erik: coming up on "bloomberg best," the stories that shaped the week in business around the world. trade tensions escalate. the u.s. and china go tit for tat on tariffs. >> they are in this for the long haul and they are playing hardball. >> i don't believe we will have an all-out trade war. >> this is not a trade war, there is no war here. erik: the new york fed names a will new leader. his counterpart in atlanta offers exclusive clues on the path for monetary policy. >> i think we're getting closer to the lower bound. at that point i think we need to wait and see and see how the market responds. erik: spotify goes public, amazon comes under fire from the white house. it is a challenging time for tech and facebook's sheryl

sandberg puts it in perspective. >> security is always an arms race. you build, they try to misuse. you build, they try to misuse in a different way. erik: it is all straight ahead on "bloomberg best." erik: hello and welcome, i am erik schatzker. this is "bloomberg best," your weekly review of the most important business news analysis and interviews from bloomberg television around the world. the world's two largest economies spent much of the last month circling the ring and the -- in the world's one true heavyweight battle over trade. the latest round began monday with a jab from china. ♪>> china hits back. the country's previously announced tariffs on 128 u.s. goods take effect today. that is in response to the trump administration's tariffs on steel and aluminum.

china is urging more trade talks with the u.s. to prevent greater damage to relations and the white house just said that china should not target fairly traded u.s. goods. >> this is china's response to the steel and aluminum tariffs. we are waiting on the u.s. publication of what the u.s. is going to single out for tariffs in terms of intellectual property. the chinese did, along with the tariffs that they put into effect today, say we would rather do this through negotiation than through confrontation. >> we certainly find ourselves in what seems to be the middle of a storm right now. we don't know if it will blow over or if it will actually pick up and get worse from here. i think what we have seen from the markets today obviously is that they are being jolted around by some of this news. i think they got quite used to and got quite a thick skin to some of the rhetoric from trump in his first year, but little action on the trade front. now we see a lot of action both from the u.s. side and the chinese side, and we can see that reflected in the markets right now. >> there is the finish for the first session of the second quarter.

it has been a tough one. the dow lower, just shy by 2%. the nasdaq erasing gains that we have seen for the year as well. >> a new leader for the new york fed. san francisco president john williams is coming east. this is beginning june 18. >> john williams is a widely respected monetary economist. he has been the president of the san francisco fed, has a doctorate in economics from stanford. he is an expert in monetary policy, but the new york fed announced that it was going to have a very wide, broad and diverse search for a different kind of leader and they ended up with another white male. that is going to raise some question. also, when the committee says when you put up a list of the things that you need in a president, john williams stood out far and above all the other candidates. including in making diversity work. >> he pioneered the neutral rate

concept which is key to monetary policy now. a proponent of the inflationary targets, he has been looking at price level target, for example. the biggest rap against john williams? he is not a banker. he lacks market expertise, his entire career at the fed or in academia and of course, this is an important position because the new york fed oversees these big banks. >> overnight, we had an exchange of trade sanctions between the united states and china, with the u.s. moving forward on tariffs on $59 billion in chinese imports including things like semi conductors, lithium batteries, tv components and china came right back and said we will find $50 billion that we can put tariffs on and those tariffs included things like soybeans and aircrafts and automobiles and chemicals. >> let's give the chinese some credit here. they've really done their research and knew exactly where to put these tariffs to cause the most pain for donald trump's constituents.

