tv Bloomberg Business Week Bloomberg July 3, 2016 4:00pm-5:01pm EDT
carol: welcome to "bloomberg businessweek." i am carol massar. david: i am david gura. we are inside the magazine's headquarters in new york. law -- e talk about david: the written case -- carol: under armour's battle to be the sportswear king. david: all that ahead on "bloomberg businessweek." ♪ david: i am here with the editor in chief of "bloomberg businessweek," ellen pollack. let's start with the policy section. there was a supreme court decision that came down on immigration. deadlocked. this is now a sign of things to come. ellen: it was deadlocked 4-4. it goes back to the lower court. the lower court has not
scheduled hearings. and what it does is basically leave many, many people in flux. david: a huge disappointment to the president. this was a signature achievement of his tenure thus far. where do things stand with his plan to allow undocumented immigrants work in the u.s.? ellen: it is all frozen at the moment. or a lot of it is frozen. taking it out of the political realm for a moment, for companies, it is a problem. because they have employees who are here on visas and have immigration issues. they have trouble planning what and to do with their talent. it is not just sort of a social or political issue. it is a business issue as well. david: and the referendum in the united kingdom, a number of pieces in the magazine about it, including by editor in chief john micklethwait. ellen: that is right, we have a whole section devoted to brexit.
david: it is a big deal. ellen: it is a big deal, and it will continue to be. we have an interesting essay by john micklethwait, the editor in chief from bloomberg news who , writes about it from his personal point of view, since he is british. really -- we have a really interesting story also on internal u.k. politics, which is, as you know a mess. ,david: let's talk about john's piece which kicks off with him remembering his gap year. he was asked about the political turmoil in the u.k. then. another big seismic shift back then. ellen: it is an incredibly charming story. he talks about meeting a guy named milton, who was asking him about the u.k., and asking him about the conditions in the u.k. and then tried to tell him how things would change under thatcher. and it was only later that he realized it was the eminent
economist milton friedman, which is really a nice story. but he turned out to be right about what he thought about what thatcher was going to bring in. david: i don't want to summarize all of it. what does john think about this this vote and what does it mean for the united kingdom? ellen: i think he thinks it is a setback. he thinks that it is the end of classical liberalism that the u.k. has enjoyed. i think he thinks it is a mistake. and he sort of takes us through the history of the change in the u.k. over time and what this means. it is a special perspective that we are happy to give readers. david: and liberalism, he notes, has not been entirely great for the u.k. ellen: right. for people on the upper end of he saysfor people on the upper end of that it has been better the economic spectrum rather than people who are less fortunate. david: your economics editor peter cory has a piece in the magazine, looking at the referendum, and it is to give
again. u.k.ll be terrible for the , and now peter is taking a step back and saying in the long-term, it may not be that big of an issue. ellen: peter says down the line, it will not be a total divorce. it will be something short of that. and he is a little more optimistic than some and basically says it is not over yet. carol and i sat down with peter coy. peter: if i were a brit, but what is done is done. the thing to do is, what do you do from here? it is not all bad. well, it is not extremely bad. first, britain was already the -- not the core of the european union. it was not in the euro currency, which is supposed to be the be-all and all of the european union. all countries are supposed to be going in that direction. britain had opted out from that. carol: they only had one foot in
the water, i always felt like. peter: right. the other thing they did not go into is the schengen agreement. this allows for no border control in the schengen areas. they said no. they did and still do have free movement, as long as they are in the european union of member country people. but anybody from outside of the schengen area who gets in does not have immediate access to britain. so in those two ways, they are already out. what we are talking about is another step back for them. do some farther further fringe , of europe. carol: one thing, as a plus for them, you wrote in your story david cameron, the prime , minister pointed out that the u.k. economy is doing ok. peter: right. they had a buffer. the funny thing about it is if it is true their economy is decent, why did they pull out? to me, it is about two things.
one is the fear of the big draws on their budget to finance and other problems. and then immigration, being the uncontrolled , immigration. they worry about people from eastern europe coming in. even though they did not have even though they could control , the flow from, say, syria, they could not control the flow from, say, romania and poland and lithuania. so those two things. but if you think if britain was , a successful economy, as you say how about the countries that , do not have successful economies? or how about the countries like germany, which resemble britain in the sense that they are contributors to the eu. so you see these two different sets of countries in the eu, both seeing the brexit as a precedent for why they should
not be in the eu. different reasons, both taken as a precedent. david: what about in the near term? the uk's pretty well-positioned and the economy is pretty strong, but in the near term, there is so much uncertainty. we have heard about that baton since the vote. -- a ton. how much will that flag the economy? peter: it hit the stock market really hard. it is going to probably put a crimp on investment for some time to come. and that is why a lot of people are predicting a recession for britain. goldman sachs, for example, is forecasting that now. but to me, that is not the big story. the big story is the longer term impact. and something like stepping out of the eu is not just one of these cyclical things that is a story for a day or a week or a month. it could be in semipermanent new
condition. so what you really care about is can britain and the eu find a , new modus vivendi, where they be as tightlyt linked as before but still managed to trade with border investment. carol: it is tricky. other members of the eu who may be questioning the union at this point, whether it is france, spain, whatever -- if the eu makes it too easy for the u.k. kind of to be out of the european union but still have the liberties of it, it may make the other nations to leave as well. peter: it is true. is the interesting germans have been surprisingly open to cutting some type of deal with the brits. one theory for that is that german industrials see britain as a big export market. carol: right.
peter: they don't want to give that up. they do not want to give that up a they may be putting that as their number one priority and worrying somewhat less on the long-term repercussions. carol: up next, another scandal in britain. its biggest insider trading case and history. david:david: and doctors milking the u.s., out of $100 billion. carol: what may be the most u.k. scientific right through. ♪
david: in this week's features section, an investigation into the uk's biggest insider-trading case. carol: i spoke to a reporter. suzi: the u.k. regulator had not prosecuted anyone criminally prior to 2009. and insider trading was really with a grabbed onto to show that were looking at institutions. they were supervising institutions improperly and they would crack down hard. this is one of the first investigations they opened in 2007. it took a while to come to fruition because of various judicial court issues and legal aid issues but this is their , landmark case. around seven people arrested in 2010. in a series of storm raids that relate to the city by surprise. it had never happened before. a number of these people were caught up in those raids. the recent outcome is what we have seen.
two convictions, three acquittals a mixed result. ,carol: unbelievable. going through your story, i felt like you needed an organizational chart to understand how it all worked and the players. there was one man who was really interesting, and i think he went by the name of "fatty" or "mad punter." talk about him. suzi: iraj parvizi was a larger-than-life guy. what we saw in this case was a modern crew of players, a meeting of two worlds. you have the bankers from prestigious firms, working m&a deals, keeping this very established ceos. then you have this underbelly of financers who were cutting their teeth on sort of "have you heard this, have you heard that," and placing huge spreads, effectively gamblers professional gamblers who were shares asocks and another outlet of what they do. iraj parvizi describes himself as a professional gambler.
he dealt with horses played , poker. for him, stocks and shares was just another way to gamble. carol: and he was quite a character in the courtroom, was and he? -- wasn't he? suzi: absolutely. he is a fascinating history. he is the son of an iranian diplomat. part of the persian revolution. he was in england. his family has lost a lot of their money, he dropped out of school. he started working dead end jobs. and a chance meeting put them in the business world, gave him a sense of what it was to make real money. from there, he became a self-made man. boutiques, buying thoroughbred horses, to become this sort of larger-than-life character. carol: in the policy section the , u.s. government is accusing hundreds of nurses and doctors of scamming the government out of billions of dollars. peter: this was the annual takedown, as they call it, by the department of justice and
the department of health and human services the office of , inspector general. every year, they save up some of the health care fraud investigations they have been working on, and they time them on the big june smash. this year was their biggest yet by far. they are arguing there is more money being spent on health care fraud investigations. they ranged all over the country. i think there was about 30 states involved. i think there are about 37 different judicial jurisdictions or cases have been filed. these are doctors, nurses, pharmacy executives. there is a lot of compound pain cream that has been a priority for hhs in terms of investigating fraud. it really ran the gamut. david: this is an annual event. things were a bit different this year. we have seen a policy shift. you write about that policy shift. what has changed? peter: last september, the department of justice issued guidance to all of their
lawyers, saying no more deals with individuals in investigations of large corporate fraud or even small corporate fraud. they are not going to make a deal that says ok, the company , may have committed medicare fraud. you may have been writing prescriptions or housing nursing home patients or doing things completely unnecessary bilking taxpayers for money, and , letting off the executives or letting off the doctors or letting off any individual who was culpable. so in the past that ability for , prosecutors to make deals in these kinds of investigations led to a lot of settlements, and it was helpful. you provided some leverage for the government to say, ok we , will let your ceo walk, let those doctors walk. there may be evidence involved, but you pay us x million dollars
and agree to some corporate compliance in the future, and no one will be charged. well, the department of justice announced that that will no longer be the case. now it takes special permission from washington to do a deal that lets an executive or anyone else walk and just hold the corporation liable. they want to see individuals in the dock for medicare fraud. david: up next, under armour reinvents its supply chain, and baltimore says "thank you." carol: and how to spend happy hour this summer in the five biggest american cities. ♪
♪ carol: welcome back to bloomberg businessweek. i am carol massar. david: i am david gura. carol: in this week's features section, how under armour is changing its supply chain. david: and transforming baltimore in its place. carol: we spoke to reporter rachel monroe. rachel: they are building a new
innovation and marketing club in baltimore, which is the heart of their new headquarters, which is also part of a huge, new neighborhood that is being built essentially from scratch. it is part of a 20 year plan to really reshape the company and the city of baltimore at the same time. david: talk a bit about the growth it has seen over the past two decades. it has gone from him driving up and down the east coast a really to it being a really big enterprise. rachel: i think he said he put 100,000 miles on his car that year. first under armour has taken over a deed they are the second-biggest athletic wear company in the u.s. they are projected to have, they had $4 billion in revenue last year growing every year. , breathing down nike's neck. carol: talk to us about kevin plank. he is really the force behind
it. a pretty competitive spirit, i think it is safe to say. nobody at the company will say "nike," but he is looking to reinvent the supply chain in this process. rachel: he is very passionate about the idea of how can he do things better. that was the idea behind the company from the beginning. making a better shirt rather than the soggy sweaty cotton shirts shirts football players were sweating in. he would do that with local to local manufacturing. the idea was to revamp products , bring in a lot more technology. the production is moved much more close to the point of sale, rather than having an 18 month supply chain that involves prototyping and shipping things back and forth across the ocean. david: he is opening a innovation center in baltimore, where under armour was based. he is a guy with a lot of affection for that place. you had an amusing anecdote in the piece about a call he makes to network news executives.
