Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
Okay. We're ready to get started. Up next is Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase. I'm sure there's a ton of folks listening in, so I did want to just welcome all of you to Deutsche Bank's 10th Annual Global FIG Conference. Obviously, this is virtual, and the format will be fireside chat. If you have registered for the conference, you can submit questions via the webcast.
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
好了，我们准备开始了。接下来是摩根大通的Jamie Dimon登场。我相信有很多人都在收听，所以我想对大家表示欢迎，欢迎来到德意志银行第十届全球金融机构集团（FIG）年会。显然，这次是线上形式，采用炉边谈话的方式。如果你已经注册参会，可以通过网络直播提交提问。
Jamie, welcome back, and thank you for joining.
Jamie，欢迎再次加入，感谢你的出席。
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
Matt, happy to be here, folks. Welcome. Go ahead and shoot, Matt.
James Dimon 董事长兼首席执行官
Matt，我很高兴来到这里。各位朋友，欢迎你们。开始提问吧，Matt。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
So you always talk about how JPMorgan was a port in the storm during the 2008-2009 financial crisis. But I think one could argue, banks in aggregate are a port in the storm this crisis, given how supportive they've been of staff, clients, government initiatives. Maybe you could talk about this both from a broader banking perspective and specifically to what JPMorgan is doing.
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
你经常提到，在2008到2009年金融危机期间，摩根大通是“风暴中的港湾”。但我认为，在这次危机中，整个银行业都可以说是“风暴中的港湾”，因为大家对员工、客户以及政府举措都提供了大量支持。你能否从整个银行业的角度谈谈这个问题，同时也具体谈谈摩根大通在做些什么？
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
Yes. So I totally agree. I mean banks are a port in the storm this time. First of all, they're all very well capitalized. They all have very healthy earning streams. They all are more diversified. Some of the regulations were good for that, for liquidity and capital, et cetera. In some ways, they're even better capitalized than people think because no one actually looks at operational risk capital, which I don't really think belongs there; or how G-SIFI is calculated, which has not been adjusted at all for the size of the economy or something like that.
James Dimon 董事长兼首席执行官
是的，我完全同意。这一次银行确实是“风暴中的港湾”。首先，银行的资本状况都非常稳健，盈利能力良好，而且业务更加多元化。某些监管措施在流动性和资本方面确实起到了积极作用。从某些方面来说，银行的资本实力甚至比人们想象的还要强，因为没人真正关注“操作风险资本”这块——我其实并不认为那部分资本应该计入核心资本；或者全球系统重要性银行（G-SIFI）的计算方式，从来没有随着经济规模的变化做出相应调整。
So -- and of course, the banks are doing their jobs. I think all of the banks are lending that money, not just the revolvers but bilateral loans, helping clients, participated in PPP, which, of course, was an extraordinary effort on part of some of our people, thousands of people. And so I think it's a good thing. I think banks are doing what they can to help this economy recover and support clients knowing that things can actually get worse, which means all these extra loans you make could actually have consequences.
当然，银行也在履行自己的职责。我认为现在所有银行都在积极发放贷款，不仅是循环信贷（revolvers），还有双边贷款，支持客户，参与小企业薪资保障计划（PPP），这当然是我们很多员工，成千上万人的一项了不起的努力。所以我认为这是一件好事。银行正在尽自己所能帮助经济复苏，支持客户，同时也知道情况有可能会变得更糟，这意味着所有这些新增贷款都有可能带来风险。
And for JPMorgan, again, I think a lot of banks are doing the same. We're doing -- obviously, taking care of your employees, whether they are going to work, whether thinking of extreme hygiene and protocols, et cetera. We all were able to get a lot of our people working from home. I think something like 80% of our U.S. employees are working from home, and it's amazing how effective it has been, all things being equal.
就摩根大通而言，我认为很多银行都在做同样的事情。我们显然非常重视员工的健康和安全，无论是需要到岗工作的，还是居家办公的，都制定了极其严格的卫生与防疫规定。我们成功地让大量员工在家办公，大约有80%的美国员工远程办公。总体来看，这样的效率表现令人惊讶。
And we're taking care of our clients, whether it be consumer, small business, through PPP, directly, large corporations. Like in terms of credit, we had \$50 million of revolvers drawn down. And I don't think it was necessary that companies did that. But the fact is they paid for those revolvers. I completely understand that they want to feel comfortable. A lot have started to pay it back already, by the way, and paid down commercial paper by doing bond issuances. I think we did another \$50 billion of bilateral credit for those who are getting prepared for what might be a very bad recession, et cetera.
我们也在照顾客户，无论是个人消费者、小型企业（通过PPP计划或其他方式），还是大型企业。在信贷方面，我们有5,000万美元的循环信贷被提取出去。我认为这些公司未必真的需要这么做，但他们为这些信贷额度付了钱，我完全理解他们想要安心一点。顺便说一句，很多企业已经开始还款了，靠发行债券来偿还商业票据。同时我们还提供了大约500亿美元的双边信贷，帮助客户为可能到来的严重衰退做准备等。
So -- and of course, we're all participating in forbearance programs. I think we have 1.5 million people, one way or another, involved in forbearance programs. So banks are trying to do their part to help the country recover.
当然，我们也参与了各类延期还款计划（forbearance programs）。我想我们大约有150万人以某种方式参与了这些计划。所以银行确实在尽自己的一份力量，帮助国家走出困境、恢复经济。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
And if you look at the Fed and the U.S. government, they've clearly done a lot from a financial perspective to help markets, to help the economy. I mean I feel like it's a lot sooner and more aggressive than they did for the financial crisis. But what else, if anything, do you think they should be doing to help bridge the economy to an eventual recovery?
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
如果你看看美联储和美国政府，从财政角度来说他们显然已经做了很多来支持市场和经济。我感觉这次他们出手的时机更早、力度也比金融危机时大得多。但你认为还有什么措施，他们现在或未来可以采取，来帮助经济走向最终复苏？
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
Yes. Yes. I think -- first of all, I think they took extraordinary effort. And I think you're totally right about the speed and pace, so that when the -- when COVID-19 started to look really bad like in February, but before the -- all the states started to close down, they acted by a couple of weeks into March at both a huge fiscal and huge federal reserve actually taking place literally in weeks.
James Dimon 董事长兼首席执行官
是的，是的。首先我认为他们已经做出了非常了不起的努力。你说得完全正确，在速度和节奏上确实如此。当新冠疫情在二月份看起来开始变得严重时——还没等到各州全面封锁——财政部和美联储就在三月初就开始采取大规模的财政和货币行动，仅仅用了几周时间。
If you go back to the original, the great financial crisis, I mean, Bear Stearns failed in March of '08, Lehman failed in September of '08. And I don't think we had a fiscal stimulus package until February, March of '09. And if you look at the Fed actions, they kind of took continuously increasingly strong actions throughout parts of '08 and into parts of '09. This they just kind of did all at once. I mean this wasn't the bazooka. This is -- the Fed took out the whole military and applied it.
如果你回头看上一轮金融危机，比如贝尔斯登在2008年3月倒闭，雷曼在2008年9月倒闭，而真正出台财政刺激方案是在2009年2月或3月。美联储的行动也是逐步加强的，从2008年开始贯穿到2009年。这一次他们几乎是“一步到位”。这不仅仅是“发射一枚火箭筒”，美联储几乎是“动用了整支军队”。
I think they did a lot of the right stuff. Of course, people are going to criticize these programs. There'll be a lot of grandstanding, finger-pointing blame. I'm sure there will be fraud associated with PPP. On the other hand, it is going to save a lot of small businesses. And so a lot of people got loans they needed.
我认为他们做了很多正确的事情。当然，人们会批评这些计划，会有很多作秀、指责、归咎。我相信PPP项目肯定会存在一些欺诈行为。但另一方面，它确实拯救了许多小企业，也让很多人得到了急需的贷款。
Unemployment insurance, they estimate that 50% to 70% of the people in unemployment are earning more money than they were earning before. So that's obviously helping a lot of people avoid an extreme amount of stress. And of course, the payroll, the -- giving people \$1,000, cutting taxes for certain people, that kind of stuff.
失业保险方面，有估计显示，50%到70%的失业人员在领取失业救济金后收入比之前工作时还高。所以这显然在帮助很多人避免极端的经济压力。当然，还有向人们直接发放1000美元、对特定群体减税等措施。
Those are all huge. The Fed rolled out trillions of dollars of programs and just announcing some of these reduced spreads in the marketplace. And the Fed can always do more. So I think they did the right thing. And I guess we're all hoping and praying that you're going to have some kind of recovery start in the third quarter from -- which obviously would be a very bad second quarter.
这些都是极其重大的举措。美联储推出了数万亿美元的计划，仅仅是宣布这些计划，就已经在市场上缩小了利差。而且，美联储始终还有更多工具可以使用。所以我认为他们做得非常对。我们现在都在祈祷第三季度能开始出现某种形式的复苏——因为第二季度显然会非常糟糕。
There obviously is more they can do. Most people think they'll do \$1.5 trillion more on the fiscal side sometime in the third or fourth quarter. And the Fed, of course, they have a lot of tools they could still use at their disposal if they wanted to.
