emily: live from pier 3 in san francisco, welcome to "bloomberg west." i'm emily chang. linkedin shares plunge in after-hours trading. first-quarter sales were up 35% and the company posted a $43 million loss. revenue slowed and the company's main business serving -- as many accounts were given to new sales representative. more on these results later in the hour. monsanto, the world's largest -- is eyeing syngenta ag a takeover target.

the talks come a year after monsanto's previous attempts fell apart. hillary clinton now has a challenger in the race for the 2016 democratic presidential nomination. vermont senator bernie sanders has officially announced his candidacy. senator sanders: i believe in a democracy that elections are about serious debates over serious inssues not making campaigns into soapb oxes. this is not the red sox versus the yankees. this is a debate over major issues. emily: sanders considers himself a socialist and caucuses with senate democrats. expedia is aiming to complete its takeover of rival travel site orbitz by the end of the year. in its first quarter earnings report, sales rose. profit grew to $44 million.

bookings were up 19% but expedia says that hotwire business continues to be challenged. many boxing fans are getting priced out of the floyd mayweather manny pacquiao fight. the cheapest tickets are going for $3400. mgm's resort holds exclusive pay-per-view rights. mario draghi spoke about being pacquiao spoke about being the underdog. the highest priced standard room is $1520 a record for the property. now to our leads. salesforce the san francisco cloud giant built by a former oracle executive may be on the block, may. who's big and bold enough to buy salesforce and would benioff s ell? if it happens it would be the largest takeover in technology history. they say that salesforce has

hired bankers to advise on offers after the company was approached by a potential acquirer who has not been identified by the list of companies that can afford to buy a company with a $48 billion market cap is small. oracle microsoft, ibm come to mind. but who would want it? would enbenioff sell it again. the company is not profitable. joining me is cory johnson who broke the story and the ubs managing director. i have been thinking about this and i'm skeptical. cory, you first. you helped break the store. cory: we know what we know, wish that there is an offer on the table and i hired bankers. -- they hired bankers. benioff has a bunch of options vested right about now. the board has to make a decision and evaluate the offer on the table. that is why the engage these

outside experts to look at the offer. but it is an interesting business. it is a business that shows tremendous topline growth but slowing dramatically. it is also a business that has a zilch for profits, stilts for free capital the last five years. -- zilkchch for free capital. the look at how they have grown the business -- doing expensive acquisitions and spending a boatload of marketing. that is why there are no profits. someone who buys this is going to want topline growth at the expense of all a lot of earnings and the expense of a lot of money. emily: you have covered salesforce for a long time and you share my skepticism. brent: i think it is going to be tough to pull this off. this is the largest deal ever in tech. and we know that large tech does not work. we know that mark has done a great job running a company organically and culture is a big thing to him. there are very few companies that could integrate the company in my belief. we already know that oracle has

said no. we think microsoft could be there. there are only a couple that could consume something this large. the historical precedents of this happening has been, it has not happened. emily: we are going to pick through some of the possibilities. you said that large tech does not work. oracle-peoplesoft, hp-compaq. would this work if it happened? >> everyone is running to the cloud. people who are behind might think this is an easy way to get ahead. having said that, i agree that mark has to work. it is going to be tough for a large legacy tech company to explain to the shareholders how the synergies are going to work and how the market line will not impacted by this. emily: let's walk through some of the possibilities and let's discuss. cory: i went through and looked at an analysis of what the growth rates are for these companies. what they would be if you believe the genius analyst like

brent who predict what salesforce is going to do next year. looking at next years assumed to numbers, so, for example salesforce and oracle. oracle is supposed to go at 1% topline. so oracle is supposed to grow at 1%. if salesforce does what is protected, which is slowed down but still grow a 20%, the merged company would grow at 18% on the top line. but earnings-per-share would fall by 17%. oracle would have to be willing to dilute itself by nearly a quarter to earn less money. emily: it sounds like oracle is not ht interested party -- the interested party. cory: it would take $60 billion to get this done. brent: oracle with $10 billion capital has enough cash but will not have enough cash for anything else. cory: the notion of how the deal would work is if someone is going to raise debt to do this.

