More stories

  • in

    NCAA and ESPN ink 8-year, $920 million media rights deal

    ESPN and the NCAA have signed a new media rights agreement that runs from 2024 to 2032.
    The deal is roughly triple the value of the current deal.
    The agreement will provide more exposure and revenue to women’s sports.

    An ESPN GameDay logo is displayed at the Capital One Orange Bowl game between the Georgia Bulldogs and the Florida State Seminoles at the Hard Rock Stadium in Miami Gardens, Florida, on Dec. 30, 2023.
    Peter Joneleit | Icon Sportswire | Getty Images

    The NCAA and ESPN have reached a new eight-year media rights deal worth more than $115 million annually, as the value of sports media rights reaches new heights.
    The new agreement carries an annual value of roughly three times the current 14-year deal, which pays about $40 million annually.

    An NCAA spokesperson confirmed an additional 25%, or $28.75 million annually, will help with production and marketing costs.
    “ESPN and the NCAA have enjoyed a strong and collaborative relationship for more than four decades, and we are thrilled that it will continue as part of this new, long-term agreement,” said ESPN Chairman Jimmy Pitaro.
    The new deal is effective Sept. 1 and runs through 2032. It will include the rights to 40 NCAA championships — 21 women’s and 19 men’s events — as well as exclusive championship coverage of all rounds for women’s basketball, women’s volleyball, women’s gymnastics, softball, baseball and FCS football. It also provides international rights to the 40 championships and the Division I men’s basketball championship.
    “Having one, multi-platform home to showcase our championships provides additional growth potential along with a greater experience for the viewer and our student-athletes,” NCAA President Charlie Baker said in a statement.
    As the sports media landscape changes, women’s sports have been a bright spot, as they notch record ratings in recent years. ESPN has benefited through its airing of the NCAA women’s basketball tournament and the WNBA playoffs, among other sports.

    Endeavor’s IMG and WME Sports, who consulted for the NCAA on the deal, say about 57% of the value of the deal is tied to women’s college basketball specifically, Baker told the Associated Press.
    The NCAA said the dramatic increase in the value of the NCAA’s media rights will allow it to explore revenue distribution units for the women’s basketball tournament, a topic the organization began discussing last year.
    Last year, complaints of inequality overshadowed the women’s tournament as several players posted on social media that their facilities were significantly worse than the men’s facilities.
    “Concurrent with the terms of the new media rights, several enhancements to student-athlete benefits across all three NCAA divisions will take effect, and this deal will help fund those important programs. And the national, integrated platform the family of ESPN networks provides will help grow the visibility of many NCAA sports, particularly for our women student-athletes,” said Linda Livingstone, chair of the NCAA Board of Governors and Baylor University president.
    ESPN and the NCAA’s relationship has lasted more than 45 years, since ESPN launched in 1979.
    The NBA has the next major professional sports rights up for grabs. The league is in negotiations with a plethora of interested parties as it looks to make its decision before the current deal expires following the 2024-25 season.Don’t miss these stories from CNBC PRO: More

  • in

    Ford reports 7.1% increase in U.S. new vehicle sales as industry marks best year since 2019

    Ford Motor reported sales of nearly 2 million vehicles in 2023, a 7.1% increase from the previous year.
    But its sales increase is lower than the overall industry’s growth.
    Ford’s F-Series continued to top the charts as America’s best-selling vehicle.

    2024 Ford F-150 PowerBoost Platinum hybrid

    DETROIT – Ford Motor’s U.S. sales increased about 7% last year, marking the automaker’s best sales since 2020 but coming in lower than the overall industry’s growth.
    Ford on Thursday reported sales of nearly 2 million vehicles in 2023, a 7.1% increase from the previous year. The company finished third in overall U.S. sales, trailing Toyota Motor and General Motors.

