♪ >> the series now shifts back to california. >> the two best players in the world are going head-to-head. >> of the starters are healthy. >> no key injuries for either team. which means this year, no excuses. >> the chances are good, the chances are good. >> even when you double down, you find your way to be that double team. >> nicely done. [buzzer] ♪

mark: that california clash may come down to a buzzer beater, folks. it may also involve some overtime. there are other races going on, including big news. paul ryan said that he will vote for donald trump. more about that later. today in san diego, hillary clinton tried to score points of her own with a foreign-policy speech to kickoff her five-day homestretch tour. she faces against bernie sanders index tuesday's primary. the target of her speech was not bernie sanders, but the man she expects to face off against in the fall, donald trump. it was a big speech with a lot of soundbites. here is the money soundbite. ms. clinton: i believe the person the republicans have nominated for president cannot do the job. [applause]

donald trump's ideas are not just different, they are dangerously incoherent. they are not even really ideas, just a series of bizarre rants, personal feuds, and outright lies. [laughter] [applause] mark: it was one of the biggest, and i would say best speeches clinton has given in the campaign. how did she do? john: we are not going to be in the disagreement zone purely on the basis of how you phrased the question. i thought she did a great job. on foreign policy, clinton has an advantage not only in terms of her resume and experience, but she just has a greater command of world affairs. in the end, for all of trump's attractiveness to a certain subset of voters, on this

question, if clinton can clear the threshold, she will win the election. this was a very good start in making what i assume will be in argument she prosecutes all the way until election day. mark: i was skeptical that a speech on foreign policy five days before she has to beat bernie sanders was a good idea. it was. it was a sustained attack on trump. she showed that she could do it with humor, and i would say elegance. and despite what trump said about her, pretty good performance skills. what democrats need to rally around her is a sense that she can go into the fall and beat trump. i think she reassured a lot of people today. john: humor is key. trump is funny. mark: you can't beat trump with anger. mark: funny with anger. john: correct. i reserved judgment on your earlier assessment that this might be problematic for her, but actually, i think she did

herself a huge amount of good. mark: i do too. john: democrats have concerns about sanders on foreign policy. you look at clinton and think she can take trump on. she was very good on offense today. one of the golden rules of modern politics is if you want to know what trump is thinking about anything, check his twitter feed. trump fired off this tweet even before hillary clinton spoke. "crooked hillary clinton is getting ready to totally misrepresent my foreign-policy positions." he also tweeted "bad performance by crooked hillary clinton! reading poorly from the teleprompter! she doesn't even look presidential!" we will skip over the alysis or misspelling of teleprompter and other matters. mark, how do you think donald

trump did on defense? mark: i suspect he will talk more about it going forward. he is going to engage her in some of the substance of her criticisms. think this is a case where, on first blush, trump's tweets were no match for her sustained attacks. that does not mean that he is the fight, but in the short term, the contrast was exactly what she wanted. she predicted during her speech that trump would be tweeting angry things, and he did. for the voters she is trying to reach, including women, married women, the contrast of taking someone down in a sustained way versus 140 characters i think works to her benefit. trump did not do well, and he suffers from not having the army of opposition researchers and surrogates that she does. john: trump cannot beat her with anger. in the end, i don't think she can beat him with anger either. can you clear the commander in chief threshold? in the end that still matters.

, i don't care how many other rules have changed in our new political environment. lying hillary, crooked hillary, has resonance in some areas, but on foreign policy, it has no substance. over the course of these months he is going to have to be able , to engage with her on substance and go toe to toe with her. mark: i would still like to think there will be a debate about who has a vision for the future, not just criticism of each other. she laid out very little today. it is unclear where she wants to take the country on foreign-policy. i think donald trump has think long and hard, because his last foreign-policy speech was mostly criticisms of clinton and obama. as i said, paul ryan said today he will vote for donald trump in november. the speaker of the house made his announcement in an op ed published on the gazette, which

is published in wisconsin. ryan said he believes donald support the agenda paul ryan wants to pass through the house. there are some problems still in trump world with unifying republicans. today the governor of michigan, rick snyder said he will not back trump. last night the republican , national committee hispanic outreach director quit last night, suggesting she was uncomfortable working in concert with donald trump. the ryan endorsement was expected, but still very symbolic and substantive deal. does that mean that the #nevertrump movement is dead? john: if you think of this week as the week in which the dreams of an independent candidate going up against donald trump and hillary clinton have boiled down to a relatively obscure national review staff writer, a guy with a resume but who is not

