Closing Bell - Closing Bell: Rocky Road Ahead for Stocks? 3/13/25

Episode Date: March 13, 2025

When will the selling stop? We discuss with Solus’ Dan Greenahus and Lori Calvasina from RBC Capital Markets. Plus, we hear from Malcolm Ethridge from Capital Area Planning Group after he bought one big name at the center of the recent market turmoil.  Meantime, we discuss if Apple is at a crossroads as that tech name gets hit with yet another bearish analyst call. Big Technology’s Alex Kantrowitz and CNBC’s tech reporter Steve Kovach both weigh in. And, top analyst Mark Mahaney tells us how he is navigating the volatility in the tech space. 

All right. Thanks so much. Welcome to Closing Bell. I'm Scott Wobner live from Post9 here at the New York Stock Exchange. This Make or Break Hour begins with more tariff threats from the White House, more uncertainty right here on Wall Street. Let's show you what we look like here with 60 to go in regulation. We are trying to get off the worst levels of the day.

The keynote today is that the Dow has given up 41,000 for the first time since September. We'll keep our eye on that for certain over this stretch. Yesterday's bounce in tech evaporating a bit today. Meta and Tesla have been two of the biggest losers though. Nasdaq coming off its worst level as well. Apple down again today. Is that company at a crossroads? We will investigate that question a little later. Consumer discretionary names are weak again as fears over a recession percolate. Dollar General the latest to talk about a consumer slowdown

during its earnings report today. That stock is higher as you see however yields they've been moving lower. The PPI inflation report came in a little light just like the CPI did.

It does take us to our talk of the tape the rocky road for stocks. When the selling might stop is it in the process of doing just that. Let's ask Dan Greenhouse Solace Alternative Asset Management and Laurie Calvicina head of equity strategy at RBC Capital Markets welcome to you both. Laurie I'll begin with you. Ed Yardeni cut his price target today as you might have seen to 6400 from 7400 from $7,000.

He's pretty lofty and he's pared it back a bit. You're keeping yours so far, correct, at $6,600? Yeah, we haven't made a change from $6,600. I will tell you though, Scott, I've been talking about my bear case as much as my base case this year. And we laid out in our year ahead outlook a bear case of $5,775, and that was based on five different models. It's now shrunk down to four different models. We a bear case of 5775. And that was based on five different models. It's now shrunk down to four different models.

We've updated some of the math. But we said coming into the year, right, that it was gonna be a very difficult forecasting journey. There was gonna be a lot of twists and turns. And you were foolish if you thought you could predict every single one of those twists and turns at the beginning of the year. Now, my 6,600 absorbs where we are right now.

We've said all along it was gonna be a rocky path. We could handle 5 to 10% within that 6600 number. But if we break, we don't think we break a little, we think you go into a growth scare, and that's a 14 to 20% drawdown, not from here, but from peak. That's what we saw in 2018, 2015, 16, 2010, 2011, fears of recession or a systemic issue

that didn't manifest. If we do that, my target won't hold. We'll have to flip into the bear case. How's that sound to you, Dan? Listen, Lori's good. And I think there's a lot to like in that. I think the problem I have. Or dislike.

Well, it depends on, yes, no. I like a lot of what Lori had to say. I think the growth scare part of the conversation, which you touched on with the panel on halftime, talks to the uncertainty and the sentiment in market. Earnings are basically the same now as they were. Earnings expectations over the next four quarters are basically the same now

from when the market peaked in mid-February. Obviously, the multiples come in, call it two unchanged turns. That speaks to the level of uncertainty and that explains the entirety of the market decline. What I was going to say is I'm going to take somewhat of a controversial position here. Go ahead. Controversial, contrary to some of the consensus and say inherent in what's going on, and Lori,

tell me if you think I'm wrong, there are just worst case assumptions going on. Trump's going to drive us into a recession and depression. Our allies are pulling away, their money's coming out of the market from foreign depositors, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. And there's just this flailing around when I think in reality, what the administration is simply saying, not explicitly, but very, very implicitly, is these are negotiating tactics. And we're trying to extract things from our trading partners.

And when we get what we want, we back off a little bit. And I think if over the next few weeks and months some semblance of a balance on Ukraine and trade can be reached, there's no reason to think that that underlying fundamentals of a relatively healthy economy and stable earnings growth can't support higher stockpiles this year. I think in part, to push back a little bit, I'm not necessarily necessarily sure that it's the market flailing around.

