Armada’s Prather takes a deep dive into the freight economy and tariffs

Speaker A: Foreign. Hello and welcome to the Logistics Management podcast series. My name is Jeff Berman. I'm, um, group news editor for Logistics Management magazine and the Peerless media supply chain group. Today I'd like to say hello and welcome Keith Prather to our podcast. Keith serves as managing director for Armada, uh, Corporate Intelligence. Keith is a managing director and co founder of Armada, uh, Corporate Intelligence. And over his 24 years with the company, he has consulted Fortune 500 and Fortune 500 and companies of all sizes, providing corporate intelligence, economic forecasting and insights on changing global dynamics, geopolitic, geopolitics, supply chain issues and other factors that affect the corporate operating environment. Keith has spent 24 years working with clients in the transportation and global supply chain sector, providing strategic support and insights on, um, the global operating environment. He's also a former CFO and is the chief editor for the flagship and officer of the Watch Report, read by more than 18,000 corporate executives weekly. He and co founder Chris Kuhl present keynotes on the economy at more than 120 events per year. Hey Keith, welcome to the podcast.

Speaker B: Hey Jeff. I'm pleased to be here. I'm excited.

Speaker A: Yeah, absolutely. And the timing couldn't be better. Keith, as we have been talking about, uh, you know, there's never a dull moment in supply chain freight transportation and logistics these days. Um, so just to sort of kick things off, Keith, why don't we take a look at how you're viewing the current state of the freight economy. And I know that's kind of an all encompassing thing when we think about all the things that factor into it, whether it's gdp, retail sales, inflation, manufacturing data, freight, uh, volumes and tonnage, etc. There's a lot to unpeel there, if you will. So why don't we start with that and then we can drill down to some other things.

Speaker B: Sounds great, Sounds great. Um, so you know, overall, Jeff, last year, and I know you've heard me speak several times, and I really have been watching, the inventory destocking process has been ongoing for the last two years. And coming out of 2024, we know we were growing pretty well. The economy was growing somewhere around 2.6%. Had a pretty good year overall. Uh, now we know that a lot of it was government spending and back straps there. Uh, but we'll, we'll leave that aside for a moment and we'll just say that coming out of 2024, we knew that inventories were balanced and we thought it'd be a really good freight year. And we actually started the Year off, pretty strong. You know we had some good solid signals in January. We're also getting some pretty decent signals in uh February spilling over into March. But now we're kind of wondering how much of that was really uh, you know, companies trying to get ahead of tariff risk, trying to get ahead of what was you know, risk of a port strike in January and that maybe there's a little bit of pulled forward uh, freight activity that would have been scheduled for Q2. Maybe we're getting a little bit of that in Q1. Then we throw on top of that all the volatility that we're going through right now and it has created a very challenging dynamic uh, freight environment overall.

Speaker A: Absolutely. Um, it's interesting too. I mean we look at uh, the most recent inflation reading. I mean everything seems to indicate it's kind of remains in that, in that 3% range, you know, 2.8, uh, 3. I think the last reading was 2.8 coming off of 3. The previous reading, uh, in January. Um, how do you sort of view the current stated at? Do you think that's. I know the Fed wants things to get down to 2% obviously. Do you think we're sort of in that kind of high M twos, low threes range for the foreseeable future until we get more clarity uh, on uh, tariff actions and things along those lines?

Speaker B: Yeah. Based on the latest analysis and literally as of today we think that current tariff activity could add about 0.3 uh, percentage points to inflation at a macro level. Okay. So some industries are going to experience a much higher, more aggressive uh, inflation rate. But the overall macro economy should be moving somewhere around 2.8, 2.9% through the end of the year.

Speaker A: Okay.

Speaker B: When we look at average inflation, average inflation has been running somewhere around 2.6% so uh, trending in the right direction. The Federal Reserve is going to continue to loosen up whether we hit that 2% rate or not. So as long as it's down in the 24 to 2 5% range, they're going to feel like they can trim again this year. They're forecasting still we might get two quarter point cuts depending on what happens with unemployment. You could see that move a little bit quicker.

