to our stores, which we loved because we have tremendous -- we have a fleet of almost 1,500 stores globally. and we have great and passionate associates who really bring our brands to life for our consumers. so, consumers have changed both in how they shop and also what they value with a brand. >> you have also relied less on

promotions and tried to elevate the brand successfully. you've seen some pricing power. but now with inventories elevated and the macro economic environment weakening, do those promotions come back? >> well, we're disciplined operators. promotions are part of the landscape. always have been and likely always will be. the context in the market around you, competitors will do different things. we've really been intentional about being disciplined and running our business in the way we want to run our business. we've invested in brand-building to make sure we could sustain pricing power for our brands, both now and over the long term. and it is very important for us to maintain those disciplines. and i think we saw it in the last holiday period where inventories in the space and apparel and accessories were elevated and people were promoting, but we maintained discipline so we could continue to drive higher aur, continue to keep our brands positioned well with the consumer.

we drove higher aur, average retail sales, higher gross margin and higher profit dollars even in the space of a slowing or more difficult environment overall. >> what sort of indications do you look for that would worry you about that luxury consumer? because the stock market's been bumpy. the housing stock market has b, the housing market has been bumpy and we wonder how long it can hold up. >> we're reading the signals every day. one of the things i'm grateful for, not only have we invested behind our brands but our business model is 90% direct to consumer. so we see trends in the business as they're happening, and it allows us to be agile in chips as we see consumer trends changing. we talked about how and where consumers shop and being able to react and being agile but also the kinds of products they're looking for have gone from social occasions to casual to back to social to maybe a more

mix. as we have investments in data and technology, we can read those trends and pivot and move with the consumer. so we're always reading the trends in the marketplace. we're taking a disciplined approach how we think about the business so we can manage inventories and protect our brands. we see tremendous growth long term for our brands, and we don't want to do anything in the current environment that would diminish our opportunities long term. we're reading and reacting to the consumer. >> i want to ask you about china. you are heavily exposed especially with coach. what have you seen since they've opened up? >> the chinese market is a dynamic market and we're privileged to be there. we've been there for two decades. with the coach brand and that is a consumer that has proven over time to be incredibly resilient and we have seen that through covid. they bounce back incredibly strong after the first wave of covid.

we learned how to engage consumers from the way that consumer behaved coming out of covid. certainly we saw the market impacted more by covid restrictions and some of the covid issues they experienced. since that time we've come into the year with restrictions being lifted, we've seen the consumer come back and engage in stores and online. as of the chinese new year, our business was positive, and we expect for the third quarter that our business in china will grow and for the full year we'll see growth in the market. >> you're one of a number of american companies investing in china and betting big on china. is it a harder decision to make given the geopolitical tensions and the relationship between the u.s. and china have gone from bad to worse? >> we're obviously monitoring,

as we do with all the places around the world where we have business, we monitor the environment. but our focus is on the consumer. what we see from the consumer is a consumer that values our brand and value what our brands represent in the market. we see a tremendous amount of runway in the market. even through the last quarter, even through the pandemic our brands were some of the top brands with coach in their respective categories. we see the consumer still valuing what we're bringing to the market. we have local collaborations and local relevance so as we remain focused on the chinese consumer, we see tremendous runways. we think it will provide runway long term. >> our thanks to the ceo of tapestry, brands behind coach,

stewart weisman and kate spade. the question on china is what you hear from consumer ceos, i would think from mcdonald's to starbucks to nike to coach. that is despite the political noise and tensions and the questions about the economy, they're focused on the consumer and they're still very bullish. and they're still very bullish. >> we're still waiting for - in the last two years, we quadrupled our team and the pace we're growing, i couldn't keep up without ziprecruiter. they do the legwork and they get my job posting in front of the right candidates. i love invite to apply. i instantly see great candidates and i can invite them to apply. we have hired across all departments, engineering, marketing, hardware, field techs. you can basically tell ziprecruiter who you need, when you need it, and they deliver. - [narrator] ziprecruiter. rated the number one hiring site. try it for free at ziprecruiter.com try it for free at ziprecruiter.com

shares of baba soaring after announcing plans for the six-way split days after jack ma returned to china and the country tried to show it's pro business. dee bosa joins us with more. china is making that pro-business stance clear in a number of ways and it comes after years of, you could argue, the opposite. you mentioned alibaba announcing it will split its empire into six different businesses laying the groundwork for future spinoffs and ipos. this is a very investor friendly

move. you can see it is sending shares up nearly 12% today, also one i'm hearing was beijing driven. remember the baba shares crushed in recent years by the anti-monopoly measures and jack ma has been a persona non grata. decentralizing power of the company coincides with jack ma's return after more than a year. there are going to be six units. the domestic e-commerce platform, the digital media and cloud, the unit seen as a major growth opportunity which current ceo will head up. morgan stanley says this is a big deal catalyst. $530 billion for the whole thing. other signs of a business, we'll call it a term offensive. ceo tim cooke was there meeting on the reopening.

and there was a meeting with the ceo. business relationships are affected through things like the chips export ban. you were talking about this in your interview with the tapestry ceo and beijing is hoping it will ramp up even further. >> it's funny. >> after years of looking unfriendly to business this is a 180 by beijing. remember, too, they can take golden shares and have in

companies like alibaba and that gives the can't government direct power to do things like veto and other things. absolutely beijing is in control. >> i think it applies to tiktok as well. >> remarkable to see their movement on geo politics, with russia, the saudis and, of course, now the business push. a relatively stable day. the vix hovering right above 20. over to the judge, post 9 and "the half." carl, thank you very much. welcome to "the halftime report." i'm scott wapner. front and center this hour, buy it or fade it? we are talking about the tech run that's been nothing short of stunning but has it run out of steam? the investment committee debate that go question. joining me josh brown, liz young here at post 9 along with jim lebenthal. we'll show what you is going on today. the nasdaq has been in the red today. the dow still holding on to a