tv Bloomberg Technology Bloomberg November 9, 2017 11:00pm-12:00am EST
♪ alisa: i'm alisa parenti in washington, and you are watching "bloomberg technology." let's start with a check of your "first word news." the house ways and means committee has approved the gop tax plan, voting along party lines to deliver the measure to the full house. the $6 trillion plan limits the directions for home owners, increases the child tax credit and lowers the number of income brackets. republicans say it is a boon to the middle class. the democrats call it a tax bounty for the wealthy. senate republicans released their vision for a tax cut plan that cuts the corporate tax rate to 20% with a one-year delay to 2019. key provisions include retaining seven tax brackets and preserving the existing mortgage interest deduction for home
purchases with up to $1 million of debt. gop senators mitch mcconnell and john mccain are calling on roy moore to withdraw from the alabama senate race if allegations are substantiated that he initiated inappropriate encounters with a 14-year-old girl nearly 40 years ago. moore was 32 years old at the time. five officers who responded when the gunman fired on lawmakers during a baseball practice were honored on capitol hill. the assailant was killed in the gunfight, and house majority whip steve scalise of louisiana was seriously wounded. global news 24 hours a day powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries. this is bloomberg. ♪
emily: i'm emily chang, and this is "bloomberg technology." coming up, disney disappoints, posting its first drop in results in nearly a decade. why the world's largest entertainment company ran out of magic in the fourth quarter. plus, at&t and the doj prepare for battle. new demands from the trump administration could derail the tie up with time warner. we consider the arguments from both sides. and sean parker sheds light on the darker side of social media. the napster cofounder and facebook founding president says he has morphed into a conscientious objector. first, disney reporting fourth-quarter earnings, showing the first drop in annual results since the financial crisis. profit dropped 1.2% to $1.24 billion. shares are dipping in after hour trading. the company suffering from the triple whammy of bad weather, .ower ad sales
disney reported a $140 million drop from investments. joining us from l.a. is our bloomberg news reporter anousha sakoui and cory johnson is in new york. what's the biggest take away here? cory: disney is doing better than a lot of other studios and other companies here, but the headwinds in the industry and the headwinds of cord cutting, they are not massive, but it is starting to impact the results across most of their entertainment businesses, whether it's cable or even box office. emily: anousha, walk us through the various trends. there were multiple things not working in disney's favor. anousha: they were hit across the piece, affected by the hurricanes, affected by falling advertising, falling subscribers, even though the affiliate revenue was up. poor performance at the box office.
indeed, they said they were going to take some write-down on a movie they didn't release called "gigantic." really kind of across the piece being hit on all fronts. it reminds me of what some analysts have been saying. at some point, it was set to snap back. bob iger, the ceo, had to flag this, saying that 2017 would be an anomaly, and it seems he was right about that. hopefully it doesn't continue. emily: the question is, is this really an anomaly and which of these trends will continue? we can't predict the weather, but of some of these other trends, like what's happening at espn, are these long-term things that are just going to keep hurting disney over the next few quarters? cory: first of all, to some degree, disney did predict the weather. the opening of disney shanghai, among other things, was meant to isolate them from bad weather in florida and isolate them from
bad weather results in southern california and in europe, to diversify their themepark business from some of these effects, including the weather. that actually works in this quarter. it would have been a lot worse if it were not for china, but espn has been a problem. the jemele hill issue wasn't a financial impact, but i think it really points to the fact that they are trying to take the espn of 20 years ago and make that work today, and they haven't quite figured out what the model is for espn today. and the result is they've got this struggling thing that they are throwing a lot of money at in terms of production costs. production costs getting higher at espn, and that is also on a trailing basis, but the results in terms of growth are not showing up. emily: anousha, talk to us about the upcoming movie season and if some of these movies that are coming out later this year will
dramatically change the box office results. anousha: you know, disney is in a place that i haven't seen it for a long while when it comes to movies. it's been ranking third in terms of box office share. it has just climbed up to second, and that is not a place we are used to seeing disney. disney usually ends the year well ahead of its peers by market share. they are expected to end the year in first place when they bring out "star wars" in december. not the return of the jedi, the last jedi, and the hope is that that will be a really big movie. actually the call with disney is just going on now. from the headlines that are coming across the terminal, you can see that they are talking about more star wars films potentially come a new trilogy, but it is also interesting to see what they are saying about their need to invest in new franchises. they really have milked, very successfully their marvel , franchises.
they are in the process of working through star wars. there is a question of how long their box office success can continue. they have doubled down on big blockbuster movies and making fewer movies than many other studios, but attendance at the box office has been lagging and people are not going to the movies as much, so how exposed they will be going into the next couple of years will be a question. emily: iger saying on the call, no urgent need for new film franchises. cory, how optimistic are you about this new disney streaming service? they have cut ties with netflix in a number of ways. they are focusing everything on this new streaming service. but when you have competitors like netflix that are already very much in this game, how likely is it for such a service coming from disney to succeed? cory: i think the real question is how big a loss is disney willing to take. netflix is a technological marvel, but they have lost billions of dollars in creating that technological marvel. and the question is, even if disney can manage to master that
technological feat, how much is it willing to spend to do so? the negative free cash flow that netflix investors are willing to tolerate, disney investors are not willing to tolerate. so what is disney going to do? are they at a point that they think this kind of service can generate positive free cash flow investorshich there demand and which disney would certainly like to have. the digital transformation to hollywood is just as upsetting the business of hollywood as the way business is done in hollywood. and just as the casting couch is getting a welcome kick out the door, the old business models of hollywood at the same time are roiling. if you pick up "hollywood reporter," you are not seeing a discussion about what's happened with the latest box office, fabulous success story. you are seeing stories about sexual harassment good you are seeing stories about the shift to digital. what's really happening is the business model is completely changing in hollywood. disney and everyone else is trying to figure out how to handle that, and i think these things are really important when disney and other companies are trying to figure out their
future. that's why all of this m&a is so interesting here. and if indeed at&t has to spin out cnn, is that something disney is going to do? we learned that disney was looking at fox and their cable network. is that something disney is going to do? they're strong balance sheet, which stays intact for this quarter, is something to pay attention to, because it might tell us what the future of disney might look like, which could be very different. emily: the call happening now. anousha, listening in for the next hour. what are you listening for? anousha: it's very interesting. as with yesterday's call with fox, investors are trying to figure out what disney and fox are thinking with the potential deal they had been talking about. just on the call now, checking the headlines as i was coming out to do this interview, they are saying disney is not going to comment on the speculation. fox did the same thing at the beginning of the call.
it's really unclear what entertainment companies are going to do. something that really struck me and as cory alluded to is these companies have varying visions of what the future brings. disney is going for this exclusive, bringing their content back onto their own platforms, whereas fox, for example, yesterday was talking about making their content available everywhere possible. hollywood doesn't know what it's going to do in terms of the future distribution model. that seems clear to me. but maybe they have very different visions. the investments they have made, that cory was alluding to -- it is a lot of emily: all right. anousha: it's a lot of uncertainty out there. emily: two very different strategies, but time will tell who is on the right side of history. anousha sakoui, cory johnson, thank you both. coming up, president trump got a grand welcome in china, but has anything of substance emerged on trade details between the two superpowers?
♪ emily: president trump just wrapped up his first visit to china as commander in chief. while the visit was big on optics, the critics are arguing it was short on substance. the two countries announced $253 billion in business deals. however, those are tentative and may not be fulfilled. president trump sounded a bit different this time around. president trump: who can blame a country for being able to take advantage of another country for the benefit of its citizens? i give china great credit. but in actuality, i do blame past administrations for allowing this out-of-control
trade deficit to take place and to grow. emily: joining me now to discuss, from syracuse, new york, isaac stone fish. how do you think the administration and president are handling the fact that they didn't get very much out of this trip? isaac: i think they are trying to send two very different messages. on the one hand, you had some astonishing comments that you just played about china not to be blamed for the trade deficit, which seems to go against so much of what trump is saying. on the other hand, you've had a administration officials speaking privately reporters, talking about this idea that, very soon, we are going to be tougher to china and there will be really harsh deliverables. right now, it's hard to know what to think. emily: at the same time as this is happening, you see tencent making a huge investment in snap, a u.s. social media
company. as the social media companies have had extreme difficulties operating in china and most of them are blocked. what do you make of that? isaac: it underscores what you are saying, how much easier it is for chinese investment, chinese money to come to the united states than it is for american investment to go to china. i know a lot of tech ceos are privately and sometimes publicly grumbling about the trade barriers that beijing erects. emily: at the same time you are seeing american companies, like apple, for example, taking vpn's down from the app store. they are making concessions that maybe they haven't made in the past. what do you make of that? isaac: i think companies are realizing that a lot of their future growth could be in china. for them to be global leaders, behooves them to have a substantial presence in china,
so they are, unfortunately, making some of the ethical compromises that american customers would not let them make in the states in china. brad: emily: what is your take on what came out with regards to north korea during this trip? there had been some hints of progress, then none. isaac: trump was a lot more professional on this trip then he normally is. admittedly, that's a low bar. but in his speech in south korea, he did talk about very aggressive reprisals to north korea without resorting to the , fire and fury like the world has never seen he's said before about north korea. at the same time, he left the door open for a meeting, telling a journalist he would be open to meeting kim jong-un, not yet, but potentially at some point in the future.
emily: we've seen a lot of unexpected rhetoric between president trump and north korea. where do you think this is going? what will this actually amount to? will there be any action, more than these words? isaac: one really hopes that the american side and the north korean side are taking the opportunity of this lag in missile testing. it's been quite a number of weeks since north korea has tested a missile, and, hopefully, there are secret conversations that we don't know about that are bringing the sides closer to a deal. reallythink one thing to watch out for is, does north korea decide to test a missile soon? they tend to do less missile tests in the winter, and this could be, particularly this break now could be because of what trump is doing. it could be just structural reasons inside north korea. i think the u.s. response to the next test will be very key. emily: china did not seem to offer much when it came to north korea. i am curious, you know, over the last couple decades, a lot of the discussion with china has been about human rights issues,
you know, how the country treats activists. that doesn't even seem to come up when it comes to president trump. is that now a thing of the past? isaac: so, trump officials have stressed the importance of human rights in china. it is just trump himself seems so overwhelmed and amazed by the red carpet rollout, by the way he was treated in beijing that one does find it hard to believe that in a private meeting he was really talking about human rights in china. officials have privately said that trump is very supportive of human rights in china, but it is not something he is known for going to bat for. frankly sometimes being very public about these things is the way to go. i don't want to say it's a thing of the past. perhaps that is just hopeful thinking on my part, but it certainly doesn't seem to be a
♪ emily: iac's third-quarter results beat forecasts thanks to robust growth in its two largest businesses, online dating and home services. the major players in silicon valley are eating up all the ad dollars. bloomberg's erik schatzker caught up with joey levin for an exclusive conversation at the company's headquarters in new york. take a listen. joey: it's a confluence of events. we think about what's best for the company, the subsidiary, what's best for what's left behind. and we have to optimize both of those things. there has to be a reason to do it.
joey: i think that it's -- one at a time. applications is, i think, a great business. it's been a phenomenal cash flow business for us. it delivers consistent earnings for us. i don't think we will get that same value outside of the market for us, so i don't think anyone will appreciate that value as much as we do, so i'm comfortable collecting what we get from that business. in publishing, it took us some
time. it was unsellable for some period. we were in a bad place for a while. we had a huge restructuring. we've now got it in a healthy place. now that business is doing well. the growth prospects look healthier than they have ever looked. i would like to see how that plays out for a little while. emily: all right. that was joey levin, iac, speaking with erik schatzker. amazon is taking its first steps into the british soccer market. amazon prime video will produce a behind the scenes series. amazon is paying man city more than $13 million for this. coming up, the latest in the drama of at&t's quest to buy time warner. is the department of justice standing in the way, and why they might have their sights set on cnn? this is bloomberg. ♪
♪ it is 12:30 in hong kong. some breaking news this hour. china is removing its foreign some sectors,t in including banks and securities companies. that is the headline on the bloomberg. the headline says it all. foreign bankske can up their stakes in chinese banks and securities firms. one of the big complaints has been with the security ventures limited at 49% they could not have that majority control. that has been lifted to 51%. the banks had been limited to
25%, so limiting their ability to cash in in on lucrative areas like secondary trading and management control. said numerous times there is too much protection of investment and financial institutions that is weakening the industry. one of the takeaways from donald trump's visit to beijing is that he did not secure any public commitments for market access. we heard xi jinping saying they would do it on their own timetable and roadmap, so we saw that as a loss. trump is out of china, -- >> he is saying it is unclear when they will start allowing this to happen, but clearly have decided to ease that restriction
on foreign ownership of brokerages, investment funds. morgan andgo j.p. jamie dimon exited their venture. and jamie dimon telling me they want that control over their financial institutions in china. tosaid someday i would love see j.p. morgan on the top of a building in china. we will have to see what the steps to implement this new world are. >> absolutely. we will watch out for market reaction when the chinese markets open and 30 minutes from now. , ae a look at my bloomberg quick snapshot across sector groups. you want to watch the financials, roughly unchanged. you have the banks and insurers. there we go, shanghai composite's, banks and brokerages, and insurers. >> the current bank ownership
for foreigners is limited at 25%. they will remove that limit. >> the sky is the limit now. we will flush out that market story later on. this is bloomberg. ♪ ♪ emily: now to a story we are watching, the conflicting reports about the state of at&t's bid to buy time warner cable. today, at&t's ceo randall stephenson said the company has not received any pressure from the doj to sell cnn, something he is not going to do to make the deal go through. take a listen. >> we have built an amazing distribution platform, 150 million mobile subscribers, largest pay-tv base in the united states, a huge broadband base. there's a lot of information and data that we think can be used to stand up a new advertising business. pairing that with the turner advertising inventory is a really powerful thing, we believe.
that is what we aspire to do. selling cnn makes no sense in that context. emily: joining me now to discuss, someone very familiar with the cnn, john kline, who was president of cnn for nearly six years. also with me, jennifer read, a senior analyst in antitrust litigation. jennifer, i will start with you. what has the doj actually told at&t and time warner as far as bloomberg is concerned? jennifer: as far as bloomberg is concerned, i think what has been reported is that the doj has been asking for either a the divestiture of directv or of turner broadcasting. turner includes cnn and many other channels as well. they are doing this because they are concerned about possible harm that could come from having very desirable content combined with very broad distribution. and there might be some ability to leverage both of those positions to harm rivals in either segment. emily: so, john, despite what
randall stephenson said, if indeed this is true, do you think this is politically motivated? >> well, who knows. you do know the doj has laid the giant uncertainty bomb on the markets. it was only two days ago that everybody in the m&a space was so excited at these rumors about disney and 21st century fox because they thought that the dinner bell had rung. and then this comes. markets detest uncertainty. no one knows whether this is a personal vendetta. ou are mergers and acquisitions going to be determined by a policy that has a rationale behind it, or is it going to be about who the president is mad at at the moment? that is what has to be clarified right now. emily: if cnn got spun off or sold, what would that mean for
cnn editorially, given that the strategy for the network has been opposition territory for president trump? jon: i think their strategy has been investigate the truth. beenis always what cnn has about. i'm no longer there. i no longer have stock, so i unfortunately don't participate in any upside from the acquisition or anything like that. they are journalists, as you guys are, and they are just pursuing the facts and the information. it depends who buys cnn. if sinclair bought them, the owners might decide to change the mission of cnn, because sinclair is a very conservative organization. if cbs buys them or disney buys them to complement their existing broadcasting operations, probably it would be business as usual. emily: jennifer, speaking of business as usual, for so many years, massive consolidation has gone unchallenged. do you see that changing now?
jennifer: i think it's not so much the massive consolidation that has gone unchallenged, because we have seen some fairly big deals in the last few years be challenged by the federal trade commission or the department of justice and actually challenged successfully. but what we are talking about here is a vertical consolidation, and that's quite different from a horizontal merger of competitors, which is removing a competitor from the market and concentrating the market. these are companies that don't compete. they are not removing competition. some of the theory of harm is how competition might get harmed by this combination are very whatlative and defend on the incentives of this company with theirey merge content and distribution. what we are looking at is a change, a departure from 40 years or more of precedent for vertical deals that either go unchallenged, because they are often procompetitive, or, if they do have some harm, that harm is remedied with conditions
that are behavioral, not structural, as in selling off a business. emily: jon, say this deal happens. what -- could you see any sort of conditions being imposed? jon: oh, sure. comcast, which is currently the very thing that at&t would become if there deal goes through, that is, a distributor that owns a lot of very well received content, is living under a consent decree that that involves i think 150 different rules. now those rules expire in the fall. and part of this may be about the antitrust division of the doj anticipating that eventuality, and maybe wanting to send a signal that they are going to take seriously these large media combinations. the thing that doesn't really add up is that at&t divesting itself of the turner broadcasting properties wouldn't really change its power to do
damage in the marketplace. i run now a small startup, a subscription video on-demand platform. we are the kind of company that could find ourselves taking away backseat if we ever tried to get on some of those at&t pipes. on those mobile phones or what have you. and the real threat to large combinations of megha distributors and mega content is the ability to squash the next netflix, the next the snapchat. when you think about what the biggest media companies in the world are, facebook, google, amazon, netflix, they were all little startups 10 some odd years ago that could have been killed in the cradle. that would have meant the loss of tens of thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in market value. that's what's at risk. getting rid of turner or cnn from at&t does nothing to address that potential threat.
emily: you mentioned earlier that cnn is simply investigating the truth. and i'm curious. if you were at cnn today, if you were running cnn today, what approach would you be taking to the trump administration? jon: the same one, just aggressively holding administration officials accountable, which was the policy when i was there. the job of the journalist -- you were there. so you know that is what we were trying to do. just hold officials accountable. wherever that may land. it's been amazing business with those who have been doing it. cnn has had a record year, two years. "the new york times," "the washington post." aggressive accountability is great business right now. emily: jon klein, you are sticking with me. bloomberg intelligences jennifer rie, thank you so much.
snap is continuing to struggle following disappointing third-quarter results. stanley issued the sell on theof a stock. morgan stanley was an underwriter of snap's ipo. snap has struggled with user growth and ad monetization. it faces increased competition from facebook and instagram. sean parker comes out swinging with harsh criticism of the first social network. this is bloomberg. ♪
of the charlotte white nationalists rally. some consider it to be an endorsement or indicator of importance. staying with social media, sean parker, the founding president of facebook, says social networks perfectly try to consume as much of our attention as possible and its potentially hurting our brains. speaking at a conference, he said, "i don't know if i really understood the consequences at the time. it literally changes your relationship with society, with each other. god only knows what it's doing to our children's brains." of course he was president at facebook. the impact of this social validation loop from social media do to the business of content and, more importantly, future generations? still with us, from new york, jon klein and bloomberg's sarah frier. jon, sean parker really laying it on thick when it comes to facebook here, saying that they not only did this purposely, but
that he is now a conscientious objector to these tactics and the potential impact of them. what do you make of it? jon: biggest humblebrag of the month first of all. he worked in the fact that he was a billionaire a couple times. he worked in the fact that they were so good at what they did that facebook became what it is. but i think also, there is a maturation process that takes place with human beings, as well as with companies. and i think you are seeing that as well. you know, you get married. you start to have children. and what was just a headlong rush to an uncertain future filled with success and parties -- we all saw that movie, "the social network." we know what it was like. suddenly, you realize it's not all fun and games. that's what mark zuckerberg has been dealing with with his foundation. sean parker has his cancer research foundation as well. they are growing up a little bit and maybe feeling a little bad. but i have to say, at the core of this, what sean parker was
saying was that facebook is built upon our narcissism. right? so, your need for a claim and your need for likes and shares and all that. so, look, if you are hooked on facebook or other social media, it's really your fault. and maybe it's time to just examine yourself. parents, of course, have to start doing what parents did when rock 'n roll came along and when television first came along. they have to know what their kids are doing on social media, and they have to offer limits. emily: you want to know what it means when it comes to the responsibilities of these companies. here's a little more of what sean parker had to say. , "the inventors, the creators, it is me, it's all of these people. we understood this consciously, and we did it anyway. it is a social validation .eedback loop
you're exploiting a vulnerability in human psychology." sarah, can you imagine anyone at facebook saying, oh, we should try to make sure people don't pay too much attention to this, let's give them an opportunity to look away? sarah: this is just the foundation of facebook's business. of course they want you to spend more time on facebook. of course they are optimizing for your attention. that's the number they throw out. 50 minutes on average of users spend with the facebook app on their phones. this is the crux of the business. and zuckerberg has had some mea culpas this year. other cofounders of facebook have had their mea culpas. i am sorry our business led to this impact on society, but fundamentally what facebook has argued is that this is just a human problem that gets blown up on facebook. right? if their attention is on facebook, they will be bigger.
and that is just what you get when you put a lot of people there. emily: there's a lot of discussion about the responsibility of these platforms, whether it comes to this, whether it comes fake news or fake accounts. jon, as someone who ran cnn, knows what it takes to verify and validate a story, we've seen these companies testifying on capitol hill. where does the responsibility start and stop? jon: these companies have to take much more responsibility than they initially did. and i think they are beginning to do that. and nobody can sense the way the wind is blowing better than sean parker. that's how he got into napster and then facebook and spotify. so, he sees that the trend is now to cast more light on the internal practices of these social media companies, and that's right. they have to own more of it. because the last thing anybody wants is for the government to start calling the shots.
so, again, part of that maturation process for a company is to take ownership of what you've done and start to come to grips with it. they have to, and they can do more. emily: what does that look like when we are looking at the volume of content, two billion users? i mean, you can lie on tv. you can lie at thanksgiving dinner. what if you lie on facebook? what should facebook do about that? jon: there are lies, and then there are lies. right? there are all kinds of gradations. they are the first ones to brag about how they have the greatest assemblage of geniuses in world history. ok, geniuses, figure it out. i'm sure they can. it is not easy. google has their best minds on it as well. this can be done. they just have to want to. disclosure, transparency are important. what's their process for vetting? and how on earth did they not even bother to check to see who was buying those ads that turned out to be from the russians when they were paying in rubles?
that is your first tip. it starts with the will to do something. self policing is always about that. mature corporations understand that. part of the maturation process, hopefully, these social media companies will come to grips with it as well. emily: sarah, you were in washington all week. remind us where we are when it comes to the changes these companies are making to their policies and what could be next. sarah: jon is right. they are trying to self police before the government comes in and says, here is what you have got to do. to his point, the two things that frustrated the congressional members as they were interrogating the companies, the two answers that seemed to frustrate them the most were, one, this content is such a small percentage of the overall content. they're like, we don't care. find it, fix it. number two, this is such a hard technical problem. we don't care. you are geniuses. fix it.
those are the things they felt were not a fair representation of how the companies should be viewing their responsibility here. emily: you say you can change the world, now change yourself. sarah frier, thanks so much. jon klein, ceo of tapp, great to have you here on the show. coming up, we explore what is driving investments in european technology. from the lisbon web summit. this is bloomberg. ♪
with one person to discuss how europe is shaping up for investors vs. opportunities here in the united states. >> in the past five to seven years, the progress has been really staggering. a few years ago, people were asking, can europe generate a billion-dollar outcome? europe has shown it can generate a $10 billion outcome. we are seeing it with a gaming company. with spotify and others, so i think there is no question today that europe can generate big outcomes. so when we come here and talk to investors we understand the different trends we are seeing on the market and where we think the next wave of innovation could come from. ed: any concerns about a bubble reemerging? >> well, i mean, we are definitely in a frothy market, and there is a lot of money trading. i think it is a market where you have to be selective. but the innovation is such right now that, this is really a time to look at where innovation is. ed: more broadly, is there a mismatch in some cases in different sectors, areas, between pre-ipo valuations and
what the market is actually willing to pay for a business, especially here in europe? >> the recent example of ipos in the u.s. has shown sometimes the late stage rounds can be priced higher than the ipo opening price. but the reality is at accel and inventure, we invest early, so we invest many years before the ipo. so we are not really impacted by that. >> you are invested in the u.s. there's a lot of talk about european governance, portugal, estonia, incentivizing entrepreneurs. how are you seeing europe grow? what kind of traction is europe getting compared with the u.s.? >> i think if you look at 10 inyears ago, innovation europe was really happening in london, tel aviv, and israel. these were the main hubs. what's really exciting about europe is we are seeing innovation around 12 different hubs.
we are seeing pairs growing fast. we are starting to see interesting companies originating from portugal. emily: that was accel partners philippe botteri. well, facebook is said to be seeking a new london office. the social media giant is said to be negotiating a new lease for a new location close to google's planned london headquarters. that is according to people with knowledge of the facebook is talks. looking for at least 400,000 square feet of space at the kings cross development. facebook has signed an agreement to lease a large u.k. office close to oxford street. that does it for this edition of "bloomberg technology." on friday show, we will speak with the president of alibaba. we will discuss the crucial 24-hour shopping event, single'' day. that's all for now. this is bloomberg. ♪
>> the following is a paid program. the opinions expressed do not reflect those of bloomberg, its affiliates, or its employees. >> the following is a paid advertisement for the the traeger renegade elite is the most versatile grill you could ever own. it is a superior one fire grill. taste the difference. the traeger renegade elite. greg: i am greg. this is danielle.