A lot of the flailing around has been coming from Washington, which has gotten the market upset the way it has. On again, off again, this is gonna happen, this might not happen, if they do this, then we'll do that, if they do this, we won't do that. The market doesn't really know what to expect. I can guarantee you almost that neither one of you expected that the market would look like this

some 50 days into this administration. No, I did not, that's fair. And listen, it is fair to argue that the administration's rollout of some of these policies, particularly on the tariff side of things, could have been smoother and more predictable than what's happened. And I would concede that point entirely.

What I'm getting at with the flailing around on the response to it is everyone is treating this as if worst case outcomes are your base case. And granted, it comes when the market was at a high. Let me say it another way. I understand what the administration is trying to do. I understand that it entails some short-term pain to fire people and to try to reduce the deficit. Pre-COVID, expenditures were $4.5 trillion. They're now $7 trillion. If you're going to adjust that, there's going to be some short-term pain.

And I imagine that's what people are wrestling with. The other point is that the administration's been telegraphing all of this. Maybe the market wasn't listening at the beginning. One after another, whether it's the president or others within the administration, have just come flatly out and basically told you there's going to be pain. There's going to be a disturbance,'s going to be a disturbance or a disruption or a detox.

And I'm not so sure that the market was either listening or wanted to listen. But this is perhaps what that looks like. Now, I absolutely agree with that. I mean, I attended Trump's speech at the Economic Club of New York back in September, and he spent a lot of time talking about tariffs. And it was clear to me from that speech that he thought they were an appropriate tool to use. And I do think that in this discussion

of negotiation tactic or good policy, Besant was asked about that in his speech last week, and he seemed to say that they were both, that this was a tool that was appropriate to use, and they would try to use them. And I think there's just been this debate and this just insistence, as I've talked to clients the last few months of, no, he doesn't really want to do this. It's just, you know, it's just a scare tactic. And, you know, I do think there's some negotiation

in there, but I do think they also truly believe that they're doing the right thing. And I think they've tried to put forth their economic vision, which has been quite surprising to a lot of people. And, you know, I think they've been pretty transparent to be honest. I do think the messaging of short-term pain for longer-term gain, I think that's become more refined lately. The question now is how much short-term pain? I think that's the right way of putting it. And by the way, we did get more tariff headlines today from President Trump who says he's not

backing down from doing even more. Eamon Javers joins us now from the White House with the very latest. Eamon. Yeah, Scott, that's right. The president was in the Oval Office with the secretary general of NATO, and he said he's not backing down

on that April 2nd deadline. Remember, that's the deadline that he's set for new reciprocal tariffs worldwide. Here's what the president said in the Oval Office a short time ago. We've been ripped off for years, and're not going to be ripped off anymore. Now I'm not going to bend at all aluminum or steel or cars. We're not going to bend.

Yes, so the president there saying he's not going to bend. Clearly those tariffs at least as of now are something he's contemplating going forward with next week despite the market turbulence that we've seen. One other thing to flag for you, Scott, we've seen a lot of CEO activity here at the White House over the past 24, 48 hours. Mark Zuckerberg, we've learned, was here on campus yesterday. I'm told he talks to President Trump regularly on the phone. He's also here quite regularly inside the building. We don't know exactly what that meeting was about yet. No

indication from the White House. Also General Motors CEO Mary Barra was here yesterday. I'm told that she presented President Trump with a scale model of the beast. That is the presidential limousine, the armored vehicle that the president travels around and the GM makes. I'm told she presented him with that. That made quite an impression on the staff here. And GM is working on the next generation model of the beast now. So they talked about that. That made quite an impression on the staff here. And GM is working on the next generation model of the beast now. So they talked about that. We don't know what else they talked about though, Scott. A lot of CEOs sort of digging the turnstile here at the White House over the past 24 hours.

Yeah. Concerned, obviously, about certainly in the auto industry what might be in store for those companies. Absolutely. Eamon, thanks for that on the North Lawn as always. Bring us more as you get it please. That's Eamon Javers. Well on CNBC earlier today, Treasury Secretary Besant was asked about the tariffs and the ongoing turbulence

in financial markets. I'm not concerned about a little bit of volatility over three weeks because if you look over the long term, the reason stocks are a safe and great investment is because you you look over the long term the reason stocks are a safe and great investment is because you're looking over the long term if you start looking at micro horizons stocks become very risky. Steve Leesman our senior economics correspondent is here now with more and Steve it's good to have you you heard the the president there in Amon's

reporting say we're not going to bend. It appears though that they are willing to let something break if they have to to install what is a new order of economy for this country. I think you're asking Scott the question that every investor is asking and maybe increasingly Americans at home and when you say break what do you mean? Do you mean the economy itself? And when you listen to those comments, do you say okay? He's willing to accept some decline in the stock market Over what he calls micro horizons. I will point out that it's about