going to be picked, and now paul ryan, as you said, expected, but symbolically, it's a huge thing. i think the never trump movement is done. mark: it's going to send a signal to donors and a lot of people. there is a clear separation between mitt romney and paul ryan. i think trump has known for a while that he was going to get this backing. he made it pretty clear in south dakota. i still think there is work to be done, particularly with the financial community. but this is obviously a very big day for trump, even though ryan did it in a pretty understated manner. john: an understated manner, but he added one thin additional layer of clause -- layer of gloss to the argument that a lot

of people who are uncomfortable with trump has stated. i don't like him, but he's better than hillary clinton. ryan put the extra gloss on of saying hillary clinton is never going to support the house republican agenda. trump may not supported fully, and we might get something from him, and if you are rationalizing your support, that gives you a little extra bit of rationalizing power. mark: ryan is on board. john: donald trump was also on defense today over his school, a.k.a. trump university. his campaign posted a video last night that showed a handful of students praising the education they received at trump university. today on twitter, obviously trump called the judge , investigating his university "very biased and unfair.' here's good news for anyone with transferable credit.

he wrote that he has told executives to reopen trump university after the civil litigation ends. normally, candidates would use their campaigns and surrogates to put on a full-court press. but donald trump's defense was basically donald trump. do you think that trump, when he -- does he need a full complement to play effective defense? mark: he didn't to get the republican nomination. if hillary clinton becomes president, this week will go down in one of the biggest weeks in the campaign. many clinton advisers believe between now and the convention is when it will be won or lost. you look at foreign-policy, the attack on trump university. it is difficult to fight back the way he is fighting back. the press is very some of the to

the argument the clinton campaign is making. that trump university is a scam. the press is sympathetic to that argument. trump is fighting back and night way that has worked for him before. the salt is only just begun. if they don't do after actor analysis, they are making a big mistake. john: you think about a well coordinated attack in politics. you have not just the candidates, you have the surrogates and the staff, you have employees, former employees, voices from within the trump universe saying this is a scheme and fraud. mark: a lot to react to. john: if you are donald trump, you have a big megaphone, but that is coming at you from all directions. mark: coming up, we are going to talk to the attorney general of new york about the civil case he

brought against trump university. but up next a play-by-play , breaking down hillary clinton's speech on foreign policy. right after this.

john: hillary clinton's foreign-policy speech in san diego was hotter than a guitar solo. here to help us unpack it is msnbc political correspondent casey hunt, who is following the political campaign on the trail. out on this fark fark west coast. -- far far west coast. first, let's listen to hillary clinton. ms. clinton: this is a man who has said that more countries should have nuclear weapons, including saudi arabia.

this is someone who has threatened to abandon our allies in nato. he says climate change is a hoax invented by the chinese. he says he has foreign-policy experience because he ran the miss universe pageant in russia. unlike him, i have foreign-policy statecraft experience. i wrestled with the chinese and copenhagen. i brokered a cease-fire between israel and hamas, negotiated the reduction of clear weapons with russia, twisted arms to bring the world together in global sanctions against iran, and stood up for the rights of women, religious minorities, and lgbt people around the world. [applause] john: casey, it seems hillary clinton is doing a couple of things in this speech. one, attacked donald trump. the other, offer an explicit defense of her record in the

state department. how well do you think she pulled off both elements of that strategy today? casey: i think that is right. what struck me the most about this speech was that when we saw all of those dozen plus republicans try to attack donald trump throughout the course of the primary, every time they did it, they seemed smaller than donald trump. attacking him made them seem smaller by comparison. one thing i saw from hillary clinton today was to go after him in a way that made her seem bigger than he is. from that perspective, i think it was successful. there was less emphasis on the back half of this piece. what stood out in the room was that what she was talking about, her record, there wasn't necessarily a vigorous defense

of some of the pieces that will potentially be problematic, whether libya or the war in iraq. i think there was some of that contrasting, but i think it was the attacks that really stood out. john: let's listen to a little bit more. this is secretary clinton talking about being in the room when president obama gave the order to take out osama bin laden. ms. clinton: i remember being in the situation room with president obama debating the potential bin laden operation. the president's advisers were divided. the intelligence was compelling but far from definitive, and the risks of failure were daunting. the stakes were significant for our battle against al qaeda and our relationship with pakistan. most of all, the lives of seals andf those brave navy seals helicopter pilots hung in the balance. it was a decision only a president could make, and when