it is kind of of amazing. rachel: he was watching the news one morning and realized that when they showed the weather on the "today" show or something like that, they were showing new york, d.c., philadelphia, but they were not showing baltimore. my city needs to be in their. he started this co-op, do whatever hustled the need to to get baltimore on the weather. he is just always thinking like that. always thinking about the brand. not only of his company but the city where the company is based. they are very much in 20 wind -- they are very much intertwined for him. carol: quickly, the company has been around 20 years. is this a step for the next 20 years in the company? rachel: yes, i think they are thinking about how they can beat nike. they are thinking big. carol: in this week's etc. section, we got a handy guide to this summer's hottest happy hour areas. bret: there are a ton of things you can do with your coworkers, your family, by yourself. he does need to leave your coworkers behind, and if you just need to give it a little
bit of thought, you can actually plan some pretty fun stuff. there are concert series happening all over the country. there is a great one in brooklyn and a millennium park in chicago as well. there are wine sipping events, if you want to have a little all -- alcohol at the artwork in l.a. you can go to houston and watch 250,000 bats fly. david: this is the coolest one. bret: these are not that involved, but it is something different something to switch up , during the work week. we forget about our lives. david: and the happy hour can often lead to the work dinner, which more often than not takes place at the restaurant you probably would not want to go to. a steakhouse type of thing. you go outside for that as well. bret: right. you are entertaining clients, you go to the steakhouse it is , what they want, fine. but we previewed five restaurants that are known for al fresco dining. you can either sit on a patio or on a roof. it is something to plant in your
david: welcome to "bloomberg businessweek." i am david gura. carol: i am carol massar. we are coming in from inside the magazine and others. the real cost of donald trump's rallies to taxpayers. carol: delahunt, the real cause for donald trump taxpayers. david: scientific breakthrough. carol: all of that is ahead on "bloomberg businessweek." ♪ david: with ellen pollock the editor-in-chief there are so , many must reads.
let's start in the finance section. big news a few months ago about saudi arabia thinking of taking saudi aramco public. the replant the of people outside of saudi arabia with very keen interest in how that is going to happen, when that is going to happen. ellen: the whole issue for them is if investment banking around the world is not having the strongest years, and saudi arabia is talking about basically selling assets. and the possible ipo, which is of saudi aramco, valued at at trillions of dollars. we have moved into trillions. so for investment banks, there is a lot of work to be done. and the whole idea of the deputy crown prince who is a very arabia, he wasdi to create the world's biggest sovereign wealth fund. they will be doing that with investment. the idea is there will be lots of seeds lots of banks, lots of
bankers visiting middle east. david: triage, i am sure. in the brexit section of the magazine you look at where , financial firms might go if they elect to leave london. a lot of people have reported saying that, as the united kingdom has exited the eu, they are looking at other capitals. dublin is one of them. that is where taxes are more favorable. ellen: and the advantage that they speak english. all of those bankers working in the city can speak the same language in dublin. that is a big plus. and of course frankfurt, which is already a big financial capital, very important. david: negative marks for not having a very fun nightlife. ellen: franklin -- frankfurt is not known for its nightlife. it is no berlin. david: paris is a city that is also being floated. they would like to get those banks back. they could actually recruit some of these banks. ellen: it is sort of the silver lining, but not for the u.k.
david: amsterdam? ellen: amsterdam, which is just a short flight away from london. luxembourg as well. another short flight away. it is convenient to city hop in europe, and the food is great. and there are all of these cities willing to take advantage of what could be a big vacancy. david: let's talk about the features section. there is a piece on crisper. cannot really underestimate how big it has been for medicine and agriculture, a new way of sort of changing the way that genes work. ellen: it's a huge breakthrough. crisper,volves using which is the way the bottom -- body or genes naturally attack viruses and snip them out. it turns out, and i am signifying this a lot, -- simplifying this a lot when you , combine it with certain proteins, you can program this function to trim out pieces of dna that are irregular and put
the dna back together or stitch it with another piece of dna. it uses a guiding piece of rna. it is really really complicated. ,david: carol and i talked to corker, who wrote that piece. >> it could revolutionize everything. it could be as big a deal as the transistor was. decades ago. it is sort of a foundational technology, a process that bacteria had used to fight off viruses. but now scientists believe they can use to edit genes easily had cheaply. we have been trying to edit genes are years. even if you don't know about biotechnology, you have heard about the genome. you know about gene editing and gene therapy. but crisper takes it to another level. there are hobbyists right now were playing around with petri dishes in their homes. it is like copy and paste on a word processor. carol: bring back the woolly mammoth. but there is some real applications in terms of what can be done. you write about it as the discovery of the century.
there are a couple of key players in it, so i guess who , gets the credit? who might get the monetary rewards? david: which would be sizable. >> investors are not wasting any time. they are putting money in various startups. and the two scientists competing who are competing over the technologyhe crisper they are behind startups as , well. and so you have got not just scientists, that businesses behind the scientists, and then investors behind the businesses placing bets on who will end up with the patent. david: picking up what carol is saying, is it about the money? or if it will be such a huge thing to harness the science behind it that private is going to come about? >> i met both scientists. i set down with them. i sat down with thing over at the berkeley institute. these are very nice people. all things equal, it probably
like each other too. david: but the each lay claim to a. >> absolutely. long story short, she found a way to apply this thing that existed in bacteria and make it something that you can manipulate like crazy easily. and the man argues that she did that, but i was already doing it with the human cell. so one person says they have the building blocks of it and another person says they put the blocks in the right order. it's really up to the patent office to figure it out. they don't really care who invented it. they often just cares who files first. carol: but he filed first? >> she files first, but he had a better one. it gets thornier and thornier. it's technology and patent law all in the same story. it is a heavy lift. but it is fun. david: when did things become acrimonious between these two? for a time, they were working with the same enterprise. robert: they were part of the
dream team that founded and consulted a company called epitaph, which still exists now, has a $100 million ipo. and the minute the man got the patent and she didn't, she left that company and soon after that, she helped to found a company called the tally of therapeutics, a competing company right down the road in kendall square in cambridge. so they are civil. they see each other at conferences, but they are competing for a patent. and they are behind businesses that are competing for investment. carol: couldn't they share? kind of the recognition? robert: they might. the nobel committee typically out up to three people. there are other names in the mix. who knows what they will do? in terms of the patent, that is often how it results itself with crosslicensing arrangements and settlements. that may happen or it may not. in april, they filed in court
saying they have talked about settling and decided not to. so they are both going to let it ride for now. david: looking at the possible applications going forward, it's not worth thinking about the potential ethical implications. when you could do at this point. carol: the designer babies. david: where are we in terms of technology, could we use them to treat diseases? robert: there has been nothing close to human trials. sean parker is funding a nonprofit one. the university of pennsylvania, i think. they are going to try to do human trials and cure one particular disease. but that has not been fully cleared by the fda. things are moving in that direction in terms of working with humans, but nobody has actually tried it with the human body yet. david: why donald trump's rallies are a lot more expensive than hillary clinton's. ♪
♪ david: welcome back to bloomberg businessweek. carol: you can find us on radio xm channel 119, a.m. 1130 in new york, 1200 in boston , 91.1 in washington, and 96 in the bay area. david: the politics and policy section, the real cost of donald trump's rallies. carol: we spoke to reporter, kate smith. kate: the rallies you see, they have protesters getting violent they are costing quite a bit of , money. more so than they really ever have, right? so donald trump is having big rallies that are costing tons of police over time, even additional personnel, and security. all sorts of extra costs. david: who is shouldering that cost right now?
ares the taxpayers who paying right now? it's not the campaign? kate: it is a mixed bag. i talked to 50 different towns. i talked to them about their experiences and the rallies and only one of them said they had been reimbursed by the trump campaign. they got a check a couple of days prior to me calling them. he said he had to do a double take when he saw the check in the mail. but everyone else either not submitted a reimbursement because campaigns have no obligation to reimburse a town for the cost. and then the other ones that had submitted reimbursements have not gotten anything yet. carol: why hasn't this issue come up before? it is not the first political campaign. kate: it's not the first political campaign. it has not been an issue before for a couple of different reasons. first of all, just the nature of these trump rallies just the , -- mood. very different than what we've seen in prior cycles. when you compare hillary to donald trump in this election cycle, the way they go about
these rallies are completely different. and this is one thing i found this fascinating when i was researching this piece. and that is, multiple towns of kind of talk to me through this process. the campaign will call you. it will be two or three days prior. carol: a couple of days. kate: it is no exaggeration. for the level of security required, they have to do this in two days. let alone, they actually run a town and they have other duties. carol: they are responsible for doing this. they don't really have a choice. kate: and the secret service. they coordinate with secret service. but what i was saying hillary , would come in. her campaign, i should say, her campaign will come in and say we , will be visiting you on saturday, and it's wednesday. we would like a venue of 200 people. and they will say, ok maybe the veterans hall, something like that. and then they distribute 300 tickets. assuming a lot of people will not come. so the donald trump campaign, from what i am hearing from a lot of different towns the , staffers will call and say we are visiting.