with few companies that have enough cash to do it do it with cash? probably not some combination and at what price? my cap collations are based on the current market capitals of salesforce, which will be higher than that, but i am not going to take a flyer and guess. emily: let's talk about microsoft. to me, microsoft makes the most sense. cory: to that point. so what kind of company would want this? they would want press releases. they do not have a big cloud business. maybe they want to change the landscape of how they discuss things. so right now microsoft is projected to grow at 8%. if they added salesforce's revenues, growing at a slower rate, but 15% sales growth is what the combined company might show. again, earnings-per-share is going to take a big hit. down 16%. for microsoft. and it would dilute the company by at least 12% if they did in all equity deal. brent: microsoft makes the

most sense. they have the cash, number one. number two, culturally it makes sense. benioff was at the conference just appeared cory: emily: benioff were at the same ceo summit earlier this week. brent: a lot of ceo's sahre the -- share the same view that he is doing the right thing. i do not believe that mark which up to these things if he did not believe in what they were doing her culturally undirec-- and directly, it makes sense. emily: sap ibm. cory: they are two companies that are similar businesses which is slinging hardware selling services, and selling a good chunk of software. in both cases you have companies that say we want to be in the software world. so hp is going for the split of the company. there is in no way they could do a split of the company and do an acquisition. they cannot afford an acquisition like this anyway unless it will be compaq where it is issuing equity.

a marriage of equals. that is hard to imagine happening but it would help them grow topline or at least not shrink topline. i think ibm is interesting. this is a world of speculation. when you look at ibm, ibm was a company that talked endlessly about cloud. they wanted all stuff into their cloud business, they made the argument that their cloud business is bigger than salesforce's, bigger than anyone. their sales growth would only declined by 3%. their earnings-per-share would be worse, of course, because they have not had any -- they have declining earnings-per-share, but it would take about a furtive ibm to buy salesforce. emily: that seems to be a bit too ambitious. brent: i do not think hp or ibm or in the mix. ibm's balancing is so bad. they cannot borrow money. they do not have the cash. they spent so much money buying back -- emily: by process of

elimination, microsoft is the only contender. is that will be decided? cory: i have not decided that for second. we have seed and deals that are hard to imagine in the past. we was doing another one. we have seen oracle and peoplesoft which has gone pretty well. maybe the exception to the rule. hp-compaq. we saw time warner by aol. emily: sap may be too busy digesting concur. cory johnson, great reporting on the story. we will continue to follow this story. coming up, reports are saying apple how apple found a defect in the apple watch. could it setback delivers that are already slow? next on "bloomberg west." ♪

emily: this is "bloomberg west." a check of your top lines. time warner cable says first-quarter profit dropped 4% to $458 million. cwc is dealing with programming expensive as programming cost to $1.4 billion. the earnings report comes a week after comcast pulled a plug on the deal to buy the company. george soros who says the rich should pay more in taxes may face a monster tax bill himself. soros could be looking at paying $6.7 billion after congress exposed a loophole that allow fund managers to deter

taxes by investing them. the bill could come due by 2017. omnivision technologies whose camera sensors are used in the iphone is being acquired by a chinese company. a consortium will pay $1.9 billion. on the vision was founded by a chinese immigrant. apple found a defect in a key part of the apple watch during production. this according to "the wall street journal." the paper says the problem was in the taptic engine of the watch. that defect caused some of the supply glitches -- crunch we are seeing. what about developers? joining the is the former head of facebook for android. let's talk about what a taptic engine the sensor which creates a tapping sensation.

which you have. in. >> it gives you a new form of user interface feedback. it is helpful to get your attention without an audio sound. emily: how big does this defect seem to you? >> i do not think it is a huge deal. this is a product that would be supply constrained. the demand is incredible. and i think it is going to be a slower uptick but of all companies, apple has the supply chain know how to make this work. emily: before the watch came out, you said, should you develop for this? then you followed up with a post because you said it is not a given. it is not a no-brainer. this is a different kind of thing. >> yeah. the reality is when there is a new platform opportunity that a large company like apple ships, you have to make a decision as an individual developer. i wanted to think about how i

would advise them if i was part of their companies to prioritize ing building for the apple watch. emily: now that you have one you say yes, make this a priority. why? >> there are three things you want to look for in a new platform to read one is you want to look at what can you do now that you could never do before? smartphones changed -- because you can do phone calls and text that because you have the internet and your pocket. second, you want to look at what kind of distant vision opportunities are there? as a third party developer your livelihood depends on how any people user software. finally and most important, you want to look at does the platform provider have a business model that means they will stay in business and not try to eat your lunch? i think that one is the most important one. to make sure you really understand. emily: so, we've been talking to a lot of different people about the watch, people who tried it wearing it for a few days since it has been out, do you think this is a game changing product? >> i do think it is a game

changing product. i think the way i relate that is right now we spend hours a day on our smartphones. if the apple watch just takes one hour a week away of the time we spent in our smartphones, we are talking about tens of millions of hours of attention that is now being diverted to a new screen. we are on television which makes money off of attention through advertising. imagine what kind of impact that is going to have on development and business. emily: you worked for facebook for a long time. how might the facebook experience be different on an apple watch? is the apple watch, can it be game changing for facebook? >> i think it can be totally game changing. i think it will take some study. if you look at the first apps, they are testing the waters. they do not actually know -- living with the watch for a week, i know if i was back at facebook running a product team, i would be 100% focused on how do i make the watch communicate the closest people to me? my wife, when she post a

picture. my son when he eventually has his facebook account. pokes me. or when my mom writes a status update. those are the things that make sense to come into this intimate space that is directly connected to your skin like the apple watch. emily: so, you have been wearing a for a week or how has it changed your life? >> it has. my wife hear from you more throughout the day. i think she likes it but i will ask her to not appear whenever she texts me i do that thing where i will get to that after this meeting. and oftentimes i forget the cuts -- it because it's not what do you want for dinner? i can reply with pre-canned responses. that is an incredible improvement over the experience of having to pull up the phone. the other funny thing i do not expect to really matter is when my phone does ring in the middle of a meeting if i go like this everything silences. cover the watch.

that silences all the rings. you're not looking way. my phone was just ringing. i think my friends are trying to pull pranks on the. emily: it works. thanks so much for joining us. we will have to check back in with you after a few months. being able to talk to your wife every single second is necessarily a good thing. >> not everything is second. emily: we will be right back after this quick break. ♪

emily: i am emily chang, and this is "bloomberg west" linkedin reported first-quarter awnings after the bell and investors are worried about slower than expected sales growth from the professional networking site. shares are plunging in

after-hours trading. while revenue was up 35%. losses widened to $43 million down. here with me is cory johnson and we were talking earlier, linkedin has wiped out $8 billion workth of market cap? cory: this is one of those situations where -- i think there is a stock story and a company store. but what we see in the company is maybe the prospect of slowing . we've seen it for a while from linkedin. revenues that were growing three years -- 86% year-over-year. it looks like they are going to grow at 32% this year. it is a lot less. i think more disconcerting is the way that linkedin has played a game with wall street is every time that report a quarter, they beat estimates and they raise the guidance. and this time they were right in line with estimates and they lowered the guidance. so when the game is eat and raise, b and rays and then you match them lower, you are

playing a different game than wall street is expecting you to play. that is why they big up -- bid up so high beforehand. emily: we saw disappointing earnings from twitter. facebook had lower-than-expected revenue. cory: they are facing currency issues. the strong dollar is affecting them across the board. look, they are all fantastic growth businesses. they are all growing much more slowly but i think that twitter is in a very different place in a less advantageous place then linkedin and facebook. linkedin and facebook are still growing fast and growing their user base much more quickly than twitter is growing. they are also generating free cash flow. that is making real money. something twitter is not doing. emily: what about when it comes to advertising? cory: i think that -- it is unclear. linkedin. we do not have the metrics to judge the efficacy of linkedin ads but that business is

growing very fast. their marketing solutions business, which is basically advertising, is now the fastest growing piece of linkedin with 38% on a year-over-year basis. the market solution business is impressive. also interesting, it is it now as big as printing solutions. 19. 19. no, there is not a third. 19. i can't believe they have built a publishing business based on people if you were writing these great articles on linkedin. and have turned it into a really big publishing business the likes of which other publishers would want to have. emily: they are really, you know, aggressive about it recruiting us to do that. they actually will identify trends or things happening in the news. cory: you get tons of feedback on it as well. emily: they do. they actually get a lot of engagement, more so than i find on other social networks. cory: they do not pay enough but who does? emily: it's free. cory: everyone on linkedin i

want to thank you for doing that for free. emily: cory johnson, thank you for watching. we will be back with more of "bloomberg west" after this break. ♪

emily: this is "bloomberg west" where we focus on innovation technology, and the future of business. i'm emily chang. let's get a check of the headlines. greece and its creditors are getting serious about reaching a deal on the bailout situation. people familiar with the matter say talks are intensifying with the goal of getting up preliminary agreement by sunday. one factor in this -- the emergence of greek prime minister tsipras in negotiations signaling that greece is serious. inflation is slowing and the ruble gaining. russia's central bank just cut interest rates for the front -- the third ttimime this year.

the benchmark rate was cut. russian officials hand that more rate cuts are coming to try and counter a looming recession. general motors is putting more money into its u.s. factories. will spend -- gm will spend more than $5 billion to upgrade plants. the automaker is investing outside the u.s. gm's joint venture in china will spend $16 billion over five years to expand there. nokia shares are falling today. the finish networking company reported a 20% gain in first-quarter sales and a profit of $177 7 million. but adjusted operating margins declined to it and it helps explain why no q agreed to by alcatel lucent for $16 billion earlier this month. and the altra luxury housing market is scaling new heights. a record number of properties around the world command prices above $100 million.

according to report, five homes sold for more than $100 million last year with 20 more on the market with nine figure asking prices. well, tesla is expected to unveil the first non-car products today. the company is introducing a whole battery and a very large-scale utility battery according to an e-mail sent to investors. these batteries will be used to store energy to supplement what consumers get from the electric grid. how can tesla adopt this lithium-ion to a new market? we have a guest from o-power. our editor at large cory johnson here as well. along with nancy fun. she was on the board of tesla. ok so nancy, i feel like you

have got the best idea what tesla is going to unveil today. nancy: i do not have the details but it is important for people to understand that this has been an tesla's dna dna from the beginning -- the notion that battery storage could propel a car but could also be used in a very important way as a stationary power source. especially coupled with renewables like solar. emily: are you expecting a home battery and a battery for business? nancy: there is all kinds of speculation and i do not know. but we do see that walmart and solar city have already been working together with the tesla battery. we have seen through some of the filings with regulators that there have been home installations on a pilot basis of tesla batteries. i don't have the answers but those are certain clues that we will see something along that continuum. emily: what having one of these batteries be like having a

generator? alex: yeah but a lot cleaner. it'd be great. consumers are going to want these batteries. cory: let me ask you, -- self generation incentive program in california. how important is that in terms of subsidies to get this business going for tesla? nancy: california has led in creating these early subsidies that allow a new entrance to come in and compete, even though they have not come down their cost her. so it is quite important up in cory: like the batteries in my house. were thankfully subsidized by the government. a lot of tesla sales of cars are subsidized. i wonder how much they are going to rely on this program as they launch this battery. nancy: it is going to be ephemeral. it is going to be important as a step but the real answer lays -- is in nevada where they're going to have a huge factory where they can derive the economies of scale and bring those costs down. emily: the factor that is yet to be completed.

nancy: looking at the long-term -- and this has been going on -- the research started years and years ago -- you are going to see, as has been appropriate that their government -- there are government incentives that paves the way and then they go away. then you get the economies of scale that really kicked into drive costs down. emily: let's talk about cost. how much we expecting these batteries to cost? i read $13,000 for a home battery appeared how does that compare to the cost of electricity, considering that you can use these batteries are in peak times and take the load off the electric grid. alex: these are going to be from everything i understand, expensive batteries, but over the course of time, the operating cost should be justified but your question points in the direction of a serious consideration which is that utilities are going to have to play a role cooperating with an partnering with tesla to drive market share.

there are very few homeowners who have $13,000 lying around to pay for this battery. and the good news is that the utilities -- it is in utilities interest to be a partner. and an tesla's interest to partner. they are in the midst of a tremendous generational transformation from having customers who are homogenous, dependent on a central power station, to a world in which demand for the commodity is declining. people are interested in new options. and they are looking to their utilities to be customer facing and provide new services. emily: you are not in your head vigorously. cory: i'm a very positive person especially when it comes to tesla. i think the expense in building out the power grid -- it is cheapest at the generation of power. it is expensive to move the power around but the last mile is enormously expensive. i want to put the question to you, nancy. as far as consumer use go, i wonder if the variability of rates which we do not have in california, where you pay more to get power in your house at