Speaker A: Right. And then as we know the they pa. The Fed paused activity last um, I believe was it last week? I think, I think it was.

Speaker B: It was.

Speaker A: Yeah. So I mean and they indicated. It seems to be kind of a wait and see approach which is um, is makes ah sense. Um, so let's shift gears over to uh, everyone's favorite topic these days, Keith, and that would simply be tariffs. As we saw yesterday and in the news cycle into today, uh, 25% tariff, um, on automotive imports is taking effect. I mean, it's definitely, um, going to be interesting to see what transpires, ah, resultant of that. But on the surface level, because we're just getting this news, how do you sort of view the impact of auto tariffs and what could be, uh, some of the subsequent effects of it?

Speaker B: Yeah, well, beyond all of us hyperventilating right now, trying to keep up everything that's happening with tariffs because, you know, we've got the April 2 deadline with reciprocal tariffs coming, but, you know, the first automotive impact, it's pretty significant because 50% of the vehicles that we sell in the United States are imported. So 50% of vehicles are going to have at least a 25% risk against them. But at the same time, 60% of our domestic, uh, components that we use for assembly also have exposure to international markets. So the, you know, Cox Automotive is thinking there should be about a 30% decrease in North American output this year as companies just try to grapple with the kinds of changes that the industry is going to be going through. So near term, we see a lot of pressure in the industry. Longer term, obviously things stretch out a little bit. We see differences in distribution patterns. You know, for freight, we kind of see the market adjust, but we're still two or three really, um, aggressive quarters away from those automotive supply chains, really making those adjustments and being able to compensate for, uh, the tariff.

Speaker A: Okay, okay. And then you had just mentioned April 2nd. Uh, this has been telegraphed, uh, for a while now that it's going to be a pretty big day, especially in regards to the aforementioned reciprocal tariffs. Um, how do you sort of, I mean, now the announcement is coming, it's coming real soon. Um, how do you sort of view what we may be in store for? And especially from a supply chain slash, uh, shipper preparation perspective as well, uh, given that we don't know all the details just yet, but what could we be looking at? Uh, what, you know, how do we think about that?

Speaker B: Yeah, so I've really stepped back from the ledge a little bit, you know, in the last couple days. This morning was a great example. Uh, Vietnam has announced that it's going to probably look at reducing its tariffs, tariffs on US Goods because it would be one of the countries that would be targeted, uh, for reciprocal tariffs. Some of our best trading partners, like South Korea, for instance, we have almost a 10 point trade deficit right now based on uh, the application of our tariffs and the application of their tariffs. And so we have some big partners out there that are at a big risk, European, uh, Union the same way. But what we're seeing in a lot of those trading partners, that they're willing to come down and sort of meet the United States halfway. And the President has even said just in the last few days that the reciprocal tariffs may feel more like a, uh, negotiation or that he may find some leniency, as he said, uh, in those negotiations. And so I have a feeling at the end of the day, once we finally see, when the smoke clears and we see what those final policies look like and the negotiations are over, that it may not be as dramatic as say, the 25% tariffs on automotives. Um, I have a feeling we're going to look back and from a supply chain perspective, the automotive tariff may be a bigger deal than the reciprocal tariffs, but subject to change, right?

Speaker A: Yeah, absolutely. And you know, just because, um, uh, we have such a heavy supply chain focus, obviously when we look at, you know, the uncertainty and sort of coupled with the impact of these ongoing tariff actions, um, you know, in terms of what it means for freight flows and I'm specifically thinking about imports and inventories. Keith, uh, you had just addressed inventories a few moments ago. Um, you know, because there's been a lot of that pull forward activity. Uh, you see, you see the subsequent impacts potentially on things like inventory carrying cost, uh, warehousing expenses as well. Um, it's just kind of what shippers and, and 3 PLs etc are, are the world that they're all living in right now. So I mean, there's also talk that the pull forward could uh, be ceasing, uh, sooner than expected too. So I mean, there's a lot there. I don't mean to have such a wordy, uh, uh, question if you will, but how do you sort of think about that, those types of things when we think about freight flows, inventory carrying cost, uh, warehousing impact, etc.