he did, it was as crisp and courageous a display of leadership as i have ever seen. now, imagine donald trump sitting in the situation room, making life or death decisions on behalf of the united states. [boos] imagine him deciding whether to spend your spouses or children into battle. imagine if he had not just his twitter account at his disposal when he is angry, but america 's entire arsenal. do we want him making those calls, someone thin-skinned and quick to anger who lashes out at the smallest criticism? do we want his finger anywhere near the button? audience: no! john: we heard the audience, practically rehearsed, helping her along and loved it. who do you think she was trying to reach with this speech?

kasie: a couple groups. one, some of the never trump national security elites like david french and bill kristol. those types, not that they will get on the hillary clinton train, but there might be people out there willing to listen to this message, that hillary clinton is the experienced, steady foreign-policy hand. i think security moms, suburban women. sometimes suburban women have been late to break for hillary. that happened in the senate in 2000. this is one way they think they can win them over earlier. i also think, potentially, there are some republican white men may might be able to win over with this. i think they know that is probably not a group they will do well with, but there are mayba few. this would be the argument they would be susceptible to. mark: she seemed extraordinarily

confident today and she referred to donald trump throughout as "donald." what do you make of that? casey: i was asking about that, because it is dismissive. she has always said governor romney or senator mccain. somebody told me that it seems sycophantic to say mr. trump. that was a deliberate decision they made to put this on an even playing field. it is something we did not see republicans do much of in the primary. john: i just have to say to you really quick, barack obama yesterday, hillary clinton today, that looked like a formidable 1-2 punch. just in terms of going after him. mark: when we come back, we go 500 miles north of san diego to silicon valley. right after this. ♪

john: in advance of tuesday's california primary, we thought we would do a little catch up on silicon valley, not the hbo program, although we are always pulling for pied piper. we mean the real silicon valley, which over the last couple of decades has grown into quite a , political force. this year though, something seems a little bit off. the tech hub has not warmed up to any presidential candidate so far. to understand why, we might need a little history lesson. >> silicon valley front and center again. here's what happened. 1939, hewlett and packard start hewlett-packard in a garage. more stuff happens. things get invented. the internet. the valley explodes.

1990,helps bill clinton. clinton helps the family -- helps the valley. >> he passed nafta, the 1996 telecommunications act. >> 2000, the valley is split. they like gore. >> bush. >> i will get the best scientific and technological advice from leaders in your field. >> silicon valley helps obama. 2008, obama helped silicon valley. >> top executives from google visited the obama administration 128 times. >> the valley comes to the swamp. >> palo alto-based facebook's washington and easy. finals,, talk about the not so much about the race. >> clinton has always had a hard time. >> among your friends in silicon valley, how many of them are trump supporters? >> none of them overtly. >> except for the skype. >> peter thiel is now backing donald trump. >> others give up on earth entirely.

>> spacex ceo elon musk said he wanted to send humans to mars by 2025. mark: it's a huge moment, because for the first time since silicon valley mattered in politics, they don't have a candidate. john: it's certainly true. silicon valley, the politics there -- there are some libertarian elements. there are some left of center, some right of center. there are not a lot of far left and not a lot of conventional far right. donald trump's approach to global economics is not going to fly with a lot of the business community, particularly with export oriented companies and tech leaders. mark: and he picked fights with 3 of the biggest leaders in the valley. john: and then you have hillary clinton. we talk about the absence of her economic message. they loved bill clinton and the information superhighway. and of course, they love barack

obama. but hillary clinton is on the wrong side of uber. she is not beloved. they are wondering what to do. mark: she does not have an authentic connection to their products. she is not someone who loves the things they do. she has been able to raise a ton of money without having the fingertip feel. donald trump hasn't had to raise money. now they both need silicon valley, and they both need the image of silicon valley. even though they are not as politically potent as they were, they are still one of america's leading industries. california, technology, they are the huge part of the future. there is nothing like it in america. john: we've said this a few times about clinton and trump.