what is your single biggest venue in your town? they say maybe the high school, it fits 1800 people. and then they distribute unlimited tickets -- david: unlimited? kate: unlimited tickets and there is no cap. and so what will happen is, they in one town distributed 6000 tickets to an event that could only hold 1800 people. it is just an amazing campaign engineering where you have now thousands of people who have driven god knows how long just to get there, and then they are pitted physically right next to all the anti-trump protesters. so you have these incredible optics of just the people trying to get into the rally against the angry protesters. it is so obvious. and then you have of course a lot of extra police needed to handle that situation. whereas, again with the clinton campaign at the veterans hall everyone got in. , carol: right. david: you mentioned you reached
out to 50 towns. i wonder what the donald trump campaign said about this. keeping in mind what you just said, it could be an easy argument to make, why would be be on the hook for this if there are all these anti-protesters there taking part, reading some of the havoc. kate: it's not their fault. when i reached out to the donald trump campaign, the campaign is responsible for all the security inside of the venue, and the four walls of the venue. they also have to pay for the venue, which is not all that expensive, but i still have to pay for it. everything outside, for the campaign laws in the u.s., it is the town's response ability, it always has been. there is a process by which you much itit however extra cost you. by the campaign itself is under no obligation to do so. carol: a dilemma facing airlines. david: there is a pilot shortage. we spoke to a reporter. mary: currently, the major
airlines are fine with the number of pilots available. it is more the regional industry that is being hit by the current shortage of pilots. in three to four years, major airlines, united, american, delta, southwest, they will start feeling the shortage of pilots. by 2026, the shortage will reach as high as 15,000 pilots. david: what happened here? this used to be seen as a good job, you sign on to, making six figures by the end of your career. what changed? mary: a lot of things change. one thing was the change in flight hours. tot was increased six fold 1500 hrs. the discouraged a lot of people because it is hard to get that flight time and expensive. before that, there is the downturn in the industry after the 9/11 attack. there were bankruptcies and mergers. for years and years, it are airlines were not hiring very
many people at all. and you had people who look at the career and said i know this guy who was a first officer at american for 20 years. i don't want to go into that job things tarted to combine and make the career a lot less attractive than it was at one time. carol: are the younger generations even interested in being pilots? mary: they have done studies. they show that only 60% of the kids who initially think that they want to go into being a polite -- pilot as a career, only 60% of them say they want to stick with that career. so what some of the airlines are doing is they are going down to colleges. they are even going to down to high schools, air even going down to elementary schools and they are trying to generate , more interest in the career. they are also working with with flight schools. and with the regional carriers, they want to help the pilots more. the guys and girls that want to be pilots, to help them financially, give them incentives like a signing bonus. david: did the airlines see this
coming? they have got these mandatory retirement ages. mary: there is always that fear of a bubble after the retirement age -- it was extended to 65. so used to have it at 60, but they are coming up on the time. in 2026, half of the current pilots are going to be eligible, or not be eligible, but they have to retire because they are 65. so that will be 30,000 -- i am sorry, 15,000 pilots of the 30,000 pilots in the industry. carol: kickstarter finds a way to make its investors happy. without going public. david: and happy hour outside the bar. ♪
path when it comes to dividends. joshua: they would not give me any particulars about the financials. neither would any of the people who actually received the dividends. carol: they don't have to. right? joshua: they don't have to they , are a private company. and they said they will stay that way. that is a reason that they gave out the dividends as well. kickstarter has said it's not interested in going public they are not interested in being acquired. carol: that's interesting. they also kind of a running the business differently than others. joshua: if you were going to pick a company to have done --ething like this, etc. kickstarter would be at the top of your list. they donate a specific portion of profits, i think 5%, to charities that are kind of like-minded. i have made, they put into their actual financial documents to they won't be to cover with her taxes, just pay them. too clever with their taxes, just pay them.