3.8 trillion off the S&P since the election or since the inauguration 3.8 trillion off the S&P since the election or since the inauguration But that said the question becomes is the administration so hell-bent on the Policies they think they want to put in place they think are so Necessary for the US economy that they're willing to risk recession to get there And I think that's increasingly in the stock market trade here, Scott. And I'd be interested to know if Dan's still there, what his view on it. Are you trading with this idea that you are operating without a net here, that the administration is just going to go and go and go with its policies, whether they're the right policies

or the wrong policies, but they're willing to risk recession in order to get where they think we ought to go? Before Dan answers I don't even know if there's any ambiguity to that anymore Steve if you listen to what the Treasury Treasury Secretary Also said when asked if his detox comment of a week or so ago Was a euphemism for a recession. He said quote. It doesn't have to be he didn't say absolutely not He said it doesn't have to be. He didn't say absolutely not. He said it doesn't have to be. He didn't take it fully off the table.

If that's what it takes to get what they need to get, then maybe that's just fine. Well, the ambiguity around that would be common sense, Scott, which is that you don't mess around and risk recession in order to affect some positive change for the economy. Because when recessions happen, all sorts of things you didn't know about could be revealed and could happen. It's a very risky game to play, and you would think and

hope the administration wouldn't play that. I don't think they're wrong to accept some form of volatility in the stock market if they can effectively first tell a story of back half gains and then on this and the other thing actually deliver that story about which there are a Substantial doubts I would say but in any event that's a different story from saying we're gonna push this thing so far We don't care that we are willing to risk a recession Scott I'm not willing to go there because I think I don't believe that people like Scott Besson are that foolhardy. But you're right to say that their language should not dissuade you from that conclusion to be kind.

You stay with us. I mean, Dan, I'll put it to you. I mean, Besson himself also last week said there's no Trump put this idea that there's some magical level of pain in the stock market that gets them to change their policy course seems non-existent if you just listen to the administration itself. I was having a conversation, to get to Steve's question and to this topic, I was having a conversation with our CEO this morning.

And one of the things that we were talking about, or the essence of what we were talking about, is this idea of a recession coming. And what he suggested to me was, are people gonna think it's a recession, which is, let's just say, two quarters of negative GDP, although he's laughing right now, that's not what a recession is,

but let's just say it's negative two quarters of GDP, if the large driver, the primary driver, or dare I say the exclusive driver, of those negative quarters is exclusively federal expenditures. And I think that gets to the conversation we're having. Meaning, if you have a recession

because the consumer retentions, job losses spike, et cetera, et cetera, business investment turns in and weakness is seen throughout the economy. That's a fundamentally different story than if, as I said before, government spending which shot up to seven trillion and has stayed there for four years, is brought back down if federal employees,

if wasteful spending, fraud, abuse, NGOs, contractors, insert whatever you want here, are reined in. That's a different conversation because I think there's a lot of people, it sounds to me like the current administration, who would be okay with a short-term pain if that pain means money is not given to no-show jobs, if that money is not given to people who don't come into work,

if that money is given to contractors and outside subcontractors who don't really earn that money. Look at a chart of... Yep, go Steve. I'm sorry, I just... It becomes a question of faith as to whether or not one actually believes there's enough of that kind of Decline in government spending to have a real impact on the economy I for one am a very skeptical of the results that Doe's says it has achieved having read several articles About it and done some reporting myself that they are not necessarily Finding the waste fraud and abuse that they claim to be finding. I remain to be convinced if they can present the data,

but there is no transparency around that. I think one answer to your question, Dan, is, is it my federal government spending that's being cut, and then I might think it's a recession, but if it's somebody else's, I might be happy about that. The trouble that you have, of course, is politically a lot of this federal spending if they actually go after things like Entitlements and and really get to the meat of federal spending that's gonna be a lot of red states

There's gonna be a lot of political fallback from that But I'm more interested in the economic fallout and if you do cut government spending enough and don't have The private sector investment to replace it Which is why this whole thing seems like it's being done a little bass-ackwards to me, is you want to pump up the economy before you subtract the federal part. Well, anyway, if that does not happen, that's where you can get into trouble. Laurie, we remember back to Trump 1.0 where there was little to no doubt the importance of a green stock market to the president at that time.

