.

>> from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." >> the mpc intends at a minimum to make paying the current accommodative stance of monetary policy -- economic slack has

been substantially reduced provided this does not put at risk financial stability. >> mark carney is here. he is the governor of the bank of england. he was previously governor of the bank of canada. he is the first non-brit to be the governor of the bank of england. he gave a speech at the economic club of new york where he said he anticipated the economy would fulfill the hopes and dreams of the holiday season. in the u.s., the latest unemployment numbers have led some speculation of a tapering of the federal bond buying program. i'm pleased to have mark carney at this table for the first time. great to have you here. let me start with canada and what canada went through. tell me what it was about that business that instructed you. >> there are two things. first on the financial side, we

had an advantage in that we saw very early on some of the worst excesses of the shadow banking system. we had the problems in a little corner of the canadian market. that little corner, that sleepy little corner, 20 billion canadian dollars in assets, it afforded ultimately a structure of leverage that you see with $250 million u.s. we saw that early on because it was one of the most egregious examples. we saw how to leverage the system. that was the fall of 2007. that made his move quicker than some others where the systems were more resilient. we thought the problems would go away. that was instructive in terms of how much leverage you can get through a chain in the system.

it is not just a commercial favor. you have to combine a certain structure products. the second thing i would say is that -- and that is very complex. the other thing, i think we contributed -- we have some very simple regulations, how many assets you have and things like that, that managed to help save the core of our system from the worst fall in the u.s. and u.k.. >> part of this is recognition. it came from the sense that you are able to have a measure of where you were. you had some understanding of what the leisure -- leverage was doing. >> we had a good line of sight as to how much leverage was in the system. you have to move quickly. that is the lesson that tim geithner and his administration did with the u.s. banks.

mervyn king and the u.k. -- in advance of my arriving, they put 140 billion pounds of private money into the bank there. >> you said that a recovery may be gaining pace, but our economies are a long way from normal. take a look at where you think we are. >> i think it is really just beginning. the recovery is beginning. the core of the systems are being repaired. we have not yet seen business is really starting to invest, really starting to believe. businesses recognize that they can get bigger businesses to capital at very competitive rates.

i think the concerns of dramatic events, whether from europe or from the financial system, those concerns ebbed. the uncertainties about the future of demand, where that will come from. can i wait another quarter, another quarter? this is the start of when we will need to see businesses moving forward. it reflects back on what households are doing and what is happening with the global economy and the regulatory response. all of these factors will influence the day to date decisions of businesses. i try to, in the spirit of the season, be more positive about the near-term outlook. i feel good about the near-term outlook, but the long-term outlook will depend on these bigger questions of what happens to productivity and what happens to the so-called supply-side of our economy. that's where you see demand going over the next few years. >> there are still big headwinds. household is rightsizing their balance sheet. they are saving more than before. the u.k. situation, what we don't have, we have not had that productivity growth that we need

to get real wages growing. we had a sharp pickup in the last few months. it is because households of moved away from having extreme levels of cautionary saving and move down to normal levels. the only proceeds of income start to grow. you have that aspect in many economies. as you are well aware, in a series of emerging markets, you have some years of adjustments. two years of adjustments, whether it is india or indonesia. that is continuing to temper export demand to the u.s. and the u.k.. and the european situation is vastly improved in terms of the risks. the dynamism is not yet there. the dynamism will not be there, or even begin to be there, until the work that the ecb is doing on fixing the banking system

over the course of the year is completed. >> you think they can do that? >> without question they need to do that. they fully recognize it. that certainty, i think, will ensure that they do it. it is a long process. it is not an approach similar to what the u.s. did. they effectively rubbed justice over the three-month period. >> on the supply side? like the supply-side is a big question. how much permanent damage has been done to productivity? to the potential of our economy? how many workers have lost their skills? these are real issues. \i will say that one thing -- the two are linked. whether it is the federal reserve or the bank of england, we will see that there's an impetus to getting stimulus now, to get people back into work as

quickly as possible. we want to encourage businesses to invest as heavily as possible, or we will see some detriment to the supply-side. that is the case. to a limited extent right now, is catalytic. the supply-side issues, i think the biggest supply-side issue, and i would say this even more strongly than a lot of people, given how open the british art and london's role as a financial center -- the supply-side issue is maintaining an open role economy. whether it is on the financial side or the trade side. and what is needed to build the confidence from jakarta to japan to jacksonville, any of those centers, the system is going to be there and default. class is slipped over in terms of talking about the u.k.. what is happening with the u.k. mortgage market?

>> if you look at the mortgage market today compared to where was in 2007, pre-crisis, it is rocksolid. back in 2007, 2008, 60% of the mortgages -- you would put 10% down on a house. now 85% of the mortgages are the other way. standards have improved dramatically. this is a housing market. it is still relatively firmly valued. let's put it that way. not just in london, but more broadly around the country. relative to historic levels. and where it started to pick up again. within the context of households that have paid 30 percentage points of debt relative to their income over the last five years. that is good. i still have a fair amount of debt relative to income. more so than american households.

if you look at that situation, there is some welcome recovery in the housing market. let's be prudent and accurately. let's make sure that it moves in a productive way. we're taking steps to improve that. if you said there are five simple steps to describe our approach. we are open for business. that's one of the lessons we have taken from the financial crisis and where the world needs to get to to have a more resilient financial institution we need more resilient financial institutions -- but we need financial markets that are going to be more resilient. they are more like the equity markets. we did not like the prices of equity in fall 2008. we could not transact the global market. you could not transact you were trying to world short-term from a bank. these are trillion dollar

markets that were shot and brought the system down. the central banking system is part of those reforms. there is an importance to collateral. people are making more exposures to each other. i will lend you money -- there are huge market that will develop and collateral. the central bank is not just a lender of last resort. it is an institution -- the traditional role of the bank of england is founded on, but it is the lender of last resort to those markets so that those collateral markets keep functioning. the derivative market keeps functioning. the system keeps functioning. even when the next shot comes which inevitably it will. they're open for business because we understand that we have a continuing role to keep those markets functioning. we want the system as a whole to be functional. >> what are the lessons from

long-term monetary policy? >> i think a very simple one of that monetary policy -- it didn't take seriously the financial crisis. financial systems want in the models. there was a downplaying of active prices. credit dynamics were -- economic growth for the system. there was a downplaying as well in terms of ignoring the interaction between monetary policy and have the financial markets behave. circumstances of policy encouraged extreme behavior. i think the lesson that we have taken at the bank of england and what british authorities more broadly have taken has been that you need monetary policy in a complementary way. we have to provide a lot of stimulus.

that stimulus can create risks, like the housing market, that is one example. the hefty take other steps to reduce that risk and mitigate those risks. if we do not, we will create bigger problems down the road or we will have to pull out too soon on monetary policy. >> what are the steps we ought to take? >> we have reinforced underwriting standards, there are a variety of ways that we can adjust the terms by which people can get mortgages. we have asked banks to put more capital behind the mortgages. not necessarily because of the risk of default, but because of

the broader economy wide effects for example. we have measures that we could do. it is just that monetary policy to do smaller things early enough that you don't have to do the big things later on. there's is an element of anticipation here. >> what is your take on what is happening in japan? >> what is happening in japan is a product of years of the challenge that i was really talking with today. a liquidity trap. the ability to get real interest rates down quickly enough that and have a well functioning financial system that transmits that to a broader economy. they are in a position where -- with the wisdom of hindsight, it is always easy. but the 20. by not taking the big steps early enough, they have not taken the really big steps now. as we all recognize, the third

arrow is actually crucial. this is a common theme with the u.k., europe, u.s., japan. we can take steps today and we have central banks to pull for demand to keep our economy going. that is what we have done. it works ultimately it incomes grow in the future. and it is the same whether it is a small move here were a big move in japan. the measures that they need to take on the so-called third arrow are absolutely fundamental or there will be no group of incomes in the future. in their absence, they will have to pull for each -- even more demand. in the words of my predecessor, tomorrow becomes yesterday. you still have to fill in that: demand. it is absolutely instructive. it is instructive for all of us in terms of the importance of having coherent policy now. >> when you and other central

bankers from china to europe to latin america look at the united states, what concerns you? >> it is fair to say, and i always hesitate to comment on another group politics, but it is widely knowledge, here as well as in central banking circles, that the series of decisions on the fiscal side, the series of short-term incentives -- in the worst of all senses of the word, we have just gone through 2013. another disappointing year, as i said make each today. we have had -- as i said in my speech today, we have had huge fiscal drive. it does not fix the long-term fiscal problems. you have a lot of pain and not a lot of long-term gain. we will be left of that next year.

there are some tough decisions. what concerns us the most is the system that it is a typical short-term situation without long-term benefits. you can look at europe, and extremely ethical situation, but in part, by taking longer-term structural reforms -- that is a more real answer. >> what gives you pause? as a central banker who knows about the relationship between economies, what is it that worries mark carney? >> i worry about a couple of things. they all stem from u.k. issues. the address broader questions. personally i worry about as finishing this global financial reform agenda. i worry about it for several reasons.

i worry about the risks if we do not finish the job. secondly i worry that we wind up with a much more fragmented system on the core financial side. that will be associated with fragmentation in commerce. we will undo many of the things we have done. i worry about that. i think the challenges that we face are considerable. they are the product of tremendous success, and we always knew we would face these issues. getting the sequencing right, and the magnitudes right, that will be extremely challenging. it relates back to my first point, which is that we need to take steps that assist in this rebalancing. we need to have the patience to recognize what is right for

china may not perfectly fit the timetable for other countries that are looking to rebound their economies. i will give you a small sample. we are looking to have a trading hub. part of the reason why we're looking to do that is because it is a traditional rover london and because internationalization is in china's interests. those are the two things i worry about. i also share a medium to long- term concern about europe. i worry about what ultimately will be needed to build the institutions to ensure that the euro is viable and resilient as it needs to be. the economic timetable and the political timetable, which really coincide, -- those are the three things. >> what has david cameron been able to do with the economy? and mervyn king? >> what happened in the u.k. has

been some very tough decisions were taken over the course of the last few years. i am going to state my patch. i have to go back there after this. [laughter] with respect to the banks in particular. mervyn and others went back and said, you do not have enough capital. your numbers look good, but they really don't. that concern is that we will see the benefit of that. i think by retaining their commitment -- that will help make a difference. i think what is -- remember, the labor market is very flexible, particularly in the european economies. if anything, it has become more flexible since the crisis. that is unusual. part of the consequence of that

is that a recession has been bad enough that the unemployment rate should be 14%. it is 7.6%. by sticking to the first principles, it has made a difference. >> there is a debate about growth and austerity. is that just a gross oversimplification of what politics allows? >> i think the rhetoric in the debate was sell them -- quite often did not match what was actually happening. the scale of austerity in the united states last year has dwarfed anything in europe. the scale of austerity in europe next year will be less than 1.0%. at least in terms of the overall level of fiscal drive. you would not know that from the

way it is predicted. you would not necessarily know it by the way the uk's compared to the u.s.. ultimately, macro policy, whether it is monetary or fiscal, can play a role in extreme circumstances. leave the fiscal authorities to the side until they need to take bigger steps is their responsibility. but when you think about medium to longer-term growth, it will not come for monetary or fiscal policy. you have to get those fundamentals right and it will come from a host of other policies. one of the points i was trying to make my speech today was, if there are some issues in the short term -- if you're really concerned about the supply side, if you are concerned about productivity growth, it is not a game for the central banks. it is not a game in terms of the

budget. these are fundamental issues in terms of education and structure, in terms of trade and financial reform, is bigger and tougher issues that you cannot distill into a soundbite or a 30 second explanation -- you have to execute them year after year. >> i know you didn't come over here to give janet yellen advice. [laughter] but is it time for tapering? [laughter] >> that's right, i didn't come to give janet yellen advice. i am confident that janet and the other members will take the right decisions. the u.s. has flexibility in terms of -- they have multiple instruments that are moving. there are cuts onshore rates, and we will leave it to them -- we will want to be very interested to see the results. >> from your college experience,

what was more important, playing hockey or studying economics? >> i sat on the bench a lot when i play hockey. [laughter] >> i did not learn that much hockey. i would say studying economics. there is a great advantage to the american liberal arts system. that mixture of the technical with the liberal arts element. it is unique in this world. >> i totally agree with you. it is almost like we are shifting away from an appreciation of what the liberal arts does for you. >> i entirely agree. the challenge in education, and i tell my children this, you want to save math and statistics, even if you don't really like it, as long as possible, because the discipline of that thinking will help

influence broader decisions. but just as, and i saw you talked about this two weeks ago, i'm not sure you have the nobel prize or you would be successful you do need both to take full advantage and to have actual human progress. >> thank you very much. it is a pleasure to have you on the show. i hope we can do this again as we watch what is happening. it is obviously a crucial time, and not because of what we have gone through, but because we went through that people are asking, have we done enough to avoid that? >> have we done enough? we have gone a long way in terms of financial reform, but the bigger questions, we are not talking about them. i want a world where you don't want me on your show.

>> thank you. thank you very much. back in a moment. stay with us. ♪ hoping and -- dell has done

thousands of mainframe migrations moving millions of lines of code. >> michael dell is here. the founder and ceo of dell incorporated. they revolution the -- revolutionized the reduction of personal computer s.from our s.

i am pleased to have michael dell back at this table. >> thank you, charlie. >> here you are at 23. >> here you are 23, use old computers. people can order the kind of computer they wanted. you would take the computer apart and you knew what was inside. you ordered the parts and you put it together. it made you a billionaire. in 2007, was it that you walked away from it? >> 2005, i became chairman. 2007 -- >> you walked away and became chairman and then someone else became the new ceo. then you came back. it is six years later. tell me about the years between 2007 and 2013. what did michael dell already a millionaire many times over, yet all the money he could ever want, a wonderful family, he lived in austin, texas, a wonderful life, and you decided

that what you love with his corporation and you wanted to be that you wanted it to be all it could be. i got the story. >> when you start a company, you have an incredible passion or. i have had that since the beginning when i was 18, 19 years old starting this business. what i saw was that there was an opportunity to do what we did in microprocessor-based computers and servers to a larger part of enterprise, i.t. enterprise computing. we set out to build solutions. in a way, we wanted to disrupt in a positive sense and bring technology to the tens of millions of growing small to medium-sized businesses out there. i did a different than what ibm did when they said they were

making computers -- you got out of that business and said that you would get into the service business. it is what you decided to do it tell, is it different from that? >> it is very different. they've said that they were protecting a legacy of old things. we did not have that. we were going into this with a very fresh perspective. while we felt it largest companies in the world, we also sell to the largest companies -- smallest companies in the world. all the entrepreneurial, fast- growing companies. we built his whole new part of the business and more than doubled the size of it from roughly 10 billion to 20 billion. one of the big reasons to go private is to continue to accelerate that growth. i continue to build the solutions and bring a democratized i.t. in terms of software, data centers, services

for all the growing businesses out there. >> did you decide to do it because you did not believe you could do it as long as you had a quarterly commitment to stockholders who might not want you to do it? >> you can still do it, it is just harder and slower. as a private company, you can go faster. you do not have to focus as much on the short-term. we used to say that our business is up -- >> doesn't that say something terrible about being a public company? people go public for a whole range of reasons, to put value on their equity, so they can do all kinds of acquisitions and things like that. you are saying is a public company, i could not do all i wanted to do becse of the pressure of wall street. that says something terrible about being a public company. >> if you step back from this, we have an affliction of short- term thinking. it is broader than just the tech industry or finance, it goes

into education and politics. this is just one manifestation of it. america is the land of instant gratification. taking a much longer-term perspective, we can make the investments, we can bring the kind of solutions and innovation without being bound to this 90 day planning cycle that companies are afflicted by it. we are more focused on the long- term. we want to make investments. in the last 5-6 years, we also spent $13 billion making acquisitions and building up these new areas that are not substantial businesses for us. >> why should i be critical michael dell? he has been there. even though you were not the ceo, you went through that period. you didn't see all the value of tablets, you didn't see all the

values of smartphones, and that has exploded. but people today think that mobile is one of the most important things in addition to technology. >> nobody's perfect. [laughter] >> i know. but is it a legitimate criticism of what happened? >> it is. technology is a relentlessly competitive space. during the time our company was public, our stock appreciated over 13,500%. that was 27 times the amount of the s&p 500 during that same period. everybody misses something. but we built one heck of a business. it is the one heck of a business. and now it is growing at double- digit rates and we are investing for the future. we are able to invest them be bold and focus on our customers and innovate and invest in our

needs. we could not be more excited to be a private company once again. >> make the case for personal computers. most people see the numbers and they see tablets going like this and pcs going like this. >> a tablet is a pc. you look at a lot of tablets, and we have a fast-growing tablet business. some people buy keyboards for their tablets. >> you're not getting into that? >> we are going rather fast. it is a fast-growing business. a tablet with a keyboard, it is a lot like a notebook. it is a fast-growing space. we think that those spaces are consolidating. there are fewer providers out there. we are gaining shares will not we will continue to gain shares. that is certainly an important part of our business.

we are absolutely investing in the data center and solutions, the cloud, social. >> what do you think the revenue stream -- how will it change over the next five years? in terms of what produces the largest amount of revenue for dell? >> we want to double the enterprise software is days. we want to double it to 42 million. >> a big that market? asked the overall i.t. market is $3 trillion. no one has more than about 5.0%. we have 2.0%. >> the enterprise solution, what you think? >> about 80% or more of the $3 trillion is in business and enterprise. the vast majority of it. those are spaces -- how do you make solutions and solve problems for corporations? like health care, education, all

areas of public sector, small, large companies, all these entrepreneurial businesses. the ring businesses -- growing businesses. i.t. is an important part of the economy. it will go from $3 trillion to $4 trillion to $5 trillion. it is right at the epicenter of how you solve all the challenges that exist in health care, education, environment, energy. >> when you look at what is happening, how do you think the changes will be in the i.t. community, in the i.t. space? >> one of the big changes is actioning all the information that we have. we have help customers protect and store vast amounts of data. we want to help them use it to make better decisions. bringing intelligence and better decision-making from all that information, that is a huge area.

it is part of how i.t. becomes a larger part of the industry stop you see this increasingly -- i.t. used to be in the back office, the back rooms. now you cannot have a company unless you are good i.t.. you have to do marketing, selling, all aspects of it. >> it has been an extraordinary development in terms of certain issues. >> there is still enormous opportunity. i was at one of the larger hospital systems here in the new york area a few weeks ago. they are really just beginning to take all the information they have and make use of it. by the way, there are thousands of other hospitals, how do we compare this information so that we can get better outcomes for patients? >> the more information you expend, the more information you can take it from other sources and analyze. >> in our country here, we are

right in the middle of this. every country in the world wants this. we are number one in health care i.t.. it is a big area of investment for us. we are helping hospitals with their clinical information systems. every country that you go to in the world, they are dealing with the same issues. they want better information so that they can have better outcomes for their patients too. >> dell is headquartered in austin, texas, where you live. there is silicon valley outside of san francisco. there's an area outside of boston. other pockets of america where they have i.t. centers. in some cases, for technology, and in other cases, having to do with pharmaceuticals and bioethics and biomedical kind of developments. can you make an argument at all that dell would've been better if they were in silicon valley? because of all the cross-

fertilization that exist there? >> the first observation i have for you is that you cannot actually find a great company and not have a great university or multiple great university nearby. everywhere in the world. >> you have stanford and university of texas. >> we have others in the area too. austin has been good to us. we are thrilled to have austin as our headquarters. we have several thousand people in silicon valley. we have 110,000 people around the world. austin happens to be our home base. we have this dell world conference where we will have thousands of customers come there. the city has been great to us. we are grateful for the city. could it have happened in another place? could have gotten better in another place? i do not know. i do know that austin has been a

fantastic place for us. it is now a kind of destination for start ups. we see enormous amounts of that kind of activity going on in our home. >> we're living in a world that is changing at a fast pace. it is changing fundamentally and technology is right at the heart of that change. i was in china last month and i spoke about how rapidly the center of the economic world is really moving very quickly. >> when you look at the global marketplace, what impact does china have? not just as manufacturers? what impact will they have on the i.t. world? >> china is an enormous in market. it is one of the largest in markets for us to sell our products outside of the united states. it is also an enormous source of

supply and an enormous talented engineering resource. >> are there companies increasingly big enough to compete with dell? are the circumstances in china making it more difficult for you to compete with them? >> they have some good companies. we have a fantastic business model. we are all in in terms of china, in terms of research and development, in terms of factoring, selling, helping our customers in china. we see china as an important part of dell's overall business. they are absolutely very competitive. they are good, tough competitors. that's what about europe? >> we do not have as many competitors in europe. we might have 20, 30 years ago. there are some software companies in europe.

>> when you look around, where will dell be in another 10 years? if things work for you the way you envision? >> as i have said, dell has gone so far. we are very focused on building this whole solutions capability. the way i built this business, was when we designed the company, we said what problems are the customers trying to solve? what get in front of that an address that. >> what does the consumer want? we're not going to simply put out a bunch of computers and say here's what we are offering you, like it or not. >> that is exactly what we are doing in the cloud and in security and in systems management and data centers of the future. and in services. the opportunity for us is massive. the privilege for being able to invest without this short-term

focus is fantastic. having control in a dash of our destiny in a way that we have not had in a long time is great. i've seen you steve jobs well. what is the impact do you think of his success and the success of apple because of design? there is an extraordinary sense of design that steve and johnnie i have -- jony ives have. >> they raise the bar in terms of design and intensity and focus. >> top competition for you. >> and plenty of others. >> how you take it? how do you incorporate that into your own company? you go hire people from apple, do you have a sense that it is a

desirable thing to have? >> trying to be another company is never a good strategy. [laughter] we start from the focus - >> we are not setting out to the apple. >> what do your customers want? we have built a tremendous business serving hundreds of millions of customers with things that we are very good at and other important for customers. there are a lot of companies out there designing a company based on a competitor strategy. i do not believe in that. >> i mentioned this to you earlier. we talked about apple, facebook, google -- they are all in each other's space. are they in a race for something? if so, what is that?

>> i think they are trying to control the consumer. the consumer is information and the consumer's account. that is a worthwhile thing to do, but that is not what we're trying to do. we are more focused on the devices themselves and the enterprise and the solutions. we are focused on the other 85% of i.t. that is in business. >> you are saying that you want to be one part apple, one part ibm, even though you don't want to be with anyone else is. in a sense that is what you are saying. >> the largest part of the $3 trillion and the fastest-growing part of the $3 trillion is something that we have not talked about. it is companies that have between 100-5000 people. this is where you see an explosion of innovation and new ideas and new companies. it turns out that those

companies are the ones who are the fastest to adopt new technologies. it flows out into the larger companies later on. let me give you an example. when we came out with microprocessing based servers in the mid-1990s, we went to fortune 100 customers. we had some really nice -- they said, that is a cute little server you have their mr. dell. why don't you talk to my successor? i am not getting rid of my mainframe, i am not replacing it. now if you go into the data centers of all the big companies in the world, you see dell servers. a third of all servers in the world are dell. we have done enormously well in data servers. that is moving into storage, networking, cloud.

where did it start? it started at salesforce.com and similar websites. yahoo!, facebook, amazon, those companies were buying from us, microprocessor servers. we learned a lot from those companies. we were bound up with this legacy of old stuff. we were allowed to innovate. >> the things that you manufacture did not hit you in moving forward in terms of manufacturing servers. i hear you, and you are basically saying that the biggest business opportunities aren't providing servers to these companies and helping run those -- >> solutions. >> providing servers and solutions. but you say that you learned it from people who were buying your servers. >> we learn everything from our

customers. >> did you learn it fast enough that you could say, we want to be doing what they are doing. when we, in a sense, be in the business that they are in, rather than just selling the servers. you just said to you learned from them. >> we learn the requirements that they had. we had tens of millions of customers who were using our infrastructure products in all sorts of ways, whether they are in the cloud, software service, all kinds of interesting businesses. we don't want to compete with those companies, we want to be the engine that powers them forward. >> are you competing with them in some way? >> we are providing the infrastructure and software services to help power their businesses. >> what business might you be in? where do you think you have the developing potential to be in a

whole new arena? amazon, could i just spent some time with jeff bezos, they were learning from their own business. they had been working on using those things as solutions to their own issues. correct? >> we're are powering a lot of those clouds. we are also bringing those cloud services to our customers. as customers are trying to figure out, how do i create efficiencies in my business, that exists in a cloud world, dell is the company that they turn to to help them do that. >> let's talk about the value. in this context, you love your company. anyone who buys that the company that they helped grow, the employees, the opportunities, all of that. most people love the business. they think it is a wonderful place to go to, because i created it.

it is a wonderful and. then there are people, and carl icahn is one example, who do not care about product. you have said this about icon for example, it does not matter what the product is. it is financial engineering. >> i think it doesn't feel right to me. i guess carl icahn and others are doing what they -- >> makes money for them. >> they are doing what they learn to do. at the end of the day, we have a long complicated process that results in where we are today. we are a practical company and we innovate with bold investments. that is all done. i think if they had a purpose and it was served -- i'm not sure. it is not how i would want to spend my life.

>> is no need a new branding? part of your mission today is to say look at the new dell. >> what we have found is that when people remember us for things we did 5, 10 years ago -- we built this whole new business and almost half the people and they'll work in services. we have an enormous new business in software and networking and storage, helping customers from a solution standpoint. we are way beyond the product. one of the things that happened is the products became more and more powerful. he customers basically told us that, would you actually know about my business? we had to learn the customer cost business.

there was banking, financial, manufacturing, education, health care, etc.. it is a very different dell then the one we had 5, 10 years ago. we continue to add significant capabilities. some for acquisitions, what we are also making significant organic investments. we have events like our annual conference next week where we will highlight that for thousands of customers. it is important that we get out front and explain what it is that we are doing and how we can add value for customers. reactions have been very strong. businesses up nicely. we are getting tons of great interest from our historical customers. they want us to win. they want us to do more for them. we are also getting lots of new customers coming in. >> how old are your children? four kids. >> 21, 19, and 17-year-old twins. what do they want to work for

dell? >> so far their job is to be in college. >> and your wife? >> she's doing right -- great. >> rate to see you. michael dell from dell incorporated. thanks for joining us. see you next time. ♪ >> live from pier 3 in san

francisco, welcome to the late edition of "bloomberg west," where we cover the global technology and media companies that are reshaping our world. i am emily chang. our focus is on technology and the future of business. let's get straight to the rundown. move over google glass. getting into wearable tech, making all kinds of wearable gadgets. and amazon drones may still be years away, but sparking a