♪ announcer: from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. charlie: elizabeth holmes is here she is the founder and ceo of theranos. it is a blood analytics company that has developed a new approach to blood testing. these tests detect dozens of medical conditions. based on blood drawn from a fingerprint. -- finger prick. her goal is to transform health care through prevention and early detection. she started the company in 2003

when she was 19. it is now valued at $9 billion. she is the youngest self-made female billionaire in the world. "time" magazine named her one of the most influential people in 2015. in may, she spoke to the graduating class at pepperdine university. elizabeth: someone said to me, define what is nonnegotiable to you. what you are willing to fight for, die for, and most importantly, live for. for me, that nonnegotiable is our mission. realizing a change in a world and an industry that has stagnated for decades and resulted in so much loss and pain. a change that would mean that one day, people would not have to say goodbye too soon to those they love. i started theranos because i believe that building a business is a vehicle for making a difference in the world. that you can do well by doing good. it is what i wanted to do with my time in our world. no matter what. charlie: i am pleased to have

elizabeth holmes at this table. welcome. we have been wanting you here for a while. elizabeth: so wonderful to be here. charlie: let's go back to this speech. tell me what the mission is. then we will go deeper. what can its impact be? elizabeth: our mission is to make actionable information accessible to every person at the time it matters. what it is about is realizing a world in which early detection and prevention become realities in our health care system. because if we can make it possible to see the onset of disease in time for therapy to be effective, we can change outcomes in the context of what we all know as reality today which is often, we find out someone we love is really sick

when it is too late to do something about it. in facilitating earlier intervention, we can change a significant amount of the cost structure in health care. charlie: there is a lot in what you just said. let me unpack some of that. personalized medicine means you do not have to go to a lab to get these essential tests that can detect disease early so that you can treat it. elizabeth: yes. we are still a lab. but it is about decentralizing and distributing access so that you can, for example, go into a local retail pharmacy and get access to this kind of information late at night or on a weekend as opposed to being very restricted as to when and where the information is available. charlie: the process is easier because you just prick your finger. you do not have the kind of blood tests that scare some people. elizabeth: myself included.

we have focused on smaller samples. for urine, blood -- we can take drops from a finger, we can take blood from the arm and take less blood than what would be required. charlie: it is less expensive. the results are quicker. elizabeth: yet. -- yes. charlie: if, in fact, it is widespread, you could have a huge impact on the health care system. elizabeth: that is our goal and our dream. charlie: how far along are you? elizabeth: we are just getting started. i've spent the last 12 years building the technology infrastructure and trying to do it in such a way in which it is truly scalable. now we have begun to apply it in such a way where we can serve individuals and physicians through transforming the cost of testing and accessibility through some of the things you have talked about and with our

recent work in changing the law in arizona to make it possible for individuals to have the human rights to order lab tests directly to get information about themselves, we will just start to see a shift in the way in which this information can be used. charlie: not having to go through a physician? elizabeth: that's right. we put a whole series of protections in place around physician engagement. the purpose of getting someone to order a lab test directly is exactly to get them to engage with their physician. historically, there have been such liabilities that prohibit physicians from engaging with consumers on tests they do order. we created blank blanket protections for physicians -- we created blanket protections for physicians around the ability to allow for a new partnership to be formed

around individual and physician involvement in preventative testing. charlie: part of this is about process. it is also about science, i assume. you get the same results you get from their renault's -- from theranos if you went to a doctor and had him take a vial of blood. what are those results? elizabeth: they are lab results. in the same way you get a lab report from a traditional doctor's visit and they tell you your cholesterol, your blood count, your glucose, it is the same type of report we are working to design in such a way which individuals can better engage with it. but our work as a lab has been in being the first lab to advocate that every lab test we

develop should be submitted to the fda. lab tests have not been regulated by fda and that process allows us to demonstrate the comparison between the capillary samples and the venous samples so that we produce those reports, you are able to see identical results. charlie: do you want to share this process with everybody on the planet so that it can be applicable beyond theranos? elizabeth: we want to share the work, for sure. we are still so early in our own lifecycle. but the goal is to get to a point where the technology is extraordinarily inexpensive and accessible, so that it is not just meaningful in this country, but one day in developing economies. charlie: are you a scientist or a technologist or an

entrepreneur? elizabeth: i think i'm an entrepreneur. i was trained as an engineer and i like to think of myself as an engineer, but now my time is spent on doing whatever it takes to realize this mission. charlie: 10 years out, you may be beyond blood testing. elizabeth: maybe. i'm so far away right now. we are certainly already doing broader laboratory testing and we are really focused on ways in which we can build distributed care infrastructures to facilitate engagement with physicians, because that's what are -- charlie: scaling is the most important thing to happen? elizabeth: scaling the right way. in and incredibly high quality manner. our goal is to be able to help give people access to information that they have not

been able to access for all of the reasons before. that means person by person being able to realize an excellent and wonderful experience and as we have the infrastructure to support that we will grow. charlie: primary growth in arizona? elizabeth: it is. charlie: what is the plan for the united states? elizabeth: we will be expanding into more states from there. we have our one wellness center in palo alto, california right now. we want to increase our work in california. we are already beginning to look at other metropolitan areas in which we can begin to establish a footprint. charlie: with the idea and the mission and the sense of, i'm a person who wants to make a difference, i see something i

find unacceptable -- how do you go from there to theranos? elizabeth: i have always believed we are here on this earth to make a difference in the world. when i found what i felt like i was born to do, which was to try to help contribute to solving a problem that i believe, at a human level -- there's a lot that matters. charlie: that will save more lives. elizabeth: when you are talking about someone you love, you would do anything, right? to be able to solve that problem, to me that was the greatest contribution i can make with my life. i started thinking about it and i was not going to classes at stanford. i started when i was a freshman.

i had begun training in chemical and electrical engineering and i began designing systems i thought could better facilitate access to this kind of information. i filed my first patent. been -- is in -- and then, i said, i will try to build it. i was spending 24/7 on it. we were paying so much money for stanford, it did not make sense to stay when i was not able to go to class. i figured, this is what i want to do, and that was it. charlie: you have a board of directors that is enormously respected. six or seven of them i know. where did that idea come from? that i want people on this board who i know have superb judgment and can be of great counsel to me and can make a difference. that's the first question. second question, how do you convince them to serve on the board?

elizabeth: that too evolved. for 10 years -- we did this work, we did not have a website, we never put out a press release. it was completely heads down. when we got to a point in which we realized that we were doing could begin to serve individuals and their physicians directly, i wanted to find the people i felt were strategically brilliant and could provide the kind of wisdom and insight -- how do we do this in such a way in which technology can truly serve as a tool for facilitating policy decisions? for example, we bill medicare and medicaid for the first time at less than they are willing to pay. which means that just through the act of us existing, those reimbursement rates will drop.

which means that all these savings will come without having to raise taxes or cut programs. it is an example of the way technology can facilitate policy. charlie: back to the board of directors. you called henry kissinger or did one person act as a catalyst to assemble the rest of them? elizabeth: i met them individually over time. george is at stanford. he had written a book on health care with another person i know. i read the book and i mark: tracy: -- i read the book and i met him in that context. i had the privilege of being able to build a wonderful relationship. he got involved in the first meeting and i think he saw it as something that could be very meaningful in the context of what we are working to do in health care. person by person, i had the opportunity to meet these people and spend some time with them and work with them and ask them

to be part of this. they all are doing this because it is a mission that will have such enormous implications as it begins to be realized. ♪

♪ charlie: how will this change physician-patient relationships?

elizabeth: the goal is to facilitate the relationships earlier in the disease progression process. charlie: not waiting for all of the symptoms to appear. elizabeth: people generally do not get lab tests reimbursed and paid for by insurance unless they are presenting with a symptom. payment is otherwise not justified. even then, 40% to 60% of americans do not go fulfill the requisitions to get the tests done because they cannot afford it or they are scared of needles or it is not convenient. by the time these diagnoses are happening, people are so far progressed, it is difficult to change outcomes. if we can create a system in which we as a lab are designed to facilitate that engagement before you are really sick, we can begin to build a new era of partnership and prevention. charlie: what is the scientific

change that allows you to do this? what did you discover, find, create that enabled you to get the same results? elizabeth: there is many elements to it. one is, test by test redeveloping the chemistry used in the traditional laboratory framework to be able to work on smaller samples. another is having to redevelop the hardware the tests are run on. the software for automating laboratory processes is another. the collection technology, in terms of the tiny tubes, is another. an engineering question. we have invested in all of those areas because it is only when we can bring them all together that that we can actually begin to solve the kind of problems we want to solve. charlie: it is how ideas are born, by asking questions.

isn't there a better way to take blood? that simple question. and then going out and figuring it out. if we had software or if we had chemistry that could analyze results in a quicker way and use less of the sample, that is progress. elizabeth: that is exactly right. that is the invention and innovation process. charlie: has anyone challenged the science of what you do? are there people who raise questions, and say, what is to show with this, because we seem uncomfortable with the results? elizabeth: the major lab companies. charlie: exactly. help me understand what they are asking and what your answer is to them. elizabeth: we never talked about this work for a long time.

charlie: because you were not there or because you wanted to get established before you took on the world? elizabeth: we wanted to do it and then talk about it. so we did. the reason we talk about it now is because we want people to begin to understand they can engage with this information. and how transformative it can be. when we did start talking about it, the response of the major lab companies was to say, we do not know how they are doing what they are doing. elizabeth holmes: exactly. -- charlie: exactly. if it is so great, why don't they show a? -- why don't they show it? elizabeth holmes: our position is, we do not think we need to explain ourselves to competitive companies. charlie: you are protected by patents and all of that. obviously, competitive

businesses always concerned about the ideas incorporated into products. in order to protect what they are doing. on the other hand, there is a necessity to make sure people understand that what you have done is truly revolutionary. elizabeth holmes: we have a very comprehensive long-term plan for what we are trying to do. just because a lab company says, i want to know how we are doing what they are doing, that does not mean we will respond and say, ok, we will go through it. charlie: what if they are independent -- is there somewhere else people can go to and say here is a way to look at the results? here is a way you can be guaranteed this is a big deal. elizabeth: the first place for that is the fda. the fda will take years to thoroughly review a system, a platform, the test data.

you have to do prospective studies and enroll all of these people. you have to have a chance to work with them constantly to make sure the data is right. there is no higher bar than them. no matter how many publications you do nobody will look at it as thoroughly as they do. our position is, what is the best way we can provide that assurance, and without question especially when you are dealing with something like a test that is binary, the fda is the gold standard for that. so we said ok, we will invest in that. we strongly believe that is the way to do this for lab testing because the data is so important. with that decision, summaries will come out through the fda process, and that information will be out there, and we think that is the right way for the information to come out. charlie: we decided to go this way rather than somehow creating some independent appraisal. because it is in your interest

to be able to document results and new ideas. elizabeth: absolutely. we have no issues with any kind of independent appraisal process. in fact, as we build partnerships with centers of excellence, which we are doing with hospital systems, that is part of what we are asking them to do. but this publication -- this comment about publication is a bit unusual, because no laboratory has ever done publications around the integrity of their lab developed tests. charlie: we live in a nation where more and more scientists are sharing their research on the internet. some might suggest that you have, for the best of reasons created a company that produces something that can change health care. but your reason for doing this

is in a sense, you want to be in the same way steve jobs was protective about the way he -- about what he created, and it was an open system. this is a business decision as well as a transparency decision. elizabeth: without question. we are the first lab to publish on our website are data from the -- our data from the audits. our scores, turnaround time scores. that is all part of the transparency piece. we can talk about our performance and the accuracy of our tests that way. the timing for when we decide to disclose more pieces had to be part of a broader business plan. it should not be reactive. it will start with the fda and going through that process. charlie: how long will that

take? elizabeth holmes: we have been working on it. i'm the last person who should be predicting. charlie: what will they tell you? elizabeth: we have had the privilege of establishing a really good relationship there. charlie: don't they primarily tell you there is no falsehood in advertising or communication? elizabeth: they do to really important things. they look at the integrity of the tests. secondly, they look at the clinical use. they tell you the test performs this way in terms of its accuracy and precision. and then they say, it should be used this way. when you talk about individual engagement in the testing process, the piece that fda does, the clinical piece, is central to the interpretation of the test results. that is what they do.

that is why we think it is so important. charlie: do you worry about -- from a competitive standpoint, it might be competitive -- that there are people developing systems using new technologies that will eliminate a needle of any kind? perhaps you are doing that. elizabeth: this is the amazing thing about this country and silicon valley. the speed of innovation. it's one of the reasons we love being there, because you have to be on version 10 by the time anyone else is on version 1. that's what our whole business is about. charlie: so you are saying yes we are looking into every possible way we can extract blood? and -- in the fastest, most convenient and painless way? if we can go a step further in terms of eliminating these

needles, we will be there, too? elizabeth: only the paranoid survive. a lot of truth to that. charlie: so you are paranoid. and you have to be. elizabeth: probably one of the most paranoid people on the planet, absolutely. charlie: does what it means to make a difference mean a lot to to you personally -- does it mean a lot to you personally echo is there something within you, a beating heart that says i have to find a place i can stand because i can't not do important things? i am asking who you are. elizabeth: i grew up in a house with pictures of my dad in tough places in the world trying to take care of people as a disaster relief worker. i always thought that was what i was going to do. i think about it all the time, if today were my last day on this earth and i could say that

the people who have never been able to afford the ability to give care to someone in their now can because of something we have done or the people who have gone through hell in just being able to get the test done now don't, i have done something in this world that has made it a little bit of a better place. charlie: does the business person in you care about how much you are worth? other than the measure of building a company that will have power echo -- have power? elizabeth: it is not what matters. what matters is, as we succeed, being able to have the tool to reinvest and keep doing it and keep doing it more and better and less expensive and smaller samples. that's all that's about. charlie: do you spend the amount

of time you do, because of all the stories that the life you have is so exciting and you feel like unless you are there, you may be missing something? what satisfies you is being right there watching this baby of you grow. elizabeth: it is. i have thought about it a lot. it is what i love. i love it more than anything else. therefore, it is what i want to spend all my time on. i have a very simple life, which is this work and my family. that makes it very easy to focus and go really deep and it becomes addictive. charlie: that is what they say. thank you for coming. elizabeth: wonderful to be here. charlie: elizabeth holmes from theranos.

you will be hearing more from her. back in a moment. stay with us. ♪

charlie: karl ove knausgaard his six-volume autobiography series "my struggle" has become a literary event, a literary sensation.

book four was released in the united states early this year. james wood wrote in the "new yorker," there is something compelling about his book, even when i was bored, i was interested. i am pleased to have karl ove knausgaard at this table for the first time. i said to you, have you seen our program? knowing that we are seen in norway. you said, i don't watch much television. what do you do with your time? are you writing constantly? karl: i write a lot and i have four children. that is my life. writing and being with my family. charlie: are you surprised by what has happened? this is your life and your struggle. tracy: karl: i was absolutely shocked when this thing happened. i wrote it completely innocently for myself, by myself. charlie: what does that mean?

karl: i was sitting in my own room writing about my own life. i never thought anyone would be interested, not even my friends. i was embarrassed when i gave it to my editor. even the publishing house did not expect anything. it was a low print of the first edition. nobody thought anything would happen. charlie: one out of every 10 people in norway has read it. what is it? karl: i have no idea. it feels like -- there is a certain identification. charlie: i was going to say recognition. carl: yeah, there was a woman in san francisco that said, how do you manage to write about the indian american woman? charlie: you were in my heart.

my soul, my head. karl: something like that. my experience with this project is i have set out to find out who i am. how did i become the man i am? how did this happen? what is identity? i thought i would be as private and intimate as i could and be as true as i could to myself. charlie: intimate review -- intimate meaning revealing as much as you can? karl: i am writing things in there that i have not said to a single living person. i thought it was too private and personal and i thought there would be no recognition. but it does not work like that. it's like, i think we are much

more alike than we think we are. charlie: meaning that we have the same hopes and same fears. karl: in this book, i am writing how it is to be 17, and the feeling of being 17 is the same everywhere. those kinds of feelings i'm trying to capture in the book. the presence of the different ages. charlie: it says something about you and something about the reader. maybe more about the reader that about you, i don't know. karl: i wrote fiction before and people could come over to me and talk about the book. it was always about the book and about literature. now people come over and they say one sentence about the book and they start to talk about themselves. charlie: and how they see themselves in the book. karl: yeah, it's like -- i

wrote about my father and he was an alcoholic and a lot of people come over and talk about their father being an alcoholic. that is a dream for a writer. charlie: cathartic? karl: for me, writing this? no. i was occupied with making novels of my own life. i was not interested -- it is not a therapeutic thing for me. charlie: you where interested in making a novel out of my own life, not about the sense of dealing with my own psyche? karl: not at all. charlie: what is the consequence of doing this other than being able to publish compelling reading for people around the world? karl: the consequences to me personally? charlie: is it a feeling of success, accomplishment?

karl: it is -- one major subject in this book, self-hatred, self-loathing. that is a big part of my life. i think that is one of the things i am looking for in my writing. charlie: to answer why? karl: yeah, that's one of the things. i was 40 years old when i started to write this book. i had three beautiful children a beautiful wife, a beautiful house. it was like the talking heads song. i was not happy. i did not appreciate life. one of the seven deadly sins. why? how did i get there? that is the question in the book. charlie: what's the answer. why were you unhappy?

karl: when i wake up in the morning, every morning, i start my day unhappy. and having this success does not help at all. it's like, all this is a lie. it is very hard to take. karl: for someone who reads the book, will they understand why you were unhappy? have you accomplished that literary journey? you wrote this because you were unhappy and you wanted to know why. so you examine your life. do you answer the question, why? or do you put it down? karl: i am interested in complexity. i am not interested in answers or one sentence solutions. charlie: answers are not the

opposite of complexity. answers can be complexity itself. it does not have to be simple. it is not like you're looking for a silver bullet that explains everything. karl: in my experience, it does not help to identify your problems. it doesn't help to say, my father did this to me, and so on and to diagnose your life does not help. this book is the opposite of that. it is trying to show the complexity of everything. charlie: why this title? karl: my original title was "argentina." this was also a book about longing. i was talking to a friend of mine about mein kampf, and i

knew that this was a good title for the book. my editor said, we cannot do that. we do not want to go there. and i insisted. i am happy we did. in norway, if you say mein kampf, people will think of this book. this book is the exact opposite of hitler's mein kampf. i had to read it because i used the title. so in book six, there is a part where i describe hitler's life. it's immensely interesting, and a very important part of the book. and i did move to that place because of the title. that is the way i work, by intuition.

charlie: are you fascinated, obsessed, or just curious about hitler? karl: i would not say obsessed. fascinated and interested, yes. charlie: because of his feet? -- deeds? karl: because he had some quality -- this thing happened in europe, germany, and it was only two or three generations ago. to see it from here, it is just an unbelievable thing. how could it happen? we define our culture against what happened there. there are a lot of things we cannot think or cannot do because of what happened. i just started to read about him and i started to read mein kampf. charlie: what kind of book was

it? karl: mostly very boring. it is -- i can't find a word in english -- but it's something you don't like. the shock is the hate of jews. it is just pathological. he writes very well about commercialism, propaganda, about how to use speech to convince people. it's like, i can tell you all the tricks and get them to you, but it doesn't matter because when i am speaking, there is so much power in that act, you know? charlie: did you see genius in

his book? karl: he is a poor writer. he got such bad reviews when it came out. one was called "mein crap." some said it was the end of hitler's career. everyone was laughing at this book. it is amazing he managed to rise up after that and get to where he got. it is fascinating. you wonder, can it happen again? of course, it can happen again. charlie: how much of this is about your father? karl: he is the major character throughout the book from the very beginning to the very end. because of his death, one of the -- because of his death, his fall, that was one of the starting points i had.

i wanted to write about him and his death. and i just continued to write. he is the most important character. and he still is. and now he has been dead for many years. i have dreams about him. i had one a few days ago. charlie: what did he say to you in the dream? karl: he did not say anything, he was just there. i realized when i wrote my first book, i was 29. i had to just wrote it and then my father died. i took my proofs around the time we buried him and i realized, the book was meaningless. i had written it to him, i wanted him to see me. he is one of the reasons i was

writing, i think. somehow -- i do not know if this is terrible, the attention i am giving him. but then, you become a father yourself and you have your father in mind all the time. because it's such a major part of who you are. charlie: does your life deserve all of this attention you are giving it? karl: i think that's the clue with this book, it is an ordinary life. nothing exceptional. i am not an exceptional person. everybody's life deserves this kind of attention. i have this idea of who i am and i started to write about it and i see this ocean of complexity and things going on and the richness of it all. i have this idea of who i was when i was 10.

and then i would start to write about it and i could see what it was to be 10, the sensation of being 10, and it is still inside of me. i think it is only a matter of getting access to it through literature. charlie: get access? karl: to yourself. the lost areas in yourself that you normally don't go in, but it's still there. charlie: did you keep a diary? karl: i kept one in my early 20's, but i burnt it because i could not stand reading it seeing myself. it's the same way with those books. i cannot read them. charlie: is the argument with yourself, with your character with your performance, with your reason for being? karl: what do you mean? charlie: you said you get up unhappy and this is about your

life. is that about not liking your character? who you are? your values? is it about the fact you have not done something you might have wanted to do? or is it about where i find myself in relationships, and work? karl: there are a lot of things i like in my life, but this is about shame. and there is some kind of atlantic -- and dan take -- p edantic in there, that you should not think you are better than anyone else. if you have it like that, shame is a very effective way of controlling society. which is a good thing. if you get too much of it, the shame gets its own life.

that's another reason for me to be a writer, a way of escaping myself and escaping the shame. charlie: a way of defining yourself? karl: no, i am running away for -- from myself. charlie: i still do not understand what the shame is about. karl: i think it has to do with having no self-confidence. i think that was -- that is something that is established in childhood. i had a father who was very unpredictable and very angry with me for no reason. i could never know what was right or wrong. everything was floating. if you have that kind of background, you don't have any inner self and you let yourself be managed by other people, you know? what does he think of me? what does she think of me? that is how i live my life, try to please everybody.

except when i started to write this book. i did not want to please anyone. i just wanted to write, be completely free alone, by myself, away from all of this. away from society. charlie: you write that working all the time is always a way to simplify life. to carry its demand, especially the demand to be happy. karl: that sounds true, doesn't it? charlie: that is why we work. karl: that is an important reason to work. we should work for pleasure. i do work all the time. charlie: are you happy now? karl: i am not looking for happiness. occasionally i am happy.

charlie: but that was not the intent of your life or the book, to be happy. karl: no it's not. charlie what is the intent? : karl: i want to raise my children functionally so they can be able to manage their own lives without being damaged. i also want to write incredibly good novels. that is impossible, but that is what i want to do. that is much better than being happy. charlie: what is that process of getting to where you can write? karl: that's on -- i think it's -- i think the idea is you should be free when you are writing. nothing should restrict you whatsoever. you have so many thoughts and so many ideas and you have to get all of these away to enter a place where you can just write.

i think reflections, thinking, that is enormously overestimated in our culture. what you feel and emotions get ignored, more or less. i follow my intuition, and that can lead anywhere. charlie: how much are you shaped by the country you are from? karl: a lot. we said this is a book about identity and where you are from is important.

i am from this family, and i am from this nation. i was born into that language and culture. i have learned everything in that context. i think of course, yes, norway is a very important place for me. i moved from there when i was 30 and i thought i should never go back. i disliked everything that was norwegian. as you do when you call from a small country. and i lived in sweden. and then this massacre occurred there, and i was totally and with all of my repertoires of feelings -- that is my identity. that is where i am from. charlie: you had to be there? karl: yeah. it was strange. i had to be there, all of my

had to be there, all of my attention was there. it was the first time i felt this is home. charlie: was that incident the catalyst for you? karl: i was -- at least, it made me think a lot and write a lot. everything surrounding the thing was interesting. the thing was, he killed the 69 by shooting them one by one over and over. it was truly a massacre. charlie: did you come to some understanding of how that could happen? karl: i think it's so many elements. nothing to do with politics whatsoever. nothing to do with radicalism. charlie: even though he attributed it to politics.

karl: i could identify with some of his feelings. but then it stops. when he goes to that island. that is the context. how is it possible? it happens. how can our children, or a young man do such a thing? that is an important thing, because he did not cry. he was surprised at all the people against the wall, and he was standing there, going to shoot them and they did not move. he said -- he did not know he was not in a film. it was like he was in a game. he never realized it was real people.

charlie: why du call this book "a furry old suicide? " karl: the plan was to empty everything i had, nothing left. charlie: you were killing yourself by giving everything you had? karl: that was the plan. when i start again, there should be nothing. it should be all beginning from scratch. it is a destructive thing to give everything in your life away. charlie: is there a demand to write another book about your life post-book? karl: i have a lot of questions if i am going to do it. if i'm going to write a novel it should be completely different. charlie: nothing about the response to this or how you've changed, because it is looking deeply into your own soul which has made you successful.

karl: that's right. i am not going there again. it is hard to go there. charlie: the book is called "my struggle." thank you for coming. congratulations on what it has become. karl: thank you very much. charlie: thank you for joining us, see you next time. ♪

rishaad: it is friday, june 5 and this is trending business. ♪ rishaad: we are live in singapore and mumbai this hour. the shanghai composite rising for the first time heading for a weekly jump of 10%. a payment plan for greece. athens says the imf debt will not be met.

saying sorry, google apologizing after a man's name appeared on a list of the top 10 criminals. for our top stories, you can follow me on twitter. let's have a look at what is going on in the market. >> you cannot understand what is happening there and we are up 1.7%. that said, i want to mention sharp first. a local report in japan saying we could be looking at a ¥180 billion loss for sharp. they denied that they were the source of that report. no decision has been made.