3 in sanfrom pier francisco, this is "bloomberg west." i am emily chang. amazon is known for being secretive but the company has gone public with its ongoing e-book price dispute. amazon said its primary goal is to lower e-book prices and create more money for authors, but will this admission actually leave the 2 -- lead the two sides to an agreement? alibaba is in talks to become an investor in snapchat. alibaba has been increasing investments in u.s. companies in the run-up to an ipo. for snapchat, it could make the

photo disappearing app the next member of the $10 billion valuation club. an essay weaker -- nsa leaker edward snowden's temporary asylum in russia is set to expire tomorrow. a bill to review surveillance practices has cleared the house and goes to the senate. we will have a look at how snowden's revelations have changed the fields of business and government and you. objectivees its public in a dispute with hash the group over e-book prices. has been going on since may. in a blog post, amazon said its key objective is to lower e-book prices. at $9.99s were priced instead of $14.99, there would be higher sales which means more money for authors and publishers and amazon.

amazon writes, "while we believe that 35% should go to the author and a 35% to , we believe 70% of the total revenue should go to hachette." joining us via skype is an small distributor serving presses and literary agents. and a published author of several books on amazon. you have been supportive of amazon throughout this dispute. what do you think of this latest response? confirms everything i've

suspected just from watching the company over the years and dealing with them as an author and a publisher. they went to this back in 2010 fighting for reasonable e-book prices and back then the response from publishers was to form a cartel and colluded with their supposed competitors in order to artificially raise thees of e-books to protect industry or make as much money as they possibly could off of readers. it has been to the great detriment of the authors at hachette that they are fighting for the use -- the much higher e-book prices. i'm glad amazon is finally talking. we are in a weird situation where hachette has not returned your calls for comment -- usually it is the other way around. hopefully this will put pressure on hachette to come to the table and negotiate in good faith. it sounds like they have not

been doing that. >> amazon wants 30% and they also want hachette and the authors to split the remaining 70%, which is different than the way it is today. i believe authors get something that 25% today. can you explain how this is different from what amazon is proposing and what authors actually take away when they sell a book today? >> i think some of what amazon is proposing here is a disingenuous smokescreen. if amazon really wanted to offer consumers lower prices, it would be doing other things differently. right now amazon, for self published authors, penalizes the other if they wish -- price there but under $2.99. earned only 30% of list rather than 70% of list. amazon makes it difficult for authors to price their books free. the only way is to enroll in their exclusive select program. i don't think this is just about

lowering prices. i think this is about amazon gaining control over the price. and control over the e-book margins. if you look at what amazon said in their blog post, they are talking about 70% of revenues. 70% of proceeds. they are not saying 70% of price. for the publishers want -- what thepublishers want is freedom to set the room prices and earn 30% list and give the retailer 30% on the e-book. the publisher wants 70% list. it should be the j publishr's decision what they pay the office. i agree with critics that the publishers aren't paying authors enough. to 12-17% of out the list price. if you look at what self published authors are earning, they are earning 60-80% of the list price as their e-book

royalty. there is a big gap in what publishers are paying and what self published authors earning. >> now, amazon makes the price of ant the e-book at $14.99, if they reduce the price to $9.99, they sell 74% more books and bring in 16% more revenue. i want to bring in our editor at large, cory johnson, who has been looking at this as well. is it a smokescreen? is right toark point out how cleverly this is written. the notion -- the publishers to do the exact same kind of math and they have done their own price analysis. they don't know for sure that every title is going to have the same pricing dynamics. they offer themselves as an example to make it seem like math set in stone. the other thing they are doing is at the end of there are no,

corytv, tweeted out, @ they try to create another area of focus on how much the authors are getting paid, arguing that the publishers should split 50-50 with the authors, pointing out, as if it wasn't obvious, that the publishers don't do this right now, i'm getting authors -- and getting authors ticked off at amazon is a problem for amazon and amazon is trying to sway opinion and seem on the side of the authors. >> do you think amazon cares more about amazon or does amazon actually care about you? >> i think amazon cares about amazon foremost, the reader secondmost, and the author the reade -- the author right behind the reader. i've never been treated as well by any publishers as i have been by amazon financially. it is night and day.

mark is trying to make a different argument about you but pricing, saying that amazon publishes -- punishes e-book races that are too -- e-book prices that are too low. it is not that amazon is just for low prices or high prices. what they have right now is publishers charging too much for e-books in large part because they are protecting relationships with bookstores with their legacy print industry. i know this for a fact -- i'm working with over 30 publishers around the world and they told me they cannot lower the price of my e-book because it will upset bookstores. your expert who thinks that publishers are doing price analysis, that is not how these decisions are being made by publishers. they are made emotionally, made because of the existing relationships, because they don't want e-books to gain penetration because it take the power away. i think people who think that publishers are behaving logically here in the best

interest of authors or readers haven't studied the history of this publishing cartel that exists in new york right now. it is not operating in the best interest of its own authors, and i hope amazon wins this fight and we get e-books at a reasonable rate. >> a publishing cartel. we will be watching to see how hachette response to this. thank you so much. now, could snapchat really be worth as much as $10 billion? china's biggest e-commerce company thinks it is, and that is alibaba. alibaba could be ready to invest serious cash in the photo disappearing appl. ♪

>> i am emily chang and this is "bloomberg west." snapchat is in talks with

investors, including alibaba group, for a financing round that could value the photo messaging company at $10 billion. people with knowledge of the situation told bloomberg that the talks are ongoing but if it is completed, snapchat would join companies like airbnb and uber with evaluations of more than $10 billion. alibaba group, which is gearing up for our u.s. ipo, as invested in a number of u.s. companies lately. joining us to discuss from new of a digitalbo advertising company, and of course, our editor at large, cory johnson. simon, i will start with you. snapchat has no significant revenue that we know of. $10 billion? is that fair? >> i think it is when you look at facebook's valuation approaching $200 billion. if snapchat can take a buyout of that market, -- bite out of that market, it might even be cheap. facebook offered a $10 billion,

which they turned down. a new producthed called stores, which is similar to a stream of information that visitors every day. that is barely getting one billion vie -- that is apparently getting one billion views a day. >> cory, what do you think? if you compare it to facebook, which tried to buy snapchat for $10 billion not long ago, is it a fair price? >> the price is ridiculous. there is no revenue, no way to imagine how there would be revenue given what kind of scale it would be. but we have seen this before with companies getting these big valuations. there are 2 ways to think about this. one is the size of snapchat. i got the numbers from comes mscore, in june snapchat had 20 million users. it is enormously popular, about th of third the size of

instagram already. one analyst suggested they are doing 1.5 billion messages a day. there are a lot of users. you would imagine this is a revenue stream the company might pursue -- i am not arguing for this evaluation. with alibaba in my open the doors to snapchat in china -- it might open doors to snapchat in china, the way that some chinese-lest companies are able to do business in china the way that facebook and google are not. it could make value with alibaba. snapchat to exist in china snapchat becomes more valuable. >> interesting, also because alibaba has a stake in its own messaging app. simon, what do you think about alibaba in particular being part of this potential financing round? how involved they might be?

>> i think as cory said, if they the 1.6 snapchat out, billion people in china, it could be a scary prospect for the networks which don't currently have access their. they already have the investment in -- a majority is a decent stake -- it gives them a new ebo, ofnt bets on wbo facebook-twitter combination. said, it could be huge. >> i want to talk about twitter's big earnings report in the second quarter. twitter's monthly active users up 24%, stemming concerns about slumping user growth. twitter also doubling revenue, more than doubling revenue while the company did report a net loss. the stock is going crazy. cory, are the numbers as good as they look. >> that loss isn't as bad as it

looks, either. it was principally stock condensation charges -- stock compensation charges. you saw that expense of the , as it is every few quarters with the ipo. without that, they would have been profitable for the first time. or even more profitable. what you see from this company is a lot of things starting to take. you see an increase in the growth rate of new use, an increase in the growth rate of page views, and the continued increase in the value of the users. onerevenue per 1000 who hit dollar 60'-- one dollar six to sense last quarter means advertisers are getting what they want. 6.2% is the more important number. they put .4% in the press release and over last year it is a 24%.

when you look at the sequential change from quarter to quarter, you can see the company bottoming out in september and turning around. the growth rate of those users is growing a little bit faster now, little it faster last quarter. that is a good thing for twitter. >> they have by some measures we accelerated user -- managed to re-accelerate user growth. it is all about user engagement when it comes to twitter. what does twitter's laughter proof -- what does twitter still have to prove? >> they have to do what they are doing in terms of the huge awareness of twitter -- it is all over tv shows, everybody knows what twitter is -- into usage. world cup, maybe expanding that to other life events where people can engage in find out information about topics they're passionate about. that is how they are going to catch up with facebook, 1.3 billion users. you.l right, thank

tol, what is an entrepreneur do when he has been fired from his last start up? write a rock album? go to weight loss camp? travel to asia and start something new? we will talk about andrew mason's latest detour.

>> welcome back to "bloomberg west." i am emily chang. could it be the great silicon valley comeback? was fired from groupon back in february 2013 after shares plummeted by 80% after the ipo. since his departure, mason has been doing some traveling, side

projects, but has also been working on a new location-based app called detour. tour with went on a andrew mason to find out what he has been up to post-groupon and it sounds like it has been entertaining and i would expect nothing less. >> as we were doing one of these detours, rate san francisco tourist neighborhood, walking to the boats and listening to our iphones, synchronizing the tours, go to a specific area and a fisherman is talking and he is very earnest about this experience. andrew mason has a great sense of humor. but he had not the most dignified -- why? >> first of all, it is a big market. groupon was all

about getting people out of the experiencing their cities into new ways but he has a couple former groupon and juniors working on this. -- working onineers this. location-based phones, gps, all these things can create a better experience. it is not just a walking sprints, it is entertainment. and a grateful dead lyricist narrated it. it brings the neighborhood alive. there is an idea there and we will see when detour enters the market place. >> with the ipo, the bad publicity had already started. what is his sort of post-groupon view? there we are. what does he have to say about it? he was upfront when he was fired -- "i was fired." >> he takes a lot of the blame

for what went wrong. primarily that they went public way too early. a rapid growth company, hundreds and millions, billions of revenue in just one year. obviously, they had a lot of organizational problems. to figure that out in public is hard. he wanted to address the relationship with the board. he said "yeah, we're great friends, we visit each other all the time," and it is clear he was joking and there was tension in that relationship. >> it seems like he is still pretty well-connected with some of the bigwigs in silicon valley. has got a good reputation at least among them. >> yeah, and i asked him why he'd did this -- why he would do this and he says "what else would i do?" he still has a lot of ideas come he is young -- >> 34. >> i don't think it is a quest for redemption.

he wants to build something that enlivens cities. he talked about a populist rift and he says that there would be no more reason to live ou -- leave our living rooms. he says he wants to get this out before we disappear into virtual reality. >> that is a good point. we will be watching and listening to his album of work songs, "hardly working." he actually made an album. >> i don't know how tongue-in-cheek it was pretty calls of the best thing you has ever done. -- he calls of the best thing he has a gun. >> brad st -- best thing he has ever done. >> brad stone, thank you. how have the revelations of an estate surveillance impacted business? >> 26 past the hour, i want to bring you breaking news on the markets. bank of america-countrywide ordered to pay $1.3 billion in penalties for defective mortgage loans sold the fannie and

thedie in the run-up to 2008 financial crisis. we are talking about the countrywide unit that bank of america bought and what they are paying for and we will continue to report on this story. more "bloomberg west" up next.

>> you are watching "bloomberg west," where we focus on technology and the future of business. i am emily chang. we take a look at the impact edward snowden's revelations have had on business, government, and consumers. we look at what is meant by privacy rights and how bulk collection and internet wiretapping as change the business of technology companies around the world. it was a little over a year ago that snowden exposed to displaying tactics used by the u.s. government. there is a reform bill in the senate that is already past the house.

it would restrict bulk data collection and have stricter requirements for gathering it and would and metadata -- end metadata collection of phone calls. it has plenty of supporters in the tech amenity, including google and apple. >> we need to be significantly more transparent. we need to say what data is being given, how many people it affects, how many accounts are affected. we need to be clear. we have a dad order on us right now -- a gag order on us right now. we all think, for example, merkel'sing angela phone is stupid, to be blunt. do you have an opinion on this? >> well, yeah, don't do stupid things. that doesn't mean we can't have

a system of surveillance, because we do. that has to be accepted. >> if you don't comply, it is treason. >> much of what has been said isn't true. there is no back door, the government doesn't have access to our servers. they would have to carve it out of a box for that. we feel that strongly about it. not, they didn't call, they didn't send a letter. they just visited. [laughter] >> what request would you make to president obama or cameron? , the ability -- so we can help our users understand how many requests we are getting and the range or types of requests we are getting and how that data is being used because we need to be able to rebuild trust with our users. a realnsa issue is issue, especially for american internet companies. trust is such an important thing

