♪ emily: i am emily chang and this is the "best of bloomberg: technology." coming up, trade showdown. the simmering trade dispute between of the world's two largest economies is taking a toll on markets and the global supply chain. has the tech cold war already begun? and a fork in the road tesla continues to get pummeled. can the company weather the storm?

and amazon is working on a device that can recognize human emotions. is this the next breakthrough for voice recognition and ai? after months of predicting the trade deal, economists and financial institutions are growing increasingly estimates the -- pessimistic. the crackdown on huawei could make apples troubles in china even more difficult. they could take a big hit if china decides to retaliate. goldman sachs estimates a chinese band could cut earnings by 29%. joined to discuss. >> we think there is going to be an informal boycott of sorts. china is not fond of america right now and the trump administration because of how it will impact the economy.

when these kinds of things happen, you see them latch onto their own brands. , in many respects, is the apple of china, people love it there. if people had to choose, they might lead towards huawei because of the terrace in the strait situation -- tariffs in the trade situation. >> as someone running these numbers, we have heard tim cook blame the slowdown, to a certain tensionsbout the trade . how do you think this will affect the bottom line? >> i would agree 100% with what mark is saying about this boycott apple campaign that will start in china. but i want to put to rest some fears around trade tariffs and chinese putting that on apple products. i think that is unlikely.

we have recently spoken with a former u.s. trade official, and what is most important is even thepeople who understand intimate workings do not know how this will play out. but one thing that has been reiterated his that apple is an important partner for china. in total, about 3 million people's jobs are impacted by apple in mainland china. you know that captures a good headline about tariffs, i think it is unlikely it will happen. >> interesting perspective. seeing,om what you are we know that huawei has already preempted this. they have three months of supply and have managed to make sure they are stockpiling. been working on their supply chain? >> if apple is going to shake things up, it would take a

matter of years. 5-10 years for a full transition. apple's manufacturing in china is not as simple as popping iphones out of china through foxconn and shipping them out. it is this vast network of ,uppliers, not only in china but in taiwan, korea, other parts of asia. some stuff comes from the u.s., pretty much all over the world that is sourced and funneled into china. it is so much more than just one factory or a city. it is a vast array and all of those moving pieces pretty much make it impossible for any significant changes to occur. >> there is potentially some silver lining. that google's android operating system is going to be hit by no longer being able to do business with quality -- with huawei.

is there a way in which international demand could pick up for apples smartphones if the operating systems of higher end huawei is hit? >> for sure. apple is not as strong as some of the other makers. in the u.s., apple is obviously the strongest. but in china, we see a proliferation of brands. huawei has a, stronghold, 25% according to the latest statistics. so some customers will look for other devices. if you are in europe, you might not be going for chinese brands, you look at something like an iphone. from that perspective, apple has a lot of positivity. i just don't think it is going to move the needle. emily: mark gurman and gene munster. riggs spoke with the head of international

affairs at the u.s. chamber of commerce about the ongoing trade war and what he is hearing from u.s. businesses. >> look, a lot u.s. companies sell into huawei. it is an important company and operates in over 100 countries, over 180,000 employees. , it raises time legitimate concerns about security issues. we need to keep issues separate from the commercial trade talks. what i am saying is that, at the end of the day that we are concerned about the overall environment. that, but wes into should not be surprised the government is taking a close look at while ways -- at huawei's operations. taylor: i like that you set to separate the national security concerns relative to everything else. so let's go to everything else. we were talking about companies like adidas and nike which have

come out and said we are concerned about the effect this is having. what other industries are you talking to that are also highlighting these concerns? >> those are good members of the u.s. chamber, but we do $200 billion of trade a day. we have a huge economic relationship, you're talking about the two largest economic players in the global economy. so what happens matters, and we are concerned about tariffs because they are a tax on consumers. they are a tax on manufacturers. and of course, the escalation of trade tensions could hurt our economy, it will certainly hurt china's economy. but let's take a step back and recognize why we are here. we are here because china conducts unfair trade practices. it does not protect intellectual property rights of a forces technology transfers. it does not allow for a level playing field when it comes to market access.