so soybeans are a big factor in iowa and a lot of the states that donald trump won in the last election. so they are being very strategic. the chinese have a very long-term view. they are in this for the long haul and they're playing hardball. >> they pulled out all the stops. people did not expect them to go with soybeans, such a huge trade and one that is so important to china as well. it affects them if they don't have that access to u.s. soybeans. it is $14 billion per year. from the rhetoric we are hearing, it seems to be a ploy to try and get the u.s. to come and talk. >> it is one of the days where markets and politics are mixing big-time. it has been a rocky ride after a sharp drop at the open. stocks have been crawling back throughout the day. >> the treasury market was calm in reaction to this. the credit market was calm in reaction to this. even the dollar was calm. so what we really had was that there was a bit of risk reevaluation within the equity

space, but long-term, most of what we knew was going to happen has pretty much happened. >> stocks in the green but, oh boy, are they volatile as 700 points for the dow. the bond market simply watched. ♪ >> the world's two biggest economies showing willingness to come to the negotiating table. investors seeing the tariffs as more rhetoric than reality. >> i think right now we are locked in a traditional game of chicken. >> there is no trade war. there is no trade peace either. >> we can call it a trade battle, a trade discussion as opposed to an actual war. >> apparently, a lot of people needed larry kudlow to state the obvious. the white house said yesterday remember, none of the tariffs have been put in place. these are all proposals. >> it is a game of chicken for both sides because they wanted to have the other side believe that it is a credible threat while at the same time not scaring investors. we have the same sort of reaction from larry kudlow from the chinese investment to the u.s.

he said that negotiations would still be our preference, but it takes two to tango. we will always stand for consultation and negotiation but -- if others do things in the wrong direction, we will have to respond to. >> larry kudlow was on a mission to calm concerns surrounding tariffs and trade. >> here in the u.s., we will it out for comment for a couple of months. i don't want to pinpoint a deadline. that is bob lighthizer's area. i would just say that nothing is around the corner. there will be a big discussion of that. >> is it a bad cop, good cop situation where larry kudlow is the good cop and bob lighthizer s the bad cop? >> there is been intense pushback from republicans on capitol hill. he went on to state that he believes and the administration believes that the relationship between the united states and china has been so taken advantage of by the chinese that they feel that this type of back-and-forth is just an opening bid.

♪ >> the united states and china ramped up their trade rhetoric overnight, with president trump calling for new tariffs on another $100 billion of imports from china. the chinese government responding it will "follow suit until the end, no matter the price." >> the thinking among analysts and economists is that china may move beyond the world of tariffs and into the will of nontariff barriers. so they may target orders for existing u.s. goods from chinese firms, or they may target existing u.s. investment in china. there is a sense that we are now going into uncharted territory. >> this is a moderate, tempered approach that we are taking. it is moderate, temperate and proportional. this is not a trade war, there is no war here. blame china for not playing ball. don't blame the president. he is standing up for american companies and businesses. that is my take. i don't see how i could communicate that more clearly.

>> the economy adding 103,000 jobs in march, missing the economists estimate. the unemployment rate holding steady at 4.1%. average hourly earnings rising by 2.7% and matching estimates. >> i think this is a weakish type of report. i think this would make for a more cautious fed, especially in light of the global trade situation that we see on an overnight basis. we're just going to have to see. but i think that the fed will be cautious going forward. my forecast has always been for a one or two hike 2018 type of year. >> fed chair jerome powell speaking at economic hub of chicago. his comments come as we head to the back end of the session. he did reiterate that further gradual rate hikes best promote the fed's goals here. >> this is where the has been in the one question was about the tariffs.

he said it was too early to tell. we can know what the impact is going to be. he mentioned that some business contacts are telling them that it could be a problem and that some of the uncertainty is weighing on them. and that you can never tell why the stock market is anything, but my guess is that are some people that were hoping this talk in washington of upsetting the economy might lead the fed to back off. he basically said we are steady. > we are holding the line. erik: still ahead as we review the week on "bloomberg best," more on trade tensions from leaders and policy and finance, how bad would a trade war be for the global economy? plus, raphael bostic of the atlanta fed and facebook chief operating officer sheryl sandberg. elon musk made an april fools joke on twitter, but there's nothing funny about tesla's production problems. >> you know the problem is not in need of your heroics, it is in need of process.