    Ford’s overall 2023 sales are lower than the industry’s sales growth, which auto data firm Motor Intelligence reports topped 15.6 million last year — marking a 12.3% increase from 2022 and the segment’s best performance since more than 17 million vehicles in 2019.
    “In a year of challenges, from a labor strike to supply issues, our amazing lineup of gas, electric and hybrid vehicles and our fantastic dealers delivered solid growth and momentum. We have the products that customers want,” Ford CEO Jim Farley said in a release.
    Electric vehicle sales came in at 72,608 for the year, up 18% from 2022 and boosted by nearly 26,000 EVs sold during the fourth quarter. Ford said sales of its electric F-150 Lightning pickup — which saw price adjustments earlier this week — were up 74% during the fourth quarter. Sales of the Mustang Mach-E notched the best annual tally since the vehicle launched in 2021, the company said.
    Electrified vehicles, including hybrids and EVs, represented only about 10% of Ford’s overall sales in 2023.
    Hybrid sales were up 25% during the full year over 2022 and up 55% in the fourth quarter.

    For the 47th year in a row, Ford F-Series was America’s best-selling truck and America’s best-selling vehicle for the 42nd year in a row. Sales topped 750,000 units last year, up about 15% compared to the previous year.
    Don’t miss these stories from CNBC PRO:

    Correction: This story has been updated to correct that Ford Motor’s 2023 sales were the automaker’s best since 2020. More

  • in

    Peloton partners with TikTok to offer short-form fitness classes, other content

    Peloton is partnering with TikTok to bring short-form fitness videos and other content to the social media channel.
    The partnership comes as Peloton looks to attract a wider array of customers and boost subscribers amid falling sales and profits.
    In May, Peloton rebranded as a fitness company “for all,” and is still working to get that message out to the public.

    Peloton has launched a partnership with TikTok.
    Courtesy of: Peloton

    Peloton launched a partnership with TikTok on Thursday as part of its strategy to change its public perception and attract a broader array of customers as sales and profits fall. 
    The partnership will create a new fitness hub on the social media platform dubbed “#TikTokFitness Powered by Peloton.” It will feature short-form fitness videos, longer live classes, content from Peloton’s instructors and collaborations with TikTok creators. 

    Shares of Peloton rose about 10% in pre-market trading after the news was announced.
    It comes about six months after Peloton rebranded itself as a fitness company “for all” and launched a tiered pricing strategy for its app. The changes were designed to position Peloton as more than just a bike company and bring in new customers who may not have been able to afford its pricey connected fitness equipment but could be interested in a monthly subscription for its content. 
    “On the one hand, there’s a longer-term goal around changing perceptions around who Peloton is for to multiple different types of audiences and I think one of the real strengths of TikTok … is that it increasingly reaches everyone, including the younger audience,” Oli Snoddy, Peloton’s vice president of consumer marketing, told CNBC in an interview. In the short term, the partnership will seek to build on what Peloton says has been a successful relaunch by boosting metrics such as app downloads and conversions, said Snoddy. 
    During the Covid-19 pandemic, Peloton became a Wall Street darling after gyms shuttered and consumers flocked to buy its stationary bikes and at-home treadmills. But demand plummeted when the virus receded and consumers returned to normalcy. 
    In the three months that ended Sept. 30, Peloton lost 30,000 members and revenue fell to $595.5 million, down from $757.9 million three years earlier at the height of the pandemic. 

    Peloton CEO Barry McCarthy, who replaced the company’s co-founder John Foley in February 2022, has been working to rightsize the business and set it up for long-term growth and profitability. He has focused on boosting Peloton’s subscriber count and opening up new pathways to owning Peloton equipment by offering a rental service and refurbished options. 
    While the initiatives are showing early signs of progress, Peloton still isn’t making money off the members that it has, making partnerships with companies such as TikTok and Lululemon critical to its long-term success. 
    “We have over a billion users across the globe of all demographics,” Sofia Hernandez, TikTok’s global head of business marketing, told CNBC. “People from 16 to 60 are on the platform and when I think about [Peloton’s] campaign of ‘anyone and anywhere,’ there’s not a better place to reach that level of audience we have, that level of a diverse audience.” 
    Hernandez noted that the partnership will go beyond workout videos and will include “behind the scenes” videos such as “get ready with me” clips and other fitness-adjacent content that gives people on TikTok an inside look into Peloton and its instructors. At first, the content will feature well-known instructors such as Cody Rigsby and Ally Love, but the partnership also hopes to introduce some of Peloton’s lesser-known instructors to a wider audience and boost their followings. 
    “We know that when people experience Peloton, they really get it, they fall in love,” said Snoddy. “This is really about taking the instructors and the content we have and kind of dimensionalizing it to a broader audience on TikTok.”Don’t miss these stories from CNBC PRO: More