当然，还有其他事情他们可以做。多数人认为在第三或第四季度，财政方面还会再推出1.5万亿美元的刺激计划。而美联储，当然，他们还有很多工具可以动用，如果他们愿意的话。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
And what about from a global perspective? Obviously, JPMorgan is a very global bank. And sometimes it's a little hard for us in the U.S. to look globally and keep track of the central bank actions, the local fiscal actions. Do you think enough is being done outside the U.S. in the markets you operate in?
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
那么从全球的角度来看呢？显然，摩根大通是一家非常国际化的银行。有时候我们在美国很难全面了解各国央行的行动以及当地的财政政策。在您们运营的市场中，您认为美国以外的措施是否已经足够？
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
Yes. I think if you looked at it, I mean, roughly -- it's roughly equivalent in the U.K., Europe and Japan, both on the physical side and the monetary side. They did it a different way. Some people did direct payroll for -- into companies to help them keep their employees. The central banks, obviously, are smaller than the -- our central bank. But for the most part, they took similar type of actions to create liquidity in the markets and to get cash into the hands of both employees and consumers and individuals and stuff like that.
詹姆斯·戴蒙 摩根大通董事长兼首席执行官
是的。我认为，如果你看看整体情况，在英国、欧洲和日本，无论是在财政层面还是货币层面，大致上是相当的。他们的做法不同，有些国家是直接向企业发放工资补贴，以帮助他们留住员工。虽然这些国家的央行规模显然不如我们的央行大，但总体来说，他们采取了类似的措施，旨在为市场注入流动性，把现金送到员工、消费者以及个人手中，诸如此类的方式。
And I think -- but there is -- and there's a heightened consciousness about the effect in the emerging markets. That to me is still hanging out there. If this recession drags on for too long, that there are countries and companies can have some issues with the leverage they have, et cetera. And of course, you probably read about the IMF, was talking about that they have $1 trillion of firepower if they had to, to help developing nations and emerging markets get through this.
我还认为——现在人们对新兴市场所受的影响有了更高的关注度。这一点在我看来仍是一个悬而未决的问题。如果这场衰退持续太久，一些国家和企业可能会因其杠杆率而面临问题。当然，你可能也看到国际货币基金组织（IMF）表示，如果有必要，他们有1万亿美元的“火力”来帮助发展中国家和新兴市场度过这一难关。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
So bringing it back to the U.S., you're obviously a very large debit and credit card player. Volumes went down sharply end of March, early April. How are those tracking, broadly speaking, as you look at the second quarter and more recently?
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
回到美国本土市场，贵行显然是借记卡和信用卡的大户。三月底到四月初的交易量大幅下滑。总体而言，当你观察第二季度乃至最近的趋势时，这些交易量目前的走势如何？
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
Yes. So the -- I guess most of the trends I'm going to tell you about, you probably have read about, which is -- and obviously, credit card, and our credit card is more prime and more travel and restaurants and stuff like that. That was down like 40%. That's come back a little bit but still down like 35% or maybe 30% at this point. Obviously, if you bifurcated into who is up and who is down, the Amazons, Netflix, Walmarts, Targets are up. Groceries are up. And then, obviously, restaurants, travel, airports are down 95% or something like that. So debit card has kind of recovered to where it was before. So that's kind of more people everyday spending. So you've seen that kind of pop right back to where it was. So year-over-year, it's actually rather flat at this point, which I think is a good thing.
詹姆斯·戴蒙 摩根大通董事长兼首席执行官
是的——我想我接下来要说的多数趋势你可能已经看到过。显然，我们的信用卡客户偏向高信用等级，消费集中在旅游、餐饮等领域，那部分曾经下滑了大约40%。现在略有回升，但仍然下滑了大约35%，或者说30%左右。当然，如果你细分一下哪些行业表现好，哪些差，像亚马逊、Netflix、沃尔玛、Target这些是上涨的，超市也在上涨。而餐馆、旅游、机场这些行业则是大跌，可能跌幅达到了95%左右。至于借记卡，基本已经恢复到了之前的水平，这更多反映的是日常消费，所以我们看到这一部分迅速反弹到了原来的位置。按年同比，现在实际上是基本持平的，我认为这是一个积极的信号。
The consumer is in good shape relative to -- we expect unemployment to go to 20%. But the way you should all think about that is it's not effectively 20% because those consumers, like I said, 50% to 70% are earning more money they're earning before. They've gotten other benefits from the government. They're -- they've quarantined themselves, but a lot of them expect to go back to work. So it's a healthier consumer. And you see that in actual underlying delinquencies, roll rates, housing prices. The last global recession, housing prices were down 40% from peak to trough. They're still up here. So then it's completely different from the consumer standpoint.
与此相比，消费者的整体状况还算良好——我们虽然预计失业率会上升到20%，但大家应该理解，实际的情况并不等于“有效失业率”达20%。正如我刚才说的，大约有50%到70%的失业者目前的收入甚至高于之前，他们从政府获得了额外的补贴。他们虽然在居家隔离，但许多人预期会重返工作岗位。所以整体而言，消费者的财务状况更健康。这从实际的违约率、转逾率、房价走势中也能看出端倪。上一次全球衰退中，房价从高点到低点下跌了40%；但这次房价仍在高位。因此，从消费者的角度来看，这次的情况完全不同。
As the recovery begins, we maybe won't -- having a good -- healthier consumer will be a -- obviously, will be a good thing for the economy.
随着经济复苏的开始，我们或许不会……我想说的是，拥有一个状况良好、更健康的消费者群体，对经济而言显然是一件好事。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
So shifting to risk, broadly speaking, as well as credit, but one of the things that you said earlier and you said before is it's not just the risk that you come into the downturn, but it's the risk that you extend or take as the downturn is going on, including to support some of your clients and customers. And one thing that we saw a few weeks back was prepaying with Marriott to purchase some of the points. Obviously, it's been a long-term partner for you, and it's essentially a bet that travel will come back. But just not maybe that specific deal, but just talk about how you weigh those risks and the potential upside from those deals because there is some upside, too, if it works out the way you're planning, I would think.
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
我们来谈谈风险问题，包括整体风险和信用风险。你之前多次提到一个观点：关键不仅在于进入衰退时你所承担的风险，还包括你在衰退过程中继续承担或扩展的风险，尤其是为了支持客户。一件很有代表性的事情是几周前你们预付款给万豪购买积分的交易。万豪一直是你们的长期合作伙伴，这实质上是押注旅游业将会恢复。虽然我们不必专门讨论这笔交易，但你能否谈谈在面对这类交易时，你们是如何权衡其中的风险与潜在回报的？因为如果结果如你所预期，这种交易是可能带来回报的，对吧？
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
Sure. Mr. Marriott, usually we approach any deal with partners. We're always like which -- it's got to work for everybody. So not like you're trying to out-negotiate someone. They needed some help. We asked for a bunch of things in there. So they've been an absolutely outstanding partner, and we're hoping this turns out well for both of us.
詹姆斯·戴蒙 摩根大通董事长兼首席执行官
当然。以万豪为例，我们和合作伙伴谈任何交易时，出发点总是：这件事必须对所有人都有利，而不是试图去压价或讨价还价。他们当时确实需要一些帮助，而我们在交易中也提出了不少要求。万豪一直都是一个非常出色的合作伙伴，我们也希望这笔交易最终对双方都有利。
I think on the risk side, the way you think about a little bit. So bank -- in the last global financial crisis, I think a lot of banks had to pull back their horns because they had no choice. This time, as we mentioned before, a lot of people are very well capitalized. So I'd mentioned in my Chairman's letter, that JPMorgan last year had pretax earnings of $48 billion. Well, that earnings stream allows you to bear a lot of risk. Obviously, some of your revenues may go down, but it allows you to bear a lot of credit risk. So you have your normal credit risk, kind of your normal cycle you predict. This is not normal. But again, you can look at it and say, "Okay. How much risk can I take before I can no longer do that?"
我认为从风险角度看，这里面需要一些思考。在上一轮全球金融危机中，很多银行不得不收缩战线，因为他们别无选择。而这一次，正如我们之前所说，很多机构的资本状况非常充足。正如我在董事长信中提到的，摩根大通去年税前利润达480亿美元。这笔收益能够支撑我们承担相当大的风险。尽管收入可能会有所下降，但我们仍有能力承担很多信用风险。通常你会面对一个常规周期下的信用风险，但这次不是常规情形。不过你依然可以做一个判断：“我还能承受多少风险？什么时候是我承受不起的临界点？”
So if this goes on for a long time, like think of 20% unemployment until the end of the year. And then, of course, I think you will see some banks pulling back because they simply can't take more risk. And a lot of the regulatory risk-based measures, et cetera, will get dramatically worse because advanced risk-weighted assets go way up as companies get downgraded, et cetera. And there's some other -- and CECL is a -- I mean more things are counted pro cyclical this time around than last time. Think of reserving risk-weighted assets, some of the regulatory things, some of the liquidity things, they will actually make it harder for banks at one point to extend credit, but that hasn't happened quite yet.