neither of them is running a forward-looking-future campaign right now. the most attractive thing about marco rubio's campaign was talking about the an economy of the future. both of these candidates, i don't know that they see the value in it, let alone being able to capture it. mark: quite a change of the last few cycles. coming up, our colleague mike bender joins us to talk about paul ryan's op-ed piece and more. ♪

john: we are joined now by the washington post's chief correspondent. and here in studio, we have mike bender.

dan, i would like to start with you because you are the dean, after all. tell us what you think about hillary clinton's broadside, sustained broadside against donald trump on foreign policy today. dan: she has had some bad days during this campaign. this is definitely not one of them. she was warming to this task long before she got up there to give the speech. it was a very tough speech mocking in all sorts of ways. she was clearly trying not just to disqualify trump, but to get under his skin in every possible way. he will respond tonight, no doubt, in ways only he can. but she defined the day with that speech. john: mike, you have followed both sides of this campaign. what does trump need to do to be more presidential? how does he meet this particular challenge on foreign-policy from

her and rise to the bait without rising to the bait? mike: that is something he has been promising to do for months now, and he cannot get out of this right. look at the last months of his campaign. it is one disaster after another. this news conference the other day, reports in the new york times about his treatment of women. dan's colleagues getting audio of him pretending to be his own spokesman. one thing after another. there are eight or nine instances of this, and i think that's what we saw clinton trying to do, trying to feed into that today, trying to get under his skin. if past is prologue, she will be successful. mark: you spoke to one of the top republican fundraisers involved in the trump rnc effort. of how does sense he or she think things are going? mike: they are excited about the

possibility of trump as a candidate and his ability to market himself. they are uneasy the structure of the campaign. the general chaos within the campaign. trump has been talking about raising a billion dollars. they are nowhere near that. fred malic told me he doubts they can do half of that. trump is not doing fundraisers every day. say what you want about jeb bush, but every time he was sitting down for breakfast, lunch, dinner, he was raising six figures. trump has not done many fundraisers himself. they can't schedule him a week out. they don't know which super pac's to help. there is a sense of frustration. mark: dan, trump has created a lot of excitement by being roughly even in national polls. how much of the structural problems, like donor concerns can be cured simply by paul ryan , saying he is endorsing trump?

dan: i think ultimately, that is of limited value. as you said earlier, this was inevitable and to be expected. it took longer than it might have for reasons ryan is best able to explain, but i think ultimately no one doubted he would be on board. there are any number of evil who don't have the responsibility paul ryan has to be a supporter of donald trump who are still holdouts. those holdouts still exist. the money is a concern obviously. the structural issues in the campaign are still a factor. as mike pointed out, there are a lot of things he has to worry about. he will take comfort in these polls, and understandably so, but i think he cannot simply be complacent. it has felt as though he has

been somewhat off stride the last couple of weeks given everything that has been coming at him. and perhaps not customarily so. one way or another, what we see from him in the next few weeks will be telling. as we know, this is a defining period in the campaign, what happens now between now and the convention will be very, very important. john: is #nevertrump dead? as we suggested earlier? is there anything left of it? mike: i think #nevertrump has been dead for quite a long time since it was essentially trying to prop up rubio in florida. i am not sure what kind of success they would have had anyway. you look back at 2012, the closest state was florida, decided by 1%. gary johnson, who is getting some buzz now, got less than .5% in florida. someone short of a major name,

it's hard to make any impact on his races. mark: between now and the california primary, the clintons plan to spend a little time there. is the clinton campaign building up the stakes too much, or do they have to go for the win? dan: i think the stakes have been built by everything around it. sanders has raised the stakes by barnstorming california for the last several weeks. the clinton campaign knows she goes over the top in new jersey before california's results are in, but they don't want to lose the state. they know it would be another dent in her candidacy. so, the stakes are there, and she is going to try to come through with a victory. john: the great mike bender. the great dan balz. always awesome to see you both. when we come back, our crash curse on youth -- crash course on trump university with new york's attorney general.