  • in

    Online holiday spending jumps nearly 5% to new record, Adobe Analytics says

    Online spending during the holiday season shot up nearly 5% to $222.1 billion in November and December, according to Adobe Analytics.
    Shoppers got drawn in by retailers’ deep discounts and leaned on buy now, pay later more than in previous holiday seasons.
    Yet Adobe’s holiday total excludes in-store spending and may not capture whether consumers spent more than they can afford.

    A UPS worker sorts packages in New York on Dec. 18, 2017.
    Adam Jeffery | CNBC

    Online spending rose 4.9% year over year, setting a record for e-commerce during the holiday season, as shoppers pounced on discounts and leaned on buy now, pay later to cover more of their purchases, according to Adobe Analytics.
    Sales totaled $222.1 billion on retailers’ websites and apps from Nov. 1 to Dec. 31, according to Adobe.

    Adobe’s data covers more than 1 trillion visits to U.S. retail websites, 100 million unique items and 18 total product categories.
    This year, more purchases rather than higher prices drove spending, Adobe said.
    Prices have been falling across many product categories sold online, such as electronics. E-commerce prices have dropped for over a year, and were down 5.3% year over year in December, according to Adobe’s Digital Price Index, which tracks online prices across 18 product categories. If Adobe adjusted for inflation, online consumer spending would have grown even more during the holiday season.
    Strong spending during the critical season could bode well for Walmart, Amazon, Target, Macy’s and other retailers, if they attracted a healthy share of those dollars. For most major retailers, fourth-quarter earnings season kicks off in February, and those reports will give a clearer picture of the companies that gift-givers and party hosts favored.
    Yet strong online holiday sales may not mean consumers will spend freely in the new year. Some shoppers may shell out more than they can afford during the peak shopping season, and could pull back in the months ahead as the bills come due.

    One reason for big spending in November and December? Big discounts. Adobe found that discount levels hit record highs during the holiday season.
    For example, discounts peaked at 31% off listed price in the electronics category, compared with a peak of 25% during the holidays in 2022. Price cuts topped out at 24% for apparel, compared with a peak of 19% during the holidays in 2022.
    Cyber Week, the five days between Thanksgiving and Cyber Monday known for compelling deals, accounted for $38 billion of online holiday sales — or nearly one in five dollars spent during November and December. Spending during the promotional period rose 7.8% year over year.
    Buy now, pay later, a financing option that has become easier to use on retailers’ websites, proved more popular this holiday season, too. The payment plans, which are offered by companies like Affirm and Klarna, allow shoppers to pay off items in smaller installments over time.
    Use of buy now, pay later hit an all-time time and contributed $16.6 billion in online spending during the holiday season, Adobe found. That’s a 14% jump from the year-ago holiday period.
    Other holiday spending totals have come in rosier than expected, too. Retail sales during the holiday season, excluding automotive sales, increased 3.1% in the U.S. year over year, according to preliminary data from Mastercard SpendingPulse. The company measures in-store and online retail sales across all types of payment, and its total is not adjusted for inflation.
    In a news release, Mastercard Economics Institute’s Chief Economist Michelle Meyer credited a healthy jobs market and easing inflation for giving consumers confidence to spend.
    The company also found sharp growth in online spending during November and December. Online retail sales rose 6.3% year over year compared to a 2.2% increase for in-store spending, according to Mastercard. But online shopping remains a smaller portion of overall holiday spending. More