Speaker B: Yeah, no, I mean the wordiness, don't worry about it. Because that's the whole. The world we're all living in right now. There's a lot of, there's a lot of yeah, buts or yeah, but. What about this? What about that? Uh, of course, of course. Right, yeah. So inventory carrying costs right now because the cost of capital is still high. That is a factor. Um, the one thing about supply chain management these days is that we've invested so much in technology as an industry that now we can kind of quickly calculate and weigh the differences between, uh, you know, freight rates, maybe from a maritime perspective, that are reducing versus currency exchange rates, the impact of a tariff versus inventory carrying costs. And I think a lot of supply chain managers are making those dynamic decisions based on what their outlooks look like. Right? So if they feel like they've got a strong demand outlook for the first half of the year, you know, if they're in one of those industries, like some of the consumer spending categories and, you know, uh, consumer staples, for instance, in retail, which are still doing really well, we see no pullback. You know, they're going to continue to really measure their supply chain and we're going to see big differences in the way different supply chain managers address and approach tariffs based on their individual situation. So, so what we're seeing, and I'm saying all that to say that when we look at it from a macro perspective, we look at it just from the US sitting at 100,000ft looking down, we don't see overbuilding of inventories. Right. We're not going back into a, uh, 2022 scenario where we're seeing warehouses full and companies overreacting, and we see the supply chain getting out of balance based on current data, based on the data that we have on inventories at the moment. So, um, so again, it's interesting because thank goodness for technology at the moment, whether it's AI or whatever they're using, because we have that ability to digest, uh, to sort of adjust on a dynamic basis. And I think you're right. Your intuition is exactly right that you feel some thinking that, okay, you know, we took our shot, maybe we got a few expedited air cargo shipments, few pallets in an advanced to build a little bit of a buffer against tariffs. But, you know, we're deep enough now in the process. Let's just wait for the smoke to clear and then we'll go figure out how much we need to order on the backside of this at that higher price, and then we'll just make the adjustments when those items come in. Um, that kind of feels like we're transitioning into that phase of it now where the companies are adjusting to the higher prices and, um, they're just going to kind of grin and bear it.

Speaker A: Yeah, I mean, nobody wants to go back to that 2022 scenario that you just mentioned. Uh, amid. Amid, uh, you know, I guess the early exit of the pandemic, when the bloated inventories were sort of the conversation of the day.

Speaker B: Right, right, Absolutely, absolutely, yeah. Led to a 24 month, ah, you know, basically a freight recession.

Speaker A: Yeah, no, yeah. Um, you, you had just mentioned the term demand pullback. And, and I thought that was interesting because I did come across a recent cnbc poll of CFOs that found that more than half are anticipating a second half recession due to what was called, and I'm quoting here, a whipsaw trade policy and the related task of insurgent inflation and lower consumer demand. Obviously when we look at data like this, it can be open to interpretation, Keith, but I mean, how do you view the potential prospects of some type of recession over the second half of this year? Is it too early to tell or some of the tea leaves, uh, pointing that way, if you will?