there are a host of legitimate issues the administration is trying to tackle. at the end of the day, we need an agreement that is comprehensive. we do not favor tariffs as a tactic about that we do favor trying to address these issues -- tactic, but we do favor trying to address these issues. taylor: what is the right tactic? you said you do not necessarily support tariffs, but you are aligned with the administration on tackling some of the issues eu highlighted -- that you highlighted. what is the right approach? --there are a multiple thing multiple things being done. japan and others are concerned and need to be part of the strategy. we also need to look at the ways to address the issues in a confrontational but pragmatic way.

at the end of the day, we need a trade agreement is both countries needed. we need to put the relationship on stable footing, a positive trajectory. we are not there. there is a huge amount of distrust and that is not good for the united states, china, or the world economy. the underlyinge, tensions have to with having a competitive environment and a living playing field -- level playing field. i am hopeful talks will get back on track. i don't think that will get -- anden until president xi president trump meet in osaka, japan. but it is very important we bring the temperatures down and talks resume. taylor: you talk about bringing the temperature down, i want to ask, how tense does it feel? what is this what level in the room in the last few months?

i have met with top administration officials and vice premier newco -- liu he. we also had a deal on may 10 that they were 90% of the way there. the last 10% is the hardest part. we have seen an escalation of that with the tariff hike on the existing 250 billion. to recognizeave the china has to come to the table in a meaningful, concrete way. backsliding, whatever china did ,ith respect to the issues these agreements have to be enforceable, verifiable. i think it was right to the administration was pressing for reform under chinese law and not just a state directive. so i hope we can get back to the table in the weeks ahead. i hope the two presidents during the g20 meeting will set the right tone.

but we are at an impasse right now. and both china and the united states will find it very difficult, they have boxed themselves in. at the end of the day, this is too big of a relationship to fail. there will not be any decoupling and we need to see these governments get back to the table. it is in the interest of the countries, the economy, and the global economy. myron brilliant with the u.s. chamber of commerce. qualcomm slides. what that means for the chipmakers settlement with apple. and if you like bloomberg news, check us out on the radio, the bloomberg at, and in the u.s. on and in the- app, u.s. on sirius xm. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: qualcomm shares fell the most in two years after a judge ruled they have violated antitrust laws. a u.s. district court judge sided with the ftc, accusing the

company of abusing its dominant addition to squeeze excessive licensing fees from phone makers. the chipmaker says they disagree and will seek an immediate appeal. with an analyst about the ruling. a nice is not just little sideline, we are talking billions of dollars of revenue that comes in every year. that money is used to fund an industry leading rmd asset. r&dou -- industry-leading asset. something with 5g, you are buying a qualcomm chip that is very important. >> let's get a market perspective. stacy, your perspective on the severity of the selloff. is it in line with the severity of risk to the business model? >> in theory, yes.

i am surprised by the magnitude. if you are paying attention to the trial itself in january, the idea that they were likely to lose was probably not a surprise. that seemed clear from the tones and manners of that emerged. i would say that maybe in the wake of the apple settlement, investors were hoping a judge might go even -- easy on them. it goes heard you say, to the heart of the business model. now the risk is we will see what , but theith the appeal risk is that the fundamental drivers of the business model are at risk, given the remedies the judge has mandated. >> yes, as one of our colleagues wrote "it may reduce royalty payments. " it has already rewritten its

customer contract with apple. in place ormain become some sort of standard bearer what contracts look like going forward? >> two things here. there were no provisions that automatically be triggered the recasting of contracts. that was some news we broke earlier today so we are sure about that. but factoring in what stacy was apple --t says that that qualcomm has to go back and renegotiate any of its existing agreements which are based upon this bad behavior. so we really don't know yet. >> it comes at a very interesting time, stacy. given the pivotal role qualcomm we have seence between china and the united states, the blacklisting of huawei, it all seems to be an opportune moment for potentially trump himself to weigh in and

support what he hopes will be a beacon of growth for 5g. do you anticipate any government interference? have is possible, we already seen some interference in this case. the doj filed a statement of interest a couple of weeks ago, essentially asking the judge that, if she found against qualcomm, they were asking for another hearing to discuss remedies. the judge essentially dismissed that in her ruling. when qualcomm goes ahead and appeals to the ninth circuit, maybe there is another opportunity for other agencies to weigh in, trump to weigh in. maybe they will potentially find a softer go in the appeals case. emily: bloombergs ian king and bernstein senior analyst stacy rasgon. coming up, the department of justice is leading against approving the merger between

sprint and t-mobile while the chair of ftc -- of the ftc has endorsed the deal. that's next, this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: bloomberg was first to report the u.s. department of justice is leading against approving t-mobile's takeover of because the concessions proposed do not go far enough to mitigate antitrust concerns. there are planning on announcing a restriction on price increases to gain regulatory approval. meanwhile, ajit pai recommends the deal be approved. we speak with our correspondent who broke the story and the founder of boost mobile. >> approval from both agencies is needed here, as well as from the state's attorney general investigating the merger. deals tomon in telecom have both the justice department and fcc review a deal. they both have different standards when considering approval.