  • in

    Walgreens posts earnings beat but slashes quarterly dividend nearly in half

    Walgreens reported fiscal first-quarter adjusted earnings and revenue that topped expectations, but cut its quarterly dividend nearly in half.
    The retail pharmacy giant slashed its dividend to 25 cents per share from 48 cents per share to “strengthen its long-term balance sheet and cash position,” according to CEO Tim Wentworth.
    Walgreens reiterated its fiscal 2024 adjusted earnings guidance of $3.20 to $3.50 per share. 

    Walgreens reported fiscal first-quarter adjusted earnings and revenue that topped expectations on Thursday, but cut its quarterly dividend nearly in half. 
    The retail pharmacy giant slashed its dividend to 25 cents per share from 48 cents per share to “strengthen [its] long-term balance sheet and cash position,” CEO Tim Wentworth, who officially took the helm during the quarter, said in a statement. 

    Walgreens’ dividend yield is now 3.9%, based on Wednesday’s closing price. That’s down significantly from its prior yield of more than 7%, which made the company the highest-paying dividend stock in the Dow Jones Industrial Average. 
    It also marks the company’s first dividend cut in nearly five decades. The dividend will be payable on March 12.
    The dividend reduction comes as Wentworth, a health-care industry veteran, tries to steer the company out of a rough spot. 
    Shares of Walgreens plummeted 30% last year as the company grappled with weakening demand for Covid products, low pharmacy reimbursement rates, increased pressure from online retailers, labor unrest among pharmacy staff in the fall, an uneven push into health care and a challenging macroeconomic environment.
    But Thursday’s earnings beat marks a turnaround from October, when Walgreens missed earnings estimates for two straight quarters for the first time in nearly a decade.

    Here’s what Walgreens reported for the three-month period ended Nov. 30 compared with what Wall Street was expecting, based on a survey of analysts by LSEG, formerly known as Refinitiv:

    Earnings per share: 66 cents per share adjusted vs. 61 cents expected
    Revenue: $36.71 billion vs. $34.86 billion expected

    The company reported a net loss of $67 million, or 8 cents per share, for the fiscal first quarter.
    That compares with a net loss of $3.7 billion, or $4.31 per share, during the same period a year ago, when Walgreens was ordered to pay a multibillion-dollar settlement for litigation alleging the company helped fuel the nation’s opioid crisis. 
    The net loss in the most recent quarter included a $278 million after-tax charge related to Walgreens’ forward sale of shares of drug distributor Cencora, formerly known as AmerisourceBergen. 
    Excluding certain items, adjusted earnings per share were 66 cents for the fiscal first quarter. 
    Walgreens booked sales of $36.71 billion in the quarter, a roughly 10% jump from the same period a year ago. 
    The company said revenue growth in its U.S. retail pharmacy and international business segments, and sales contributions from its U.S. health-care division, drove the increase. Walgreens is making significant investments to transform from a major drugstore chain to a large health-care company. 
    Despite the quarterly beats, Walgreens reiterated its fiscal 2024 adjusted earnings guidance of $3.20 to $3.50 per share. 
    Walgreens expects lower Covid-related sales, along with a higher tax rate and lower sale and leaseback contributions, to offset earnings growth. 
    The company did not indicate in the earnings release whether it would also maintain its previous revenue guidance of $141 billion to $145 billion. 
    Walgreens said during its quarterly earnings call in October that the company expects more than $1 billion in savings during fiscal 2024 due to its ongoing cost-cutting initiative, which involves closing unprofitable stores and using artificial intelligence to drive supply chain efficiencies, among other efforts.

    Sales growth across pharmacy and health care

    Walgreens’ U.S. retail pharmacy segment generated $28.94 billion in sales in the fiscal first quarter, an increase of more than 6% from the same period last year. Comparable sales at pharmacy locations rose 8.1%. 
    That segment operates more than 8,000 drugstores across the U.S., which sell prescription and nonprescription drugs as well as health and wellness, beauty, personal care, and food products. 