如果这场危机持续很久，比如说到年底失业率还维持在20%的水平，那你就可能会看到一些银行开始收缩，因为它们确实无法再承担更多的风险。许多监管下的风险权重指标会急剧恶化，因为随着企业信用评级被下调，风险加权资产会迅速上升。另外，比如CECL（当前预期信用损失模型），这次比上次金融危机更具顺周期性。无论是准备金、风险加权资产、流动性指标等，这些监管因素在某个时间点都会使银行更难发放贷款。不过目前这种情况还没有出现。
So -- but look, you got to -- whenever you look at something like that, you got to look at -- you have to be -- you hope for the best. You expect some kind of base case, and you plan for the worst. We do consider our job to help people through the toughest of times. So when I mentioned all the credit we did, $6 billion was to hospitals, health care systems; billions was to municipalities, schools, you name it. We're trying to help them through this. And yes, we know we may bear some risk, but we'd rather -- for JPMorgan Chase and other big banks to say, "We help you get through your toughest of times." And yes, we lost some money is better than "No. When times get really tough, we pulled in our horns and you went bankrupt." We are their lender last resort.
所以当你在评估类似的事情时，你必须做的是：抱有最好的希望，制定合理的基线预测，并为最坏的情形做准备。我们确实把帮助人们度过最艰难时期当作自己的责任。就像我提到的，我们发放的信用支持中，有60亿美元是给医院和医疗系统的，还有数十亿给了市政当局、学校等等。我们是在尽力帮助他们度过难关。当然，我们知道这其中可能会承担一些风险，但我们更希望的是——让摩根大通和其他大银行能够说：“我们在你最艰难的时候伸出援手。”即使这过程中我们亏了一些钱，也比“在困难时刻我们收缩战线、任你破产”要强得多。我们就是他们的“最后贷款人”。
If you look at the total bank lending, I think total, it's up almost $1 trillion. That's far more than Fed lending has happened, so -- or even PPP. So when you put it together, it's been an important part that banks continue to lend into the crisis a little bit.
如果你看整个银行体系的信贷总额，现在已经增加了接近1万亿美元。这远远超过了美联储的贷款规模，甚至也超过了PPP（薪资保护计划）的规模。把这些加总在一起，你会发现银行在这场危机中持续提供信贷支持，确实发挥了重要作用。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
So you gave some possible outcomes in your shareholder letter under stressed economic assumptions and compared them to CCAR results from last year. We've now got a couple of months of additional data. What are your thoughts on how credit losses might compare to the scenarios run by the Fed?
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
你在致股东信中提供了一些在经济压力情境下的可能结果，并与去年的CCAR（全面资本分析与评估）结果进行了比较。如今我们已经多了几个月的数据。你认为当前的信贷损失情况与美联储压力测试的情境相比如何？
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
Right. So the first one -- look, that's one scenario. And one of the things I was talking about the stress test is, one scenario is not how you prepare for risk. The way you prepare for risk is we do like 120 scenarios a week. And you've got to be able to handle a lot of them and react rather quickly and stuff like that.
詹姆斯·戴蒙 摩根大通董事长兼首席执行官
对。首先，那只是一个情境。我在谈到压力测试时就强调过：你不能只依赖一个情境来做风险准备。我们每周大约运行120种情境模拟，你必须能够应对其中的大多数，并能快速反应、灵活应对，这才是风险管理的正途。
But take a base case. And I'm going to use unemployment as the proxy for the economy. You can look at GDP or a bunch of other factors. But the base case, most economists now have unemployment in the second quarter ending somewhere around 18%, give or take, 1% or 2%, okay? And like I said, it's not as bad as real unemployment, 18%. And then the base case has it going to 14% in the third quarter, maybe 12% or 11% or 10% in the fourth quarter. And that's kind of the consensus estimate. If that happens, and I think it has a chance of happening because you're already seeing people going back to work, states opening up, restaurants opening -- they're opening up again. So you're already seeing the positive effects of the opening up taking place, at least for the economy. If that happens, since CECL is very forward-looking, I think that banks will have to put up a lot more credit reserves this quarter. So our -- we would have substantial increase in credit reserves in the second quarter.
但我们来看一个基线情境。我打算用失业率来作为经济的代表指标。你当然可以看GDP或其他很多因素，但大多数经济学家目前的基线预测是第二季度的失业率大约在18%左右，正负1到2个百分点。就像我说的，18%的数字并不等同于“实际失业率”有多严重。接着在基线情境中，第三季度失业率会降至14%，第四季度可能降至12%、11%甚至10%左右，这也差不多是市场的共识预期。如果这种情况发生了——我认为是有可能的，因为我们已经看到人们开始重返工作岗位、各州逐步解封、餐厅重新开放——至少从经济角度来说，重启已经带来了积极影响。如果果真如此，由于CECL（当前预期信用损失模型）是高度前瞻性的，各家银行在本季度可能会大幅增加信贷拨备。对我们而言，第二季度的信贷拨备将会出现大幅增长。
But if the base case happens, you may not need any more credit reserves in the third and fourth quarter or going forward. Again, because CECL upfronted a lot more than it did before, but it's very sense of something like that. You always have to be prepared for a worst case. Like, what if somehow we stay at 18% to 20% of unemployment until the end of the year? Well then, of course, you'll be putting up more reserves because now you're looking another 12 quarters forward, another 6 quarters forward.
但如果基线情境实现了，那在第三、第四季度乃至未来可能就不再需要继续增加拨备了。这也是因为CECL在模型设计上比以往“更前置”，已经在早期反映了大量的预期损失。但这种模型也很敏感，因此你始终得为最坏的情况做好准备。比如说，如果我们一直维持在18%到20%的高失业率水平直到年底，那显然我们还需要继续追加拨备，因为届时我们要重新评估未来12个季度、或6个季度的信贷风险。
I think the base case in some numbers is worse than the Fed stress -- severe stress. So -- but on the other hand, unemployment isn't exactly the same. Housing prices didn't go down. There was no global market stress, which we've always thought wouldn't happen anyway, the trading stress thing that happens in the first day and you have no recovery from it.
我认为，从某些数字来看，当前的基线情境比美联储的“严重压力情境”还要糟糕。但另一方面，失业率的表现并不完全相同。房价并没有下跌，也没有出现全球性市场压力。而我们一直认为那种“第一天市场剧烈崩溃并且毫无反弹”的交易压力情境本身就不太可能发生。
So depending what the Fed does, when they look at this next go around, which we're going to find out next month, we'll see what it is. But the fact is, it is very different than the Fed's adverse -- it's a really adverse case.
所以最终还要看美联储下一轮的审视和判断，这一点我们将在下个月知道。但现实是，目前的情况与美联储所谓的不利情境是非常不同的——现在确实是一个真正的不利情境。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
And if the base case is close to the average...
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
如果当前的基线情境接近平均水平的话……
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
But even -- but I said even if the simply average case, even a worst case plays out, JPMorgan Chase will have the capital and the wherewithal to continue to do their job.
詹姆斯·戴蒙 摩根大通董事长兼首席执行官
但我说过，即使只是一个普通的基准情境，甚至是一个最坏的情境，摩根大通仍将具备充足的资本和能力，继续履行我们的职责。
Now if we go into a Great Depression, that will be different. That will strain everybody. And you're going to see banks and other large companies start to make decisions, which could make it worse as they try to protect themselves.
但如果我们真的进入一场“大萧条”，那就完全不一样了。那将让所有人都承受巨大压力。届时，银行和其他大型企业可能会出于自保考虑而做出一些决策，而这些决策反过来可能会让情况变得更糟。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
And just on the base case, if that does play out, the substantial reserve build in 2Q and maybe on the rest of the year and beyond, do you think the second quarter reserve build for the industry would be higher than the first quarter? It seems like that's still a possibility.
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
回到基线情境，如果它确实发生，在第二季度需要大幅增加拨备，乃至全年都可能持续下去。你是否认为整个行业在第二季度的拨备增长会高于第一季度？这似乎仍然有可能发生。
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
I don't know yet. It easily could be roughly equivalent. And we all have a different mix of business. So you really got to look at the difference in credit cards, in wholesale, in auto, middle market. They're all different.
詹姆斯·戴蒙
现在我还不确定。完全有可能和第一季度大致相当。我们每家银行的业务组合都不一样，所以你得具体看信用卡、批发贷款、汽车贷款、中型企业贷款等业务板块的差异，每一类的情况都不同。
But roughly going into the first quarter, you didn't forecast 18% unemployment going to the second quarter. And like I said, CECL is very forward-looking. So we will pick up some of that over time. And so -- but look, I don't think that's a terrible case. I mean if we start to have a recovery where unemployment drops by 6% in the third quarter, that's not so bad. People have gone home. They've quarantined. Their incomes have stayed up, for the most part. Hopefully, a lot of these small businesses won't be permanently damaged, and you'll start to have a real recovery.
大致来看，在进入第一季度时，没人预测第二季度会有18%的失业率。而就像我之前说的，CECL是一个高度前瞻的模型，所以我们会逐步反映出这类变化。但说实话，我并不认为那是个糟糕到极点的情境。比如如果我们在第三季度开始复苏，失业率下降6个百分点，那也不算坏。人们已经回家隔离，绝大多数人的收入仍然维持得不错。希望很多小企业不会受到永久性损害，那么经济将有机会实现真正的复苏。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
And then in terms of the timing of the actual credit losses, there's obviously a lot of...