carol: what is going on in the world? it is interesting. does it question the traditional model that has been out there for so long, with the endgame being typically an ipo and public offering? joshua: it's essentially a rejection of the vc model. which is, you put a bunch of money into a bunch of companies, nine of them just died. gets bought either by google or goes public. and kickstarter says we are happy to just move along. we do not need to have astronomical growth every quarter. we don't need to reach these arabian heights. we have a good business and we like what we are doing, and it's sustainable. carol: venture capital is ok with this? joshua: their main venture capitalists is fred wilsons. when i talk to him, he said he was looking to experiment with something different. he knew from the beginning that this was the deal with kickstarter, and he said it was ok. i talked to some other venture
folks who were not invested in kickstarter, and they were intrigued, but they said kickstarter is an anomaly. i would not want to work under this model. i need extra term. carol: that's what i think when i read your story. there are going to the other companies that will follow like kickstarter. what is the expectation? joshua: i think the expectation is the ruby an increasing number of companies that try this. especially in that part of the industry, where they see themselves as the do-gooders. they are not really a sort of cold, hard profit machine. zeb: it is the idea of who they are, other companies, helping other people get off the ground. joshua exactly. companies are interested in this, but it will be a small portion. david: moving happy hour outside. carol: here is britain begin. brett: there are many things you can do that don't involve alcohol. we have many of them in the section this week. does notr happy hour
have to happen after work. if you really know you cannot get out of work at a reasonable hour, switch up your routine in the morning. definitely don't drink between the hours of 7:00 and 9:00. david: wise advice. brett: that's wise advice. but there are elements you can switch up, you can try nitro coffee, which is coming to 500 starbucks. david: what is it? brett: it is coffee with nitrogen gas, frothy. it's delicious. they do it in houston right now. you can workout. instead of taking the run on the treadmill, in chicago you actually can go to the roof of a hotel and do a cardio workout up there. which is different. in a lake, instead of being stuck in traffic, you can take the new light rail line. you can bring a surfboard on there and it is super cheap. david: you asked her colleagues to chart out how they spent their evenings. one of them walked the dog. [laughter] walked to his poodle. there are other things you can do besides going to the bars.
brett: you don't have to put that much thought into planning all of this. one of the things we are trying to stress is be conscious of how you are spending your time. you can walk a friend's dog. you can go to an art park. one of our editors actually went and played basketball and then got frozen yogurt. it was a different thing they did, really swished up their night and it was great for the family. carol: bloomberg businessweek is on news stands now. david: what was your favorite story? carol: i like the story of the pilot shortage. i had no idea that was going on with the regional carriers. millennials,ut how kids, they are not getting in to being a pilot anymore. david: not a desirable career. carol: and expensive. how about you? david: i really like the piece on what could be this immense breakthrough in medicine and agriculture. this gene editing. and also i love the back story about how the two sides are fighting it out over who first found it. universities are fighting it out
♪ shery: coming up, these stories that shape the week in business around the world. vote,hocks of u.k. brexit who is in charge? >> the labor leader jeremy corbyn was a resounding defeat. >> go. .hery: global glum >> the best word would be sadness. will: the united kingdom not be the last members stay to leave the european union. >> it is in danger. shery: initial market turmoil. >>