♪

john: donald trump says he wants to make america great again. some very famous bands want to make america rage again. they even have a hat. tonight, we went to introduce you to a super group that calls itself "the profits of -- " prophets of rage" which includes members from rage against the machine, public enemy, and cyprus hill. between them, they have sold more than 20 million albums. they are among the most outspoken and provocative political acts in heavy metal and hip-hop. they decided they had to do something to disrupt the election cycle.

on monday, they unveiled themselves on kroq, and then performed a concert at the whiskey a go-go. mark and i were lucky enough to access to alusive day in the late, which they revealed the cornerstone of their grand plan of electoral mischief making, staging a raucous concert in cleveland during the republican convention. >> 106.7 kroq, this is the kevin and bean show at 7:00. you have to be at the whiskey at 10:00 a.m. to get a wristband. >> dude overwhelmed with epicness. this is the best $20 i have ever spent. >> hey, man, john. tom, this super band is your idea, right? >> i made the first call to chuck. >> what we want to present is

songs that are timeless. they are beyond us as individuals. there is an atmosphere we want to confront. john: why now? >> our nation and our world is on the brink of electoral insanity at home and environmental insanity around the globe. >> there is no music with substance that speaks to this. mark: what is the state of the union? >> martin luther king famously said there is no hotter place in hell than for people who remain neutral in times of moral conflict. this is a time of moral conflict. we are escaping the hot pit of hell from bringing some rock 'n roll hip-hop fury. >> ♪ clear the way

prophets of rage ♪ [applause] >> the last time rage against the machine played in los angeles, we out through trump, sanders, and clinton by a margin of 3-1, so i think the general electorate is ready for our message. strong half.y [laughter] john: you guys have three big catalogs to draw from, rage, public enemy, cyprus. you also have your own music. >> we have a song of the time called "the party's over." >> i think the message conveys that we are done with the lies told to us for our votes. the party is over. we are standing up and making

our voices known. ♪ the party's over ♪ >> the two-party system has been over for a long time. we have to come up with something for the 21st century that makes sense to the new generation in the voting marketplace. john: do you see a difference between the republican and democratic parties? >> not really. i never have. ♪ john: trump, clinton, sanders, why is this unprecedented? you have said this is an unprecedented moment in history. >> it is unprecedented. one of the things that has irked me greatly is the way the media has talked about the trump campaign and the sanders campaign as both of them raging against the machine.

we are going to set the record straight about what it really means to rage against the machine. both of those campaigns have tapped into something real. people right, left, and center believe the system as it currently stands does not serve their needs. but what they are being offered through a tiny funnel of the is a racist demagogue on one hand, and a great dreamer on the other hand, and the middle is the lesser of three evils. none of those choices are good enough. john: that would be hillary clinton? >> yes, there needs to be an alternate voice that stands unapologetically with the people. john: what are you doing in july? >> there's this thing called the republican national convention in july. that will be a perfect place like "prophets of rage" to be. john: so you have a venue? >> we have a venue, and some things might be spontaneous. it is hard to say.

this is the thing that you don't broadcast to the local authorities. [laughter] john: this is not a tentative thing. you are going to be there. >> we will be rocking fiercely in and around the rnc. >> will you be in philadelphia? >> anything is possible. we are figuring it out. mark: at the end of of four days, if you have raged most effectively, what will of happened? >> timmy c will have gotten the nomination. [laughter] ♪ mark: fluency some of your -- let's see some of your acceptance speech. >> you're going to get your --- whooped. ♪ >> my view is that progressive, radical, revolutionary change comes from below, not above.

even if you stake all of your hopes for your family on hope, sometimes that doesn't work out. if you stake them on this xenophobic, fear-based racism, this is not going to work out either. the underlying problems are systemic. the problems we have been running for decades attacks the system, not the individual candidates. change starts at the kitchen table, the classroom, wherever people gathered to talk about making the world what they wanted to be. >> here is the thing. songs travel the world. how would you like your country to be looked at from the outside looking in? because these songs are going to be played worldwide with the rest of the planet looking in. something has to be done. what better thing than music? ♪ ♪ rock on

♪ [applause] prophets of rage. we love y'all. john: our thanks to everyone who made that piece possible. we will be right back with new york's attorney general, eric schneiderman, and the civil lawsuit he is bringing against trump university. right after this. ♪

john: i am joined now by a man who donald trump has said is "disliked by practically everybody." honestly it could be a lot worse.