Speaker B: It is too early to tell. And I'll tell you the reason why. Nothing, um, that has been done thus far has been done through an act of Congress. And you know, for better or worse, all of the actions have been taken so far that have slowed down economic activity, have been basically swipe of a pen types of things. And the Trump administration, President Trump himself, very sensitive to economic activity. Right. So they're watching data very closely. They know at what point in time the economy is about ready to break. And um, so I think they'll weigh, and they'll measure that against, uh, you know, reducing tariffs. Again, swipe of the pen removes tariffs in some sectors. Now their objective is to get reshoring taking place. They want manufacturing back in the US and there are some industries that are so critical to national security that they're going to continue to keep that pressure on to make sure that they get reshored. But there are other areas where they can easily use a swipe of a pen to create exclusions. Um, I know you and I talked a little bit in January at the Jumpstart conference about, you know, just the impact of those tariffs in 2018 and 2019 that were given exclusions. And about 35% of all the tariffs were granted exclusions at that time. And so I think ultimately, as we kind of get into the actual practice of applying these tariffs, I think they'll use that ability to, to weigh risk sector by sector, maybe product by product, and we'll see some backing off and we'll see some easing of these tariffs over time. So back to recession risk for a moment. I mean, I do see those estimates out there of a 30% recession risk. I don't know that it comes in the second half of the year. Um, we would start to see the biggest impact in the credit markets and in the labor markets. And right now, at a macro level, those remain stable. So, uh, you know, soft, soft landing, for instance, that may be the discussion, and that may be where we go, where we're looking at, you know, annual GDP rates somewhere around 1% or maybe a little bit less through this transition period before we build momentum coming out of the backside of it.

Speaker A: Okay. And that, that's really interesting. And you had just mentioned sector by sector tariffs. Obviously we have auto. There's been a, a fair amount of attention on obviously steel and aluminum, which has already happened. Uh, we have pharma, we have semiconductors. Um, when you look at tariffs or potential tariffs on that sector by sector basis, do certain things jump out to you in terms of potential impact? Tariffs on a certain sector could, uh, impact consumers, um, or businesses, and by extension consumers more so than others. Or again, is it, Is it. We have to kind of look at the fine print first?

Speaker B: Yeah, I think we're going to have to look at the fine print. Uh, you know, the steel and aluminum tariffs, uh, those actually created a lot of consternation in the business environment. Everything from construction to manufacturing, all the way across the board. When you actually look at the relative cost per product, the product costs are not going up 25%. I mean, that, that particular input into those costs are going up by 25%. So steel input is 25%, but it may only be 1% of the total product cost. So the actual impact at a macroeconomic perspective, again, is sort of mild inflation of, uh, you know, three tenths of a percent or so. And we don't know how quickly US Domestic production on some of those industries will fill in. What we worry about is where we don't have a US presence right now in an industry. If we're 100% sourcing a product overseas, like some of the medical pharma industry, it will take those supply chains a long time to be able to make the adjustment to build U.S. domestic capacity. Those are the ones at the greatest risk. Uh, right now, just for instance, Jeff, about 75 or 80% of hospital administrators are believing that they're going to have to increase healthcare costs to their patients. Because the ability for us to manufacture the. Everything that we need to be able to fulfill the health care supply chain, we just don't have that capacity. And so those are the areas where I would see those exclusions come pretty quickly. And that's, indeed, I mean, that's what we saw in 2019. Um, those were the first industries that Got exclusions. So you know, I think you'll, I think you'll stay hard and fast on some areas like pharmaceuticals, you know, we can't run out of baby formula again. Um, some things like that that I think have some national security bearing he's going to stick hard on. I say he uh, it's all President Trump, right? Yeah. And uh, and so I, I really do think that there are some industries like that where he's probably not going to bend. Um, but again where we don't have domestic capacity today, I think that's where those exclusions will come in.

Speaker A: Okay, understood that. Um, and I wanted to shift back real quick just to the whole US USM M CA component. Keith. Um, obviously this has been a big topic. Uh, we saw tariffs on again, off again, et cetera, um, uh, being levied on each of our north and south trading partners. How do you view sort of the current state of things, uh, where might things be going in terms of how we look at US Uh, uh, trade and really by uh, trade relations in general with both Mexico and Canada?

Speaker B: Yeah, you know, honestly I've been kind of surprised at how hard the President has been on Canada and Mexico tariffs and how sticky they have been. Uh, there's those 25 tariffs and that's pretty significant and it does impact a lot of industries. And so we were waiting, just keep waiting on him to back off on those. Uh, but that's not coming. And strategically we need a strong USMCA block, if you will, to offset some of the, some of the foreign risks, some of the geopolitical risks to the United States. So from a military national security perspective, it has a lot of weight and we need those two economies to be healthy in order to be able to create that stability. And so I've been a little bit surprised that we've been this sticky on applying some pretty heavy penalties on that cross border trade. And so I, I would love to think that as we again uh, get beyond April 2nd that maybe there is some softening and some easing on some of the potential. But in the meantime it really is creating some challenges. And again we go back to automotive. Automotive is one of the big areas that's going to take a big hit. Um, and there's a lot of rethinking of you know, how we move products or what the impact would be. The average vehicle, you know, price on it can range anywhere from you know, five to $10,000 per vehicle, um, in price increases. And uh, just based on the cross border trade and the impact of what would be essentially Mexico tariffs. So I, I see, I see where we're going long term with it but I, but I do think the near term impact is going to be, it's going to feel pretty significant I think if tariff rates stay at the levels are at right now.

Speaker A: Yeah, no, absolutely. Let's shift from autos over to uh, ocean, ocean vessels if you will. Keith. Um, the big uh, a hot topic this week has been the uh, hearings um, uh through the US Office of the United States Trade Representative in regards to uh, push really a push focused um, on eventually domestic shipbuilding. But it comes with some big caveats in the form of uh, some hefty tariffs, fees, fines, whatever you want to call them for China origin vessels uh calling at US ports. Um, it was I believe between 1 and 1.5 million uh with some, some variables in there. Uh, that, that, that those are no small, I mean that's a, those are huge numbers and the general consensus is that that can mean that global carriers start calling more only on the larger ports and bypass smaller ports which really could throw a wrench in uh, in how US ports are, are viewed. Um, not, not viewed but I mean activity. You know ports like Baltimore SA wouldn't get as much freight or cargo as obviously LA, Long Beach, NY etc. There's a lot going on there. Nothing's uh, written in stone. You know it would be interesting to see what the USTR eventually does. What are you hearing? What are you seeing on that front?

Speaker B: Yeah, just as you said and I think you captured it all very well, um, that there's a lot of pressure right now on the ustr and I think the industry is doing a good job of at least painting the risk of side of things. I think the administration will have to go back and relook at uh, the overall plan and I don't know if it means just simply that they back off on the size of the tax which would be one approach to make it painful but not so painful that companies completely change distribution patterns and especially what you were talking about, short sea shipping, you know where we have a ship go make multiple docks or uh, multiple ports of call. Uh and right now even we're even thinking about what happens between Chinese um, built vessels in the global trade lanes and how much shifting do we see of capacity of that capacity moving between Asia and European trade lanes and maybe having to see then European uh, vessels shifting to US Asia trade lanes. And does that create a lack of capacity and really tighten and increase the cost of transportation between Asia, US markets. And so there's big ripple effects that are kind of growing around the globe. It's not just uh, the short sea shipping issue and what happens to individual ports. But I think basically as you outlined very well, the risk to the port industry right now is pretty significant as the rule was written. So what we hope is happening is that this is the art of the deal and that you start uh, much higher than where you're willing to settle and that the Trump administration came in high with this forecast. You know, get the comment period, get the public comments, um, hear the testimony and then come back at it with a, with a more moderate approach. Because I understand the strategic need to start to build out the US shipbuilding industry. Forget the economics for a moment, just from a national security perspective. It's a big deal. It's a big deal. And uh, you know, I think they are worried about, you know, future conflict of the ability to uh, head off uh, adversaries. And so there is a real need there to make a change. It's just you know, to use a carrot or a stick. And I think that's kind of where we're at is right now you're kind of hitting the shipping industry with a stick, trying to force it. Whereas opposed to maybe when the dust settles, hopefully what we'll get is a little more moderate approach and maybe a combination of carrot and stick approach to, to get you a ship building growing.

Speaker A: Right. I mean to put it mildly, if you look at, if you, if you've been looking at uh, the submitted comments to the ustr, there has been a fair amount of pushback on this and that, I mean I, that certainly has to get the administration's attention and the USTR's attention as well. I like that point. You made that kind of aim high uh, coming in and then see where the dust settles. Um, it's something we're following closely. It's something the whole industry is following closely. So uh, the end result is gonna be really uh, quite interesting to say the least.

Speaker B: It is and it's broad based. You've got the retail federation, you've got all kinds of industries that are impacted by this. So it's not just the port authorities and it's not just uh, carriers that are pushing back to say that hey, this could be really dangerous for the U.S. it's all these associations that rely on that flow of goods. And um, they're all you know, putting good data, good risk data in front of the administration so they just understand the size of, of uh, the risk and what they're doing.

Speaker A: Absolutely. Two more quick things before we wrap, Keith, and um, I just want to get your take on the recent deal with the blackrock made. It was really an all encompassing deal. They, they made a major investments uh, in different ports and uh, port terminals if you will, but really on each end of the Panama Canal. Those are, those are really the big ticket items if you will, as it relates to the US Supply chain. And uh, obviously the Trump administration has been talking about how it wants to take back the canal and how China has too much of a presence there, a lot of moving parts. Again, um, and I don't want to get too inside baseball on it, but what's your take on all of it?

Speaker B: Yeah, so I got to participate in a national security roundtable recently and from a military perspective that's where I think a lot of the concern was being generated. Ability to move ships between uh, two different the Atlantic theater and the Pacific theater. And that if we had a foreign country that has an adversarial relationship with the US that that wouldn't be good for potential movement of those military vessels. You know, from a, from a commercial perspective, you know, when we think about it from a global supply chain and the commercial side of the world, the drought had a bigger impact on us than who owns the, you know, the different, the different gates, opposite ends of the, yeah. Of the, of the actual Panama Canal. Um, and you know, the impacts of just not being able to move 35 ships a day or 36 ships a day through the canal, you know, that was, that was a crisis for us and uh, change distribution patterns. But um, the actual ownership by BlackRock was a good compromise. It probably eliminates the fears that was driving some of that discussion. And um, you know, so I, I, I hate to downplay it but I feel like it's probably an event that's in the rearview mirror that we're looking back at and we probably shift our focus more to you know, concerns about further drought and what that does to throughput.

Speaker A: Understood. That's a great take. And then lastly Keith, I'd just be curious to see how you view, I mean uh, obviously it's still early, we're not even April quite yet, but prospects for the 2025 peak season. My expectation would be that it's going to be a little different just because of what's going on with tariffs and how that impacts planning and um, and forecasting to a degree. Um, do you think it's going to be different or do you think it's going to follow more typical patterns or is it just too soon?

Speaker B: Okay, so I got to throw a weird curveball at you because I'm going to bring up the conspiracy theorist in me. Okay, in a good way. In a good way. Uh, you know, when you look at the Trump administration right now, they have a real need and a real desire to be hitting some economic momentum and to be hitting some strides by the second half of this year. You think about going into midterms next year. They need to have a lot of economic momentum built early in 2026. And so I think the pain, the suffering, the turmoil, the change, the transition, everything that we're going through right now is the administration trying to pack it all in the first hundred days or trying to pack it all into the first six months, uh, to try to get all that change made so that business, economy, uh, the consumers can all make their adjustments, and then we get into a different kind of growth pattern. And so that's a long way of saying that. I feel like there are a lot of interests right now that would be creating tailwinds to make sure that we have a good, robust peak season with decent consumer spending, with, um, again, a fairly stable unemployment rate, even if it's up just a little bit, um, but that we still have good wage growth. And you start to see segments of the economy start to thrive. Um, because I think again, it would take right now, uh, an overestimation by the administration that what they're doing is all the right moves and none of the wrong moves. It would take that kind of an overestimation for them to really miss in a big way, setting up a better growth environment as we go into next year. Um, because it's critical for the final two years of the Trump term, he hits that midterm with a lot of momentum built. And, um, so I think they're going to do everything they can make sure that happens. So, uh, anyway, that's my thinking. I think when I look at economic fundamentals right now, they generally remain pretty positive for a good, robust peak with what we would consider to be good consumer sell through.