    A sign advertises Covid vaccine shots at a Walgreens Pharmacy in Somerville, Massachusetts, on Aug. 14, 2023.
    Brian Snyder | Reuters

    Pharmacy sales for the quarter rose 10.7% compared with the fiscal first quarter of 2023, as comparable sales climbed more than 13% due to price inflation in brand medications and “strong execution” in pharmacy services, Walgreens said. 
    Total prescriptions filled in the quarter including immunizations totaled 311.6 million, which is flat compared with the same period a year ago. 
    Walgreens cited a weaker respiratory virus season this fall, which is blunting demand for medications and vaccines. The company also pointed to Medicaid redeterminations, which are routine reviews each state’s Medicaid agency conducts to determine whether beneficiaries still qualify for coverage. 
    Retail sales for the quarter fell 6.1% from the same period a year ago, and comparable retail sales declined 5%. Walgreens pointed to the weaker respiratory season as well as “macroeconomic-driven consumer trends” and Thanksgiving holiday store closures – a first for the company last year — to explain the decrease. 

    More CNBC health coverage

    Meanwhile, the company’s international segment, which operates more than 3,000 retail stores abroad,  racked up $5.83 billion in sales in the fiscal first quarter. That’s a rise of more than 12% from the same period a year ago. 
    The company said sales from Walgreens’ U.K. subsidiary, Boots, grew more than 6%.
    Revenue from Walgreens’ U.S. health-care segment came in at $1.93 billion, up from $989 million in the same period last year. 
    That division includes primary-care provider VillageMD, which includes urgent-care provider Summit Health, and CareCentrix, which coordinates home care for patients after they’re discharged from the hospital. 
    Walgreens will hold an earnings call with investors at 8:30 a.m. ET.
    — CNBC’s Bertha Coombs and Robert Hum contributed to this report.
    Don’t miss these stories from CNBC PRO: More