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
接下来关于实际信贷损失发生的时间问题，显然这里面有很多……
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
Can I say one other thing -- can I say something that's also very important? You're going to know a lot more by the end of the third quarter because you're going to see what actually happened to delinquencies and roll rates for credit card. You're going to see the first round of forbearances and mortgages come due. How many people can actually start paying new mortgage again? So you're going to see like how much stressed and strained it was. You're going to see more about home prices. You're going to know a lot more about whether people opening up dramatically increased COVID cases or just a little bit. So I do think by the end of June or at least by -- when companies report mid- to late July, you will know a lot more, and you can inform -- your decision will be a lot more informed than right now, even though it's only a little over 30 days away.
詹姆斯·戴蒙 摩根大通董事长兼首席执行官
我能补充一句吗？我想说一件非常重要的事。到第三季度末你会了解得更多，因为你将看到信用卡的实际拖欠率和转逾率是怎么回事；你会看到第一轮延期还款的按揭贷款到期了，有多少人能够重新开始偿还房贷。这能反映出金融系统究竟承受了多少压力和紧张状况。你也会看到更多关于房价的情况，还能知道重新开放是否导致了COVID病例的大幅增加，还是仅有小幅波动。所以我认为，到6月底，或者最迟在公司7月中下旬开始发布财报的时候，你将掌握更多信息，你的判断也会比现在更有根据——尽管现在距离那个时候也就30多天而已。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
Well, that essentially answered my question on timing of when we might have more clarity on credit. Last kind of topic on -- as you think about credit and maybe the downside...
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
好吧，这基本上已经回答了我关于我们什么时候能够更清楚了解信贷情况的问题。最后一个话题是——关于你怎么看信贷风险以及可能的下行情况……
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
Matt, I know I'm in trouble. The thing about CECL is everyone uses their own assumptions. So it's going to be up to the analyst to kind of dig into the 10-Qs and ask the question about what's your assumption? Some people are assuming a very strong recovery. Some are assuming something different. Some use probabilities of different scenarios. Some use -- some are expecting home price to go way down. Some expect them to go up.
詹姆斯·戴蒙
Matt，我知道你是想追问，但CECL的问题在于：每家公司用的假设都不一样。所以最终还是要靠分析师自己深入研究10-Q（季报），去问：“你们用了什么假设？”有的公司假设强劲复苏，有的假设其他情况，有的用了不同情境的概率分布，有的预测房价大幅下跌，有的则预测房价上涨。
So you've got to dig into CECL to figure out what the hell they put up. It is one of the reasons I always thought that CECL was a bad idea. And people are going to spend more time playing around the assumptions than looking at the actual underlying data.
所以你必须深入研究CECL，才能搞清楚他们到底拨了多少拨备。这也是我一直觉得CECL是个坏主意的原因之一。因为大家最终会把更多时间花在“调整假设”上，而不是去看实际的底层数据。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
So I do want to ask on dividends. A few weeks back, there was a lot of concern, certainly, question about the banks being able to continue to pay the dividends. I mean frankly, for JPMorgan and many banks, it's really hard for the math to show the need to cut the dividends. But I guess the question is, one, I want to make sure you still agree; but then two, under what circumstance may bank dividends be cut or suspended? I would imagine it might not just be financial in nature, if you could address that.
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
我想问一下关于股息的问题。几周前，市场上对银行是否能继续支付股息产生了不少担忧。坦白说，对于摩根大通和许多银行来说，从数据上看，很难得出必须削减股息的结论。所以我想问两个问题：第一，你是否仍然同意这个判断？第二，在什么情况下银行会削减或暂停股息？我猜想可能不光是出于财务因素，如果你可以谈谈这点就更好了。
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
Yes. So I think it's important that a company try to sustain its dividend. I do think there are legitimate complaints in the great financial recession that a lot of banks, in particular, and other companies, but banks continue to pay very outsized dividends going into a crisis. And they depleted too much of their capital by doing that.
詹姆斯·戴蒙 摩根大通董事长兼首席执行官
是的。我认为企业维持其股息是很重要的。我也承认，在上次金融危机中，很多银行（当然还有其他公司）在危机初期仍支付了过高的股息，这确实引起了不少合理的批评。因为这么做导致它们消耗了太多资本。
Remember, this time around, the real capital being used to buy back stock, and all the banks stopped that. And people are a little misguided when they're talking about dividends. It's a drop in the bucket. So we just announced our dividend for this quarter. It's less than $3 billion, like 0.15% of our capital base. If you take the base case, what I was just talking about, the kind of the base assumption that economists have out there, we will earn quite a bit of money this year. Obviously, it'll be down a lot, but that's a lot of money. Why do you cut your dividend and then you just have to increase it right away to meet that obligation to shareholders? And of course, you don't really need it either because you still have a lot of excess capital.
这一次真正用到资本的是股票回购，而所有银行都已经停止了回购。人们在谈论股息时其实有些误解，因为股息所占资本的比例其实非常小。我们刚刚宣布本季度的股息总额还不到30亿美元，仅占我们资本基础的约0.15%。如果以我刚才提到的基线经济情境为基础，也就是经济学家的普遍预测，我们今年还是会赚不少钱的。尽管盈利会明显下滑，但绝对金额依然不小。那你为什么要削减股息，然后再立刻恢复，以履行对股东的承诺呢？更何况我们也根本不缺资本。
So the better course of action was to wait and to see. And if you go -- if the recovery starts -- and like I said, I think we have a pretty good idea when we report earnings. Then you don't -- you will never need to cut your dividend. If by any chance that it's pretty clear that this is going to get worse dramatically, then of course, the Board will take up the issue and say, "What should we do? When should we do it? How should we do it?"
所以更理性的做法是先观望。如果复苏开始了——正如我说的，我认为我们在财报公布时会有一个相对明确的判断——那么你根本就不需要削减股息。但如果未来形势显著恶化，那么董事会当然会讨论这个问题，考虑“我们应该做什么？什么时候做？怎么做？”
If they have to -- if a Board is mature, they'll consider that. But you have to have a pretty bad economic environment, I think, for banks to justify their Boards and to show that we should cut it now. It is cheap capital if you have something like a great financial crisis that goes on for 3 years. It's cheaper to do that and try to raise capital in the marketplace. So -- but again, you've got to look at the numbers. These banks, most of them are really well capitalized.
如果真的需要这样做——一个成熟的董事会当然会考虑。但我认为，必须是经济环境非常糟糕，银行才有理由让董事会做出“我们现在应该削减股息”的决定。如果真的遇上像上次金融危机那样持续3年的严峻情势，削减股息会是一种相对廉价的资本补充方式，甚至比从市场上融资更划算。不过归根结底，还是得看数据。眼下大多数银行的资本状况都非常稳健。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
And conversely, if things keep moving in the right direction, it's not going to be long before investors and analysts start asking about resumption of buybacks. Obviously, the entire industry of big banks preemptively chose to suspend buybacks to support clients, to support customers, to support the economy. What are your thoughts on resumption of buybacks?
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
相反地，如果经济继续朝着正确方向发展，投资者和分析师很快就会开始询问股票回购是否会重启。显然，整个大型银行业早前都主动暂停了回购，以支持客户、支持经济。你对重启回购有何看法？
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
I think you're a little premature. I think you've got to see the white of the eyes of the recovery before you start something like buybacks. But I think the companies that -- and to be more opportunistic. If companies all of a sudden are retaining a lot of capital, they're earning money, reserves are coming down, et cetera, yes, I think you may see people start them, but they probably won't be the size that you saw before. And yes, we've always...
詹姆斯·戴蒙 摩根大通董事长兼首席执行官
我觉得这个话题现在还为时过早。在启动股票回购之前，你得真正看到“复苏的实质面貌”。不过话说回来，如果公司突然发现自己留存了大量资本，开始重新盈利，拨备也在减少等等，那我认为确实会有公司开始恢复回购。但它们的规模可能不会像以前那么大。而且我们一贯的态度是……
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
And just longer term on buyback...
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
那从长期角度来看，你怎么看回购……
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
Excuse me?
詹姆斯·戴蒙
你说什么？
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
No. Go ahead, please.
Matthew O'Connor
没事，请继续说。
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
I think it's -- and the other notion that people have about buybacks, something bad about, buying back your stock -- and I've always thought that you shouldn't buyback your stock when you think you're buying at a price that your remaining shareholders are getting a good deal. I never believed this notion that you buy -- that it's returning cash to shareholders. Therefore, it doesn't matter what price you pay, which is kind of -- so there's this attitude that people overpaid. Obviously, that's true sometimes. It's a free world. People are going to overpay.
詹姆斯·戴蒙 摩根大通董事长兼首席执行官
我想说的是，很多人对股票回购有一种偏见，觉得它不好。但我一直认为，回购股票的前提应该是你相信在这个价格回购，对剩余股东来说是划算的。我从不相信那种“回购就是把现金返还给股东，所以出什么价都无所谓”的说法。那种态度就是——无论价格如何都去买，结果往往是买贵了。当然，有时候确实会买贵，这很正常，在自由市场上，人们总会有出价过高的情况。
On the other hand, it's a normal recirculation of capital that you can use, and you give it back to your shareholders. This notion that disappears is dead wrong. You're just recirculating it to somebody else to a higher and best use. And obviously, banks should retain the capital they use to safely run their business. Once they've done that, there's no reason they shouldn't be buying back stock if they think that's the best use of their capital.