There seems to be less focus on that. And I think we're getting around that, which is why many people came in thinking, well, there's a lot of red on the board. At some point, he's going to say, no, I need that scorecard to look as good as my golf score looks. And they're making the case to you that the Trump put that many people expected maybe doesn't exist and if it doesn't and you've got city downgrading equities to neutral and BCA downgrading equities to underweight and HSBC downgrading equities and truest downgrading US equities

maybe that's a result of all that. Now look I think we knew there was a lot of froth in the market coming into this year, and we're seeing a lot of that froth taken out. It's not completely out, especially on the institutional side, but we did need to dial things down a bit, you know, regardless of the reason, and we've done that in here. I think the, you know, if I could just zoom out just a little bit, we know from all these consumer companies that have come out recently that D.C. is not the only game in town right now.

We also had fires, we had bad weather, we had plane crashes, we still have inflation, we still have high rates. All of this is happening in the context of a consumer that was already starting to come under a bit more pressure. And I think maybe that's one of the things that perhaps is not well understood down in Washington. We're also in a squishy point between soft data, which is deteriorating, and hard data, which is not really out yet and can't really show much

of what the impact of all of this has been yet. So we just need a bit more information right now in terms of what some of those discrete impacts are. And I think we're about to get it in a hurry with all these conferences, and then in a month we've got earnings. And lastly, Steve, you're talking about a Treasury Secretary, by the way, who's got decades and

decades of experience going through market cycles. So he's certainly not going to let this current one force him to change his overall perspective, because he wouldn't have done that necessarily as a trader thinking of the longer picture. And he's not going to do it just because you have a 10% or whatever it is to this point pull back in the stock market. You know, Scott, that's a great question. I wish I could ask Scott Besson. Would he belong this market? I don't know the answer to that. It's an interesting question given the amount of uncertainty that's out there, but would he take a flyer on his program here? Scott, every time Scott Besson comes on the market is calmed. I feel like the administration has some order around it. It's just unclear at this early

stage how much people like Scott Besson are calling shots or otherwise just trying to explain shots that have been taken that are difficult to explain. I see how it all continues to unfold. Steve, I appreciate your time. Thank you for joining the conversation along with Dan and Laurie. Thank you both for being here too. Is this a buying opportunity? Simple question, complex answer. Is it the start of a bigger market meltdown?

Nobody knows. Malcolm Etheridge, however, is buying one big name at the center of this recent market turmoil and that's why you see him sitting right there. It is Nvidia, which I've asked you probably I don't know 40 times since you've been joining us why don't you own that name. Well now you do. Yeah I would say it's probably closer to 40,000 Scott and each time I said for some reason or another my answer was not yet or I felt like the trade had passed me and I was watching

Nvidia trade last week- basically the entire week it traded down to the one ten mark and kept finding resistance. For some reason it would break through that number and then it'd be bought back up into the closing so I did take the plunge. I'm bought last

Friday right at one oh eight and so. Hopefully this is the place right that's a twenty five percent discount off its high. Around one forty eight that one ten number is a twenty five percent discount I mean. And so So hopefully this is the place, right? That's a 25% discount off its high around 148. That 110 number is a 25% discount, I mean. And so I'm happy to buy with a discount knowing that as you just teed up, we're in a pretty volatile space where that

company could see far more volatility than it has to this point, but I feel good about at least starting the position there. Is that a statement overall that you think the worst of the selling in the mega caps, for example, is now over? And I ask somebody who has Apple and Amazon and Microsoft as part of the portfolio as well. Not necessarily.

I think it's bifurcated here. So I think a company like Nvidia, maybe even Microsoft, who don't really rely on the consumer much at all. Companies like that, who can have their conversation with their enterprise clients, and that's where it ends, are probably going to experience a different meltdown if there is one from here. When we get earnings, we'll start to hear a little bit more about it. You think about an Amazon and Apple, all of the other Mag 7 names rely on the consumer,

and Dollar General was out with guidance today telling us that the consumer is in trouble. And so I think if I'm going to go buying any dips here I want to buy those that are shielded against whatever is happening with the consumer. You've have you have had a

decent reset in multiples from the mag seven though and it has been notable if we you know we're thinking that OK maybe these things are a little extended with the pullback. Well I don't know maybe not so much anymore for example a month ago in video was north of 30 times forward today it's less than 25 Apple a month ago was north of 31 today it's below 28 Microsoft was almost

29 today it's 26 and a half and so on and so forth you get my point. I do and I think that that is what is shaping up to create that buying opportunity and certain tech names certain mag-7 names but I don't necessarily want to buy the entire Nasdaq thinking that a high tide is about to sweep through and raise all boats I think there's still a lot of unknowns you guys just got through naming a lot of them as far as this administration is concerned. CIMIs for example it's gonna be a bumpy road ahead for semis as a category because

the president's trade policy does sweep up a lot of those names. Nvidia and others and so I don't necessarily think this is a place you want to go trading any of these names in the semis but I do think for longer term investors this is a

name that I'll continue to hold for quite some time this is shaping up to be a great place to at least start to build that position if you like me have been on the outside looking in for quite some time. You feel overall as though the selling is starting to get a little exhausted. What's your current psyche on the overall market? Yeah, I don't think it's possible to answer that question as clearly as you just asked it simply because none of us really knows what the president's stance actually is on

benchmarking his presidency against the S&P 500 index, right? I take the point, I think Dan was making that today he may be saying, I'm not really looking at the S&P as my scorecard, but we also know that two weeks from now he could say something completely different. And so I think that investors are still holding out hope for that Trump put that would come in, you know, with any sort of pivot in policy stance. But I also think we could be months from now

before we find out whether there is going to be a pivot. And at that point, sentiment has crept into where this is no longer just a correction. We're talking full on bear market territory. So a lot of this is really pegged to the whims and the opinions of one person. And that's what makes it very tough for me to say, yes, this is where we can say we've reached peak capitulation,

and it's time to start thinking positively again. All right. You've avoided my question for the most part, but I liked your answer. So I'm going to let you off the hook. It made perfect sense to me. We see you soon thanks for being here that's Malcolm Etheridge joining us once again today we're just getting started up next Apple shares falling again on the back of yet another bearish analyst call so

what's at stake for that stock we discuss with big technologies Alex Kantrowitz just after the break. Apple shares lower again today another negative analyst note drops this time KeyBank reiterating its underweight call $200 price target. It comes a day after Morgan Stanley's Eric Woodring dropped his own outlook and told us exactly why right here on Closing Bell. The news out late last week about the delayed advanced Siri integration means I took a second look at my iPhone units and determined that one of the catalysts that I had previously embedded into my numbers wasn't necessarily going to materialize ahead of the iPhone 17 launch and therefore cut my numbers to kind of take that factor out of my expectations.

All right, that's Eric Woodring. Now let's bring in CNBC tech reporter Steve Kovac along with big technologies Alex Kantrowitz as Apple finds itself at a bit of a crossroads. It's good to have you both with us. Alex, you say that the AI effort from this company has, quote, moved from disappointment to embarrassment. Explain. Well, we saw a very impressive vision for Apple intelligence when we were out at WWDC last year.

A Siri that understands your context, that can help you get things done in the real world. Something that can really push Apple's efforts to sell more iPhones forward. The thing that would draw people in to buy iPhones. Because let's be honest, right now the iPhone 15 and the iPhone 16 kinda look the same. Same with the 14, I can't really tell the difference between them.

You need something important, something that's special to the next generation to sell more, and Apple intelligence and AI could be the thing. Now, we know that they haven't been able to ship the thing they promised at WWDC at this point, but we were still expecting it to come sometime this year. Now we have no idea if it's ever gonna come.

There are reports saying it may, we may not see that until 2027. And that's why we go from disaster, from disappointment to disaster. If that's not coming until 2027 or 2026, at the earliest, the super cycle for Apple is nowhere to be found. Some, Steve, are taking this even further. Daring Fireball's John Gruber, known to many as the number one Apple watcher, or certainly without any disrespect to either one of you at the towards the top of the list obviously who posted something is rotten in the

state of Cupertino and said quote the fiasco here is not that Apple is late on AI it's also not that they had to announce an embarrassing delay on promised features last week those are problems not fiascos and problems happen they're inevitable. Leaders prove their mettle and create their legacies not by how they deal with success, by how they deal with, how they acknowledge, understand, adapt and solve problems. The fiasco is that Apple pitched a story that wasn't true. I know you paid attention to that commentary, which did go viral.

Yeah, and viral to say the least. I can pretty much guarantee, Scott, that everyone down in Cupertino is reading that post, passing around including the very top ranks of the executives. And Gruber brings up a fantastic point. I haven't been covering Apple quite as long as him. About 15 years for me, I think he said he's been covering it over 20. Neither of us have seen anything like this, where Apple literally shows us a kind of concept video that never becomes reality as a product that they promise,

let alone advertise. And then we really got to start wondering what the leadership decision tree was. Someone at Apple decided they needed to show this at WWDC nearly a year ago, June of last year, and this was going to be their take on this artificial intelligence boom Even though it clearly wasn't ready

Let alone to show to the press even in some kind of demo form and as we're kind of talking about the fallout for this Not just what these analysts are saying and what the stock is reacting but the leadership decisions And how Apple is meeting this artificial intelligence moment and I want to kind of zoom the clock back a little bit, Scott, to 2012. You might remember when Apple put out its new Apple Maps and it was a complete disaster. It didn't work as well as Google Maps and so forth. Apple had to, not just Apple, Tim Cook had to come out and apologize and the head of iOS, his name was Scott Forstall, he was pushed out of the company because of this. That's starting to raise some questions now.

I've seen a lot of chatter online just about who is going to take the fall for this. And there's a number of people. It starts with Tim Cook, of course, and what decisions he and his team made in order to say this was coming when it wasn't. There are other executives involved in this. There's John Gianandrea. He is the head of artificial intelligence at Apple, a huge hire they made several years ago from Google. This was supposed to be his

debut, Scott, when he goes by JG internally at Apple. JG coming out here and saying, this is our big debut for consumer artificial intelligence before everything he worked on was kind of behind the scenes. And then you have the marketing aspect of it, them actually going out there and putting out those big commercials starring Bella Ramsey and saying, this is why you need to go out there and buy an iPhone 16 because these features are coming. And then several months later,

just last week, pulling down those ads. And that kind of falls on the marketing department, Greg Joswiak, making that decision to run those ads, even though it didn't seem like internally at least that this product was gonna be anywhere near ready to release when they said it was. So it's not just the stock, it's also as Gruber appropriately I think points out,

this is a huge embarrassment and we really gotta take a look at the leadership here and who made these decisions. And like to Alex's point, these decisions put Apple in a position where these features either if they do come out, it's not gonna be till next year or even the year after. Alex, it sounds like what you, Steve,

and this Gruber gentlemen are describing is a crisis. Now, crises are fixable. Can Apple fix it? It's gonna be really hard. And so the delay is the symptom. I think what Gruber points out is the disease, which is that within Apple culture, and by the way I think people have been watching Apple culture, I've been able to point this out from a long way back, there has been an inability to develop artificial intelligence.

Remember the car project? The car is not a car, self-driving cars, it's a software program. They never got anywhere. And within Apple, I don't think the culture is flexible enough to be able to develop artificial intelligence appropriately, effectively. The divisions are simply too siloed, right? They have people working on AI in one division and working in AI in another division. They can't talk to each other because they're not disclosed

on these projects. And also I don't think Apple has marshaled enough people within the company to really work on AI to a point where they break down some of these silos and say, let's get going and building, build the cutting edge. Amazon, we just saw a couple of weeks ago, released Alexa Plus or is, showed us working demos of Alexa Plus,

which we never saw with Apple at WWDC. It's not that Amazon has better people working on it. It's Amazon has a culture that incentivizes collaboration and invention and they've been able to do it. So I think your question, can Apple fix this? Yes. What's it gonna take? It's going to take a cultural reset within that company

to say AI is the most important thing that matters right now. Us building in siloed ways, the ways that Steve Jobs told us to, where secrecy was the premium and surprise was the premium, that's gotta be gone. We need more collaboration, more openness, and more willingness to be wrong

and maybe even experiment in public, and we haven't seen that from them to date. Steve, how would you answer that question? Yeah, I think it's also a little bit of a loss of trust, Scott, because so many times, I've been in, I can't even count how many times I've been in product demos with Apple executives where what they show me is coming out soon or you know on the roadmap to come out. It works. You can put your hands on it. You can test it and they almost always

deliver on it with very minor caveats that honestly don't matter. And now we're putting setting up to a point where as we go into WWDC and we see their next version of their vision for artificial intelligence, presumably, it's gonna have an extra skeptical eye. We can't, not just journalists like you and I, but also investors can't necessarily take them at their word unless we can actually see these things are working and not just the concept video.

I mean, what we saw at WWDC, at least with regard to the Siri part of it, it turned out to be no more real than what Mark Zuckerberg has been showing us about the metaverse. They're literally just concepts and ideas and not actual products that are anywhere close to shipping. And so, you know, if you and I are down there again,

this June, Scott, we're gonna have to take an extra skeptical eye because Apple lost a good amount of trust of how these products are going to be released. Well hopefully we will be sitting there together once again, the three of us, for that matter. For a company frankly that's been given the benefit of the doubt many, many times by investors and maybe right now is in fact at a bit of a crossroads. I appreciate the conversation very much from you both and your insights. Steve will see you soon.

Alex will talk to you again. Up next top analyst Mark Mahaney. He's standing by with how he is navigating all the volatility in tech. We are back after the break on the belt. Welcome back with today's continued weakness, the NASDAQ 100 now on track for its worst weekly performance since September. Evercore ISI's head of internet research, Mark Mahaney, joins me now for where we might be heading next. It's good to see you as always.

Hey Scott. Is this selling run its course? What's your take? I don't know whether it's run its course what what's your what's your take. I don't know whether it's run its course so I think these are issues that are probably out of my pay grade to figure out but it seems like most of the stuff from where I stand seem self-inflicted I looked at the fundamentals of most of the large cap internet names all the high quality names their fundamentals were very consistently. Stronger robust and as recently as maybe the end of January beginning of February

when they gave their earnings and they talked about the March quarter outlook. Things seem to be very consistent. So we just had a lot of policy volatilities. Bar as I can tell that's really impacted these these stocks. The backdrop here of course, Scott is we had a two and a half year bull market in some of these tech stocks, especially the highest quality names. The large cap internets I look at were up 100% from the middle of 22 when interest rates stopped rising to the end of last year. So there was a setup here for if you had a negative catalyst come through,

there was a setup for a correction. We've had the catalyst. I mean evaluating multiples is in your pay grade so I'll ask you this. As I said to our earlier guests you've had a significant rerating in almost every one of these names within the space whether it is Alphabet from 20.5 forward to 17. nine from meta to 28 four to 23 to Amazon's had a re rating have they re rated enough in your mind if they were frothy before do they make more sense today. Yeah I would say that they were frothy before I just think that they were kind of close to a full full values I think there was very little dislocation in the Internet space other than Uber. Any of the year there was very little dislocation in the internet space other than uber.

Any of the year there was very little dislocation the space but now you've got a chance here to step in and buy some of the stocks that what I think are very good prices so I don't want to mislead you at all here I like Amazon right here right now it's my number one pick I made it my number one pick last week when you get into twenty five times earnings I'm doing this on my twenty six earnings that's the lowest multiple we've ever had on Amazon and I think it's core had on Amazon I think its core fundamentals are intact I think it's got some enough

recessionary hedges in there and I think there's some new narratives coming out of Amazon you you under previous commentary you referring to the Alexa plus service that's going to be rolling out I think you got your Kuiper you know rocket

launches coming out this month I just think that there's enough to to Amazon and the cost disciplinary has been super impressive I think these retail margins are going to continue to rise. So I like buying Amazon right here 25 times earnings knowing that we may still have a lot of policy uncertainty for a while. But I'm going to take my shot at Amazon right here 25 times earnings. I feel the same way about Google at 16 times earnings. I think there's a lot of ways that the narrative can change. I think it's got some recessionary hedges in there a little bit if we get a recession.

And I think just the valuation, you haven't had something like this cheap maybe once before in Google's history. Take advantage of Google now, buy the stock. It's interesting to me that you have Expedia as one of your top picks right now, and you made a point of mentioning it to our producers. I mean there's obviously a lot of leverage to the consumer and consumer behavior. Can you expand on

why you're if not pounding the table on that name today certainly letting us know this needs to be mentioned? Well I'm constructive on it. I actually kind of dipped it off of our top picks list about a week ago so I think the best opportunities right here are kind of with the three mega caps. So if you're going to trade off the highest quality names, and I would put Amazon and Google in there, if you're going to trade them off at these levels, those are the ones you step in and buy first.

I think you can buy names like Expedia and Booking later. But the recent data points that we've seen have been soft on travel, just the airlines Delta Southwest and American even in the online travel space that I look at you know the alternative accommodations market something happened in February the consumer it doesn't mean that consumers are gonna stay weak but consumers definitely paused a little bit and that's in North America companies like booking.com are probably better positioned because they're 80 to 90% outside the US

and there's no evidence that there's been any slowdown in consumer spend outside the US. So I'd probably prefer booking to Expedia right here. Okay, so let me just, I just wanna make sure I'm 100% clear on where we stand. So of your top four large cap net longs in which you had Expedia listed as number four is no longer the case? Oh, I'm sorry, I think I over confused you.

So we're gonna go Amazon first, Uber second, Google third, and Expedia would be fourth. Expedia are booking, they're just about the same. The one thing that's changed since I put together that list is we've seen travel weakness, but it's particularly pronounced in North America. And Expedia is much more of a North America company at 60% of its bookings whereas for a booking although it's slightly more expensive it's only

10-20% so frankly Scott I'm kind of even-steven on the two names but you know if you've got a market weakness I want to go with the highest quality names first and so I'm fine with my top three. Okay. That's not the strongest endorsement I've ever heard of a name, but nonetheless, we'll leave it there. If that's how you want to go, that's how we'll leave it there.