  • in

    Three surprises that could inflame commodity markets in 2024

    As Russia continues to pound Kyiv, Western sanctions are beginning to cripple Arctic LNG 2, the aggressor’s largest gas-export project. In the Red Sea, through which 10% of the world’s seaborne oil travels, American forces are doing their best to repel drone attacks by Yemen’s Houthi rebels. On January 3rd local protests shut down production at a crucial Libyan oilfield. A severe drought in the Amazon risks hampering maize shipments from Brazil, the world’s largest exporter of the grain.image: The EconomistAnd yet, across commodity markets, calm somehow prevails. After a couple of years of double-digit rises, the Bloomberg Commodity index, a benchmark that covers raw-material prices, fell by more than 10% in 2023 (see chart). Oil prices, at a little under $80 a barrel, are down by 12% over the past quarter and are therefore well below the levels of 2022. European gas prices hover near their lowest levels in two years. Grains and metals are also cheap. Pundits expect more of the same this year. What, exactly, would it take to rock markets?After successive shocks inflamed prices in the early 2020s, markets have adapted. Demand, held back by suppressed consumption, has been relatively restrained. But it is the supply response to elevated prices, in the form of an increase in output and a reshuffling of trade flows, that makes the world more shockproof today. Investors are relaxed because supply levels for many commodities look better than they have since the late 2010s.Take oil, for instance. In 2023 increased production from countries outside the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and its allies, a group known as OPEC+, was sufficient to cover the rise in global demand. This pushed the alliance to cut its output by some 2.2m barrels per day (b/d), an amount equivalent to 2% of global supply, in a bid to keep prices stable. Nevertheless, the market only just fell short of surplus in the final quarter. Kpler, a data firm, predicts an average oversupply of 550,000 b/d in the first four months of 2024, which would be enough to replenish stocks by nearly as much as they declined during the heated summer months. New barrels will come from Brazil, Guyana and especially America, where efficiency gains are making up for a fall in rig count.In Europe manic buying since the start of Russia’s war and a mild winter have helped keep gas-storage levels at around 90% of capacity, well above the five-year average. Assuming normal weather and no big disruptions, they should remain close to 70% full by the end of March, predicts Rystad Energy, a consultancy, easily beating the European Commission’s target of 45% by February 1st. Ample stocks will hold gas prices down, not just in Europe but also in Asia, in turn incentivising more coal-to-gas switching in power generation everywhere. This will help lower coal prices already dulled by a huge ramp-up in production in China and India.Mined supply of lithium and nickel is also booming; that of cobalt, a by-product of copper and nickel production, remains robust, dampening green-metal prices. Increased planting of grains and soyabeans (outside Ukraine) and clement weather are prompting pundits to project record output in 2024-25, after a lush 2023-24. That will push the average stocks-to-use ratio at food exporters, a key determinant of prices, from 13% to 16%, a level they last saw in 2018-19, says Rabobank, a Dutch lender.Abundant supply suggests a sedate first half of the year. After that, surpluses could narrow. Non-OPEC oil output may level off. Delays at some American liquefaction-terminal projects, which were originally set to start exporting in 2024, will frustrate Europe’s efforts to restock gas. Low grain prices will crush farmers’ margins, threatening planting. Markets will be more exposed to shocks, of which three stand out: a sharp economic rebound, bad weather and military blow-ups.Whether or not big economies avoid a recession, the pace of global growth is expected to be slow, implying modest growth in raw-material demand. Inflation is also expected to ebb, so commodities will have less appeal as a financial hedge. But a surprise is not impossible. One looks less likely in China, the usual bellwether of commodity markets, than in America, where interest rates might soon be cut and an infrastructure splurge is gathering pace. Liberum, a bank, calculates that a one-percentage-point rise in its forecast for annual global GDP growth would boost commodities demand by 1.5%.Freakish weather would have a deeper impact. Europe’s winter is not over yet, as evidenced by the cold snap that has just begun. A lasting freeze could force Europe to use an extra 30bn cubic metres of gas, or 6-7% of its usual demand, Rystad reckons. That could push the region to compete more aggressively with Asia for supplies. A climatic surprise would be more disruptive still in the wheat markets, not least if it were to affect Russia, the largest exporter, which has had bumper harvests since 2022. The larder to cover shortfalls is emptying. Owing to rising consumption, which is set to hit records this season, global wheat stocks are already headed for their lowest levels since 2015-16.What about war? Four-fifths of Russia’s food exports are ferried across the Black Sea, as are 2m b/d of crude. Naval tit-for-tats could jolt prices, though rising output from OPEC+, and international pressure to protect food shipments, would calm markets. Red Sea flare-ups, caused perhaps by a sustained American campaign against the Houthis, could cause a 15% spike in oil prices, says Jorge León of Rystad—though this may not last long either. War involving Iran and other Gulf states, where most of the unused production capacity lies today, is what would really cause chaos. The potential for terrifying prices of the sorts predicted in March 2022, when barrels at $200 seemed possible, could return.It would take something extreme—or a mixture of less extreme but still unlikely events—to blindside commodity markets. That is not quite the solace it seems. They have been blindsided by similarly improbable events several times this decade. ■For more expert analysis of the biggest stories in economics, finance and markets, sign up to Money Talks, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter. More