when you are thinking about using any service where you are going to share important and personal information. we continue to work to just make sure that we can share everything that the government is asking. >> do you think the trust has fallen because of this? >> yeah, i definitely think so. not only within the u.s. but also internationally. there are other countries that really have concerns about what the nsa is looking at. i think that transparency is something that would really ultimately help. >> i think it is my job and our job to perfect everyone who uses facebook and all the information they share with us. job tour government's protect all of us and also to protect our freedoms and protect the economy and companies. and i think they did a bad job of balancing those things here. so frankly, i think the government blew it. thinks thekerberg

government blew it. all this coming as edward snowden's asylum in russia is set to expire tomorrow coul will he be grant an extension? cory johnson is in new york and joining us from miami is the ceo of a software security company who is also a former computer scientist for the nsa. so what do you think? is snowden going to be granted an extension in russia? >> i would say of course he is. the russians don't want to set a incedent that they can take some unlike edward snowden with reams of classified information and then turn him away. realistically, there is no way snowden isn't going to be granted some form of asylum for the rest of his life in moscow. >> having worked for the nsa, what would you imagine the n sa's interest is in making some sort of deal for his return, and

the white house's, for that matter? >> is really not just the nsa. it comes down to the whole intelligence community. they still say they don't know exactly what he took, who he gave it to, and a lot of edward snowden says is definitively not true about who he is giving us information to. to.iving this information we know he went to the chinese newspapers in hong kong and gave a lot of information, possibly specific information, about what servers in and around china the things access to, and like that, the specifics of what he did, are very interesting to the nsa. that said, at this point, they must be ashley through damage control and have some -- partially through damage control and have some idea of how badly they were hit. >> there is the idea that andden might go to germany having him testify on u.s. spying on german officials in germany and the notion that he may be granted immunity there.

is there any possibility of that? >> i don't think so, no. the germans are very tight ally despite their -- germany already a tight intelligence association with the united states, and it is long and ongoing. there is really no way edward snowden would be foolish enough to venture off to the rest of western europe. to stay in moscow and probably be in that very nice apartment in moscow for the rest of his life. >> there is still a giant discrepancy between what snowden revealed and what the tech company ceos are saying. when you hear tim cook essay they actually have no -- say they have no access to apple, who should we believe? >> the reality is that a lot of that is marketing. . backdoor is specific language

what they are trying to say is that there are these classes of things they would not do for the government, but we are not going to tell you about all of the classifications of things that we will do and have done in the past for the government. when they say "a backdoor," it is specific technical language and it doesn't divide transparency on their part on what they are going to do for the government. if a regulation forced them to do something -- they can't say there are not other connections and it is one of the things that is -- made it difficult for them , which theye trust need to do to penetrate international markets. we saw cisco taking massive hits all last year and it came downty is really hurting because of some of these revelations, and it is largely the fault. -- their fault. >> it is interesting, the nuances that these ceos -- eric schmidt told me that they didn't

call, they visited. is somebody lying here? do you think these ceos are lying to their users? >> i think they are being very cagey with their words. behas been and continues to in their best interest to cooperate as much as they can with the u.s. government. the u.s. government is one of their very largest customers. obviously, they are going to get special preferences and ask for special favors. on the other hand, that makes it harder for them to look into the rest of the world market, which is where there is growth in. they have to somehow establish trust and the rest of the world market and what they don't want to see is the sort of internet balkanized so they only have access to these friendly u.s. countries and cannot go into china and india and all these other countries. they see that as a possibility. when eric schmidt comes to you of what "i am not fond the u.s. government has done to

my company," we are talking about a company where largely the connections tween them and the nsa are not things they want you to know but that doesn't mean they are not very valuable. spend ahese companies lot of money lobbying in washington. what about this bill that has theed the house and in senate to stop bulk data collection and enforce greater transparency? do you think this is going to pass, do you think this is going to make an actual difference, or is the nsa going to keep doing what it has been doing? >> i thought it was interesting that you said "stop bulk data collection" when all it does is move it slightly to the right and keep the bulk correction in the hands of the tele-communications companies. it has been a weird part of the national discussion that the americans are upset about government having access to this information but they are ok with verizon, at&t, and t-mobile -- a german company -- having all that access to this information.

-- no one hasf ever passed anything in the senate, and in recent days the senate has gridlocked in an unfortunate way, but it may or may not pass. i don't think it will make a difference either way. >> immunity ceo, former computer scientist, thank you so much. we are awaiting word as to whether russia will extend edward snowden's asylum, which expires tomorrow. speaking of privacy, should your e-mails have the same privacy protectors as letters sent to you in the mail? microsoft thinks so.

>> welcome back to "bloomberg west." i am emily chang. we continue our look at privacy in the digital age after the revelations of edward snowden. do you want to know why your teenager isn't home from school

yet? with apps like life 360, you can. it is used by 39 million families and has received 76 million dollars in investment funding, but what are the privacy risks involved and how can families ensure that there ata is safe? joining us is the ceo and cofounder, and editor-at-large cory johnson is still with us. >> we don't like to think of ourselves as a tracking app. we think of ourselves as an app that makes communication easier. location tracking is poor to it but when people think of tracking they think of these big brother-type things. an alert when your kid gets home from school. the word "tracking" never comes up. it is about peace of mind, and we have skeptics who pushes on

this and we say try it for 2 weeks and say it is a tracker. >> well, if the government wanted to track someone down, what is your policy? >> in terms of government sharing without a legal subpoena, we do not share information, period. we delete our location data every 10 days. it cannot be later used for nefarious means. it is very tightly controlled and you control your data and it is completely opt-in. >> there are others who have done this. apple has find my friends. it in adn't they do bigger way than they already do? >> location sharing is a commodity feature and why it has worked for us and hasn't worked very well for apple and google is we focus on the family. what we found his location sharing is very powerful but it is only useful for a small circle of people. there is only a handful of

people -- your family and everyone like your family, your babysitter and her best -- this is relevant. >> chris, i don't have friends or babysitters, but do you imagine an enterprise version of this and what might it be used for? >> there could be enterprise versions of location sharing services, but at life360 we are all about the family and people in your close circle. you could imagine fleet tracking for truck drivers, even for onools, parents and kids field trips, more in line with what we are doing. but overall, location is going to be a core feature of almost every service we use in the digital age. >> i know this is an idea you came up with after hurricane katrina. what about in an emergency if there is an earthquake in california and my husband is in po -- palo alto and i am in san francisco and my kids are home? how do we communicate with each other, especially when services are disrupted?

>> usually in major disasters of voice communication gets clogged but data is reliable and robust. we have seen and heard from tons of users -- we have had users after tornadoes and 200 families use us in needs in on me after japan. when youorked even cannot make a phone call. what most people are using our app for is saying i am ok instead of i need help, because in disasters most people are ok and the challenge is reconnecting with the family and letting people know the information. >> chris, how do you guys make money? >> we make money by selling peace of mind-type services, and we are focused on becoming a hub for the family. we have done major partnership deals -- 50 million -- $50 million with the largest security and automation company because this network is bigger than tracking. we will connect life360 two

euros where we could have your doors automatically locked and the thermostat turned down and all automatically based on the location of your family members. that ties in with the business model we are charging for. >> interesting stuff. thank you for joining us. still ahead, microsoft is going to court over your right to your own e-mail. we will speak to their general counsel next.

>> i am emily chang and this is "bloomberg west." we continue our look into privacy and how life has changed for business, government, and consumers since edward snowden's nsa revelations a little over a year ago. in a "wall street journal those quote op-ed, -- "wall street journal" op-ed, the microsoft general counsel says they cannot

turn over info to companies exclusively in foreign countries. johnson isarge cory with us from new york and we are also joined by the general counsel and executive vice president of legal and corporate affairs in washington. this all came out of a specific government request. tell us what exactly the government was asking you to do -- is the government asking you to do, and why are you against it? >> the u.s. government is seeking to serve a search warrant to obtain e-mails that are in our data center in dublin in ireland. we believe that the e-mails that you store in the cloud are entitled to the same kind of legal protection as the information you put on paper. the government can serve a warrant that the warrant only reaches the united states. it doesn't region of the country. -- reach another country but one of the concerns we have is that it the u.s. government uses was

to reach into other countries, other countries are going to do the same thing. the british government has already moved in this direction. we know that the mac and public does not want its e-mails stored in the united states -- the american public does not want its e-mails stored in the united states to be subject to a rents served in other countries. >> the government says this is part of a narcotics investigation, in the interest of public safety. how do you respond to that if the public is at risk? >> public safety is important. public safet -- that is the first thing we need to underscore. we need a world in which public safety is protected, privacy is protected, and technology can move forward. there are ways to do that. this is in ireland and the u.s. has a good treaty with the irish government, law enforcement work together all the time. if the government wants to access data at the data center in ireland, the proper approach