但另一方面，回购其实是一种正常的资本再循环方式，你把资本还给股东。那种说回购的钱就“消失了”的观点是完全错误的。你只是把资本转移到了另一个股东手中，以求它被更高效地使用。显然，银行应该保留足够的资本来安全经营业务；但在满足了这点之后，如果他们认为回购是资本的最佳用途，那完全没有理由不去回购股票。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
And do you think, looking to the other side of this as banks, including JPMorgan, thinking about allocated excess capital, will it be done differently? You've talked -- you've floated the idea of supplemental dividends over buybacks given some of the price. So do you think that could gain some momentum, again, looking at the other banks?
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
你是否认为，等度过这次危机之后，银行（包括摩根大通）在如何分配多余资本方面，会不会有不同的做法？你以前曾提过相较于回购，可能会更倾向于发放“额外股息”，尤其考虑到价格因素。你认为这种方式会在其他银行中逐渐获得支持吗？
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
No, I don't. And it's the worst -- to me, that's the worst way to handle excess capital. So there's nothing -- to me, the way we look at excess capital, there's nothing wrong with holding excess capital for a while because you can tell your shareholder, "Hey, this is excess capital. I hope to deploy it for you at a good return 1 day, soon, in the next year or 2. If I can't use it, I do want to give it back to you. I'd rather just raise the dividend and slowly suck down the excess capital then do a special."
詹姆斯·戴蒙
不，我不认为会那样。而且在我看来，那其实是处理多余资本最差的方式。我们怎么看待多余资本？我觉得暂时持有这些资本没有问题，因为你可以告诉股东：“这是我们暂时多出来的资本，我希望能在未来一年或两年内以一个良好的回报率把它投出去。如果最终找不到机会，我会把它还给你。”我更倾向于逐步提高普通股息，慢慢消化掉这些多余资本，而不是发放一次性的特别股息。
The reason that people are considering special dividends and stuff is because the way the regulatory system is working, you were heavily penalized by having dividends. And so you couldn't raise your dividend too much or something like that because it would penalize you under a bunch of tests that they have or something.
人们之所以会考虑发特别股息，是因为当前的监管体系对于普通股息的处理方式不利。如果你的股息水平过高，你可能会在监管测试中受罚。正因为如此，银行不能随意大幅提高常规股息。
So I'd rather that you -- as long as you meet your regulatory requirements, you get to decide your dividend, and you don't have to worry about that. You don't -- special, obviously, you can do one day. I think it's not the preferred way to do something.
所以我更希望能做到：只要你满足监管要求，就应该由你自己决定发多少股息，而不用顾虑这些限制。虽然你也可以选择某天发一次特别股息，但我认为那不是最理想的方式。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
And if I could segue into the longer-term impacts from the current crisis. I mean the first thing that comes to mind is where we just left off on regulation. And banks were obviously at the center of a dramatic increase in regulation last cycle. Hopefully, it'll be different this time. But talk about how you think regulation may be different from this crisis, both for banks and maybe broadly speaking, for corporate America.
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
接下来我想谈谈当前危机可能带来的长期影响。首先想到的就是监管问题。上一轮危机后，银行业无疑成为了监管大幅加强的核心领域。希望这次的情形会有所不同。你怎么看这次危机后，监管环境可能发生的变化？不光是针对银行，也包括对整个企业界更广泛的影响。
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
Yes. Look, I've always acknowledged that there was a -- you always want good regulations. Some people believe there's been more. I mean more isn't always good. More could actually be worse, have adverse consequences. And obviously, after the crisis, there was a need for regulatory reform. Some of these institutions, not banks so much as investment banks, massively overleveraged. A lot of the shadow banks massively overleveraged. Accounting allowed people to have these huge off-balance-sheet things that just simply not accounted for, and they were overleveraged and mismatched in terms of maturity, their liabilities and assets and stuff like that.
詹姆斯·戴蒙 摩根大通董事长兼首席执行官
是的。首先我一直承认，我们确实需要良好的监管。有些人认为监管越多越好，但实际上，“更多”并不总是“更好”，反而可能带来不利后果。很明显，在上轮金融危机之后，监管改革是必要的。当时，一些机构——主要是投行而不是商业银行——杠杆率极高。很多影子银行也同样严重过度杠杆化。会计制度允许他们存在大量未纳入表内的资产负债，这些资产实际上没有被清晰地反映出来，它们的资产和负债在期限结构上严重错配。
So reform was a good thing, transparency, more liquidity, more capital, more stress testing for those who didn't do it. Some of us already did it, but those are very good things. But of course, you can look at a bunch of other things. I think -- and I don't want to be complaining about regulation. They are what they are. We'll deal with them the way they are. But it does make sense at one point to look at, were they calibrated right? Were they coordinated right? Do they have adverse consequences? And I won't go through it here, but there are a lot of things which are having adverse consequences today on swap rates, on repo rates, on the movement of money, the -- where the risk is ending up in the system.
因此，改革本身是好事——提高透明度、加强流动性要求、增加资本充足率、对未参与过压力测试的机构进行测试，这些都非常必要。我们当中有些机构早就开始做这些了，但整体而言这些都是正面的改进。但同时，你也得审视其他方面的问题。我并不是要抱怨监管，它们就是如此，我们会按规执行。但在某个时间点，有必要重新审视这些监管规定：它们的设定是否合适？是否协调？有没有产生负面影响？我在这里不一一列举，但目前有很多监管政策确实对掉期利率、回购利率、资金流动以及系统内风险的归属产生了负面影响。
The papers are right about mortgages today, like we have this problem on mortgages. No, the problem with mortgage was created by bad regulation that forced a lot of none -- forced a lot of mortgage lending out of banks, that forced servicing out of banks, that forced less transparency over there. So there are all these things that took place where the consequences were 5 years from now or 7 years from now. And people at the time don't necessarily look back and say, "That's why we actually call it the problem."
关于抵押贷款，媒体今天说的问题其实说对了一部分。所谓的抵押贷款问题，实际上是某些糟糕监管政策造成的——这些政策迫使大量抵押贷款业务退出了银行体系，服务功能也被转移出了银行，从而导致该领域的透明度大幅下降。很多监管措施在推出时，并不会立刻产生问题，但五年、七年后你才发现它们的负面影响。而当初人们并不会回过头来看，说：“原来我们今天的问题是当初那个政策造成的。”
So I think one day, they should be looking at how you look at liquidity a little bit closer, operational risk capital, G-SIFI -- I think, G-SIFI is by far the stupidest calculation I've ever seen in my whole life. And then in America, we gold plated it. We added to it. So -- and the reason I say that, if you look at G-SIFI, cash is a negative. Repo's a negative. Short-term AAA stuff is negative. And there are negatives over and over, and these multiple calculations take place. Is that what they really intended to do? And so you've got to look at these things even -- I believe in having tons of liquidity, but certain things give you no liquidity value and, therefore, creates a little bit of a cliff effect.
所以我认为将来某一天，人们应当更深入地审视几个问题，比如流动性监管的方式、操作风险资本、以及全球系统重要性金融机构（G-SIFI）的评估机制。G-SIFI 是我一生中见过的最荒谬的计算标准。而在美国，我们还在此基础上“镀金”加码。我这么说的原因是，你去看G-SIFI的指标：现金被算作负面项，回购是负面项，短期AAA评级资产也是负面项，还有很多重复的负面加权。这真的是监管本意吗？所以必须重新检视这些内容。我本人非常支持保持高水平的流动性，但某些资产在监管中却被视为“无流动性价值”，结果反而会制造悬崖式效应。
And like I said, I already mentioned the pro cyclicality of CECL, reserving generally risk-weighted assets generally and a whole bunch of other stuff that actually, if this thing gets worse and worse, will cause banks to pull back dramatically at precisely the wrong time. So I do think after this is all said and done, maturely, people should look at these things and decide which ones work, which ones didn't work, which one should be modified, which is the way people should always be looking at regulations.
正如我说过的，CECL（当前预期信用损失模型）本身存在顺周期性，加上一般性的准备金要求、风险加权资产等多项因素，一旦局势恶化，可能恰恰在最不该收缩的时候迫使银行收缩信贷。因此，我确实认为，在这场危机结束之后，有必要以成熟理性的态度重新审视这些规定：哪些是有效的，哪些无效，哪些应该被调整。这才是监管应有的态度。
How can we make it better? How can we make it more efficient? How can we make it serve the markets better? How do we make it protect the system better, protect consumers better? And sometimes, the rules that are put in place have the absolute opposite effect that people expect. And so you've got to be very careful when you put rules into the marketplace on what you expect them to do.
我们要思考的是：怎样才能让监管变得更好？更高效？更有利于市场运行？如何更好地保护金融系统与消费者？有时候，监管规则产生的效果恰恰与初衷相反。因此，当你将一项规定引入市场时，一定要非常清楚你希望它达成的目标是什么。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
And I want to talk about how this crisis might cause some tweaks to your business model. I mean the first thing I want to ask about is on the technology spend. It's an area that you've been focused on for many years. You highlight the annual budgets of $11 billion to $12 billion. How will your approach to investment spend in technology change from the crisis, whether how much you spend, where you spend it?