  • in

    American stocks loiter near an all-time high

    It is the first trading day of the year. The stockmarket opens a whisker away from an all-time high. American equities have soared over the past 12 months, up by around 25%, with a handful of technology giants leading the charge. There is a big move in the share price of Apple, the world’s most valuable company, which sets off a move in the broader market. This dictates the tone for the rest of the day.image: The EconomistFeeling déjà vu? For these facts describe both January 3rd 2022 and January 2nd 2024. In 2022 the mood on the first trading day of the year was approaching euphoria. The s&p 500 index of large American firms rose to 4,796 points, setting a new all-time high. Apple became the first company in the world to be worth $3trn, even if its market capitalisation then dipped. After the boom of 2021, the stockmarket appeared to be signalling that it was ready to continue its charge, surging to ever-greater heights.So far 2024 is looking rather different. When an analyst downgraded Apple to a “sell” recommendation on January 2nd, arguing that a slowdown in demand for the company’s phones would persist, the world’s biggest firm saw its share price fall by 4%. The rest of the market followed in short order. Instead of surging past the high-water mark set on January 3rd 2022, stocks slipped by 0.6%. Despite the roaring bull market that marked the end of 2023, the tone became anxious. Television talking-heads began to voice obituaries for the hot streak in American shares. The mood did not improve the following day, either. Stocks slid by another 0.8% on January 3rd.image: The EconomistTo understand whether such anxiety is warranted, consider the lightning-fast rally that preceded it. Stocks jumped by 16% in the final two months of 2023, a rise that represented two-thirds of the gain for the entire year. The s&p 500 rose for nine consecutive weeks, its longest winning streak since 2004. Having dipped in and out of a true “bull market” (defined as stocks rising at least 20% above their most recent low) throughout 2023, equities now tower some 31% above that level.Many of the market moves over the past two years appear to be sensible. After Nvidia, which makes semiconductors, the next-best-performing firm, measured by its rise in market capitalisation, is Eli Lilly, which is at the forefront of another technological advance (in its case: weight-loss drugs). Meanwhile, manufacturing companies have benefited from the return of generous industrial policy under the Biden administration’s Inflation Reduction Act. Although firms that mirror the wider economy, like banks and consumer retailers, have done well recently, they remain well below their levels in early 2022. Vaccine-makers such as Moderna and Pfizer have seen their prices collapse, reflecting the fall in the importance of covid-19. As such, the overall picture is not that of a market gripped by irrational exuberance.But the recent surge has been broad-based, with nearly all types of firms soaring (see chart 1), which reflects economic conditions. Growth has been better than expected. After cutting earnings forecasts through most of 2023, analysts became more optimistic. Annualised core inflation, the Federal Reserve’s preferred measure, has more or less been on target for the past three months (see chart 2). All this has led to a big decline in interest-rate expectations. In October investors expected that one-year interest rates would be close to 5% towards the end of 2024. After lower inflation data and a doveish set of forecasts from the Fed, investors now think that they will be just 3.5% (see chart 3). They expect the Fed to cut as soon as March, and to keep cutting at almost every meeting in 2024.Yet nerves are understandable. Financial markets often overshoot. And a lengthy hot streak is a sign that such an overshoot may have occurred. The most obvious risk to the bull market is if any of the rosy economic indicators become gloomier in 2024. The combination of falling rates, slow inflation and steady growth is Utopian for investors. Were strong growth to continue for too long, though, the Fed might be slower to cut rates than they hope. With less relentlessly upbeat news, it would only be natural for the market to give up some of its gains. ■For more expert analysis of the biggest stories in economics, finance and markets, sign up to Money Talks, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter. More