is to go through that treaty, work with irish law enforcement, and get that data under irish law so that it can be turned over to law enforcement authorities in the u.s. >> brad, why did you file this suit in new york state? >> welcome we filed in new york because that is where the warrant was. it was issued by the u.s. government, before a magistrate, goes to federal court in new york. but it was really determined based on where the warrant came from rather than something else. >> earlier this year microsoft readingt of heat for e-mails from a hotmail account in order to track down a microsoft employee accused of corporate spying. i know that you changed your terms of service after that, but we have been talking about the relationship between the nsa and the government and technology companies. how can you be sure you are not going to snoop in our e-mails, that there is not a double standard? >> the first thing we need to do is be visible. -- principled.

i think you are seeing this and other tech companies as well. the first principle is that people sex messages, their instant messages, their voice conversations, their e-mails text messages, their p's instant messages, their voice conversations, their e-mails are all entitled to protection. people will only use technology if they trusted. let's ensure that we are creating processes that are worthy of that trust. when a question arose as to what investigators are doing, it crossed my desk and it took a day to say that this is not what we should be doing, not what the government should be doing, let's be transparent with the public through our terms of service, let's change our terms of service so that people have confidence in us and in others, too. you how this is affecting business. john chambers has been

courageous enough to flat out policies arensa's hurting cisco's business in china. what is the impact on microsoft's business? >> i personally believe it is a problem for all of us in the tech sector. it is a problem for us, for other companies that are focused on cloud services or devices that connect to the cloud. it was definitely brought home to me when i was in europe in may. numbers.ok for precise i don't know that we can quantify it that precisely. from remember having a cio one of the german states look me in the eye, he held in his hand the decision that had been issued by this magistrate in new york that had approved of the government's war and that we are now contesting, and he said to me, look, if this decision is not reversed, there is no way that my state government in germany will ever be able to look any of its information in a data center run by any american

company. it's as simple as that. that was one person, one day, but we are seeing this around the world every day. >> all right, brad smith, microsoft's executive vice president and general counsel, thank you so much. you will be in court tomorrow. cory johnson, editor at large, thank you as well. thank you all for watching this edition of "bloomberg west." all the latest headlines on your phone, tablet, and bloomberg.com . from bloomberg world headquarters in new york, i am mark crumpton and this is a special edition of "bottom line." janet yellen and the federal open market committee will release as damon on monetary policy. they have been pairing bond purchases since december, as the u.s. economy grows faster than forecast in the second quarter, u.s. central bankers face daunting pressure to act out

room -- back off from easy money policies. we will be hearing from chief washington correspondent peter cook at the fed, joining us in a few minutes. joining us, michael mckee, lisa abramowicz, and miserable financial chief economist and diane swonk. thank you for joining us. financial chief economist diane swonk. what can we expect? >> they do these forecast all year but we are expecting -- basically, what janet yellen statementur read the and thrown in the trash, then she has done her job today. she does not want it to make any waves. the paragraph of the last statement that assesses the economy, they think they can get away with not changing the word. >> lisa, what is the bond market expecting? >> movement, particularly in the

2-year hills, the highest level year yields have risen the most since november of last year. investors are getting a little bit antsy, especially with the better than forecast economic data. >> diane, good to see you again. we are not expecting anything in terms of interest rates, are we? >> no, we are not. the bond market got a bit ahead of itself, despite it made clear that they did not want to raise rates too quickly and derail the expansion, the idea that they would use regulations to trim hikerowth with one rate overall is something they take very seriously. they are a little bit ahead of themselves in terms of how quickly janet yellen would want to raise rates and also how fast rates would go up. janet yellen has made it very clear that the fed is gradualist

on this. >> we will ask our panelists to stay with us. we will get back right before this announcement, we are seeing the markets are down. let's go to peter cook with the fed decision and statement. continues.r 25 billion dollars in monthly bond buys reduced as we expected. which on the economy. looks like an improvement in the economy, a take up in the inflation, but they still seek slack in the labor market and still maintain that a highly accommodative stance remains appropriate. "growth in economic activity rebounded in the second quarter. labor market editions improved. the unemployment rate declining further. however, a range of market remainors suggest there significant underutilization of labor resources. household thinning appears to be rising