5:00 when everyone is running their air and their dishwasher and you pay -- right now you pay the same amount in the middle of the night. if there was variability, then the battery business makes more sense. nancy: absolutely. and that is where all utilities are heading. if you look at the regulations in various states, it really trying to ask the use of distributed power along with storage and price according to where does it make sense -- where is the grid strengthened by drawing power from? is it from your battery, from your solar array, is it from the great? a-- the grid? software is going to be available to help utilities make that decision. and therefore, bring prices down. cory: what i'm thinking about is the economic incentive. if the homeowner or the business pays more at a certain hour when nate -- basic economics -- that is when the world changes because suddenly they have to bear that cost. nancy: i have a tesla.a it's cheaper for me -- it's a

fun car. it is cheaper to charge it during the night. and that is easy to do. that is the first step. you will see all kinds of ability to use pricing to get people to use their electricity off-peak hours. emily: alex, last word. alex: there are some conventional wisdom developing that i think is lazy which essentially is saying that the advent of cheap to stupid energy resources like solar and storage will mean the death of utility. i think you need look no further than at&t to see that today that we have 40% of u.s. households without a landline. at&t is among the 25 most important largest companies in the world. utilities will adapt to this challenge. the utilities -- as you identify -- have to be part of the solution. in regulation needs to change, technology needs to change, but i think you heavy till it is looking to take advantage of new opportunities. emily: thank you both.

we will of course be covering tesla's announcement today. tune in for that. up next, we will get to bio hacking. the trend of people implanting microchips to get superhuman abilities. ♪

emily: welcome back to "bloomberg west." bio hacking --what it means and how it is giving some people superhuman abilities. first, a check of the top others. apple is fighting a potential cost of the future. the european commission has been looking into whether ireland him properly gave apple state aid. if regulators forced the cupping to pay past taxes, the cost could be material. and how much is too much money to give your kids?

maryland's suggest they draw the line as $53 million. merrill lynch surveyed high net worth individuals and if you have 100 million to give $53 million is too much for one child, $26 million is too little. estate taxes figure into this in a big way. in this week edition of wiring the world, we are exploring the realm of bio hacking, a growing number of people are inventing -- implanting microchips under their own skin to give them beyond human abilities. we traveled to seattle washington, to witness what one pioneer can do with a wave of his hand. reporter: this is meghan. hey. she is about to be one of the world's newest grinders, people who bio hack their bodies with implants for extra human abilities. are you ready? meghan: i am ready. reporter: a bio hacking pioneer

is the man with a steady hands implanting this. >> there it goes. reporter: a chip for radiofrequency identification or rfid. >> that's it. meghan: not as bad as i thought. reporter: megan is one of a small but growing group of people embarking on high tech upgrades. why? megan: i have a believe that most things in life are improvable. that it's our responsibility to act on that improvement. reporter: this is one thing you could do. keyless home entry. he's been bio hacking the past 10 years. he shows off scars from past spirit. today, he has got to rfid chips you can see through his skin. >> you can see it quite well. reporter: as founder of

dangerous things, he sells do-it-yourself kits. he sold a few thousand with interest from the u.s. to sweden and japan. thinks big-name tech has bought samples. >> samsung, google, apple. i am sure there are a lot of skunk works programs in these companies. reporter: he can also do this -- a magnet in his pinky has given him a sixth sense, feeling magnetic field. >> give it a good -- there it is. reporter: he gets a little jolt when walking through metal detectors. feels a microwave when it is on, and because of laptoplid has magnets -- >> if i let my finger just, it will turn it off. reporter: estimates 3000 people to 5000 people in the u.s. are grinders. like neil harbeson the world's first person with an antenna implanted in his skull. born colorblind, he now sees

color. rich has small implants in his ear to listen to music. and dubbed the first cybord has worn a computer vision system for three decades. a bio hacking expert says time leads to acceptance. >> it is pretty easy to imagine that some of the technologies that are totally blue sky ideas today are going to eventually become sort of accepted part of who we are, who our bodies are. reporter: emile says you should not fear tech in your body. education is needed. emile: if you know what is going on and a how to control it there is nothing to be afraid of. reportere opening doors without keys could be just the start. emily: coming up new numbers show just how much the ride sharing service list is spending to compete with uber.