erik: this is bloomberg. ♪

erik: this is "bloomberg best." i am erik schatzker. let's continue our global tour of the week's top business stories with e-commerce giant amazon. again, it is the target of a twitter fusillade from the white house. >> president trump has upped his attacks on amazon in a fresh round of tweets this morning, saying only fools or worse believe our post office makes money with amazon. they lose a fortune. this will be changed. also, our fully taxpaying retailers are closing stores all over the country -- not a level playing field. marco rubio has weighed in, supporting the president and saying economic monopolies will equire close monitoring.

under existing antitrust laws, could the justice department go after amazon? >> i think under the existing laws it would be very difficult. it would be an uphill climb. the laws and the body of law as cases have gone to the court really sets a high bar and difficult standards to prove that a company is a monopolist as contemplated under the antitrust laws. that is why you see some calls, primarily by democrats, for a change in laws or a reassessment of the antitrust laws to better apply, the way they would say it, to this kind of companies. >> april fools. after the worst month for tesla in more than seven years, elon musk jokes that his electric carmaker has gone bankrupt. the ceo tweeting "despite intense efforts to raise money, including a last-ditch sale of easter eggs, we are said to -- sad to report that tesla has gone completely and totally bankrupt." that is what he tweeted.

>> it is not funny for the tesla investor right now. there is a widespread expectation that the company will not meet their forecast for ending the first quarter making about 2500 model 3 city sedans per week. more importantly, the idea is that even if they get close to that number, there is a lot of skepticism about the production surge that they mounted at the end of the quarter being at all sustainable going forward. >> tesla shares rebounding today. the stock rising as much as 8% before closing the day up nearly 6% in the end. it fell short of its self-imposed production target for the model 3 but analysts say tesla's performance wasn't as bad as feared. is that good enough? >> no, it is not good enough. not as bad as feared was, a couple of dozen production units for the month as far as we know. this is a plant that at this point, if it was in full production, should be doing at least 10,000 units per

month. so not as bad as we thought it might be. but look, when musk himself is indicating he will solve the problem by sleeping on the factory floor if that is what it takes, you know the problem is not in need of heroics, it is in need of process. i think what has happened is production of model threes started too to early and it is showing up in quality and low quantity and i think that will bite him because it will be very hard for them to come back from a poor start on this model. ♪ >> spotify made its public debut today with an opening price on the new york stock exchange at $165.90. the music service launched their alternative ipo on a day tech stocks have been rocked by uncertainty. the stock went as high as $169, it has come back down a little bit from those prices. but what kind of price action did spotify want to see on the opening day?

what have you heard from the company about how pleased they are about this? >> i rounded up my sources to get their benchmark for what a successful first they would mean. they said they didn't want a lot of volatility in the stocks. they wanted this to have not had a big pop or fall from the opening price. the stock did sell off there in the latter part of the day from that opening price. talking to my sources, they said supply would be a potential issue. at the open, only about 5.6 million shares changed hands. throughout the day, it's about 28 million, which is not a ton. this is a stock that has over 100 million shares. 170 million shares that are treatable because there is no lockup. a small volume is setting this $26 billion valuation here for spotify and if and when these shareholders decide to sell down the road to inject a bit more volatility that they don't want to see in the stock.

♪ >> time for a bloomberg exclusive. apple is planning its own chips in mac computers starting as early as 2020. the move would take processes from intel. >> it is a significant move or apple. it is very much a defining moment for the company. it is them saying we don't need a partner anymore to do the main engines in our most expensive, fastest computers. we will be able to do it ourselves. apple has never been a company that wants to stick to other people's roadmaps. they want to do things their way. this will very much allow for that going forward. >> apple is pressing into the future. he company is working to bring touchless control and curved screens to their iphones. curved screens? >> yes. >> what is this? >> we have seen this already with samsung. relatively speaking, all smartphones look the same.