it's the attorney general of new york, eric schneiderman, to talk about a civil lawsuit that you have now pending against trump university. let's say this wasn't donald trump. how big a cases this in the scheme of your office? >> we have brought cases against different for-profit universities before. this is part of a broader investigation. more than 5000 people were ripped off for millions of country -- millions of dollars. mark: across the country? >> yes. in new york, 600 or 700 people were victims of the scheme. they held them out to be a new york university. it was never registered or certified to call yourself a university. we brought the suit in 2013, long before anyone thought he would be the republican nominee for president. it has nothing to do with politics, it's just a straight up fraud case. he made a case that he would teach people his personal secrets to get rich in real estate.

he had nothing to do with the curriculum. the president of the university has testified to that under oath. so has he. it's a pretty straightforward fraud case, but now he has entered the political scene, so it has gotten a different level of attention. for whatever reason he has , decided to attack me and the judge in the parallel case in california, so we have entered the debate. john: you were involved in a tangential way with the clinton campaign, correct? >> i endorsed her a long time ago. john: this is part of trump's argument, that this is really political. but he also gave money to you at some point, right? >> yes, after i won the democratic primary in 2010, he gave me $12,500. john: so, just to address trump's view that this is all happening because of politics, do you have political motives?

>> we started this suit in 2013 and there is nothing going on then. there were thousands of victims. we were talking about people that in hard times bought this pitch. singing myeos of him , handpicked experts will tell you my personal secrets. you can learn what i learned in a lifetime in a weekend seminar. we know from sworn testimony that he gave, that the president of the university gave, that he did not pick the instructors. he did not write the curriculum, so they were not his secrets. people fought that it was a university. the new york state department of education says you have to stop calling yourself a university. it was a scam from beginning to end. we have brought a lot of fraud cases against people holding themselves to be lawyers that are defrauding immigrants, other

for-profit colleges. this is what we do. mark: what evidence do you have, if any, that is not part of the public record yet? >> in our case, most of what we have is in the public record. some stuff is sealed in the california class-action, although the judge in that case recently announced he was unsealing other portions of it. we have the playbooks, the scripts for the instructors, who were pitch men. they are clearly designed to get people to spend as much money on trump seminars as possible, and we have transcripts of the seminars themselves. it's nothing secret. mark: he has said he doesn't want to settle and he won't, but if you came to you, what would be a just settlement in this case? >> he has to pay back the people he ripped off and pay the fines assessed by the state of new york. you can't allow people to run around saying, this is the halperin university, halperin hospital, law firm.

we have laws about that. regard the integrity -- we guard the integrity of our institutions. mark: you said it was not a university. from your point of the, it should have been shut out from the first day. >> it was. we have the record, and this was all before the courts. again, these cases have been pending for years. there have been motions made. all of the arguments trump makes have been rejected by the courts. he has lost virtually everything in a set of motions decided earlier this year in our case. we have records of him sending deceptive records to the state department of education. we are moving to another state. we are changing the way we do business. at one point, there was a physical forced entry into their offices because they claimed they were not in new york. this is all before the courts. john: you have not deposed trump at this point. >> no, and we don't need to because we have his deposition in the california case. we deposed the president of the university. other employees and students

have been deposed. we can use their sworn testimony. we are ready to go to trial. john: you don't think you need to. would anything change her mind to bring trump in? >> at this point, we are ready to proceed without deposing him. the judge has indicated she wants a trial with live witnesses. he is taking a last appeal to the highest court in new york. once that is decided, we are ready to go. thank you to the attorney general. don't forget, if you're watching us in washington, d.c., you can listen to us on 99.1 fm radio. we will be back with who we think will win in california, after this. ♪

mark: nba finals begin tonight. cavs, warriors, who have you got? john: it's going to be great.

a better series than last year when these two teams met. i still have the warriors, and i will tell you why. watch the way they played in the fourth quarter of game six. that elimination game against oklahoma city, that's the championship team. mark: they are a great team, but i believe they will lose. i'm going against the conventional wisdom, cavs are going to win. john: you are a lebron guy deep down. mark: long live the king. john: head to bloombergpolitics.com to look at the push to bring robert mercer into a yet to be formed super pac for trump. and coming up on bloomberg west, cory johnson, the great cory johnson speaks with the ceoof box. we will see you tomorrow. until then, sayonara. ♪

♪ rishaad: it is friday. it is the third of june. i am rishaad salamat. and you're watching "trending business". ♪ live in singapore and tokyo this hour. brent arising above $50 for the first time since november. price acceptable in the first half of next year. interested in the fe