Speaker A: Okay.

Speaker B: Consumer's still pretty healthy right now. Retail sales forecasts are still pretty good. Um, you know, we have to watch the role of inflation, have to, you know, watch the role of DOGE and some of the government layoffs and if there's a ripple effect there. But most estimates are saying that those are going to be pretty isolated, literally, uh, like the D.C. area and a couple of other heavy government worker areas that go through Some, some pain and suffering there, but the rest of the economy tends to do pretty well through the, through that period. So, um, anyway, it's still a lot, A lot will happen. Uh, as you and I were joking about off. Off camera, we could do this podcast in two weeks and things may be different.

Speaker A: But no question about it. And you know, a lot of it doesn't. Don't you think a lot of it comes back to the need for supply chain certainty as opposed to uncertainty, which is definitely, uh, being felt by a lot of people. And I just say that because we recently did a. Here at Logistics Management, we recently did a survey focused on the current state of, uh, supply, uh, chain uncertainty. And it overwhelmed me overwhelmingly came back to something like 90, 91% are feeling the current impact of supply chain uncertainty. But that also speaks to what you're talking about now with the administration trying to juggle a lot of different balls in the air. So we'll see where, how, where it all ends up, right?

Speaker B: Yeah. And I think you nailed it. Um, when you think about corporate executives, you know, you think about the stock market, they hate uncertainty. They don't even mind if you give them bad news as long as it's certain bad news, because then they can make adjustments, right? They can make adjustments. They can deal with it. They can, they can work through it. What they, what they can't handle is the uncertainty. And right now that's what they've got. We've got a lot of uncertainty out there. We see consumer sentiment has dropped a little bit, and that's, that's delayed spending. Um, but as soon as we get into a certain environment where they know exactly what their tariff risk is, then they can start to work plans to get around that or they can work through it. And I think that's what the stock market's looking for. I think that's what the corporate world's looking for. So the sooner that the administration can kind of get to that point, uh, obviously, I think the better for everyone. And that would be my only real gripe with what's happened over the first hundred days, is just that there's a lot of volatility and uncertainty, and that has slowed down some of the momentum. M. I think that could have already been built.

Speaker A: Yeah, understood.

Speaker B: All.

Speaker A: Uh, right, look, Keith, this brings us to the end of our time for today's podcast. So on behalf of Logistics Management magazine and the Peerless Media Supply Chain Group, I'd like to offer a big thanks for, uh, spending some time with us today.

Speaker B: Oh, absolutely. It's my pleasure. My honor.

Speaker A: Yeah, yeah. Uh, thanks again. And, uh, for those of you listening in, if you want to learn a bit more about Armada corporate intelligence, please go ahead and check out their website. It's Armada Intel.com and Keith is also on LinkedIn. So if you want to go connect with Keith, go give him, go find him there. It's in. His last name is spelled P R A T H E R. And, uh, for those of you on Twitter, please go ahead and feel free to give us a follow simply at Logistics mgmt M. And also, uh, if you're not subscribed to our podcast, please go ahead and do so. All you need to do is Punch up supply chain 247 podcast wherever you get your podcast. And, uh, it'll be right there. And, uh, please go ahead and subscribe. Um, thanks everyone, and, uh, we'll catch you next time. Have a great day.