each smartphone maker probably needs to try to push the boundaries a little bit. the issue apple has is is that the leader in the screen technology is samsung. apple buys a lot of its screens from samsung, which is the competitor, so it is playing catch-up. apple said many times they don't always want to be first in the market for something, but they tried to be best. >> we heard from facebook's mark zuckerberg yesterday on a conference call with reporters and we learned that the cambridge analytica problem may be worse than we thought. investors are already weighing in on the consequences with a substantial reduction in the market cap of the company. something like $90 billion it has gone down. >> the stock is down 20% from its high. i think this whole issue -- it has affected the whole tech industry in general, but the whole issue of regulatory risk for these companies. what we are seeing from them as we talked to investors, the expectation is there will be an increased level of expenditures at the company to deal with data security.

so you will probably see margins in the near to intermediate term facing some margin pressure. however, what we have not seen -- and we heard from mark zuckerberg on this last night -- we have not seen any real issue on the revenue line. advertisers are still with the company. ♪ >> jamie dimon envisioning the amazon of wall street, the jp morgan ceo said in his annual letter that the bank could grow almost everywhere. wealth management, currencies, fixed incomes, consumer banking, investment banking, you name it. walk us through how big they want to be in all the different areas. >> absolutely. he had some pretty assertive plans for almost every division. for example, in investment banking, he saw for example in -- he saw growth around the world. for wealth management, he was to double his workforce or double his market share in certain areas. he actually ironically named amazon twice in the letter. i like that because he wants to be painted as the amazon of financial services. across the board, he certainly outlines risk to the financial system.

he also said he could grow in currencies, fixed income, places wall street has had issues the past couple of years. ♪ >> oligarchs are among those hit in the latest round of u.s. sanctions against russia. sanctions were levied against seven tycoons, including one who has been linked to former trump campaign manager paul manafort, also sanctioned, 12 companies, 17 government officials. deripaska stands out. the other names leaked to the forefront in the wake of these sanctions? >> the oligarchs, big names. >> victor vekleberger, the metals tycoon, and several other names that are a mixed bag of players that do not seem to be as close to the kremlin as others. i think the big shift here is until now, the u.s. had not sanctioned businessmen for being close to the kremlin as it was written into the law last year. this is the first wave of

targeting people close to the kremlin in the business sphere. ♪

♪ erik: welcome back to "bloomberg best." i'm erik schatzker. raphael bostic was named president of the federal reserve bank of atlanta last june. he is a voting member of the fomc this year. after the fed's march meeting, he envisioned as few as two and as many as four rate hikes in 2018. he sat down this week for an exclusive conversation with michael mckee. ♪ >> i do think that there was an initial expectation about inflation at the beginning of this year that got priced in. we have kind of backed off that a little bit. i think some of it is priced in,

but i think also the markets are doing the same thing we are, trying to wait and see what the numbers come in at and the dynamics around it to make an assessment about where inflation is. >> the pce headline last month was already at 1.8%. how soon do we get to or go over 2%? how far over 2% would you be willing to go, and for how long? >> i think as you said, the trend is going in the right direction. i think we would hit 2% sometime in the next quarter or two. i am actually very comfortable going above the 2% to some amount, 2.2% or 2.3%. i do think that is a crisis of overheating necessarily. and i think it is also important that we take a stance to say -- so that everyone understands the 2% level is an average and not a feeling. i have some concerns that we have been below for so long that if we go to 2% and do a hard stop and act aggressively to hold it at 2%, that will send a signal that we really need 2% as a ceiling.

i think that would be unfortunate and not helpful in terms of where we want inflation expectations to be. >> you have said maybe you expect two more rate increases to get us to neutral and then pause and see where we are. ut what is neutral to you? >> for me i think neutral is somewhere in the 2.25% and the 2.75% range. for the fed funds rate. a lot of the baseline analysis that we have done suggests that your risk-free rate is pretty low right now and it has dropped over time. i think we are getting close to the lower bounds of where i view neutral to be. at that point, i think we need to wait and see how the market esponds. we have been in an expansionary and accommodating position for a long time. i think getting us back to neutral is something that is a priority. it should be a priority. and so i think the fed funds level, we are in a good place on that trajectory.

