Amanda Agati - Cautiously Optimistic
This episode is brought to you by Bastiat Partners, a boutique investment banking firm.
Bastiat Partners is a new breed of investment and merchant bank that specializes primaries, secondaries, and co-investment opportunities in the private markets, catering to a unique coverage universe of 250+ family offices, VCs, and crossover hedge funds. While sector generalists, the Firm specializes in fast-growing technology and technology-enabled businesses, advising companies on primary capital raises and creating liquidity events for founders and early investors via secondary transactions. The Firm also advises fundless sponsors and GPs on co-investment opportunities. Bastiat Partners was founded nearly a decade ago by Nader Afshar, a former senior investment banker at J.P. Morgan, and is headquartered in Los Angeles.
Securities offered by Hollister Associates, LLC, Member FINRA/SIPC. Bastiat Partners and Hollister Associates, LLC are not affiliated companies.
See https://bastiatpartners.com/.
Album art photo taken by Mike Ando.
Thank you to Mathew Passy for the podcast production. You can find Mathew at @MathewPassy on Twitter or at thepodcastconsultant.com
Please leave us a rating in your favorite app store!
+ Transcript
Bill: Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to The Business Brew. I'm your host, Bill Brewster. This episode features Amanda Agati, Chief Investment Officer at PNC Financial Services Group, Amanda is responsible for the firm's overall investment strategy, portfolio and risk management functions, investment solutions, and the development and execution of investment policies for the Asset Management Group at PNC. The last number that I saw cited was that the Asset Management group had $180ish billion as of the third quarter of 2021. Amanda is overseeing quite a book of assets. This conversation is more broad than it is deep given Amanda's role. It was super fun to talk to her. I have enjoyed getting to know her and hopefully she'll come back on the pod some time.
Thrilled to be joined by Amanda Agati. It's Agati, right?
Amanda: It is. Yes.
Bill: There you go. Good. I'm glad I didn't blow that right out of the gate.
Amanda: [laughs] Me, too.
[laughter]
Bill: Yeah. That would have been a terrible way to start.
Amanda: Right.
Bill: Do you want to tell people a little bit of your background and what you do at PNC?
Amanda: Sure. I am PNC’s Chief Investment Officer. What that means is, I'm responsible for the entire investment offering for PNC’s Asset Management Business. We have about $180 billion in assets under management as of the end of the quarter, certainly subject to some market fluctuation here for sure. But in this capacity, in terms of asset management, we serve a number of different client segments. And so, we service family offices, ultra-high net worth individuals, and institutions. It really runs the gamut. I always say it takes a village to support a business of this size in terms of advice and guidance that we provide.
A lot of the functions that I'm responsible for and oversee fall into a number of different categories, including investment strategy, portfolio construction, manager research, responsible investing, dare I say, crypto falls into my world as well. I know that's a hot topic certainly these days. We have a portfolio analytics team, we have four proprietary investment teams that do individual security selection, along a few different asset classes and mandates, and then all the operational risk, legal, etc., underpinning the offering. So, it is quite a job.
Bill: Yeah, and I would imagine lately, more exciting. I don't know if exciting is a great thing or a bad thing, but it's certainly, I was thinking to myself, the 2020s had been an interesting start of the decade.
Amanda: Anything, but normal.
Bill: Yeah.
Amanda: That’s for sure. Far from it, when there's no guidebook or playbook for the experiences that we're all dealing with and that the markets are trying to wrestle with, it does make for exciting and yet, sometimes challenging times. I'm short on sleep. That's for sure as a function of these last few years.
Bill: [laughs] Yeah. Well, I think I've aged five years in two years. So, I got that going for me.
Amanda: Yeah. I always joke that I'm aging in dog years. I'm a dog person, so that that joke resonates with me that I'm definitely aging exponentially. So, I'm with you on that.
Bill: I just got a puppy.
Amanda: You did. What kind?
Amanda: A golden. She's growing very fast.
Amanda: Awesome. We got a dog just about a year ago, she's going to be a year old in two weeks. It was the best and the worst decision we ever made. We love her and she's absolutely horrible. She doesn't have a single manner at all. She's sweet, but she's literally terrible.
Bill: Yeah. Well, so, it's like Marley and me.
Amanda: Yeah, I was hoping for a little bit more well behaved like a big hairy, slobbery lapdog, if you will that will just hang out with me while I'm in here in this office doing all this work and she doesn't want any part of this room or me frankly. [laughs]
Bill: Sometimes, I'll bring my dog in while I'm recording a podcast and I don't know if you see my beautiful paper shades that separates my office from my home. Well, she started to chew those and then she likes all the cords. So, there's nothing I can do except for put her in her crate.
Amanda: Yeah, so, we're in the same boat for sure. Mine is about 110 pounds now.
Bill: Oh, wow.
Amanda: So, hopefully, your puppy isn't quite that big of a giant.
Bill: That's a legit size dog.
Amanda: [laughs] I didn't say what she was. She's actually a Great Pyrenees. It's basically living with a polar bear/tyrant.
Bill: Wow.
[laughter]
Amanda: She keeps it interesting. We do love her. I can't trash her too too much, but she has a lot of learning and manners to acquire.
Bill: Well, at 110 pounds, she can do a lot of damage, too.
Amanda: Yes, she can. We have found that out for sure.
Bill: Yeah. I will need to replace my floorboard or the baseboards in my house. They have become a chew toy, which has been fun [crosstalk]
Amanda: That’s sounds about right, yep.
Bill: Yeah.
Amanda: Yep, that sounds great.
Bill: It's a bear market and baseboards in my house.
Amanda: [laughs] There's a bull market and rawhide dog bones in our house. [laughs]
Bill: There you go. Yeah, we're on the pig ear train.
Amanda: Yeah, okay. All right.
Bill: I like the things that you sent me the good, the bad, and the ugly, and I'd love to pick your brain a little bit about how you were thinking coming into this year, how that's changed a little bit, and I know, it's a really broad question, but maybe we can talk a little bit about where we are, and I know the hot topic’s inflation and whatnot. So, I don't know, if you want to riff on some of that.
Amanda: Yeah. We entered 2022 actually feeling pretty good about the backdrop, the underlying fundamentals, the trajectory of earnings growth, the trajectory of economic growth, at least in the US for sure. Even though, valuations were elevated on a number of asset class categories, we actually felt there was still room in the cycle that we didn't need to make meaningful portfolio changes. In response to what we're seeing, we're feeling it was going to be a little bit of a Deja vu kind of a year. Not in terms of record-breaking market returns and performance like we saw in 2021, but a lot of the key themes were similar or variations on basically, the same types of themes that investors have been focused on.