the doj is focused on competition, will he merger lead to higher prices? -- will a larger lead to higher prices? the sec has a much broader, public interest standard. typically, they come out on the same side of the deal and work closely together. here, it looks like the doj is leaning against the deal while the fcc chairman announced he intends to recommend approval. emily: interesting. obviously, this has been a long time coming. both companies have suggested concessions they can make. -- it sounds like the dot doj thinks there is not enough. what is your perspective on whether this is good or bad? >> it is interesting, because i spend a lot of time meeting with the doj and with the chairman ajit pai and commissioners. while they are concerned about , i waspetitive nature

quite surprised to read that article today because i thought that the divestments they offered was something the doj would have saw as a positive. i am not concerned as to whether the new t-mobile will go after verizon or at&t. i think everyone of them -- once a highof them paying customer side. i think the commissioners have because right decision it really does protect the low income customers, which are the ones we need to be concerned about. the high end customers, you know that the new t-mobile will be fighting tooth and nail with verizon to get those customers. it is the prepaid part, which verizon does not play in. at&t has only started to warm up to it. and no doubt, t-mobile and

sprint have the lion's share of those customers. i was surprised, because i would've thought the doj would have liked that. another part of was surprising was the divestiture of's sprint. -- of sprint. i am surprised that was not mentioned, but having said that, they made the right decision. emily: and the promises they have made, as i understand it, are the sale of the prepaid , advancing 5g, and pledging to not raise prices. where do those promises stand, including boost? >> except for the divestiture of boost, those of the promises and behavioral conditions the justice department has made clear it does not like. upt was an issue that came when at&t tried to buy time

warner last year and the justice department sued to block the deal. it is possible the companies could make additional divestitures to satisfy the doj. it is not unusual for the department of look for a different remedy than in other regulator. we saw there is sometimes a split with the eu and doj. that is possible, you can see another free trade -- prepaid brand being sold, possibly spectrum. that is always a possibility as a way to get the justice department on board. emily: if this deal does not happen, what does that mean for your business and vice versa? >> the question has got to be asked, the statement they made about the divestiture of boost was like a 30,000 foot level statement. there is a lot of devil in the details. there is no point in spitting

out boost and giving it a wholesale deal. the question is, who is allowed to buy it? tracfone, aizon, competitor, able to buy it? there are some questions that need to be asked. thoseen who will police to make sure you get the best deal you can. there are a lot of details that have not seemed to be brought out. and then who will police that? who will make sure the deal the new owner gets gets the right ability to compete? i'm still waiting to hear the details. what that just be left to t-mobile to sort out? if the doj comes on board, will they play a role? there are certain people who should buy it and certain people who shouldn't. so i am interested to see the details, because at this stage, they are very light. emily: meantime, the fcc would

still need to vote on the dell - - the deal. we spoke to a commissioner earlier, take a listen to what he had to say. review at the sec has been looking at competition issues. -- fcc has been looking at the competition issues. they would have the same size and scale in terms of customers for the first time. when you have a third competitor on that scale, what our records showed is that there would be big benefits for consumers in terms of the new competition were going to see. emily: sounds like he is in favor. and any indication about how the rest of the sec feels, despite the potential pushback from the doj? think you would expect that the sec is controlled by a g5 -- by ajit pai. and it willg a deal

win approval, even if the two democrats on the commission vote against it. is, the justice department, it is one man's division, the head of the antitrust division. there is no committee. he was aggressive on at&t and time warner. he really surprise a lot of deal-watchers when he sued to block the deal because those companies were not direct competitors. face, putting aside the promises of 5g, would be anti-competitive. fours combining two of the national carriers. this is the deal the doj opposed that when it was proposed in 2014. david mclachlan of bloomberg and peter of boost mobile.

boonn's echo has been a for the company and they are hoping lightning strikes twice with a new wearable device in the works. and we are live streaming on twitter, check us out and follow our global news network tictoc on twitter. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ back to the best of bloomberg technology. amazon is once again pushing the boundaries of what technology is capable of. the company is working on a voice activated wearable device that can recognize human emotion. bloomberg has seen internal documents and drawings that describe the product as a wellness product. they have microphones and software that can determine the emotional state from the sound of the voice. allmazon thinks that with of the data on voice that they contact that with indicators about how somebody is feeling. if they seem aggressive, docile,

what the pitch is like, and after putting that through their software algorithms, they can the grout what emotion the wearer is feeling and use that to talk to them. the skies the limit from there. emily: my next question is how well is this working. do we know how much progress they are actually making on this kind of technological breakthrough? >> we don't. they have been at it for quite some time. work on this continued last year and has been going on recently as a child to make sure that the software can accurately tag emotions. there are concerns that may be a system like this would not be accurate when they roll it out. know whether it will come into a promotional -- commercial product that will be

released. emily: amazon has been working hard to get alexa on the move beyond something pleasant to my kitchen counter to something -- whether it is headphones or other kinds of wearables, how much progress are they making? >> it is unclear. they don't have the install base of android or apple's iphone when we think about the smartphone coming with a voice assistant. amazon has been throwing everything at the walls to put amazon in other places. in mentioned the car device earbuds that are supposed to feature alexa. they really want to make alexa anywhere. that strategy does not include a smartphone after their flop with the fire. they have been trying every other door. emily: with all of the concerns about privacy and our data and how tech companies are handling that data, how would amazon handle emotional data?

categorize it, store it? >> that is a great question. given that this might be a far off from commercial availability. they say we take privacy seriously. our reporting's on the folks who listen to and audit shows people should be aware that this is another source of data that tech companies are going to hold onto. have given up this technology to a tech giant, it is theirs to do with it what they will under their privacy policies. emily: there are a lot of unknowns. -- soon might and alexa will wearable hit the market? >> that's a great question. they have been announcing new alexa products toward the end of the year. september, i would not be

surprised if there is an event. emily: facebook for its biggest rattle yet with bad actors on the platform. the social media giant says they removed a record 2.2 billion fake accounts in the last quarter. that is after facebook saw a steep increase in the creation of fake accounts. majority of the counts within minutes of being crated. users arehly active fake. mark zuckerberg said a shift to privacy made policing such content even harder. >> it is going to be harder to find the different types of harmful content. we will be fighting that battle without one of the very important tools, which is being able to look at the content itself. bes not clear if we will able to do as good of a job as we can today with that tool. discussoining us to

facebook is the vice president of global policy management, monica. driving all, what is this steep increase in fake accounts? where are they coming from? newome of it is coming from tools that people are using to try to create large amounts of fake accounts in an automated way. understanding that, our engineers have invested in catching it. we have gotten better and we have seen those efforts paying off. emily: are they from any particular country or any particular groups? >> i don't have any other information to share on that. i would say that we see fake accounts created all over the world. we are focused on tapping that at a global level. emily: we just heard what zuckerberg had to say about encryption on a call. towardis shift encryption on privacy? will that you race on the you race-- will that

some of the progress you're making? >> i spent my career, before i came to facebook, i was a criminal prosecutor. i see the importance of law enforcement being able to access content using search warrants and other things. in a valid and important way. we are mindful of that. that is one of the reasons that as we look to find what is the best privacy model for our community, we are also focused on what do we need to do to keep that community safe. newy: you have announced a oversight board for all facebook content decisions. what will that look like and when will that happen? the oversight board is a new initiative we are trying to launch by the end of this year. what this will be is a group of people acting independently from facebook. people with the relevant expertise who can look at specific divisions we have made.

somebody posted something and we removed it. they asked us to take another look at it. we say we will keep it off our site. they can go to this external board and ask the board to take a look at it. whatever the decision the board makes, that will be binding on us. if they say put it back up, we will do that. emily: we have seen elections in india, very challenging. you had to moderate content in 10 different languages. what are some of the learnings there that you will take forward? >> we are focused on making sure that we are doing our part to keep elections free and fair. as part of that, we built a team that is talking to election commissions around the world and looking to understand what are the unique houses -- challenges they might face in different areas. emily: what are some of those challenges? speaking of india in particular, what did you learn in this most recent situation that could help you in other countries? >> in all of the elections, we are learning different things.