we are also unwinding the balance sheet to a more neutral position as well. i think that will be quite helpful. >> are you seeing the neutral rate move up as the economy strengthens? >> it is possible. that is something we are definitely going to look at carefully to make sure that we understand how these dynamics play out. i think that as the economy strengthens, as inflation gets higher, there is a possibility that free rates could increase. but we will wait and see how that plays out. ♪ erik: coming up on "bloomberg best," more of the week's top business stories. including plenty of merger talk and a little action. plus, are the u.s. and china really entering a trade war? we have expert insight from around the globe. and emily chang talks with facebook's sheryl sandberg at a critical moment for the social media colossus. >> i feel deeply personally responsible because there are real mistakes that we made and that i made. erik: this is bloomberg.

♪

erik: you are watching ♪ "bloomberg best." i'm erik schatzker. the topic of trade once again dominated the discussion on bloomberg television this week. from the impact on national economies to the uncertain future of nafta, let's revisit some of the most provocative conversations, starting with henry mcveigh. he gave me his view of the u.s.-china situation. ♪ erik: it is pretty clear the market thinks the trade war is bad. what do you think? henry: it is friction in an economy where we have been trying to have orders coming down. that is what technology is about.

that is what china integrating into the global economy, going all the way back to wto in 2001. i don't believe we are going to have an all-out trade war. my view is that global trade actually peaked in 2007. nobody is talking about that as a percentage of gdp. it went up from 1984 to 2007 and since the great financial crisis it has been shrinking. i think that is one point to take into consideration. second is that i think this is really about the u.s. was comfortable win china was the exporter to the world on low-end manufacturing and low-end goods. since they announced their china 2025 plan in 2015, they have been moving up into the value-added goods. that is a threat to u.s. intellectual property and it means they in source more. that is what they are trying to do to create a larger domestic economy. some of this, to me, is not unexpected. president trump was on the tape

saying when you look at the u.s. trade deficit, about 80% comes from two countries, mexico and china. within china, it is two things, technology and apparel. if you believe my thesis, the u.s. is not going to do anything on apparel, which they announced today, and within technology, they are allowing no tariffs on personal computers, which is the low-end, but they have gone after things like semi conductors at the high end. so i really think it is about the high end. i think this is an opening salvo. i think we have entered a new era between china and the u.s., but i'm not expecting this to be what you saw announced in the past 24 hours to be the endgame. i think it is opening of negotiations. >> it is unfortunate that trade tensions are arriving just at this moment, when global recovery is being supported by trade. for the first time in a long time, trade is growing faster than global gdp, and in that way

it is spreading recovery around the world. the trade tensions, one has to understand, they arise because people feel as though trade is unfair and trade advantages are being gained by other countries, and that is being -- causing them dislocation. we have to understand the dissatisfaction leading to these trade actions has a reason. at the same time, we think that the differences of view should be settled through a cooperation and through dialogue, and that is the way to make sure that trade continues to grow, that market access increases, but on a fair basis, and that way everyone can still gain. ♪ >> do you think the administration's approach to china has been a smart one so far on chinese trade? >> what i know best is agriculture. agriculture has had -- you have to go back to the 1950's when agriculture did not have a

surplus in trade to the united states. agriculture has been the backbone of trade the united states. you start a trade war with china, agriculture will lose. that is what i believe. they are an important market to us. and as far as i can comment on agriculture, i think that it could be very hurtful to u.s. companies and the u.s. farmers. >> obviously, we have watched investors scratch their heads about the additional announcements both from the united states and china. what do you think the clients are saying at this moment, and what are clients saying to you? >> clients want to know the uncertainty that tariffs and the prospect of trade protectionism posed to the outlook. is that something they should be counting as a downside risk that counteract the upside tailwind we are getting from fiscal policy? of course, it's difficult to quantify exactly what kind of economic output