Of course, all of that got turned upside down and a matter of 30 days, maybe 45 days in total, we entered the year thinking that the Fed would do maybe one to two rate hikes over the course of 2022. It was pretty casual in terms of that maybe. We knew that they were going to shift and move away from ultra-accommodative policy, of course. We knew that they were going to begin to taper the balance sheet, but the pace of change in terms of their tone and rhetoric was basically much faster, more aggressive than what we and certainly the consensus view had been. In a matter of a very short period of time, we feel the world got turned upside down as it relates to that.
In addition, we didn't have in the crystal ball forecast Russia invading Ukraine or the pressure that was going to come into the commodity complex and energy prices in particular from a risk premium perspective. It really turned into nowhere to run and nowhere to hide first quarter and we're still certainly feeling the effects of that as the market continues to wrestle with some of these big macro headwinds. I would like in it to a perfect storm of macro headwinds. Not surprising to see the market grappling with and wrestling with how to reprise this narrative as it continues to rapidly evolve here. We're thinking about five major headwinds at this point. It's global inflation sitting at-- of elevated sustained levels. I don't know what word to use to describe how elevated it actually has gotten not only for the US, but across the globe. That's obviously having a significant impact much more so than what we had anticipated coming into the new year. We have China's zero tolerance policy around COVID having really significant implications. That was not part of the playbook coming into the New Year that we were going to see that and that hasn't really disrupted global supply chains.
At the beginning of year, we actually thought that that was the key to the path forward. Getting some stabilization in supply chains that that was going to be the catalyst. If we were to get some of that settling as the global economy reopened that that was going to be the catalyst for the market to continue its rally. Here we are in the middle of May, and I don't think we've made any progress at all as it relates to supply chains, and so that's continuing to put a ton of pressure on the system at large, and certainly, inflation-related metrics. Of course, we have Russia-Ukraine, what's happening there with the energy complex, and then that pesky Fed. So, we've seen really significant multiple compression just year to date [unintelligible [00:10:39] four, five multiple points of compression when you look at forward P/Es just on the S&P 500.
Again, coming into the year, we were not banking on much in the way of valuation, multiple expansion. We really felt that was about as good as it could get in terms of valuation multiples, but the key was going to be supply chain normalization, which would drive earnings growth. Earnings growth, all else equal for all of these macro headwinds that are swirling is actually still in really good shape. Then Q1 earnings season coming in better than expected. Net-net, we think this is much more of a macro headwind, perfect storm-driven correction here and not the first leg down with that recessionary backdrop looming right near on the horizon here. We think there's still room left on the clock.
Bill: How do you think through with a-- The definition of a recession versus-- I don't know. 2021 is a hard comp. So, the absolute level of activity, you could have a recession, but still have a pretty strong fundamental economy underneath that. But I think that the word recession is a very scary word and there's just a lot of tough nuance to look through in the current picture, it feels like.
Amanda: Yeah, for sure. Tough comps relative to last year’s also an understatement. I don't know how to describe it in more of an extreme way. The fact that we are able to continue to put up positive growth, I recognize Q1 did not come in positive [chuckles] territory. From a GDP growth perspective, but our expectation for the full year is that we will still see that possibly as strong as almost two times trendline growth. I think we need to put some of this in perspective and recognize what happened in Q1 as a function of the math. When you look under the hood, the headline number never really tells you the full story, gives you the full context. When you look under the hood, I think there's a lot more there to focus on that actually matters, then that's positive.
For Q1 in particular, we saw consumer spending still being really strong. We still saw business fixed investment being very, very strong. If those two things continue to hold up, if not accelerate from here in a very seasonally, historically weak time of the year, we feel the back half of the year is going to see some more acceleration and strength that's completely underappreciated in this environment.
At the end of the day, though, the trick for investors is that we are indeed in a slowing expansion phase of this cycle. It's always hard to not get too nervous, too bearish, too conservative, too soon and miss out on potentially the last hurrah in the leg of the cycle or even in a bull market rally. We definitely think that this is another positive year of growth when you look at earnings growth, and when you look at GDP growth, and so, therefore, there is still time left on the clock. Even though, it feels scary right now with how far markets have moved down, we actually are using it opportunistically to reposition portfolios.
Bill: It's been interesting to watch. I have obviously never lived through a period like this. I don't know if anybody has, but things moved a lot faster to the upside than I thought that they would move, especially growth has certainly moved a lot further to the downside than I thought that it would move at least the speed at which it has. I think that this argument of stagflation has really taken off. As somebody that missed inflation, it's hard for me to have any credibility thinking about any of the stuff, but I'm trying to learn as I go along. I don't know. In your seat, you're looking at a lot of different things. So, how are you thinking through the persistence of inflation, and I guess, the slowing of growth at the same time, and what risks that may or may not pose?
Amanda: Yeah, I think what I would say is that usually in a rising rate environment and in a sustained inflationary environment, we see pretty significant multiple compression, not just for the S&P 500, but across the multi-asset universe. That's playing out relative to historical precedent for sure. That is definitely informing what we think the path forward can look like. We don't believe that we are entering a period of stagflation. That's not our base case. Our base case continues to be a slowing expansion, phase of the cycle with recessionary probability picking up in the second half of next year. I think the net effect of what we're looking at here is really that the underlying fundamentals are still strong, but slower on a relative basis. When we look at portfolio positioning, it doesn't pay too too much in this type of uncertain environment to be really far out on the wings. [audio cut] to be making really significant stylistic or tactical bets.
What we've been doing with portfolios is reducing some of those over and underweight positions, getting closer to more of the strategic baseline. It's important to stay really diversified given how volatile the backdrop is and the fact that there wasn't really anywhere to hide, especially in Q1, we had stocks down and bonds down at the same time. It's not unusual that both of those asset class categories would be down. What's unusual is the magnitude of the decline that both are in effectively correction territory, if not more severe than that. We are searching for some semblance of balance in portfolios and the usual suspects that you would rely on fixed income being an insurance policy in the portfolio. It's not necessarily what it has been historically. We're effectively at the end of a 40-year bull market in fixed income. And so, perhaps, it's not entirely surprising to see some of this pain as this regime starts to shift here. But I think it's really important to stay fairly well diversified across the multi-asset universe and not take really significant bets in this environment.