we have put out some posts in our newsroom where we have addressed the different actions being taken, including in india. one learning we have had across the board is that people will try to use fake accounts in a number of different ways. in order -- including to spread spam and misinformation. while a lot of that is not necessarily relevant to elections, it could be. one of the things we are investing in is removing fake accounts as quickly as we can. we remove more than a million accounts a day at the time of upload. we have a u.s. presidential election coming up in less than 18 months. how well-prepared do you think facebook will be by that point to avoid what happened two years ago. >> we are preparing now. we are working to make sure we have all of the measures in place to make sure we are doing our part.

you are accepting various governments to put certain laws into place about how content is moderated in their particular country which will likely differ from country to country. how will you deal with different rules and different countries when there are 200 different countries? challenge.real this isn't a new challenge for us. our policies are global, meaning that the rules we have for harassment or hate speech are the same in france as they are in south africa. we are used to dealing with different norms around speech. when we look at different laws and different countries, the issue gets more and more complicated. it is important to have conversations with regulators early and make sure that the reit -- regulation is thoughtful. emily: coming up, it was another rough week for tesla with the

bears piling on. we will discuss. this is bloomberg.

emily: tesla continues to come under pressure this week, trading at its lowest level since december of 2016. city highlighted negatively skewed risks as well as cash flow concerns. jay and craig weighed in. some folks ontill the street who are too high with the stock. that is problematic given what the citigroup analysts said this morning. the big concern that he flight and that morgan stanley flagged, all of these analysts who have stepped up to raise concerns about this name is demand. this is a company that was

having real production problems last year. this year, the big story is deliveries. them not being able to sell as many model threes as maybe elon musk sort of suggested there was demand for. the model s and model x are long in the tooth and very expensive. that is causing real problems is what hases and everybody freaking out about this company. >> they are too early to the party. we have not seen demands catch up. and are saturating the market. do you agree with that? eventually it will. it is important to stress that i am a believer in tesla. i think they will turn the corner and capture what will be a juicy growth curve around the electrification of vehicles. that will eventually be 100% globally. 2019 will be a difficult year. they are going to miss their

numbers. everyone knows that. i want to focus on what has happened in the last three weeks around this story. the stock is down 27%. since may 50 -- 24% when trump tweeted about 25% tariffs. there has been an acceleration on the downturn based on what has happened in the past few weeks. analysts have not changed their opinion. the reason why the stock has dropped is ultimately, this gets back to the demand, the china piece is more in question. i think there is risk. s are is risk that tesla tariff going into china. there could be consumer backlash going into the china brand. was expected to be about a quarter of the sales for this year. if that number gets down to 12%, there will be more of a dramatic miss. i think it is investors getting

comfortable with the china risk that has thrown the stock into a tailspin more recently. new storyking at a being posted with analysts adam jonas from morgan stanley being quoted as saying tesla is no longer seen as a growth story. they are seen as a distressed credit and restructuring story. >> in the near term, i don't know. in the next six months, i don't know. i think it will be a difficult year. i think the stock could trade lower during that time. this is not a distressed stock story. there is just so much emotion around people who are following this. i think, stepping back from the there is an autonomy piece that is important. with all of its flaws, this is not a distressed company. they have a recent raise of cash, $2.7 billion.

that will give them an extra two --rs of runway at $300 $300,000 annual run weight -- rate. this is not at risk of going out of business. >> we were looking at tesla's cash flow. craig, your perspective on the autonomous part of the equation. we had an analyst who was talking about safety records in autonomy makes it unfathomable we will get robo taxis in the next year. >> i think you heard jean talk about the concern of china. another one that i will throw fueled thehat has selling has been this issue of another fatal crash in a tesla involving autopilot where the ntsb came out with a preliminary report last week. it was similar to an incident a couple of years ago in a model s

where a semi truck crossing the road and the tesla did not pick up on it and a person was killed. to takek has tried peoples attention away from demand and the delivery issues the company has been having and talk about the future of robo taxis. he has undercut, in terms of being able to make the case that we are on the verge of this robo is a casee, when it of deja vu all over again of someone tragically dying in an instant involving autopilot. >> does elon musk have to be more transparent? to behink he just needs more judicious about what he says and set better expectations at the core. it is unlikely we will get that anytime soon. whatever he says, dial it back by 40% and that is probably the right answer.