impact at this point that talk about trade protectionism is having. if they follow through what impact that might have on gdp. there are effects that can impact the economic outlook, even if they don't follow through. all of this uncertainty, all of the market volatility, even if you don't have any skin in the game -- say you are an average american who doesn't have stocks and bonds. you are looking at markets and that uncertainty, and you have your finger on the pulse of the stock market each day saying geez, is my firm going to hire? is my job secure? what is going on with the u.s.? volatility can affect every merican household. >> should european union officials square with trump in trying to get a better deal of china? >> yes. as far as the intellectual property, i think they have to,

because there have been several examples of chinese companies stealing intellectual property. a couple of years ago, they have a lot of examples about how intellectual property has been stolen. machines have been shipped to china, put under a different brand, and this is clearly illegal. if china wants to be the adults in the room,it has to talk like one and behave like one. tom: what will bring discipline o the president's message? can larry do it or does the dollar bring discipline to the message? >> i'm not sure they will be able to convince them to change tack on protectionism in china. if anything, some of them are economic nationalists and

security hawks. i think the discipline will eventually come from the markets. we have seen how this rise of trade tension has led to a significant market correction, 10% from the peak in the last month or so. and if this trade tension were to escalate, you will have more of a correction. a large part of the equity market has been wiped out by inaction on china. so at the end of the day, i think there will be more market discipline rather than his own advisors. it will force him to change tack. erik: this week, we learned if the privacy lapses of facebook are even worse than initially reported. the social media company said its data on as many as 87 million users may have been improperly shared with research firm cambridge analytica. bloomberg technology's emily chang discuss the biggest ever crisis to hit facebook with its chief operating officer, sheryl sandberg. >> this is going to be a long process.

we are systematically looking at all the ways facebook data is used. we are going to tell you about them. we will shut them down. and this is a forever process. security is always an arms race. you build, they tried to misuse, you build, they tried to misuse a new way. we are committed to this for the long run. emily: has mark has personally aken responsibility? how much do you feel personally responsible? sheryl: i feel deeply personally responsible. there were real mistakes that we made and i made. when you take a step back and think about what has happened, for a long time, we were focused on building social experiences. and a lot of good happened because of those. when we found problems, we would shut down that problem. so the specific case of the friends of friends sharing that happened with cambridge analytica, that was shut down. what we didn't do until recently

and what we are doing now is just take a broader view, looking to be more restrictive in ways data could be misused. we also didn't build our operations fast enough. and that is on me. we had 10,000 people working in security at the beginning of the year. at the end of this year alone, we will more than double the 20,000. we are massively investing in smart technology, and we are doing all of this to make sure we get to a place where we can proactively protect people's data. emily: facebook has constructed a model that leverages personal data that users share with facebook, and you are the chief architect of that. assuming the business model will evolve as a result of the changes, how will that impact the bottom line and profitability? sheryl: we have never run this company for short-term gains, and we have never run this company to maximize profits. we have run it for the long term health of our community and business. we announced two quarters ago in earnings that these investments are big and will impact

profitability. that is ok with us. it's the right thing to do. we want to make these investments. we will update at the next quarter. emily: mark has been asked if he's the right person to lead. do you believe he is? he says he is, do you agree? sheryl: i believe deeply in mark. mark had a vision for what social services and social sharing could be, and that vision remains important. mark, me, and all of us take full responsibility for what is happening, and we are making an important shift. we will keep building social products, because sharing is so important to people all over the world. and we are going to be much more proactive. i'm not going to sit here and say we won't find more problems. we will. we are going to continue to find problems. we will continue to shut down situations when we find them. and this is a forever thing. security is an arms race. this is something we are signed

up for not just now, but on an ongoing basis. erik: you are watching

"bloomberg best." i'm erik schatzker. let's resume our roundup of the week's top business headlines, with the big news on the big deals. media mogul rupert murdoch hopes regulators will approve his company's acquisition of a satellite broadcaster, sky. and he is enlisting disney's help in clearing that hurdle. >> disney ready to help 21st century fox acquire british broadcaster sky. disney, which is planning on buying most of fox's assets, has offered to purchase sky's news business to soothe concerns over murdoch's control over british news media. would this appease regulators? >> i think it will.

we have various options on the table from fox. they have offered to give sky news an independent editorial board and offered a separate company within sky. and we have the offer of disney buying sky news. so all the options are there, and this would be a pretty significant firewall between the murdochs and sky news. >> does this mean that the potential comcast bid is dead in the water? >> i don't think so. we are waiting for them to make their formal offer to sky. at the moment, it is an indicative offer. comcast is still in the game, but it does seem fox and disney, their bid is making progress. so comcast needs to get a move on with its own offer. ♪ >> in world news, walmart's health insurance, humana, said to be exploring a wide range of ffers, including a merger. >> it seems less likely that walmart would out and out buy humana and elect to strengthen

their existing partnership. they have already work together on insurance products and maybe do something to bring people into the walmart stores and build on what they have. >> what does that mean, exactly? there will not be multiple billions changing hands? how does that work? >> to be clear, we don't know what exactly these companies have planned. neither company has said anything public about what partnership might take. from what we are hearing from our sources, that's right. you would more likely have a joint venture or expansion of some existing partnerships rather than an outright deal. we are not saying that is off the table completely, but it seems less likely. >> sources tell us that cbs has submitted a bid on viacom, starting negotiation on the future of the two networks. we know cbs has made a below market bid and had ideas on management. it feels like they are either together, apart, or together again. what is going on?

>> right now, they are pretty far apart. going by the initial offer being ut in. the ceo of cbs, who has done a great things for the company, and sherry redstone, whose family business controls both companies, she didn't want it to become about the personnel. she really wanted this to be about the special committees of the two companies getting together to decide whether this with a merger worth its merit. now it has become about that, because it has come down to price and management. >> a food delivery giant in china closed a final agreement to acquire moabite. but what does this acquisition mean? >> the shareholders have approved this deal.

they will acquire fully the shares of mobike. existing investors of mobike will become investors in the other company as well. this will allow mobike to have existing managers to stay on. the ceo will also stay on. >> police in california say a woman shot and injured three people at youtube's headquarters before apparently killing herself. >> right now, what we know is that the election suspect is deceased of a self-inflicted gunshot wound. the police chief revealed that in a press conference this afternoon. the three victims are all alive, they are at at san francisco general hospital, one in critical condition. we do not know what was behind this, but it really does have everyone shaken. a lot of these buildings in silicon valley aren't well protected.

how can you protect against something like this? it is why the incident took a lot of people by sur♪ >> the u.k. is biggest country yet to try to address the gender pay gap. firms with at least 250 employees in britain have until today to report wage disparities. an expected 9000 companies are legally required to report the differences paid to male and female employees. what do they have to disclose? >> it's around 9000 companies. the last time i checked, bloomberg has a wonderful live graphic tracking all of this that you can look at on the website or the bloomberg. it seems like the great majority of firms have complied. what they have to disclose is the mean and median hourly pay for men and women, there for the -- therefore the difference between the pay of men and women, which would be expressed as a percentage. they will have to report the proportion of men and women being paid a bonus and the women and men in each pay quarter.

it hasn't shown how much a man and woman are paid comparatively for the same job, but it showed women are generally paid less. especially in the higher ranking roles. there is a real lack of women in the top paying roles. in fact, 19 out of 22 industries in the top paid quartile, less than 50% women. that was quite staggering, i thought. >> deutsche bank wants the former chief executive of merrill lynch to sit on its supervisory board. but what does the shakeup of the supervisory board mean for deutsche bank's direction? >> the names came out a couple of days ago in the press, and people had the time to kind of digest them. the feedback was not so great from the german analysts, certainly. people said zame is a symbol of the old world of finance.