When we start to get a little bit more clarity or at least, when some of those macro headwinds start to subside, I think the volatility backdrop will also start to settle in. We have effectively been in a high volatility regime since the onset of the pandemic. But last year, investors got really conditioned. I know I certainly did, too. Volatility only moving up. The market just kept going up, and up, and up. We all got conditioned to, “Well, we're not going to see any meaningful swings. It's all to the upside.” I think when you look at the S&P 500, the biggest decline last year was only about 5% and it was really short-lived. It was only a few days. Of course, it's been the polar opposite experience. This year and I think what's even notable, this year is that everybody thinks high volatility, “Oh, stock market.” But actually, volatility has been much more pronounced on the fixed income side. The move index, which is the comparable index for fixed income to what we see with the VIX on the stock market side is actually sitting higher than March 2020 levels.
Bill: Wow.
Amanda: I think that's probably not-- It's surprising that we have that much volatility in fixed income. But when you think about it, perhaps, not quite as surprising given how volatile the path for Fed policy, Fed messaging, market-driven interest rates, the whole host of issues that the fixed income markets have had to deal with this year. And then, of course, recessionary fears on top of it. I think that's probably-- I'm giving you a lot of different aspects and trying to answer your question here. But I think that's one of the most notable things this year and why investors are freaked out a bit more than perhaps what we've seen in past corrections, because they don't have that balance and protection on the fixed income side and stability that they're used to.
Bill: Yeah. Do you happen to know, is there an average duration in the move index?
Amanda: I'd have to go back and look. I don't know exactly what it is.
Bill: I've been thinking a lot about the saying is in a real correction all correlations go to one. I've spent a lot of time thinking about that. It makes sense because everything is competing for capital all the time. If the opportunity cost of holding one thing is increasing relative to the other, then it would make sense that people would sell it to buy the other and it would create this cascading effect if there's net outflows on average. I guess, at the same time, theoretically, credit risk would probably be increasing in aggregate. So, it makes sense.
Amanda: It does make sense. Yeah, the question is, what's everybody buying right now? Because not many things have been spared as a function of the carnage in the market on a year to day basis. So, cash isn't really a friend right now. [laughs]
Bill: Right. The only thing that it seems is in a real bull market, well, commodities and the US dollar.
Amanda: I guess, maybe, but I'm not convinced that the underlying fundamentals in the commodity complex are sustainable, I think it's totally a function of the geopolitical tensions that we're seeing. If by chance, we get a ceasefire, we get some resolution there and not our base case, but if we do, I think that backdrop changes very quickly. I think the profitability and the margin expansion there is very fleeting. And so, I would definitely be buyer beware, in terms of chasing that right now.
Bill: The commodity people, I think would say that the supply response is going to take a long time, but I have never heard a commodity pitch that says a lot of supply is coming on soon. It's almost like by definition, if you are bullish, that’s what you're going to say.
Amanda: I don't know where the supply is coming from. It doesn't seem anybody has any real appetite to turn on the spigot really quickly. You're not going to get a lot of policy support out of Washington anytime soon, either. We thought coming into this year-- To get back to your earlier question about outlook coming in, we actually thought that things were going to be pretty tight in energy markets coming into this year, just because supply has been pretty constrained, OPEC plus has seemingly been able to get their act together, meeting after meeting, which is not the norm. It's more like the exception, but from a production agreement standpoint, they're pretty well set there.
Then a lot of interest, obviously, in alternative related energies, but nowhere near able to take over in terms of the lead or take the batons in terms of production and energy source there. We figured coming into this year prices were going to be elevated, but never did we think we would see 110 WTI as a function of geopolitical tension. It does seem, though, for what it's worth, in the short run, it does seem the energy producers have definitely gotten some religion as it relates to return on capital, and profitability, and all that. But I do worry about how lasting that ultimately is.
Bill: Yeah. Well, that's interesting that you have-- It sounds your bias was towards supply not growing and yet, you still are reluctant to think that it's the commodity complex will continue to run in the long-term, if-- [crosstalk]
Amanda: Yeah, we were definitely and I think still are of the opinion in general that traditional fossil fuel usage, oil, whatever you want to describe it is in secular decline. Yeah, that's forming the opinion around supplies being constrained. At the end of the day, though, we're in a very different place, because the world is awash in supply. It's just a question of whether we want to actually produce it and get it out of the ground. The onset, I mean, this is not new news, but the onset of the discoveries around fracking and North American shale completely changes the dynamic. We just need the will to actually produce it in fairly rapid fashion to make any meaningful difference in terms of offsets here. I'm just skeptical that in the very short run we'll be able to move the needle.
I think to the extent that this stays in place for a fairly significant amount of time, I think we'll start to see some evolution there and some movement towards more production. But I just think it's not as easy as flipping a switch. It should be because I think, last I checked the breakeven for North American shale was somewhere in the neighborhood of 55 bucks a barrel. There's definitely room from a profitability perspective to turn that spigot on. But again, it's so hard to do this when you have geopolitical event or have it be event driven as opposed to true demand growth. I don't think demand has really even returned to pre-pandemic levels. And so, I understand the complexity and the challenge with and I think I'm just skeptical ultimately that we actually turn the spigot on and can meaningfully move the difference in the short run.
Bill: Yeah, it doesn't help that I don't think capital providers are particularly interested in funding a lot of fracking at least. I don't know. The last time that happened, it didn't work out so well for a lot of people.
Amanda: Mo, it didn't. No.
Bill: Yeah. It's funny, because I've-- It's not funny. It was a silly mistake on my part, but I've read like what marathons written on capital cycle theory, and here I just missed it, and it was right under my nose, but whatever. It won't be the first or last thing I missed. There will be plenty more. How do you keep all of this in your head? You cover an immense amount of breadth, right? So, how do you do this?
Amanda: It's definitely a challenge. I drink a lot of coffee [laughs] and I definitely do not sleep very much as I think my dark circles can probably show here. It's a lack of sleep and definitely allergies given the time of year here that we're recording. But seriously, though, it is a lot to capture. We're responsible for coverage, insight, actionable points of view across the multi-AXA universe, so that's public equities, public fixed income, and alternatives. It's important for me to have the perspective given all of what we need to do to support and advise our clients. At the end of the day, I have a really strong team behind me. I'm not a one woman show. So, trusting in the team, and their significant depth of experience, and expertise certainly is a key component of this job as well.
Bill: What was your career path like? You've ascended quite high.
Amanda: I guess, I have.
Bill: Yes.
Amanda: I don't spend that much time thinking about it. I'll give you the long and winding road to the career path. I'm a Penn Stater. I graduated from Penn State with a degree in finance and a minor in economics and math, nerd alert. [laughs] I started in investment banking, realized that there was way more to life than the grueling nature of being in investment banking. That is there was no life doing that. That was right around 2001 just to date myself to remember.
Bill: Oh, wow. That's an interesting time to start.
Amanda: A very interesting time. Indeed.
Bill: What did you cover?
Amanda: I was basically a generalist, but we were doing a lot of M&A related activity at the time.
Bill: A lot of pitchbooks.
Amanda: A lot of pitchbooks, a lot of financial models. So, a lot of good training.
Bill: Yeah.
Amanda: I'll put the positive spin on that it was a lot of good training for the balance of my career so far. But I finally realized that there was more to life than investment banking. I shifted gears into equity research. Again, as a generalist, that's a hallmark of my career having my hands on a lot of different things, and not getting really, really deep, and specialized in one specific thing. I think it wasn't a calculated decision, but it ultimately prepared me well for future jobs. I spent a lot of time in equity research on the buyside, picking stocks for individuals, as well as mutual fund strategies. Then was a portfolio manager for a little while, and a lot of time and investment strategy, and then ultimately, I shifted into this role last year when my predecessor retired.
Bill: That’s cool.
Amanda: That's been a whirlwind tour through all things, investment management.
Bill: I came to this through, basically, studying some Buffett and now that I actually understand what he was saying, realizing how much I don't understand about what I used to think I understood. But I think if I could criticize my view of the world, it's a little too equity centric.
Bill: Oh, me, too. Me, too.
Bill: Yeah?
Amanda: Center of the universe is all things equities. Yeah.
Bill: Sometimes, I wonder, if that's because I think from first principles, it's the right way to be or if it's because I'm a product of a 40-year bull market in especially US equities. It's been a hell of a run.
Amanda: It sure has. Yeah. Probably some combination of both, I would say.
Bill: Yeah. I went to Markel which is an insurance company. I was interviewing-- I did a panel there. It's hard for me not to quality equity over the long-term. It's just hard for me to buy that that's not a place to generate wealth. But then I have some macro friends and they're like, “How do you like equities right now?” I don't have a great answer for them, especially what's going on.
Amanda: I like them better than I did at the beginning of the year. Does that count? [laughs]
Bill: That does count. That counts a lot. [chuckles]
Amanda: Given the dislocations that we've seen and the really sharp reset, but no real breakdown in the underlying fundamentals. I have to say that I like them better here. I think there are pockets of opportunity, even though it doesn't feel anything was really spared. I'm with you. I think large cap dividend growth in particular is very well positioned in this environment. I'm going to stick my neck out and say that I think quality growth in general, growth at a reasonable price is also very well positioned. I'm going to go and say, “Growth is the new value from that perspective,” because I think there's a lot of defensiveness in those business models and strong underlying fundamentals.
I think there're a lot of investors that are putting their eggs in the value basket, but there're some real structural issues that are sitting in the value side of the equation. They haven't really fully recovered from the issues that were brought on by the pandemic. I feel that's an area where you have to turn it upside down a little bit and say, “Really, growth in this environment?” But I think as growth starts to get more scarce as we're in the slowing expansion phase of the cycle and as we get this valuation reset, I think investors are going to slowly start to turn to paying up for growth. I think it's getting very well positioned here. I wouldn't be backing up the truck into QQQ [chuckles] or the NASDAQ-100 just yet. I think there's still potentially a bit more pain ahead there. But some of these other areas, I think you have to start fishing around and I think there's potentially some business models there on sale.
Bill: I'm just asking more theoretically, when would you think about the QQQ or whatever is interesting? I guess what I'm really thinking about in my head is, when growth hits a pocket, there's such a difference between how growth investors look at investing and value investors look at investing, that the rerating, I mean, we're seeing it in all these growth stocks. There does not seem to be a bid. I think some of it is funds liquidating, I think some of it is just risk off, but there's definitely a fundamental point that makes sense to start buying. I'd argue it exists in some places right now, but I'd be interested to hear how you've got much more experienced than I do.
Amanda: I'm not sure I have a great answer for you other than to me it seems this just systematic rerating. The discount rate is moving up as a function of what the Fed is doing. Therefore, those future cashflows from those growth companies are worth less. I'm not sure that that formula necessarily holds given the environment that we find ourselves in. I think there's some truth to that and I think there's also some truth to valuations getting really overextended, if not crazy, overextended in some areas of the aggressive growth spectrum here. I don't know. I guess maybe I'm an idealist. I think there's still runway left in the cycle.
As I said before, even with the slowing expansion phase, growth is still positive. Just for the S&P 500, earnings growth for this year is still expected to be 10% or more and that's a pretty strong result. Even in a non-pandemic year, all else equal. Forget about the tough comps and everything. That's a strong result and that is just not being appreciated currently in this environment. I think sentiment is just in the dumpster. Sentiment is just basically back to the worst of the levels at the onset of the pandemic. And so, I'm not sure that what's happening is fully rational. I think this is the next phase, this is what the Fed is going to do, so we're just going to throw the baby out with the bath water.
Bill: Yeah, it's funny. There's a quote that somebody said, he goes by on Skelly Cap on Twitter. He said, he had a PM that once said that when-- “Basically, in bull markets, everybody's time horizon is years and years and years and in a bear market, the time horizon comes tomorrow.”
Amanda: Yep. [chuckles] That's exactly what we are certainly feeling and experiencing in conversations with clients, for sure. Yep. It's an amazing shift in terms of perspective and horizon when that happens.
Bill: Yeah. So, how do you talk to clients about that and coach them through, “Hey these are long duration assets and thinking long is the answer here?”
Amanda: It's hard to get them to think opportunistically. Because everybody's like, “Well, nothing was protective.” There was no ballast in my portfolio like, “Why shouldn't I just pull the plug here?” I think what we try to do is come back to the goal and objective for the pool of capital that we're managing to not losing sight of the long-term goal and objective. What it would mean to pull the plug now? Miss out on potentially this sharp significant rally to the extent some of these macro headwinds start to fade here. But we also come back to our investment process.
A disciplined repeatable investment process is really our guiding light and our guiding principle in terms of gauging that path forward. I think we felt really strongly that we're seeing one or more legs of that investment process stool starting to falter. We'd be telling a very different story, but our process is very much focused on the technicals, the valuation backdrop, and business cycle related analysis. There's no one silver bullet. We're not hanging our hat on one particular type of analysis. You really have to have all three are working in concert to get the right context and picture for the path forward.
While the technicals piece is definitely flashing a lot of red and a lot of pain, the other two components are suggesting still runway left, still positivity, still strong underlying fundamentals, still time left on the clock. The technical piece is the thing that moves the most volatile of the whole process. That's what you want from a signaling effect. But we don't see structural impairments starting to ripple into the rest of the process based on the indicators that we're looking at. We, even though, it's been very painful and it's been a shock to the system for investors based on what we've seen this year, we keep trying to come back to what is the process telling us and the process is still telling us that there's time left.
Bill: Yeah. I've struggled. I don't mean to make this about me, but I feel I've been six months behind or well maybe six months are a little bit too punitive, but at least a month behind. I keep looking for the data to crack because the market is clearly saying that the data will crack. But the data seems-- I look at Treasury receipts. My buddy, Bill got me looking at this. If you look at tax receipts, the amount of tax receipts that are coming from wages and withholding taxes right now, it's crazy. When you comp it to 2019, it's incredible and I guess if somebody wanted to make a hyperinflationary argument, they'd say, “Well, yeah, that's because labor is tight. So, they're going to make more. So, things are going to cost more” and you get into the spiral. But it seems to me with real estate prices doing what they did, which is what like two years of 20 plus appreciation or something like that. Stepping in and slowing this down seems to be a very healthy process. I don't know. This seems cathartic in a way, but it certainly doesn't feel great.
Amanda: [laughs] It doesn't feel good mostly because I think we've overdone it in terms of the correction here. There's no question that we need to move back from ultra-accommodative policy, and stimulus, and liquidity being injected into the system. At some point, this economy, this ecosystem, whatever you want to call, it has to stand on its own two proverbial legs. I'm all in on the idea of walking back from ultra-accommodation. But I think we need to be very careful about how far we go. Because the thing that keeps me up at night more than anything else and believe me there're a lot of things keep me up at night as an investor, especially-
Bill: [laughs]
Amanda: -in this role, is the Fed fighting a battle that it can't actually win.
Bill: Yeah.
Amanda: The Fed is used to fighting this battle in a very hot overheating economy. I don't think that that's where we are. We're already in a slowing expansion phase of growth.
Bill: Yeah.
Amanda: When I think about the exogenous forces that are driving up inflation, is the Fed raising rates going to do anything to energy production like we talked about earlier? Well, no. Is the Fed going to raise rates and that have any impact on Russia-Ukraine? Obviously, not. Is it going to have any impact on COVID situation and the zero-tolerance policy that China's put into effect? No. Is it going to fix supply chains? No. It might slow down some demand to take a little bit of pressure off supply chains, but I think the Fed can only do so much with the tools in the toolbox. I don't know whether the Fed feels it's fighting credibility issue or making up for lost time because they're behind the curve, but I do worry that the Fed just goes so aggressively here that it ultimately breaks the cycle. In the reality, it isn't actually all that effective and tamping it down. I think they can do their part and I think if they keep going here, we can certainly end the year in a better place, a more manageable place from an inflationary backdrop. But I think there needs to be this recognition and realization that some of these other forces need to settle and that will make a big difference in terms of the inflationary backdrop. I want them to do a little bit more, but I don't want them to go as far as what maybe the market is pricing for.
Bill: Yeah.
Amanda: I think there's a big disconnect in terms of what they need to do versus what they should do here. That's the key. If we could get some real clarity on what they're actually going to do, I think it would make all the difference for the backdrop. A perfect example of this was a couple of days ago, we had polar opposite views in the same trading day from multiple Fed governors. We had master saying, “We got to go 75 to 100 basis points, it's got to be intermeeting, we need to do this now.” And then, we had Waller and Williams, Doves at the other end basically saying, “25 makes sense. Let's be data dependent. Let's recognize these other forces.” What's the market to do when you have that kind of volatility in a narrative coming out of the same organization in one day? We need to get to a one house view from the Fed and it just feels we're nowhere near that yet.
Bill: Yeah, it's an interesting tension between the dual mandate of pursuing full employment and tamping down inflation given what you're saying. There's an episode coming out, J. Mintzmyer, by the time this airs, it will have come out. But he covers shipping and his point is, “When you get these kinks in the shipping channels, when China shuts down basically, a city, even if the ports are functioning, the drivers can't really get to the boats.” Any type of blockage like that sends rates historically through the roof, because it's a price times volume equation. When the volume gets-- You take that much marginal capacity out, price goes through the roof. I think it's every-- I mean I shouldn't say everywhere. That's a broad statement. But it's a lot of different places.
Amanda: It’s pervasive.
Bill: Yes.
Amanda: Yeah.
Bill: That's right.
Amanda: It absolutely is. Mm-hmm.
Bill: I don't know how you slow that down without potentially breaking something more important. At the same time, I have a mother, she works hard to provide for herself and she's really, really scared about food and gas. I don't know. I feel for that group of people. I don't know what the answer is. Perhaps, targeted relief, but then you maybe create more inflationary pressures. I don't know.
Amanda: Yeah, I'm not sure I have a silver bullet answer either. I think, at the end of the day, this is what happens when you shut the lights off on the global economy and then you try to turn the lights back on. We haven't really experienced this. We don't have a guidebook or a playbook for how to do this in an efficient way. I think turning that light switch on has been a lot harder than people anticipated it. It's even to this rush for demand all at once. Demand hasn't normalized, but we're all rushing for the same things, because we haven't been able to spend on them for the better part of two years. If we could even just get a little bit of stability and normalization out of consumer spending behavior. I think it's more a function of the pandemic and the lockdowns than an overheating economy. We went from zero activity to full on and then some activity to try and catch up for last time. I think that dynamic is just really underappreciated here. I think we're being way too quick to try and shut this off when there're other forces at play here. I think everybody has a role to play, I guess, is what I'm saying. I'm not sure that the Fed can solve it alone.
Bill: Yeah. Well, another buddy said, “Try to book a plane ticket for this summer. And then tell me what you think." There's a couple of weddings he was going to and he was like, “They could double the price of the plane tickets and I'm going to those weddings. I've waited to party with my friends for two straight years. There's nothing that you can do that's going to stop me from going.” Every single travel and entertainment company is saying, ”We've never seen anything like this.”
Amanda: But it's pent-up demand, right?
Bill: Yeah.
Amanda: It's two years of not being able to go anywhere or do anything of any real consequence. Consumer balance sheets, being in the best shape maybe they've ever been. We keep talking $2 trillion sitting on consumer balance sheets. What I think is interesting is, we're effectively in a slight expansion phase, we're in later innings of the cycle. I don't know about you, but I have investor whiplash from it, record breaking cycle market collapse, followed by record breaking opening here, and we're already talking about a recession. I think there's just this flood of activity, this race to catch up for lost time here. I don't think this is just really emblematic of a true cycle. I don't think you can really compare this to patch cycles and say, “Oh, yeah, this is exactly what we should do.” There're a lot of variables here that just aren't being taken into consideration.
Bill: Do you think that some of the worry, specifically of inflation, I guess, when I was talking to my buddy from the macro firm, he said, “One of the issues that the Fed really has to fight is that historically, central banks have lost credibility over inflation fights.” It puts the Fed in a real predicament because they have to break inflation. I just wonder how much of our perception of reality is driven by the fear of that combined with-- I'm not blaming it on social media, but I just wonder how much is amplified by that dynamic and then you get prices confirming things. I'm a proponent of price drives narrative. I don't know. Have you ever seen anything like this before?
Amanda: No. This is the most challenging backdrop. I've seen certainly, in my career and trying to analyze it, navigate it, make decisions about what the path forward is going to look like is really challenging. The crystal ball that's sitting behind me, I don’t think you can see it behind me-
Bill: I do. I like that one.
Amanda: -is definitely hazy as it relates-
Bill: [laughs]
Amanda: -how to frame the path forward. I go on record all the time as complaining about the Fed. I am inherently fighting the Fed. But in this situation, I actually feel I'm the Fed’s friend. So, go figure, I’m taking a little bit of a contrarian view that they need to do their part, but success doesn't necessarily mean getting to that 2% long run target here in the very short run. It's more like progress is considered success, because of all these exogenous forces. If Russia-Ukraine went away tomorrow, if China's zero tolerance policy went away tomorrow, so supply chains could normalize, I think those things would make a huge difference in terms of the backdrop and normalizing what inflation looks like for this environment. I'm not saying it's going to be too. I think the Fed still has to do its part. Nothing about the backdrop settling is enough to call off the Fed, but I think the Fed could make some meaningful headway absent some of these forces.
Our expectation is that the Fed is going to keep chipping away at it. But the thing, as I said earlier, that keeps me up at night is that they're absolutely fighting this credibility battle and they're just going to keep going for it to try and make up for lost time. That's where I think we end up in a really significant problem. I'm in the Fed’s friend at the moment as long as they go at a somewhat more measured pace than what perhaps some of the more hawkish views at the Fed are suggesting right now.
Bill: Why are you on record often as criticizing the Fed?
Amanda: [laughs] Because I'm always like, “Why are they doing this? What on earth--?” Especially, back in 2018, when the Fed went on autopilot and started tightening there, I was like, “They don't need to do anything here.” We don't need that tighter Fed policy. That's not the key to the path forward. There were other forces at play at that time. Tariffs, concerns around free trade and all policy changes that were come in the equation that were freaking everybody out, that's a technical term for investors freaking them out.
Bill: Yes. They do that a lot.
Amanda: Yeah. [laughs] I was like, “This is not the time for the Fed to step in.” They should stay silent, they should stay out of it. That's not the problem here. Inevitably, I'm just critical of whatever decision that they're making. I'm laughing about it because it's just one of those things where it's an easy target, right?
Bill: Yeah.
Amanda: It doesn't mean that I have better information, or more information, or know any better. It's an easy target to make judgment calls against. But this is notable in terms of me trying to support what they're doing and just recognizing that they're not going to be successful alone in this.
Bill: Yeah. I think the other thing that's complicating the issue is just the political backdrop of some of the promises that have been made on the fiscal side. I don't even say that it's not a judgmental I agree or disagree. I just think that it's objectively what I missed is the level of stimulus relative to the size of our economy and what that was going to mean. I was so conditioned to see velocity not increased, despite my perception of money supply increasing. It was fairly obvious in retrospect to see if you're actually giving people money, they're going to spend it, and then velocity increases in inflation, but I don't know how that all plays out going forward. If I did, then we'd be having a different conversation, right? [laughs]
Amanda: We sure would be. I wish I had an answer for you. I don't know either, but I think it's all coming home to roost simultaneously. It's that flipping of the light switch as opposed to a gradual ramp. It was a shot in the arm like pun intended, liquidity coming into the system, stimulus checks, all in one shot, and a couple of doses, and a booster on top of it to just play off of the pandemic and all of that. I think we're just seeing it play out all at once. We're not even fully reopened, but as the economy has largely reopened, it's just this mad rush all at once. I think we need to work off some of that pent-up demand to actually see some normalization. I don't think we need to have the Fed put the brakes on necessarily just yet. We need to see some of these other things stabilize first.
Bill: Yeah, and going back to your previous point, it's crazy that a lot of the world is opening and then we've got a major part of the world that is shut down completely, trying to be the zero COVID policy, that is complicating.
Amanda: Absolutely. I think the big takeaway for me is, we put all of our proverbial eggs in one supply chain basket. [chuckles] When you have a Black Swan Event once in a hundred-year pandemic, you're not battle tested for what happens in that regard. We did see some supply chain movements early on, the low hanging fruit moved to parts of Southeastern Asia, but it was small. Key beneficiary places like Vietnam, but we haven't really been able to fully diversify. To the extent that we're seeing this lockdown again here in 2022, it's having really significant impact. I think it is going to catalyze a multiyear movement of supply chains, CapEx investment to relocate supply chains to other parts of the world to diversify. But again, you can't flip a switch and do this overnight. We're seeing it with chip manufacturers in particular, just such an epicenter of pain was 70% of manufacturing and two companies in two countries. We have to diversify. We have to be better prepared when things like this happen. Maybe, I'll call it a positive in terms of a positive outcome as it relates to this that business investment CapEx will be catalyzed as a function of this. So, I think with a lag to fact that will be another important shot in the arm for economic growth longer term.
Bill: Yeah. When I hear that, I think, “Okay, well that could put additional pressure on commodities,” because you're going to need to build things with CapEx and that could put additional inflationary pressures, because presumably to the extent that it's on shored, I guess, it probably goes to Mexico more than locally. But I don't know if it's domestic in the US, but that inflation would actually be associated with true growth.
Amanda: Job creation, true growth?
Bill: Yeah, which could maybe not be the worst thing in the world. I don't know.
Amanda: I think it would be a positive. I'm counting it as a positive. Maybe that's my internal optimism coming out here, but I think that would be a really strong positive. We don't think everything is going to come back to North America or the US in particular, but those things that are absolutely critical inputs, especially healthcare related. We want to make sure that we have an appropriate level of inventory and supply chain management that we can control our own destiny around. Clearly, just in time inventory did not work when you have a Black Swan Event of this sort.
Rethinking that in addition to supply chain management, I think is really important. I think it's going to be a multiyear phenomenon in terms of investment spend, because it takes so much time to put up a new chip manufacturing facility and all that. So, it's not going to fix it in the short run. That's not the silver bullet answer here. But I do think that will be a multiyear theme that investors can get excited about.
Bill: To what extent do you do you think about private valuations in the context of public valuations have moved around so much, right? The nice thing I make a joke a lot I say, “My private valuations haven't come down at all.”
Amanda: [laughs]
Bill: So, that's the ballast of the portfolio. [laughs]
Amanda: They haven’t marked to market, have they?
Bill: No.
Amanda: Yeah? That's a suitable replacement for fixed income. That's for sure.
[laughter]
Bill: Yeah, just close your eyes and mark to model works, right?
Amanda: Yeah.
Bill: But how have you seen the shift in behavior to private investing? I don't know. I've opened my mind to the idea that behaviorally there may be some validity to the idea that-- I've heard the idea of an illiquidity premium, I used to laugh it off. I actually think it's maybe not the dumbest concept in the world.
Amanda: No. We are strong believers in that illiquidity premium for sure. It moves around a lot, no matter whether it's private equity, or private credit, or private real estate. It's not the same premium. It's not one size fits all. But we actually were spending a lot of time talking with our clients around this idea towards the end of last year of moving from pretty elevated public equity valuations into private markets. Nothing was cheap. I'm not sure that anything with the exception of a few opportunistic ideas here are like table pounding cheap. Even with the reset that we've had, more reasonable, I think is the way to describe it. But we do think there's still a lot of runway in private markets. Whereas it feels maybe the cycle is a bit shorter on the public equity side, we think there's still runway left in private markets.
Really, private markets are the epitome of active management. We think that value that active managers and active strategies can provide, especially in this environment are really, really valuable. We still think that there's a lot of opportunity in private markets really across the spectrum. We're talking with clients about making those moves in a thoughtful way. You don't want to put all of your exposure into one particular vintage year one strategy. It takes time to build out private markets related allocation. But we think the timing has been pretty good to think about shifting from public to private, we think that will continue. We came into the year thinking that that was going to be a pretty significant theme and I think from flows perspective, that's borne out. I think that will continue.
Bill: The only thing that I personally thought about that is then there's a liquidity drag that I have to manage on the other side. But that's cognitive error, because it's not as if you should buy an equity thinking, “Oh, well, I could just sell it tomorrow.” Because by definition, it's a long-dated asset and then you get yourself an asset liability mismatch, potentially. So, I don't know. I've got a lot of brain problems that I try to mitigate. I can't help it.
Amanda: [laughs] I think you're doing a good job mitigating them. Yeah. [laughs]
Bill: Well, I don't know. You should see what it's internally. The amount that comes out, I block twice as much it goes on in my head. It never stops.
Amanda: Well, can you imagine how I'm feeling right about now? [laughs]
Bill: No.
Amanda: We're covering the waterfront of topics here.
Bill: I know.
Amanda: Internal wheels are spinning at turbo speed. [laughs]
Bill: I haven't even gotten to crypto yet.
Amanda: No, you haven't.
Bill: What do you think of that?
Amanda: Well, despite it being springtime here in the Philly area, we're definitely in a crypto winter.
Bill: Yes.
Amanda: That’s for sure.
Bill: A Lunar winter, see what I did there? [laughs]
Amanda: Blizzard, maybe. I don't know. Antarctica, something like that.
[laughter]
Amanda: Yeah, it's definitely been a challenging time for crypto in general. Maybe, if I just step back and talk about it conceptually, where we're focused on or where we're interested, that'd be good. We actually are really excited about the underlying technology and the innovation that might be borne out of blockchain technology and the cryptocurrency industry at large. There's no question that crypto is by far the most volatile asset or asset of assets on the planet. It's definitely gone through its share boom and bust cycles. But when you're talking about multi-trillion dollars here wrapped up in this industry, it's hard to ignore it.
I think the key message that we've been sharing with our clients is, you have to know what type of exposure you're getting yourself into. Because I think at last check, there were somewhere in the neighborhood like 13,000 coins. They all do different things. They all have different use cases, and business models, and networks, and all of that. If you don't really have a good sense of what you're getting yourself into, I think it's hard to frame the investable opportunity set. Is it a replacement for gold, is it digital gold, is it a new method of payment system, is it a stable coin, is it a proxy for a central bank digital currency? All of them have very different ranges of outcomes and investment opportunity sets or in the case of stable coins, not really an investment opportunity set at all, by definition.
I think what's interesting about it is that it's really the next wave of innovation after effectively an innovation drought. The last business cycle was so long, and so slow, and so sluggish. Below trendline growth, not much in the way of productivity enhancements. What's interesting is, we have this new innovation here, just because I had a fancy camera on my iPhone last cycle, it didn't mean that much In terms of productivity enhancements. There were pockets of it. I shouldn't make a wild generalization, but I'm doing it anyway. There were definitely pockets of innovation. But in general, it wasn't enough to drive a step function change in the trajectory of growth. It is still very, very early innings for blockchain.
The regulatory backdrop, I could spend the rest of our time together talking through. It's so uncertain. Lot of headwinds building on the regulatory front. Who ultimately will win out or ultimately govern all things crypto? But we really think that the use cases that are ultimately born out of blockchain technology are the interesting areas for our investors to get exposed to. The challenge right now is that it's very hard to access. Many of these use cases or new business models, they're mostly private markets, venture capital. It's maybe even tied up in some LP hedge fund type of strategies. That's I think why you're seeing all this fixation around the coin, specifically, it's the way to access in some capacity, maybe not directly, but in some capacity this next wave of innovation.
Broader retail investors clamoring into it, trying to get access to something that in past cycles might have been just only reserved for more sophisticated or bigger capital pools in private markets. There's a number of dynamics there. We're in wait and see mode a little bit in terms of how the regulatory backdrop plays out here. But really excited about use cases as it relates to the technology itself.