  • in

    Robert Solow was an intellectual giant

    Ensconced in a lorry, hidden from the enemy by the brow of a hill, the young Robert Solow decoded the radio signals of Nazi platoons across Italy. “We were very, very good at it,” he said. The trick was to get close to the enemy but not too close: near enough to pick up their transmissions, but not so near as to risk capture.The codes were not fancy—it was “combat stuff”. But if they could be broken quickly, they might reveal an ammunition delivery that could be thwarted. The radiomen were not fancy either. Most were high-school graduates. Even Solow, who would go on to earn a Nobel prize in economics, the Presidential medal of freedom and a Portuguese knighthood, before his death on December 21st 2023, was “middle-middle-class”. He was educated at Brooklyn state schools. He preferred softball to books, and was destined for Brooklyn College until a teacher spotted his potential, broadened his reading, and encouraged him to apply to Harvard University, which he joined two years early and rejoined after the war.Solow’s years as a soldier only strengthened his egalitarian streak. He declined to become an officer, so he would not have to boss anyone around. When the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (mit) offered him a job in 1949, he asked what the lowest paid professor earned, and accepted the same. When he served in President Kennedy’s Council of Economic Advisers, the Swiss embassy wanted to know his protocol rank. His answer was that he was a full professor at MIT and the government had no rank as high. Informed in the predawn hours in October 1987 that he had won the Nobel prize, his first instinct was to go back to sleep.What he craved was more precious than prizes: the esprit de corps that comes from membership of a small, highly motivated band of colleagues. “If you’re in a group that is doing good work, it’ll have a high morale. And if it has high morale, it’ll do good work,” he once said. As an economist, he liked formal models and mathematics. But nothing too fancy. Over-refinement reminded him of the man who knew how to “spell banana” but did not “know when to stop”. His strategy was to break big questions—about growth, resources, unemployment—into littler ones, in the hope that small answers would aggregate into larger ones.The MIT culture he embodied disdained hierarchy, cherished collegial lunches and made time for students, many of whom became illustrious friends. Four of Solow’s students later received their own sleep-disturbing calls from Sweden. Economics, Solow maintained, was a “handicraft” industry, often driven by the “extraordinarily powerful research apparatus” of one professor and one undergraduate assistant.Something he liked about academia was that ideas, no matter how prestigious their source, could be scrutinised by anyone. His own criticisms were energetic and witty, which could make them harder to take. He found the “freshwater” school of macroeconomics, identified with the University of Chicago, preposterous, especially in its early incarnations, which assumed a “representative agent” could stand in for the many actors in an economy. To get into a technical discussion with freshwater types was like discussing cavalry tactics with someone claiming to be Napoleon, he said. The claim is absurd, however well they know their stuff.The work that made his name began as criticism of the growth theories of the 1930s and 1940s. In these, investment added both to national spending and the economy’s productive capacity. There was no guarantee these additions to demand and supply would stay in line with each other. Moreover, excessive spending, by boosting demand, would inspire firms to invest even more, whereas inadequate investment would induce firms to spend still less. The economy was for ever poised on a “knife-edge” between deepening unemployment or intensifying labour shortages.This precariousness was hard to square with the relatively stable progress of advanced economies like America, where even the Great Depression eventually ended. Solow showed that the knife-edge disappeared if economies could vary the capital-intensity of production. Strong investment would not then be destabilising. It would merely result in higher capital per worker.High investment would not, however, result in faster growth over the long run. At some point, capital would run into diminishing returns, leaving growth to be dictated by other factors. Solow calculated that capital accumulation could explain less than 13% of the growth in income per person in America from 1909 to 1949. The remainder was attributable to other forces, which he loosely labelled “technical change”. This vast unexplained portion of growth became known as the “Solow residual”.Tough paternal loveAlthough his work created reams of subsequent research, the father of growth theory was not impressed by many of his progeny. He was sceptical of statistical exercises that dissected growth rates across countries at every stage of development. Nor had he intended to imply that technological progress, which he did not model, fell entirely outside economics. A lot of innovation was “dumb luck”. And much of it emerged on the factory floor, “invented” by unheralded foremen. But some was the result of profit-driven investment in research. Later attempts to create formal theories of technological progress nevertheless asked more questions than they answered, he argued.Part of the problem was that innovation is often peculiar and particular, whereas growth theorists strive for generality and abstraction. Solow, who had himself observed the research labs at General Motors and collaborated with the McKinsey Global Institute on industry-level studies of productivity, thought model-builders could learn from case studies and business histories. The aim was to “extract a few workable hypotheses” without getting lost in the detail. To understand how the economy works, to decode its secrets, you need to get up close, but not too close. ■Read more from Free exchange, our column on economics:Where does the modern state come from? (Dec 20th)How to put boosters under India’s economy (Dec 14th)At last, a convincing explanation for America’s drug-death crisis (Dec 7th)For more expert analysis of the biggest stories in economics, finance and markets, sign up to Money Talks, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter More