tv Bloomberg Best Bloomberg February 21, 2016 11:00am-12:01pm EST
♪ >> coming out on bloomberg best the stories that shape the week it n business around the world. chinese currency remains a hot topic. the fed weighs in with its latest set of minutes. earnings season continues with pain for some, joy for others. while, european banks cope with an ongoing nightmare. and, some of the biggest names
in business show. >> in silicon valley, they are in their own world. >> they are scaring the hell out of some people. shery: plus the singapore airshow. it is all ahead on bloomberg best. ♪ shery: hello. i'm shery ahn. welcome to bloomberg best, a weekly look at the most important news and interviews from bloomberg television around the world. let's begin with a day by day review of the week passed k's headlines. new concerns of the yuan.
>> what did he say, what was significant? >> the message in and of itself was not new. we are not engaged in the current evaluation -- evaluation. the fact that he said it at all -- the key message is we are not going to push the currency down. we do expect volatility along the way. there is essential message coming from china that is not about devaluation. >> that is what a lot of asset managers this morning said. the fact that he said anything was a sign of support. >> the senior economist in singapore is saying the report we got on the trade front, his
assessment does not make sense to keep a strong currency. they would like a weaker one. shery: russia agreed to freeze energy production. >> we have an agreement to freeze production between saudi and other countries. >> it was probably too much to ask between these two countries. you think about where we were only three months ago. and where we are today. you have much seachange. three months ago, saudi arabia and russia were fighting. moscow was trying to do the same in china. both countries were fighting a proxy war in syria. today, the ministers of both
countries they really reached a preliminary agreement. i think that is quite significant. >> they have a floor, a price they don't what the threshold to be below that. that is $30. >> russia and saudi arabia are trying to tell the market that's it. if you try to break the price below $30, it will come with -- we are only now understanding what is going on behind the scenes. >> transcripts show policymakers expressed concerns of policy markets and risks to the u.s. economy. joining us from washington, mike mckee. there has been residents on the part of the fed. you read any more understanding out of this document on where the risks are and whether the
balance is positive or negative? >> we know where the risks are but we don't know how big they are or if they will come to pass . remember, this was back in january. it has been a month since that time. janet yellen has already testified again on capitol hill about a lot of this stuff. fed officials were struggling to understand the implications of falling oil prices, the stronger dollar, chinese growth, and volatile markets, all in time when spending was hanging in and the labor market was remaining strong. many saw those developments as increasing the downsize risk to the economy, but they had no framework for how bad the risks would be. a number of participants noted the large magnitude of changes in domestic financial institutions were difficult to reconcile.
if things were so bad, why with the data coming -- why was the data so ok coming in on the labor market. they said, let's wait, and see what happens. >> walmart stock is dropping nearly wiping out gains for 2016. the world's largest retailer lowering its sales forecast to relatively flat. >> investors can ask themselves, no growth next year when you knock out currency. we do live in a world of currency, you have to factor in currency. why own walmart at this point? the stock has been doing really great. people looked at it as a flight to safety. a safe haven. if there is a recession, there is an assumption they will trade down. we have seen wages going that. today was a reminder that there
still are issues for this company. this company is not growing. why have your money in walmart rather than amazon? >> we were talking yesterday that if e-commerce continues to decline, someone will have to answer to that. what do they do about that? >> they are blaming outside markets. brazil, china. the u.k. they are seeing increased competition there. there's always some reason. amazon's fourth quarter retell cells are up. they have to spend. it is really expensive. is that almost a billion dollars online master and will spend another billion dollars this year. >> breaking news today. yahoos board has created an independent committee to explore its options. it also says it is separating its alibaba stake. independent, does not include admires -- marissa mayers.
>> they want to show the market that they are taking very seriously this desire to find a buyer. the concern was that marissa mayers, management, and the board had different views. >> what the board needed to show is that we really want to make this thing work. >> just two days ago, they started shutting down some verticals. they are laying off people shutting offices. i suppose the board might think, we're thinking about selling it retooling. >> the best way to do a sale is not to say, we are desperate. it is, we have other options. is that a thing to think about? >> she also has to think about morale among the staff. you have to retain people to run the business. no matter where marissa goes
when this goes down, you need to keep the trains running. the more you are talking about, look, we're going to close up shop, and up in the hands of private equity, verizon, where it is -- shery: later in the program, we will focus on two sectors that were very much in the news this week for different reasons. there is plenty of optimism around aviation at the singapore airshow. coming up, a roundup of company news from around the world. ♪
a wireless carrier promises to keep growing. those are just a couple of the most interesting company stories that we covered this week. here's a look back at a busy five days. >> a watershed moment in a long simmering debate between silicon valley and washington. apple is rejecting a court order to help investigators to unlock the iphone of one of the san bernardino's shooters. what we know now, and how does this play out? >> the government has come to apple with a court order trying to compel them to give them the ability to unlock an iphone. apple is pushing back. there is no sign that either side will stand down. this is a legal case that will play out for quite a while. >> i think apple should resist the order. it would set a precedent. it could mean that the fbi go to
apple and demand they unlock any phone. they would go to apple and say, if you can give us access to phones, what about computers? it would go to other providers and demand the same thing. there is a lot at stake. >> you disagree. explain your position. >> i do believe that giving these -- given these sorts of situations we are doing but today, apple should give them access. i think apple should be directly involved and not compelled to give up the keys to the kingdom, if you will. shery: softbank is surging up 14% after saying it is ready to
spend a record amount buying back stocks. this could be worth $4.5 billion. how does this compare with their past purchases as well as others? >> at ¥500 billion, this is by far the largest buyback. it could be worth 14% of the companies in shares. to give you a comparison, the biggest rival in japan has announced a $350 billion buyback. the stock has been simply clobbered this year, falling yesterday before the announcement. this will put the market value below the sum of the values of it shareholdings, which includes sprint alibaba, as well as yahoo! japan. one thing that helped the announcement was softbank said they would not borrow more money for the bite back. it is good news because there are any $100 billion in debt.
>> of $5.6 billion loss and a massive overhaul to operations. what is it that you think investors are commenced about in the strategy update that we have seen this morning? >> it seems this plan their outlying is ambitious. moran to singly, they are talking about a complete exit from bulk commodities -- iron or coal. it is quite a significant change of strategy. i think a lot of investments to florida because the outlook for those commodities as much worse than other commodities. >> you are focusing on consumer. >> i think it is a matter of stripping us back to the core
rebuilding the base, and making sure we are fit to go forward in the positive, both strongest way we can. we have been making changes over the last 10 years that have been incremental. i think it was time for a bold step out. we have been working on that strategy for the last couple of years. in this market, the opportunity is there to start with the different looking portfolio, and making some bold moves. >> corporate bond cells are seeing the slowest start. today is a special day. apple and other large companies are leading a resurgence. what is going gone? >> the markets opened after being closed for virtually two weeks. their occurrences -- there are concerns of global turmoil. now, seeing the most respected companies come to market. these are the fortress balance sheet type markets coming out
saying, let's take advantage. >> this is like the old adage in home financing. you can only get a mortgage if you don't need one. >> you raise such an interesting point. what does apple need more money for? they have $30 billion in cash available to them. they have $70 billion of annual revenue. have $56 billion in debt, but it is meniscal miniscule in this the scheme of things. you are seeing this issue issuance , for what? apple will buyback shares. the tech industry is the stories the -- notoriously fickle.
people are not being paid all that much. this is perceived as safety. >> shares surging for a second straight day after significant investment by alibaba. the stock has jumped 80% in just two days. what in the world can alibaba do for groupon that justifies a huge stock jump like this? >> it is really what groupon can do for alibaba. if you think about alibaba there is a strategic and tactical im imperative. it was founded in 1999, and the founder of said he wants to see it around for three centuries. what he is doing now is planting seeds. these are seeds that he has planted in order to learn about the u.s. market, see what it is about, so when the innovation is ready, they will be prepared. >> how optimistic are you about
groupon's long-term future? >> there is value -- especially if you are thinking about betting against groupon. >> t-mobile, the nation's third-largest mobile carrier reported millions of new subscribers for this year. >> how do you do a? what are you doing inside this company? >> we crossed it. we added 8.3 million customers in 2015. we had 108% of all the postpaid phone growth in the phone industry. in 2015, t-mobile added 3.5 liter postpaid phones subscribers. att verizon, and sprint? -269,000. >> are you making money doing it? you started this pricey w ar -- it is great for consumers,
serious questions about the health of one of europe's largest financial institutions. this week, the discussion -- is there a crisis brewing in european banking? a topic that spark debate throughout the week on bloomberg television. >> since the fall of lehman brothers in 2008, 8 of europe's s biggest banks have had layoffs and lost billions in market value. >> defined a banking crisis, if you could and if this is one. it certainly feels nerve-racking covering this on a day-to-day basis. >> i think last week felt like, in the short-term, a crisis. use all plunges in prices. -- use allyou saw plunges in prices. you saw a lot of fear in the market.