Mark, thanks. We'll see you soon. That's Mark Mahaney. Thanks, Scott. Evercore ISI. Up next, we track the biggest movers into the close. Christina Partsanevalos is standing by with that. Hi, Christina. Hi, Christina. Hi, Scott.

Well, Chipmakers stocks soaring right now as a new CEO prepares to take the helm, plus a discount retailer unfortunately predicting continued hard times ahead for its customers. All those details. Next. We're about 10 away from the closing bell. Back to Christina now for the stock that she's watching. Hi, Christina. Hi, Scott. Well, Intel. Those shares are soaring right now after it announced Lip Booth 10 would from the closing bell back to Christina now for the stock that she's watching. Hi Christina. Hi Scott.

Well Intel, those shares are soaring right now after it announced Lip Booth 10 would take the helm of the company next Tuesday. 10 is a former Intel board member and Cadence Design CEO. He's definitely well known in the space and he's expected to cut costs while focusing on products as well as Intel's foundry business, which we know there's been all kinds of rumors, but that's why you're seeing shares up about 15%. Switching gears though, Dollar General also in the green after it posted better than expected Q4 results, it issued though a grime forecast.

But analysts say a turbulent economy could lead to growing demand for cheap groceries. Fellow discount retailer Dollar Tree also higher in sympathy right now, up about 6.5% or Dollar Tree up 5.5% and up about six and a half percent or a Dollar Tree up five and a half And both of them around six Scott. All right, Christina. Thank you Still ahead much more today's volatility Mike Santoli will get his take on the sell-off coming up All right coming up next Mike Santoli all over today's market sell-off He'll tell us what he thinks in the market zone next. Are we now in the closing bell market zone. CBC senior markets commentator

Mike Santoli here to break down these crucial moments of the trading day lows of the day for the NAS. Yeah lows of the day for the S and P. The Russell's not that far from bear market.

Oh yeah. That two thousand mark. I mean it goes back years and years. Gave it up by four points. We're below that too, VIX 25. What's, what's, how do you think? It's starting to cut into some noticeable levels. I mean, we basically wiped away six months worth of gains, more or less, at the lows.

You finally exceeded 10% likely on a closing basis. And a lot of the things that have been really grudging in terms of falling into place in terms of capitulatory activity, starting to see that perhaps. By the way, gold's a couple bucks from three thousand. So gold's the only thing at a record. The travel stocks, the restaurant stocks, are in freefall. So United down another three and a half percent today, as is Delta. I'm glad you went there because I wrote it on my list. And it shows you that what really is going on

is there's this raw nerve about consumer confidence, what's the kind of spending that first gets hit if consumers are a little bit uneasy, it is travel. So all this stuff feeding finally into what looks like, you know, we're acknowledging perhaps the risk. Now it's interesting, because for days, if you were the bloodless, systematic, trader, disciplined as can be,

and all you're looking at is oversold readings and how far we are from the highs and historical patterns and tactical clues, you would have been saying, look, way to the evidence says we should rally here. Buy, buy, buy. That's why we've kind of stepped down here and I think we've tried to make a stand,

but you don't have fundamental high conviction buyers following. You get these sort of technical bids and then everybody else is saying, look, I'm just reading the policy headlines. It seems haphazard. It seems unpredictable. Nothing's gonna make me think my company's gonna earn more

in three months than they are now. Eventually, we have a give up trade and you do have the makings of a rally. I do think we have to keep in mind mind for as much as it seems like this process has been maximum aggression on tariffs and an indifference to the near term pain economically or in markets, that is obviously an overlay of concern, but it can also be removed pretty easily because right now it's mostly words. So I'm not saying that's going to. And I'm not saying this is all

some masterly negotiating process, but I think you have to keep that in mind that it could quickly take the pressure off at some point. Powerful words nonetheless. Another chance, speaking of, the Treasury Secretary or someone from the administration to talk up the market didn't do it. Not focused on that.

Apple's worst week since March of 20. That's a weight. Tesla's down another 4% and the momentum names, which got a nice looking bounce yesterday, roll it. Look, it's always when a correction happens, it's always multiple things. It's not just, oh, we're kind of thinking growth is soft. It's momentum reversal, policy, you know, kind of noise, and then you have

the macro fears. You did finally get a decent bid in treasuries midday today because that was completely indifferent to all this. So yield started to come down again. A lot of the washed out stuff starting to fall into place, but it's dangerous when the market doesn't respond to oversold conditions that we have now. Couple articles today about credit, FT, Reuters, pay attention to all of it, into overtime. It's on Ford.