Bill: It's interesting. I don't know anything for real about crypto. I just know enough that I watch. But it reminds me a lot of 98, 99. I know something big is going to come out of it or well, I don't know, but I will not be shocked if something very big comes out of it. In the future, I just think we're a little bit early and the speculative fervor was super high. 2000s crash did not disprove the thesis that what was going on would change the world, right?
Amanda: Right.
Bill: I think that there's a nonzero probability that what's going on right now will also change the world. I just don't know how.
Amanda: I agree. I think ultimately, it has the ability to revolutionize a lot of traditional processes, payment methods, services, etc. At the heart of it, I think that's the objective. That's the motivation for many of these different types of networks and coins. We'll see. I'm with you. It's very early. There's going to be a lot of volatility around this. If done in a thoughtful way, I think it does have the potential to really revolutionize some of the more traditional approaches and processes across the economy, across the ecosystem, across the landscape. So, I'm definitely an optimist and favorably disposed to the future of crypto.
Bill: Something that you said is that we were coming out of a recovery that was characterized by low productivity growth. Am I wrong in thinking that some of that productivity growth? Well, I guess, I would be. I associated with tech like growing so much, but I must be blocking myself. I'm just wondering if in three to four years, we're back to this sluggish growth like what we came into the pandemic is what we end up out of the pandemic, but it's just going to take a while to get there.
Amanda: It's possible. But you would think that additional technology investments would drive productivity enhancement.
Bill: Yeah. Except we're all on Instagram.
Amanda: [laughs] Exactly. Or, I'm taking selfies on my fancy camera and distracting myself from all of what's going on. [laughs]
Bill: Yeah.
Amanda: Yeah.
Bill: It's interesting how the camera created so much value and yet didn't create any value at the same time.
Amanda: [laughs] And that zero is that what it is? I don't know.
Bill: Well, I'll tell you, I like being able to share videos and stuff. I think the joy factor went up with the camera, but the amount of value that it captured from a monetary perspective, I think is quite a bit higher than the value to society. But then again, I don't know. Society values. So, what do I know? I'm just talking in circles at this point.
Amanda: [laughs] I don't know. I don't know.
Bill: Yeah. Well, how else are you going to take pictures of what your dog destroys in your house and then share that on Instagram?
Amanda: That's true or when she digs in a giant mud puddle in the backyard after it's been raining for three days here, and then goes from a pure white dog to completely chocolate brown.
Bill: Right.
Amanda: She definitely is on my Twitter feed- [laughs]
Bill: Yeah.
Amanda: -having done that. So, yeah.
Bill: So, she's white. Mine's white, too. I got one of these creamers.
Amanda: Okay. So, mine literally is the polar bear. She is pure white.
Bill: That's awesome.
Amanda: Yeah.
Bill: Until they dig in dirt.
Amanda: Until. Yeah.
Bill: Yesterday, my kids, they get the hose, and they're on this trampoline, and the water below the trampoline created mud that the dog found, and that created real problems for me.
Amanda: [laughs]
Bill: Because-- [crosstalk]
Amanda: You have a dog washing station, maybe?
Bill: No, we don't.
Amanda: No?
Bill: But I think we're building a house and I think we're going to have that. But I had just come back from a work trip and my wife told the kids, she said, “I'm going to take a nap. Your dad's in charge.” She comes down, chaos.
Amanda: [laughs]
Bill: it was not good for me.
Amanda: Oh, so, you're in the doghouse, then.
Bill: Correct.
Amanda: Is that it? [laughs]
Bill: Correct. Yes, indeed I am. I was at a bank and I got to ask you this question. What would you attribute your success in your career to? it's not the easiest place to continue to climb the ladder and you've navigated it.
Amanda: It is definitely not. Well, I've navigated to some degree, I guess. I don't know. I think there's still opportunities ahead. But clearly, I would say that I have worked really hard to get to where I am today. I think I don't want to underestimate how much that contributed to it, but I think in an organization of our size, fifth largest bank in the country now, you have to have strong advocates, 360 around you, supporting you. It's not just from the top down. I think that's really important. I've had people in high places advocating for me for sure over the course of my career. But I think the best scenario is, when you have people below you, and next to you, and above you that are all cheering for you, and all advocating on your behalf.
I'd like to think that the work alone stands for itself and that's the thing that catalyzes whatever the next opportunity is. But I've learned over time that it's much more about the relationships that you build in terms of how you can get to whatever objective you're looking for. The work has to be there. It has to speak for itself, but the relationship aspect of the business is really important, too. So, I'm very grateful to have had a number of strong colleagues and mentors around me helping pave the way.
Bill: Yeah, you deserved it and I know it because you talked about the people below you being your advocate, too. I think that is often an overlooked insight. I wasn't there for long, maybe five or six years or so, but some of the people that I think how they treated people below them probably put a ceiling on their career that could have been much higher, but not having the advocates among the people that worked for them, I think probably hurt. So, that's very insightful.
Amanda: I do think it makes a big difference. I can't say that it was necessarily well calculated on my part. It's just me being me and I think inherently I'm more of a servant-leader type of person, and just wired that way, and that translates-- that goes a long way in terms of getting buy in from the people that work with you and around you. I do think that makes a big difference. Everybody focuses on the business as being a relationship business and talking about clients and building relationships with prospects. I think the internal relationship building is also really important if not even more so. I think that's really been my key to success over time.
Bill: Well, my takeaway is that you are wicked smart, you're fun to talk to, you're an optimist, and you treat people well. So, that seems to be a pretty good combination to me at least.
Amanda: my goodness. Thank you. I can't ask for a stronger bullet point list than that. So, thank you.
Bill: Yeah. Well, I've enjoyed interacting with you on Twitter. I'm really glad. I forget exactly how we got talking or whatever. But I was like, “Hey, do you want to come on?” I'm glad that we did this. I hope that you had a decent time and-- [crosstalk]
Amanda: It was great.
Bill: All right.
Amanda: We’ve covered the waterfront and I hope that we get to do it again soon.
Bill: Well, you're welcome to come on anytime, but you have to deal with my cockamamie brain whenever you come on. That's the only caveat. [laughs]
Amanda: Same. I think we're kindred spirits that way. So, it works well.
[laughter]
Bill: All right. It sounds good. Well, thanks again for your time and I appreciate it.
Amanda: Thank you. Me, too.