i would argue that is a short-term seal. last week. in the long-term, we're seeing the next chapter in the transformation of an industry. i like to look back to last may 21st, wedbushhen deutsche bank gave a vote of confidence. it tried to restore the court of the bank, and how it existed before and after the crash -- that is not going to work anymore. something more radical must be done. that is based the what the market was saying to european banks at the time. >> we have seen some leadership changes to reflect that. >> i think that also fed into what we saw last week. the restructuring went on and on. this is like mark 34 deutsche bank -- mark three for
deutsche bank. it will take years to execute this plan. you have that process going on, and then of course, went china slows down, that throws fuel onto the fire. >> to what extent this has been fueled by regulators? >> i think it is instructive to compare europe to the u.s.. in the u.s., banks were clearly kicking and screaming about dodd-frank and the impact that would have. >> they got rid of assets from day one, didn't they? >> they took their losses early. they started to impose an implement -- and implement rules and regulations. the banks seems to be alive and well in the west. look at j.p. morgan's revenues last year. >> a lot of the reality about
banks is known. the fact is we still have risks to come. we have a situation where banks are having to pay to deposit money with the ebc. they have to charge more to their customers, which reduces the amount of customers borrowing in an already depressed year here you will see npl's larger and getting worst. i keep going on about these ridiculous weapons of mass destruction. we will see something occur in italy. i think there's a good chance we will see other bonds can again -- kick in. at the end of the first quarter, we will see a lot of the holders of these bonds who wake up to the reality that they are no longer priced at par, but some
of them all the way down into the 70's, and they have to sell them. you see a wave of selling to the market, and that will contagion ae of ways. >> when people but these, it was all about distance to trigger. there is very little danger that any of these will be triggered. clearly, deutsche bank proved the other day that their access to liquidity, liquidity coverage ratios -- massive the quiddity. short-term, i don't see a cap. we are nowhere near the triggers. >> in "the financial times," talking about the thinking sector. -- banking sector. the banking sector has been
battered. unduly so are rightly so -- or rightly so? >> unduly but there is not smoke where there is no fire. we have been burdened by a whole lot of costs. the natural change what have you, and a flat yield curve. for a bank, you live off of maturation. the curve has been flat for 5-6 years. >> we are bashing the banks at the same time we need them to do better work. >> that's right. that's a problem. >> european banks trade for less than a book value. something that could be
attractive to investors. they are nowhere to be found. my activists shunning european banks? >> it seems it would be an attractive option for them. the problem is that we don't really know -- or activist investors aren't sure who is really in control of european banks. isn't the regulator? is at the european central bank? even if you have investors on board, will you have regulators and other investors on board as well? there are so many complexities with pushing banks into a different direction, for now they're just staying away. >> can you compare the activism in u.s. banks with european banks? >> i think there is more activism in the u.s. in general. again, the european issues are far more complex. we have a lot of countries involved, a lot of national regulators, and a lot of
strategic issues that have not been worked out with the same aggressiveness. there are so many unknowns and future losses that hit these banks that activists are staying away. >> part of what we hear when the banks are at risk is no worries, mario draghi has your back. in terms of profitability, he can't actually help them with that. >> you're right. his words were the european banks have access to ample amounts of funding, and he was more worried about the counterparts, the suggestion of that, the share price performance. i think the european banks in most cases have got a long, long way to go until they actually get to the steady-state the u.s.
banks are in. as you know, a lot of u.s. banks buffer the cost of capital at the moment. alix: exactly. this is a global basis. what is the next wave of trauma for the european banks? chris: what is the next wave of trauma? difficult to say. i suppose it is whether or not the ecb will take rates down further and there will be more sort of, soul-searching about what do negative interest rates -- if the ecb suggests it goes down, what does that mean for profitability, and does that have another negative impact? is there any growth out there, which will start -- if you want to alleviate that problem? shery: still ahead, the best interviews of the week. mark cuban on silicon valley bernie sanders on the supreme court, and the fed president who thinks big banks should be broken up. that is coming up on "bloomberg best." ♪
♪ shery: welcome back to "bloomberg best." i am shery ahn. it has been a week of controversial conversations on bloomberg television. bernie sanders describes his ideal supreme justice. minnesota fed president neel kashkari explains why he is open to breaking up the biggest u.s. banks. let's begin at the nba all-star weekend where stephanie ruhle went one-on-one with dallas mavericks owner and noted tech disruptor mark cuban. mark: in silicon valley, they are in their own little world. they have insulated themselves they have lost touch with reality. you have kids that graduate from this school or that school with an idea that they get an $8 million valuation, they raised $2 million, keep 75% of the company -- it is ridiculous. i have been saying it for a long time.
stephanie: what is going to happen? mark: they are getting written down to nothing. a lot of them are going out of business. literally, if you invest in 95% of silicon valley's coming out or have come out in the last year, the minute you write that check and it clears, you should write it to $0 because that is what it is worth. these companies have no chance. stephanie: no chance? mark: some companies are good, but 95% are done before they started. 5% will be amazing. stephanie: should more be going public? marc benioff has been outspoken saying stop avoiding the public market. if you have a lead, go public, get testing. mark: i have written a blog post saying that exact same thing. i have been a proponent of that for a long time. a couple of different things. what is happening in the market right now -- there is a dearth of high-growth companies. we look at facebook, netflix google as hypergrowth companies when their hypergrowth is behind them. they are still growing quickly. what is happening now is the hypergrowth in private companies
is being bought out by private investors, right? i do not know that uber will accelerate their growth. their growth rates are probably going to decline. stephanie: and early investors cannot get out. mark: they are stuck. stephanie: across all of your businesses, when you think about what you are most concerned about, what is it yet of -- what is it? when you think about what you are most concerned about, what is it? especially being from detroit. you are in a relatively depressed environment. dan: the biggest concern is the overreaching power of the federal government and the kinds of things they are doing today that we have never seen before at least not in my lifetime. it is very disconcerting to businesses. i get calls every day from ceo's, public companies, private companies just with stories that are not even out there of stuff going on. so that to me is the biggest concern. also this belief that companies and corporations are evil across the board. shareholders of public companies, public companies --
shares are owned by pension funds and public unions, this is america. we create wealth through shareholder value. and this concept that some people are selling, that the american system is evil to me is the biggest concern. stephanie: are we not promoting entrepreneurship as much as we should? dan: to some extent -- stephanie: i mean, is the government? dan: absolutely not, currently. i do not think they believe in it. >> you raised the subject of the replacement for justice scalia. you said anybody you appoint would have to be an opponent would be in favor of overturning citizens united. you made that comment the other day. basically the litmus test, essentially, i think, so how is that different from the litmus test that republicans apply, we will only appoint a supreme court justice who is for overturning roe v wade?
or has a certain position on affirmative action? is there a difference between those kinds of litmus tests? sen. sanders: i'm not a great fan of litmus tests. i do not need them to read everything i've written and publicly support them. that is not what i am saying. what i am saying is this issue of citizens united is so significant, is so fundamental to the future of this country -- this is democracy, and right now, what we are seeing in this campaign are people like the koch brothers, wall street, and other billionaires buying elections, and if we allow them to buy elections, then everything else does not matter because you do not have a democracy. so this is one issue that i am saying yeah, i want my nominee to be loud and clear that he or she would vote to overturn citizens united. it goes without saying that i am pro-choice. not terribly likely that i will be nominating somebody who is anti-choice, etc. but this is a litmus test to me because i'm worried about the future of american democracy. neel: we all remember the
crisis, 2007, 2008. i was in the middle of it running the t.a.r.p. program. we hated that we had to bail out the banks. i think americans across the political spectrum hated that as well. we see the anger of the american people still today. none of us want to be in that situation again. so dodd-frank was passed very quickly because -- which i supported. but the more transformational measures were taken off the table. things like breaking up the banks or putting so much capital into the big banks that you turn them into utilities, so they virtually cannot fail. there are a number of other options. here we are six or seven years later, and in my view, we have done some good. the banks are safer, they have more capital, deeper liquidity but we have not taken the risk of a bailout off of the table. if a number of banks run into trouble at the same time, policy makers will have to bail them out. stephanie: you never take risk out of the system. maybe you take it out of banks' hands, but somebody will be left holding the bag. it is those investors who have risky assets.
it's insurance companies, 401k's, so it is not evaporating -- it is going to someone else. neel: i agree. but it needs to be distributed in a way that it is safe. in the late 1980's, 1000 little savings and loans failed in the s&l crisis. that was terrible for those firms, but there was no crash. in the late 1990's, we had the crash, devastating for silicon valley, but no risk of an economic collapse. that is where we need to be. howard: volatility is normal fits of volatility. i wrote a memo recently where i talked about my friend, sandy, an airline pilot who describes his job as hours of boredom punctuated by moments of terror. and that is the disruption of the investor's job. stephanie: hours of boredom punctuated by moments of terror. that is how you describe investor life? howard: i think that is right. this is one of the last six weeks in the stock market have been one of those moments of terror, but it is normal. the reasons are not quite
normal, but we have kind of one-off. i think people have gotten used to dealing with normal economic cycles -- recession, recovery, etc., but we have now kind of cosmic issues that people do not have any experience with and do not know how. china, oil, rates, terrorism are just four examples. stephanie: is the fear exaggerated or punctuated by the presidential election? when you see donald trump up there -- dare i say -- putting fear in the u.s. economy speaking in such declarative statements about the disastrous situation we are in, does that affect the market? howard: i cannot tell you definitively because i do not have any research on the subject, but i would guess so. they are scaring the hell out of people. donald says the chinese are killing us. the mexicans are killing us, the japanese are killing us, but we are going to get the jobs back.
♪ shery: you are watching "bloomberg best." i am shery ahn. this week, the singapore airshow brought together the biggest players in the aviation industry from top airline executives to manufacturing ceo's. my colleagues haslinda amin and stephen engle were there to cover the state of the business from every angle. haslinda: airlines enjoyed the most profitable year in 2015 and
the international air transport association expects further gains. tony tyler joins us this morning. such optimism, tony. how solid is the recovery and profitability? tony: we are forecasting airline profits globally for the year. it is up $33 billion over last year. that forecast was made last december, and we will be updating it in june. a lot will happen between december and june. the fuel price coming down obviously has a large part to play in that. haslinda: china is going down. why isn't china a risk to the aviation sector? tony: you are right, china's economy is slowing down, although in fact air travel within and to and from china is not slowing so much because the economy is reshaping itself, restructuring itself, and consumers are spending a bit more, and they are spending on travel. we are not seeing reduction in china as such a big factor at
the moment. fabrice: i think we are firm. the board will be above one, and it means we will continue to consolidate a backlog of 6800 aircraft. stephen: we see the low-cost carriers in this part of the world, what are you seeing? fabrice: many people talk about it, but we do not see it. the reality is we have never had such happy customers, so profitable, so it is true as well that the segment is very dynamic, so there is a lot of growth. there is a big surprise among some competitors. so all in all, i can confirm that we see the growth and for a simple reason. asia pacific accounts now for 40% of our deliveries, so this is the area of growth, and it will continue, except if
everything collapses, but this is not the prediction. haslinda: malaysia airlines undergoing a massive restructuring, taken private because of massive losses amounting to more than $1 billion. a 30% cut in operations. they have already cut most of the european group. is at the end of it? christoph: we are refocusing on emerging economies, strong gdp growths, and creating new relationships between malaysia and those countries. the most prominent being china. no more cuts to be expected. we will change our outlook each and every year, like every airline. we simply did not have enough work for all the people we employed, so that was very unfortunate, but also that is over. we have reached our final headcount numbers.
haslinda: how does it look in asia? what are the prospects? john: it is an enormous market for us. over the next 20 years, globally, we expect about 350 aircraft in space, 25% of that is going to come from asia pacific, including china. so it is an enormous possibility for us. today, we have 20 customers in 11 countries with over 200 aircraft flying in the region. we have a lot more work to do in this region. a big operation here in singapore. a big operation in beijing. we are committed to the region we want to grow here. haslinda: committed to the region, but you are going to face increasing competition. i know you love competition, but china's come back as well as japan's mitsubishi aircraft trying to get into the space you are in. you have dominated this for a long time, but competition is heating up. john: those competitors bookend where we are. mrj is at the low end.
our view on competition is we take them all seriously whether they come from russia, japan, or china. there is no arrogance or hubris in embraer when we think about our competitors. what we can do to address the competition is try to improve our offering on a consistent basis. haslinda: congratulations on the orders. amounting to about $1 billion. yugo: thank you very much. haslinda: so your orders so far from japan, the u.s. -- how about the rest of asia? what are you doing to gain? yugo: asia is the most expanding region, and we are doing our best to sell mrj in this region, and we feel it very strong potential. haslinda: how do you view the competition, because you have to break the duopoly. are you prepared for that? can you do it? yugo: first of all, we are the newcomers.
we have designed aircraft that has quite a huge advantage compared to the existing product. so with these frank, strong points, we are convincing our customers to order the next mrj. haslinda: what is your competitive advantage, and how soon can you make inroads? yugo: our product is pure consumption. our product will have better consumption by more than 3%, and this will save the fuel costs very much for airline customers. akbar: i do not think it is a good idea for oil prices to be below $50 a barrel. it is not good for the economies of the countries, and it is not good for airlines. yes, it improves the bottom line but it does not increase the bottom line is much as i would like to because as i said earlier, because people travel
less. and at the same time, because people are traveling less, we have capacity. there is competition for this capacity, so it is downward pressure. stephen: how are you hedged? if you say $50 is the -- akbar: we are hedged only a small amount of fuel, but at a very high price. i hope that i will be able to hedge waiting for the oil price to go it little bit below $30 a barrel for me to take a hedge again for a big amount of fuel. stephen: do you expect it to? akbar: you never know. it is fluctuating so much. we are uncertain of where it is going to go. either it will go this way or that way, but we hope it will increase because we want businesses to increase. people expect because of lower oil prices we're going to reduce our fares.
yes, we reduced by giving passengers the fuel surcharge we used to charge, but they should not expect too much reduction in fares, because when oil prices started to rise above $100 and reached nearly $150, we did not increase our fares 150%. this was encroaching on our bottom-line and our margins. ♪
♪ shery: as we wrap up this edition of "bloomberg best," let's take a look at some of the week's most interesting and entertaining charts. tom: let's go to our single best chart. i did not know what this chart would look like when we made it, but has to do a lot with michael porter's estimate that education matters. going back 25 years, that is the growth in employment of those with a college degree versus
those without a single bit of college as well. the starkness of that -- you can see the tensions of 2007 and 2008 -- everybody flattens and rolls over, and the college degrees, professor porter, just pick it right up. prof. porter: scale is tremendously valuable, and the people with scale are doing well in america and other parts of the world. the college degree has in the -- has been the ticket to that definition of being scaled and being educated. brendan: today, we will play the game called guess the european periphery economy. right here, we have got gdp growth. it looks reasonable, up at 3.9%. anybody would dream about that kind of growth right now. correspondingly, this is the spread of that country's sovereign debt against german bunds going down, down, good gdp growth, things are looking great. something happens, however. right now for the last two years, that has been rising. someone tell me there is a clue in the colors what european
periphery economy is this. stephanie: pink is supposed to give us a clue? brendan: that is red and white the colors of russia. -- poland. >> this is not stunk the judges. david: this is not stump the judges. brendan: poland's justice party, you have good economic growth, bad political risk. >> so taylor swift wins three grammys, won album of the year for "1989." now for those not in the know, 1989 is the year she was born. so i was thinking, what if you had invested as her parents in various assets the day she was born on december 13, 1989? look what i came up with. they, of course, being americans, would only invest in
assets in the u.s. dollar. you invest in the s&p 500. you are sitting on returns of 446%. you decide to put your money into gold. you are sitting on returns of 190%. the dollar index gives the returns of 2%, and the yield on the 10-year treasury has come from 7.8% to 1.75%. so if you are mr. and mrs. swift, you're not only happy that you produced taylor, but your portfolio of u.s. dollar assets has done remarkably well. well done, mr. and mrs. swift. shery: that is it for "bloomberg best" this week. remember, you can always find the latest business news from around the world at bloomberg.com. i am shery ahn. thank you for watching bloomberg television. ♪
♪ emily: he got his start as a journalist with a front row seat to steve jobs' inner circle. and wrote the seminal book on the early years at apple. then, michael moritz decided to try his luck in venture capital. he went on to become one of the most heralded investors in silicon valley history, joining the boards of google and yahoo!, then, a few years ago, took a step back for a rare health condition he has never revealed. joining me today on "studio 1.0," sir michael moritz chairman of sequoia capital and co-author of the new book "leading."