the pre-financial crisis excesses and types. so that is one worry people had. other people might say that deutsche bank is deepening the bench of finance knowledge on its supervisory board. that could be a good thing to get a better grip on the kind of business is the bank does, the risk they will be doing and the changes coming for them. but we have to wait to hear more on that, really. >> deutsche bank investors scouting for a new chief executive. today, we have learned investors approached a former jpmorgan executive about taking the job. and we also learned investors talked to bank of america's christian meisner. does anyone want this job? >> we seem to be getting the sense that everybody is thinking oh, this will be a really, really hard job to do. if you look at how deutsche bank has been trading, they have had this whole turnaround plan.

last year at this time, they were talking about their big capital increase, they wanted to ipo their asset management unit. they have done all of those things. but it does still seem like they are lagging to their peers and their competitors in some of their biggest businesses like stocks and bonds trading, which is one of the biggest sources of income. it is down since 2015. >> samsung reported higher than expected profit for the first quarter, thanks to strong demand for its memory chip. operating income coming in at $14.7 billion. what contributed to those strong numbers? >> we are seeing broad demand for memory chips, which are used in smartphones. as well as increasingly in servers, the power of the cloud services we use. so that was really the main driver and continues to be for samsung. even after a lot of challenges

over the past year-and-a-half or so. ♪

>> we want to tell you about a ♪ great new function that allows you to see all of our recent charts on the bloomberg. it is called gtv go. you can catch up on all of the key analysis for future reference. erik: there are about 30,000 functions on the bloomberg. we always enjoying showing you our favorites on bloomberg television. maybe they will become your favorites. here's a function you will find useful.

quick go leads you to our quick takes. here is a quick take from this week. >> opec has functioned as the textbook cartel. the 14 members of the organization of petroleum exporting countries produce 40% of the oil used every day, giving strong influence over oil prices and the global economy. like a championship boxer who has dominated in the ring for decades. in its more than half a century of existence, opec has fought off challenges from new technologies and competition from petroleum discoveries outside of its members' domains. but the group is up against the ropes now, as the u.s. produces record supplies of fracked shale oil and the planet begins to mbrace renewable energy. to stave off the competition, opec has cut output. this strategy has succeeded in the past, but will it work now? here's the situation. production cuts by opec and its allies gave prices a quick boost when they were agreed upon in november 2016. but it didn't last.

the real question is whether opec can prop up prices when the u.s. continues to increase production by fracking deposits of shale oil. here is the argument. opec's agreement to cut output includes several nonmember countries, which should help it regain control over crude oil and prices. some forecasts suggest oil consumption will continue to rise in the next 20 years, which seemingly would benefit opec and its allies. it is unclear how opec's strategy will play out, even though oil has risen since june 2017. analysts are divided over whether the cartel would succeed in eliminating the supply glut that has affected prices for several years. plus, with increased innovation in renewable energy, oil consumption may peak sooner than expected. that could leave opec knocked down with no chance of getting back up. erik: that was just one of the many quick takes you can find on the bloomberg. you can also find them on bloomberg.com, along with all of the best business news and analysis, 24 hours a day.

that will be all for "bloomberg best" this week. thanks for watching. i'm erik schatzker. this is bloomberg. ♪ .

♪ david: are there many who said, i want to be the leading cellist in the world? yo-yo: so in music there is no such thing as this is the greatest anything, because it is about learning forever. david: what about where you play? yo-yo: you don't have to be there. i don't have to be there. so if we are going to spend time together, let's make it count. >> would you fix your tie, please? david: well, people wouldn't recognize me if my tie was fixed, but ok. just leave it this way. all right. ♪

david: i don't consider myself a