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
我想谈谈这场危机可能对你们商业模式带来的一些调整。首先我想问的是技术投入方面，这是你们多年来一直高度关注的领域。你们每年的技术预算在110亿到120亿美元之间。经历这场危机之后，你们在技术投资的金额和方向上会有什么变化吗？
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
Well, it won't change the way we look at it, which is you have to build technology to serve your clients better, faster, cheaper. And that's just as true today as it was 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 30 years ago. Obviously, the technology is different. So now you have cloud, you have AI, you've got work from home and all these things, which obviously, you use technology to adjust to. But if you look at our business, it's people, products and technology, branches. It's -- and so yes, it won't change the fact that we try to use technology to do a better job for clients. It already does a tremendous job on risk, fraud, marketing, getting your cost of servicing down, your cost of digital, which is great for clients. It also reduces the cost rate. In some cases, of course, it's more fraud or errors out there.
詹姆斯·戴蒙 摩根大通董事长兼首席执行官
不会改变我们看待技术投资的基本原则，那就是必须通过技术让我们能为客户提供更好、更快、更便宜的服务。这一点在今天依然适用，就像10年前、20年前、30年前一样。当然，今天的技术手段已经不同，现在有云计算、有人工智能、有远程办公等各种新形态，而这些都需要技术来支持和适应。但如果你看我们的业务构成，核心还是人在服务，产品与技术，以及分支机构。所以，不，这场危机不会改变我们通过技术提升客户服务质量的决心。事实上，技术已经在风险管理、反欺诈、营销、服务成本控制、数字化成本等方面发挥了巨大作用，对客户而言这些都是利好。当然，有些情况下，技术也会带来更多的欺诈或错误问题，但总体上它确实提升了效率并降低了成本。
But -- so I don't think it's going to change. I think what's going to change a little bit, it will accelerate -- in my view, accelerate people working from home because you have more data, you know what works, you know what doesn't. You had this great experiment of all time. It will not accelerate digitization, but that -- because that was already taking -- but maybe it'll accelerate just a little bit, but that was already taking place.
所以我并不认为这场危机会改变我们对技术的投入方向。我认为真正会发生变化的，是它会在某种程度上加速“居家办公”的趋势。因为现在有了更多数据，我们知道什么有效、什么无效，这次全球居家办公的经历其实是一次前所未有的“大实验”。至于数字化转型，并不会因为这场危机而“被加速”——因为本来就已经在快速发生了。当然也可能会略有提速，但原本就已经处于进行时了。
We're a little surprised of seeing the consumer business that the folks who are already digital are doing more of it. The folks who aren't digital aren't exactly picking it up. And I wish we could find a way to incent them to do that better. But I'm not sure it's going to change that much. The markets the world have already been effectively, most -- for the most part, digitized, clients are getting very used to it.
我们在消费金融业务中看到一个有趣的现象：那些原本就使用数字化服务的客户，现在用得更多了；而那些本来没有数字化习惯的客户，却并没有因此“被带动”起来。我希望我们能找到一种方法，鼓励他们更顺利地转向数字化。但老实说，这一趋势可能不会有太大的变化。全球多数市场其实已经基本实现了数字化，客户对这点也已经越来越习惯了。
But some of the fundamentals stay the same. You got to do a great job for your client, and you're going to have competitors who are using technology to try to unseat you. And so you always have to be looking at the whole landscape to make sure you're doing the right things.
不过，有些基本原则永远不会变：你必须为客户提供卓越服务，同时你也会面对那些试图用技术手段颠覆你地位的竞争者。所以你必须持续关注整个行业格局，确保自己在做正确的事。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
And then as your role -- as JPMorgan's role as a leading global adviser, you're obviously talking to big companies all around the world who are both trying to get through the downturn that we're in here and probably also thinking a little bit differently about their business or if they're not already, will be soon. Are those conversations happening? And how can JPMorgan be in a position to help them with some of those strategies to execute on?
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
接着谈谈摩根大通作为全球领先顾问的角色。你们显然在与全球的大公司保持对话——他们一方面在努力应对当前的衰退，另一方面也可能正在重新思考自身的业务模式，或者很快就会开始这么做。现在这种对话已经在发生了吗？在这些客户调整策略、寻求转型的过程中，摩根大通能发挥什么作用来帮助他们落地执行？
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
Yes. So they're definitely happening. A lot of it is speculation, but thoughtful -- I shouldn't call it speculation. It's just thoughtful questioning about what did we learn and what will it change about society how consumers operate, how companies can operate? Obviously, and you've seen a lot of it, we all can talk about how much more people can work from home and which can do all the commercial real estate and possibly big cities and suburbs. And look, we simply don't know. But I do think it will have some effect in those things that you try to figure out.
詹姆斯·戴蒙 摩根大通董事长兼首席执行官
是的，这些对话确实已经在发生。很多内容可以说是推测——不过不如说是深思熟虑的问题探讨：我们从这场危机中学到了什么？它将如何改变社会、消费者的行为模式、企业的运营方式？你也已经看到很多类似讨论，比如人们能在家工作多少比例？这会对商业地产、甚至大城市和郊区的格局产生什么影响？我们现在无法确切知道，但我确实认为这些方面未来都会受到一些影响。
I think for the most part, right now, companies are still in the mode of making sure they can get through this. So I think you're very, very wisely, so a lot of companies raising capital. So I've got a lot of clients say, "I now have enough capital to take me to the end of 2022, the end of 2023." The equity markets are open. Convert markets are open. Private placement markets are open. Investment-grade, high-yield -- I think investment-grade and high-yield alone in March, April and May, may be the 3 biggest months ever. And so I think those are very wise moves that people are thinking about, "How do I just make sure I can protect my employees, my customers and my company for an extended period of time to help get through this thing?"
我认为，目前多数公司仍处于“确保能熬过去”的阶段。所以现在很多公司在非常明智地筹措资本。我听到很多客户说：“我们现在已经有足够的资本撑到2022年底、甚至2023年底。”股票市场是开放的，可转债市场也开放，私募市场也是如此。投资级与高收益债市场——我认为在今年3月、4月和5月，这两个市场可能创下了有史以来最活跃的几个月。所以我认为这些企业在做出非常明智的决策：他们思考的核心是，“我如何确保在这段时期保护好我的员工、客户和公司本身，从而挺过这场危机？”
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
Maybe shifting to current trends in your 10-Q from a couple of weeks ago. You raised the outlook for net interest income, both for 2Q and for the full year. What's driving the better net interest income?
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
我们来谈谈你们几周前10-Q中披露的一些最新趋势。你们调高了对第二季度以及全年净利息收入（NII）的预期。推动这一上调的主要因素是什么？
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
I would say it's marginal. I think we raised it by $300 million or $400 million a quarter. It's marginal, and it's mostly growth in deposits, loans, balance sheet and stuff like that.
詹姆斯·戴蒙
我认为这只是一个边际上的提升。我们大概将每季度的NII预期上调了3亿到4亿美元。这个调整幅度不大，主要是由于存款、贷款以及资产负债表整体规模的增长。
Expenses will be -- I think we -- I think the last time we spoke was $65 billion. They'll be a little bit less than that $65 billion. Trading markets, this quarter, so far, there's still a month to go, are just as strong as last quarter.
至于费用，我们上次通话中提到的是650亿美元，现在预计会略低于这个数字。而本季度的交易市场表现，目前为止（还有一个月），依然和上季度一样强劲。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
And some of the growth that's happened on the balance sheet, obviously, the commercial line drawdown. You mentioned some of that has already started paying off. But there's also a lot of deposits that go with it. Is there an opportunity to take some of this business and make it more permanent, whether it's from a relationship perspective that you've been able to get closer to them? Or even just markets aren't opening for all customers, I would imagine. So some borrowers might have to come back to the bank versus the debt market.
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
在资产负债表的增长方面，部分是由于企业信贷额度的动用。你提到部分额度已经开始偿还。但与此同时，也伴随着大量存款流入。请问是否有机会将这些业务变为长期性的？比如从客户关系的角度看，你们是否因此更贴近客户？或者说，考虑到目前并非所有客户都能顺利进入资本市场，一些借款人可能还需要回到银行而不是依赖债券市场融资？
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
Yes. I think the answer is yes, but it's very hard to isolate it. So I think what we have seen a little bit is if you've got great services and products, you're still winning business. Obviously, JPMorgan Chase may be a safe harbor for some. So I do think some of the deposits we got, some of the clients that we got was because of that. Our experience has been, yes, we get some, and we also lose some down the road. People forget -- they forget the safe harbor, and they can save 3 basis points sometimes.
詹姆斯·戴蒙 摩根大通董事长兼首席执行官
是的，我认为答案是肯定的，但要明确衡量其实很难。我们确实观察到一些趋势：如果你有出色的服务和产品，你就能持续赢得业务。显然，对某些客户来说，摩根大通是一个“避风港”。所以我确实认为我们之所以获得了一些新存款和客户，是因为我们提供了这种稳定性。但从过往经验来看，我们虽然在危机中赢得了一些客户，后面也会失去一部分。客户有时会遗忘这段“避风港”的经历，只为了节省几个基点的利息成本就离开。
And -- but I do think it's really the quality of products and services. The -- obviously, in a crisis like the stability of a strong ship. And I haven't -- yes. I'm sorry, go ahead. No.