emily: that was jean munster and crites udell. -- craig trudell. an investor wants to take on amazon. we will take -- talk to him about his new adventure. this is bloomberg.

emily: retails -- retail starter very shop wants to bring back the joy of online shopping. is it possible to shake a marketplace that is already so crowded and dominated by one major platform? i caught up with the cofounder and ceo. he was the chief strategy officer at snap and a longtime investment banker. is 9% of the retail market. over the next decade, 30-40% of

all retail will be online, i believe. there are not that many consumer choices. we think there is a lot of opportunity, if you look at markets like china, where 25% of the market is e-commerce, there are many more players in china than in the u.s.. obviously focus on a younger audience. is there something you learned there in terms of the needs that were not being met in e-commerce? they like to do research before they buy something. they also care about responsibility when it comes to shopping. they care about economy. as a consumer, if you want to buy a sustainable product, where do you go? -- if you lookf

at our platform, we have 200 different attributes. i am excited to bring a new way of shopping to consumers. the market is large. youy: what makes you think can take on amazon, which already has convenience. they are doing one-day shipping. have really admired amazon. i am a shareholder of amazon. however, i think as e-commerce goes from 10% to 40%, one company cannot solve everything. amazon is a juggernaut in software. there is a lot of different things. they are a brilliant market company but there are a lot of parts of e-commerce that have not been addressed by existing players. i think we can bring that. we can give consumers different ways to discover new products. emily: your wife and cofounder

worked at amazon for many years. what sort of secrets does she bring to the table? >> no secrets. [laughter] amazon is a large company. she learned a lot from there. i think it is great to work with her. emily: you helped take snap public and took many comfy's prop -- companies public including alibaba. i have to ask you what is happening in the markets right now. i'm sure you are watching from afar. what is your take on what happened? >> at uber? >> yes. >> i don't want to specifically talk about uber. one thing that stood out to me -- versus the companies that will have to raise money again in the future. i think it makes sense.

we are in an economic cycle. you don't want to write unlimited checks to companies. if you look at some of the companies that are profitable, they did well. companies that are not making money did not do very well. i think the market is telling these companies that you have been around for a long time. at some point, you have to make money. emily: d think there is a reckoning coming for tech companies that have gone to market without being property -- profitable. ? >> amazon did not have to go raise money for a third money capital. i don't remember when amazon went and raised capital. even if it was, it was more of a point of strength than a point of weakness. companieslot of these

are involved in many different initiatives. at some point, they have to prioritize on what will drive more profitability. much do you think what is happening in the public markets is because of what is going on between the united states and china? war is not good for anyone. all trade some point, relationships have to be based on mutual respect, which helps. everybody agrees that --r the last decade, some u.s.kes sense that the will engage in a trade negotiation. we need more respect oh, neutral relationships with china and all of our trade partners.

is in the interest of both parties to come into a relationship. situation, it is a tough position. there are a lot of things to work through. i am not close to that situation. i am optimistic of a good outcome. it will take some time. it is in the interest of both parties. emily: let's talk about your company and when you will launch. >> late june. emily: what will you see? >> trust. when you're in a marketplace where anybody can force something, the platform is vulnerable to counterfeit and fraud. we saw that with ebay. what we are doing is equity all of the products from the brand. guaranteeing everything we are buying is real.

25 years, there was a premise up open platform. we saw that it brings chaos. is discover. discover new products. we are giving consumers more choice to discover products. third is to continue to make a big commitment on convenience. i know amazon does it but we will continue to do so. we are excited. it takes a long time to build a business. hopefully we will continue to bring new products and innovation to the platform. that does it for this edition of the best of bloomberg technology. we will bring you the latest throughout the week.

we are livestreaming on twitter. check us out and follow our global breaking news network tictoc on twitter. this is bloomberg. ♪

jonathan: from new york city, i'm jonathan ferro. bloomberg "real yield" starts right now. coming up, treasury yields hitting their 2019 lows driven by anxiety of trade and growth. the latest uncertainty coming from the u.s. economy, manufacturing data showing signs of weakness. chipping away at a high-yield market, digesting the monthly supply so far this year. we begin with the big issue. what will it take to get the fed to change course?