but is it making a difference? that is next. ♪

emily: this is "bloomberg west." behind the friendly pink mustaches and fist bumps, lyft is spending fiercely compete with uber. according to a presentation to investors, lyft expects to spend 60.5% of its revenue on marketing in december 2015. joining me to discuss -- leslie picker who helped get this document. what was the most shocking thing? leslie: their growth. there are spending a lot of money to acquire customers and compete with uber. we know about uber, the $40 billion valued number one player in car booking. but lyft is not going to sit

down and let that happen. they are spending money to acquire customers. it seems to be working. the company is projecting revenue of about $800 million for this year. that could mean a $1 billion revenue company by the year. that is not chump change. it is interesting also, to see their betrayal of over. they say in their marketing government that uber is a company that has an antisocial type culture, top-down management. it is clear that this is a battle in the car booking world that is not going to go away. emily: you are saying the number of customers, the number of rides is increasing by four times? leslie: exactly. 2.2 million last year. that is a staggering number. and we are looking at a company that is gaining 92 cents of profit for ride. so, the company said they were profitable in san francisco.

that is where lyft seems to be more popular. it is one of their more established markets. they are working on other markets to gain profitability. we will see over the years how that plays out. emily: is the bottom line -- let's watch -- the growth that lyft is seeing is not sustainable, or lyft is a true number two, and we should not count them out? leslie: keep her on the growth in saying it will likely slow sometimes in. they showed and 11 fold increase from two years ago. that cannot sustain itself, but its growth pattern does look like they are gaining market share. a show in the document they are gaining market share from uber. it is one of those companies that is worth watching. now whether it is a kind of mark where there can be two players remains to be seen. some people say yes, some people say no. emily: leslie picker. check out that article on bloomberg.com. thanks.

the biggest health insurer in the country has some big news today. if you are covered by united health care, a video consultation with a doctor will now get the same coverage as a trip to the clinic. you have to pay a regular co-pay and you can get instant access to a doctor via any device with wi-fi,. united health care is working with three partners the now clinic, american well, and doctors on demand. joining me in this studio adam johnson. thank you for joining us. first of all, how did you get united health care to cover this? this is a huge breakthrough? adam: yeah, it is huge breakthrough. it is a big step for virtual medicine. insurers like the fact that you can receive just as high quality care is you do and clinic and a video setting. the way we got the deal was we had all their execs and employees use the service. they had a fantastic experience. they took a deep dive into our

clinical quality standards and our physician groups and said, you guys are doing a good job . emily: who is using the service? people who have insurance or people who do not have insurance? adam: it is more of people that have insurance but do not have time to wait to get an appointment at a doctor. the national average wait time is 21 days to get an appointment. emily: here's the question -- is a video consultation as good as an in person checkup? do you get the same treatment? adam: for many cases, it is. if you have a broken bone, we will not be able to reset a bone. if you are bleeding out, go to the emergency room. if you have a kid that has got pink eye or sinus infection, i heard cory coughting, that kind of thing we can do very well. emily: how immediate is an appointment? adam: our -- we have on demand in the name of our company. our average wait time is two minutes. emily: something like one medical.

we are seeing explosion -- more convenient health care. i just wonder about the quality of it. who are these doctors and how do you get them -- vet them? adam: our physicians have 12 to 15 years of experience. these are docs that had a private practice. they cork from home. they are seeing patients all day. they are not messing with medical records. emily: talk to us about usage. even though it is convenient, usage is still low. so, what sort of transit -- adoption are you singing how do you saying and how to get more patients to accept this? adam: it's low compared to the number of physical walk-ins but it is growing. the way we are getting adoption is through word-of-mouth. someone will try. 75% of our members are working moms. they've got school-age kids and they go to work every day. they use the service. they are blown away. it saved them a check to urgent care. they do not have to pack the kids up and go in. they tell their friends who tell their friends. emily: how do doctors feel about

this? adam: primary care physicians first way of working from home. every other profession -- except yours -- has been able -- emily: can i work from home? my producer in the controller. adam: they can work from home. there is no overhead. they see patients all day. they like it. emily: where does it is going? adam: i think this will become more mainstream. united, the largest health insurance mayking usin- in -network. i think in five years everyone will start a nonemergency visit with a video consultation. emily: thanks so much for joining us. thank you so much for watching this edition of "bloomberg west ." to remember all the latest headlines all the time on your phone, tablet, bloomberg.com and bloomberg radio. we will see you later. ♪

>> from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: yesterday at this table, we had a 68 minute conversation with iran's foreign minister, javad zarif. tonight part two. a conversation about the nuclear deal, the relationship between iran and the u.s., and the possibilities of future engagement. here is that conversation. if there was a nuclear agreement, is it likely to lead to more cooperation in terms