不过，我还是认为最关键的是产品和服务的质量。尤其在危机时刻，强大而稳定的“航船”显得格外重要。哦，对了，我还没……抱歉，你请说。不是的，你继续。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
I was going to go a different route. So go ahead.
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
我正打算换一个角度提问，你请继续。
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
Yes. No, go ahead.
詹姆斯·戴蒙
没问题，你请继续。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
Okay. And then just on the expenses, what's driving some of the slightly tighter cost there? Obviously, you've been a good expense manager over time. You've talked about tightening, if needed. But what's driving the slight reduction in the cost outlook?
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
好的，我们来谈谈费用方面。最近成本方面有些小幅收紧的迹象，这背后的原因是什么？你们一直以来在成本控制方面做得不错，也说过在必要时会进行紧缩。那么目前这一轮成本展望下调的驱动因素主要是什么？
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
First of all, some is volume-driven. So it isn't because we did anything greater ourselves. It was volume-driven. And some of it is, I would say, in general, is headcount-driven. While attrition is lower, headcounts are lower, hiring is a little bit lower. And obviously, you can get tougher in certain expense categories. So I think it's just kind of what I call no regrets expense management.
詹姆斯·戴蒙 摩根大通董事长兼首席执行官
首先，有一部分是由业务量驱动的，也就是说，并不是我们主动做了什么特别的动作，而是由于交易量本身减少了。其次，一般来说，还有部分是与人力有关的。尽管员工流动率下降了，但整体人员数量也减少了，招聘也相对放缓了。而且我们在某些开支类别上会采取更严格的控制。所以我把这称为“无遗憾的成本管理”——在不影响长期战略的前提下，理性管控支出。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
So I wanted to circle back a little bit on credit quality...
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
我想回到信贷质量的问题上……
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
But it's not cutting the fact we're trying to open new branches or trying to expand this business or that business or invest more in technology. In some cases, it led to obviously more rapid change in technology.
詹姆斯·戴蒙
但我们并没有削减那些战略性投入，比如新开分行、拓展业务领域或增加技术投入。有些情况下，反而加速了我们在技术方面的转型和应用。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
I want to circle back on credit quality. And the forbearance, it's a very interesting concept because there is maybe the human psychology aspect where if you're kind of kicking your payments down for 1 or 2 months, you get right back in and start paying off, if you have the ability to. But if it ends up going on 2, 3 quarters or kind of some magic time frame, it could cause focus...
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
我想继续回到信贷质量这个问题上来。关于“延期还款”（forbearance），这是个很有意思的现象，因为这里可能涉及到人类心理的问题：如果你只是延迟1到2个月的付款，而且你有能力的话，之后很可能会重新开始偿还。但如果延期时间延长到两个季度、三个季度，或者到了某个“心理临界点”，那可能就会出现问题……
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
Well that's 3 months you're talking about, yes. Yes. Well, like I said, I don't want to get into...
詹姆斯·戴蒙
是的，你说的是三个月的情况。是的。就像我之前说的，我不想深入讨论……
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
Yes. I just want to conceptually -- right now. I just want to conceptually talk about there's a little of that risk where you give people flexibility and how do you know they pay when they can?
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
是的。我现在只是想从概念上探讨一下：当你给客户延期还款的灵活性时，是否存在这样一个风险——你怎么判断他们是否在“有能力还的时候”真的还了？
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
Well, that's a very good question. In fact, just so you know, we do check. And we had several -- it wasn't a huge number, but several people who we know had $5 million or $10 million asking for forbearance in their mortgages. I mean some people just think of it just like an entitlement.
詹姆斯·戴蒙 摩根大通董事长兼首席执行官
这是一个非常好的问题。实际上，供你参考，我们确实会进行核查。我们发现有一些客户——数量不算很多——但我们知道他们拥有500万、甚至1000万美元资产，却申请房贷延期还款。对他们来说，有些人就是把这当作一种“理所当然的福利”来用。
Now here's some other interesting data. I think about 1/3 of those who ask for it never actually use it. And I suspect a lot of people who asked for it, even people who started using it, did it as a safety precaution. They hadn't started to collect unemployment insurance. They didn't know if they're going to lose their job or not. So there are all these various reasons.
我们还有一些有趣的数据。我记得大约有三分之一申请延期还款的人，实际上根本没有使用这项措施。而且我怀疑很多人申请了延期，甚至开始使用它，只是出于一种“安全防备”的考虑。当时他们还没开始领失业金，也不知道自己是否真的会失业。所以原因有很多。
So my hope would be is that when you start to see the first people come off of forbearance that the people start repaying is higher than people think, not lower, which, by the way, also gives them an increased chance to do refi, which could be very smart for them in certain cases. So -- but we're going to see the first cohort of people coming for forbearance sometime in June. And so we actually have some real data to look at that.
所以我希望，当首批客户结束延期还款期时，恢复正常还款的人数比例能高于市场预期，而不是低于，这也顺带提升了他们申请再融资（refi）的可能性——在某些情形下，这对他们是非常聪明的做法。我们将在6月迎来第一批延期还款客户的“到期回归”，届时我们就会获得一些真正的数据可供分析。
In the old days, it was always a danger that when you stopped paying that mortgage, you would never start again. But remember, last time around, with the thing we're looking at, home prices are down 40%. There's a good reason not to pay. You weren't going to lose any equity value in your home, whereas today, it's the opposite. There are very few people underwater in their homes today.
过去的确有一个常见问题：一旦人们停止支付房贷，他们可能永远不会恢复还款。但别忘了，上一次危机时，房价下跌了40%。那时候不还款在某种意义上是“合理的”，因为你不还也不会再损失什么房屋净值。但现在情况相反，当下几乎没有人处于“房屋净值为负”的状态。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
One of the things that we see from a crisis like this is those kind of strengths kind of reconfirmed but then also maybe some weaknesses exposed. And I wonder if you could touch on this, maybe specific to JPMorgan. And if you have any thoughts on the industry as well. I mean we touched on a couple of them in terms of like the capital and liquidity. But like one thing that comes to mind for me is bank technology, I think, generally gets a bad rap. Yet the vast majority of employees have been working from home, and it seems like things have been working. Trading is happening. ATM is working, cash management, mobile deposit. So I don't know if that's just my perception, but maybe that's something you could talk about even more broadly speaking. Just your view.
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
在这类危机中，我们往往会看到一些优势被再次确认，同时也会暴露出一些弱点。我想请你谈谈这方面的看法，特别是针对摩根大通自身，如果你愿意，也可以谈谈整个行业。我们刚才已经聊到了一些，比如资本与流动性。但就我个人而言，我想到的一点是银行技术经常被诟病不够先进。然而在这次危机中，大多数员工居家办公，却一切照常运行——交易继续进行、ATM在运行、现金管理、手机存款也没问题。这可能只是我的感受，但你是否可以就此展开谈谈你的看法？
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
No, I think -- banks are huge users of technology and quite good at it, with back-up systems and topnotch data centers and ATMs. And the big banks, we run like 6,000, 7,000 applications. They all mostly work all the time. But of course, something will go wrong somewhere. And you're always going to piss off a customer because you didn't do something exactly right.
詹姆斯·戴蒙 摩根大通董事长兼首席执行官
不，我认为银行其实是技术的重度用户，而且在很多方面做得非常好——包括备份系统、一流的数据中心、ATM 网络等等。大型银行比如我们，运营着大约六七千个应用系统，大部分时候都运行得非常稳定。当然，总会有某处出现小问题，客户对某件事不满意也是常有的，因为我们未必事事都能做到尽善尽美。
I think if you look historically, a lot of banks weren't the best, what I would say is making customers happy. Then you have people come along who is customer satisfaction. That's what they drove. They drove it all the time. So I think banks do a much better job today in customer satisfaction. But I do agree with you, this whole pandemic showed the strength of bank's back office, the strength of the technology, the strength of the digitization, the strength of the fact that we can put traders, bankers, ops, people, call centers, all at home working, effectively, with at their fingertips, pretty much the same tools they had before. That's kind of extraordinary. And you haven't seen people's data centers go down. You haven't seen major problems.
过去来看，很多银行并不擅长“让客户满意”这件事。后来出现了一些公司，他们专注于客户满意度，这是他们的核心驱动力。而现在的银行，在客户满意度方面做得比以前好得多。我同意你的看法，这次疫情确实展现出了银行后端系统的强大能力——无论是技术能力、数字化能力，还是我们能否让交易员、银行家、运营人员、客服中心员工在家工作，而且工作效率几乎不打折扣，他们手中所使用的工具和以往在办公室时几乎一样。这种适应能力是非常了不起的。而且你也没看到数据中心出现重大宕机、也没有看到系统性故障。
You have seen, in certain other industries and you've seen with some of the fintech companies, they had those problems. They couldn't trade for their clients. They couldn't move money for their clients because they did have an extended outage of some sort. So I think banks are getting -- they've always been bigger users of technology. They're getting better at the friendly side of it, making the customer happy all the time, customer satisfaction, which, of course, we measure nonstop now.
而在其他一些行业，尤其是一些金融科技公司，你确实看到了问题——他们无法为客户完成交易，资金无法转移，因为他们系统出现了长时间的宕机。所以我认为，银行本来就是技术投入最重的行业之一，现在也越来越擅长“以客户为中心”的那一面：让客户满意、提供良好体验。当然，这一点我们现在也在持续不断地进行测量和优化。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
So we talk about various macro scenarios from here, and I have a few questions that came in over the webcast. Essentially, trying to get your best guess on how it tracks from here on the economy, on the stocks. And one client said, "I don't know how you ask this, but Jamie set the bottom last time when he personally bought stock." You already own a lot of JPMorgan, but anything you want to comment on that line of thinking would be of interest to the audience.
Matthew O'Connor 德意志银行
我们谈到了接下来的多种宏观经济情境，我这边也收到了一些来自网络直播的观众提问。大致意思是想听听你对未来经济和股市走势的最佳猜测。其中有位客户还说：“我不知道该怎么问这个问题，但上一次是Jamie在亲自买入股票时给市场定了底。”你已经持有大量摩根大通股票了，但不知你是否愿意对这种观点作些回应？我想听众会很感兴趣。
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
Yes. Well, I'm not -- yes. I do own a lot of JPMorgan. And I think JPMorgan is a very valuable company at these prices. I mean its capabilities around the world getting through this. I look back, by the way, even in '09, we earned 7% intangible capital. That was our finest year. That was not our worst year. That was pretty good. And if you look at this year, I will feel the same way that we did our job. We're hopefully going to earn some real money anyway. Of course, it will be down, but remember, a lot of companies can go from profits to losses very quickly. So I think it's a very valuable company.
詹姆斯·戴蒙 摩根大通董事长兼首席执行官
是的，我不否认，我确实持有大量摩根大通股票。而我认为，以目前的价格来看，摩根大通是一家极具价值的公司。我们在全球范围内的业务能力，正在帮助我们度过这次危机。回头看，2009年那一年，我们的无形资本回报率（ROTE）达到了7%。那其实是我们最出色的一年，而不是最差的一年。那年表现相当不错。如果你看看今年，我会有同样的感觉：我们尽到了自己的职责。我们还是有望实现可观的盈利——当然会比往年下降，但请记住，很多公司在危机中是从盈利迅速转为亏损的。而我们仍能盈利，所以我认为公司价值非常突出。
But we are -- we're the -- we'll always be affected by the global economy. You cannot be a bank and be immune to what goes on in the world out there. And some companies may be -- like maybe a serial company, or certain things where it doesn't change very much because people have to eat or something. But no, we have credit and risk in markets and clients and all the things like that. So I don't -- and I'm not going to try to predict the bottom.
但我们是银行，我们必然会受到全球经济的影响。没有哪家银行能对世界经济的变化“免疫”。有些公司也许可以，比如谷物食品公司这种，因为人们无论如何都得吃饭，这类业务波动就小得多。但我们涉及信贷、市场、客户等多重风险因素，所以我不会，也不打算去预测市场的底部。
My base case, I think -- look, the way we're thinking about today is kind of that base case, which is, hopefully, this thing will happen. I give it some pretty good odds. The government has been very responsive. The Federal Reserve has been very responsive. Large companies have a huge wherewithal. Hopefully, we're keeping the small ones alive long enough that most of them can get back into business. People are not completely demoralized by being unemployed now because, for the most part, they consider it temporary. And that while we're going to report a really bad GDP this quarter and unemployment, you could see a fairly rapid recovery.
我目前的基线情境是——从我们目前的思考角度来看，我们希望经济复苏能够实现，我认为这种可能性不低。政府的反应非常积极，美联储的响应也很及时。大型企业拥有强大的应对能力。我们现在的目标是尽可能帮助小企业撑下去，让它们能够熬到重新开业的那一天。现在人们并没有因失业而完全丧气，因为他们大多数人认为这只是暂时现象。尽管本季度的GDP和失业率数据会非常糟糕，但我们有可能会看到一个相对快速的复苏。
And I think that's got a good chance. And that's one base. Think of that as, obviously, it could be that, give or take a little bit. And it's not a bookend, but it's kind of a decent outcome. Hopefully, we can do better than that, but it's a decent outcome.
我认为那个基线情境是有相当可能性的。可以把它视为一个大致方向，当然结果可能会略好或略差一些。这不是一个“极端边界”的情形，但它算是一个不错的结果。我们当然希望能够比这更好，但就算按这个情形发展，也还算可以接受。
On the other side, it just gets extended. You have that 20% unemployment, and we can't get out of it because capital is being destroyed. Big companies start to lay people off. Some of these -- you can't prop up the stock market forever. And some of these liquidity part may not work exactly the way people expected. The emerging markets have more problems. The government doesn't have another $1.5 trillion stimulus. So you could come up with a scenario. No, it can continue. And you guys can put your own odds in what that would be. Bank has to be prepared for both. You can't just pretend. "Well, this is the one that's going to happen. If that one happens, I'm going to go bankrupt." So you have to be prepared for both.
另一种情境是，情况持续恶化：失业率保持在20%，资本不断被消耗，大公司开始裁员。你不能指望靠政策永远支撑股市运行。而某些流动性支持机制可能也不会完全如人们所预期地奏效。新兴市场的问题会更严重，政府也未必还能拿出新的1.5万亿美元刺激计划。所以确实存在另一种剧本，而你们可以自己判断那种可能性有多大。作为银行，我们必须为这两种情境都做好准备。你不能假设“只会发生某一个”，因为如果最终是另一个发生了，而你没有准备，那你就可能破产。所以必须双向准备。
And the stock market itself, a lot of announcements have taken place by a lot of people who are very bright about the stock market. And one of the good insights is that it's not a stock market. Banks are down 40%. Oil coming down 50%. Airlines are down 80%. And then, of course, you've got the winners: Amazon, Walmart, Target, Netflix. So it isn't like you don't have -- so you can't look at the stock market as one vehicle and one beast. But you also have a tremendous amount of liquidity out there.
至于股市，很多聪明人都对目前市场发表了看法。其中有一个很有价值的观点是：这不是一个统一的“股市”。银行股下跌了40%，原油下跌了50%，航空公司股价下跌了80%；但同时，也有赢家，比如亚马逊、沃尔玛、塔吉特、Netflix。所以你不能把整个股市当作一个单一的整体来看待，它并不是一头“单一的野兽”。此外，现在市场上的流动性也非常充裕。
When the Fed puts trillions of dollars of liquidity in the system, I talk about liquidity. When they buy assets, that cash that they put out there is kind of like water that fills every crevice. The crevice that get filled may not be that the buyer who sold the treasuries to buy more treasuries. The buyer may buy emerging mortgage common stocks. They may make venture capital investments. They may look at stocks with 2% or 3% dividends and say that's a hell of a lot better than 68 basis points on the 10-year treasury. So I do think that, that liquidity lifts up, in some way, it's almost impossible to measure the stock market and all asset prices.
当美联储向系统中注入数万亿美元的流动性时，我讲的是流动性。他们购买资产时投放的现金就像水一样，会填满所有缝隙。而这些被填满的缝隙，不一定是指卖掉国债的人又去买更多国债。这个买家可能去买新兴市场、抵押贷款支持证券、普通股；他们也可能进行风险投资，或者看到某些股息率有2%或3%的股票，觉得这比10年期国债的68个基点回报好多了。所以我确实认为，这种流动性在某种程度上提升了股市和所有资产价格，而这种影响几乎是无法精确衡量的。
And so look, we got to hope for the best, which is that, that recovery takes place. And if that takes place, it may very well justify stock market valuations, et cetera, then the bad case takes place. And I think we should all do everything we can to maximize the chance that the good outcome takes place. And that means the regulators, the government, fiscal policy, monetary policy, financial regulatory policy, to make sure we get out of this thing. Because I think if it does go on for a year, it won't be very good.
所以，我们必须抱着最好的希望，也就是经济复苏真正发生。如果真能实现，那么目前的股市估值等也许就能得到合理解释。但如果是坏的情形发生，那就是另一回事了。我认为我们所有人都应尽一切努力去最大化好结果出现的可能性。这意味着监管机构、政府、财政政策、货币政策、金融监管政策都必须协调一致，确保我们走出这个困境。因为如果这种状况持续一年，那将非常不利。
Matthew O'Connor Deutsche Bank AG
Well, we are bumping up against the end of the session. So Jamie, thank you so much for joining. I know there's a lot of interest in your comments. So thank you for you and JPMorgan participating again this year.
马修·奥康纳 德意志银行
好，我们这场对话也快到时间了。Jamie，感谢你的参与。我知道大家对你的观点非常关注。再次感谢你和摩根大通今年的参与。
James Dimon Chairman & CEO
You're very welcome. Everybody, keep the faith. We will get out of this thing. We'll talk to you all soon. Thank you. Bye.
詹姆斯·戴蒙 摩根大通董事长兼首席执行官
不客气。大家要保持信心，我们一定会走出这一切。很快再和大家见面，谢谢，再见。