♪ emily: i'm emily chang in san francisco and this is "bloomberg technology." coming up in the next hour, the shine is back on the apple. shares in the tech giant spike after the u.s. announces it will some a 10% tariff on chinese imports, including the iphone. facebook has allegedly been paying hundreds of outside contractors to transcribe clips of audio from its users. plus, how the network is

responding. and, move over, oprah. sherry redstone cements her status as the most powerful woman in u.s. media as cbs agrees to merge with viacom in a long awaited deal. shares of apple and chipmakers soared in tuesday trading after the u.s. delayed a 10% tariff certain imports including smartphones as well as laptops. before boarding a helicopter in new jersey, president trump said "in case it has an impact on people, what we have done is delay it so they won't be relevant during the christmas shopping season." to discuss in washington, the president of the u.s.-china business council. ., bloomberg's l.a sarah mcgregor. sarah, do we have any idea what the motivation is for the change of heart? sarah: we do know that the news

gave a bump to the stock market. we saw some retail and technology stocks go up today. there have been some declines in share prices in recent weeks since tariff announced -- since trump announced the tariff. of course, that is an immediate cheer from the market. what we don't know what was discussed between officials of the china and the u.s. on the phone call. we know that the trump administration was waiting out on purposes -- on purchases from china and other agricultural continued trade stocks, for the chinese to come as planned. we don't know what kind of promises were given in exchange for this delay. as you said, it is about $110 billion of goods that will still be hit in september. in december we calculated it is about $160 billion of goods. it is not that these tariffs aren't going to happen, it is just a staggered timeline. emily: we are hearing that the chinese vice premier liu he had

a phone conversation with robert lighthizer and secretary mnuchin. of all of the fits and starts, one step forward, two steps back, how optimistic are you that they will come to an agreement? >> there is a little bit of a cycle here. talks, hiatus, then more sanctions. talks, hiatus, then more sanctions. we have seen repeat of this cycle, 6, 7, eight times. are we at the end of the process or are we in the middle of the process? it is difficult to say. these tariffs will have a severe impact for many people, including sporting goods, apparel, and other consumer goods, such as toys. while some sectors have been temporarily let off the hook, others are looking at a much more immediate effect, and this

will have an effect on the economy. emily: sarah, walk us through what is on the list, what is not on the list. of course some products still getting hit by tariffs on september 1, then a new raft of products in december. you have some apple products on both lists. what stands out? sarah: i think as an example of the uncertainty and chaos these announcements caused. for a company like apple, the airpods are on the list for september 1, but the apple iphone for december 15. we have heard from companies that have sent this in itself messes with their planning. they have already told their clients, the people they sell to, that the prices will go up and now they have to plan for something slightly different, even if it is a temporary reprieve. some of the items from the september 1 list include more agriculture products, footwear, some retail items.

the december 15 list is interesting, because it is more your holiday shopping, black friday, ciber -- cyber monday type of items, things like tv and cell phones. trump acknowledged today that there would be a hit if those tariffs took effect on consumers going into the holiday season. that was some of the thinking behind the delay as well. emily: while it is difficult to say what is going to happen in the short term, in the long term got the discussion about whether this is the beginning of a new normal, no matter how these talks play out. what do you think? craig: i think we have to remember, at the beginning of the dispute, which was over the 301 sanctions imposed by the united states trade representative on intellectual property rights, market access, cyber forced technology transfer and market access, those are issues that can be solved. if we go to the core of the

problem -- if we remember the cause belli, our original objectives, those can be resolved. we hope there is a resolution of those important issues in the near-term because there are other issues piling up on top of this in the trade, technology, and national security area. until we get agreements in a relatively more simple space of trade, those larger issues are going to become more difficult to resolve. emily: near-term, as i understand it, the next step we know of is a phone call between the two sides in two weeks? is that correct? sarah: absolutely. it can't be stressed enough that today's announcement, there is no indication that the two sides are any closer to a deal. we do know they are going to speak again in two weeks.

there were talks scheduled to happen in early september. we don't have a date on that yet. the chinese were supposed to come to washington. we haven't heard that those were canceled. if those move forward, there are more chances for progress. if the december 15 date comes and the two sides have come up with an agreement, there's a chance the tariffs could be delayed or not put into place. there is a wider window for the talks to take place, but there's really no indication today that anyone is closer to a deal on these really big issues like addressing ip theft, any of -- that the trump administration is closer to removing any of the tariffs china has been advocating for. emily: sarah mcgregor, i know you will keep us posted. craig, we are going to switch gears to hong kong. protesters at the hong kong international airport, one of the busiest global hubs in the world, brought it to a standstill tuesday.

for the second day this week, dozens of flights canceled, and the chaos escalating as police officers began confronting and arresting demonstrators. a lot of complicated micro situations in this chaos. first of all, what is your reaction to just how quickly this has escalated in the last 48 hours and the impact on the global business and tech community? many companies obviously have hubs there and a lot of travelers coming in and out. craig: i am very concerned that beijing has started to use the word terrorism to describe the situation. that word has great meaning. it portends a change in the hong kong situation if this continues. i am hopeful that the

demonstrators understand the import of that word and that there is a bit of a backing off. at this stage, the last thing that we need is more violence. statuseed, hong kong's as a center of asian commerce and culture is at risk. emily: there has been violence allegedly on both sides. there was a video widely circulated on twitter of a chinese police officer who was trying to confront a protester. the baton was stolen and protesters started hitting the officer with the baton. on the other hand, there are reports of other officers dressed as protesters, trying to apprehend protesters. what is your take on the chinese government's reaction so far? you have security forces doing demonstrations in shenzhen, just across the border. at the same time, hasn't

escalated to broadscale violence. craig: i think that the use of the word terrorism is indeed a step change. it worries me greatly that that provides an excuse for the pla or others in the chinese government to go in. if there is "terrorism" in hong kong, clearly beijing would be concerned. i think most would argue this is not terrorism. it is a riot. but beijing is clearly going up an escalatory ladder, and i hope that the violence stops before acts are committed that cannot be taken back and change hong kong's status forever. emily: president trump tweeted earlier, "our intelligence has informed us the chinese

government is moving troops to the border at hong kong. everyone should be calm and safe." it is unclear what information the president has, if any. what do you make of president trump's response here, given the complicated dynamics between the u.s. and china that he in many respects is initiating and how it is impacting u.s. business in tech companies and u.s. consumers? craig: the u.s.-china relationship is incredibly complex. i think the president's use of the word riot, which is the same word that the chinese have been using, indicates a degree of empathy with beijing. and that the president understands that this is a situation that needs to calm down. the violence does need to stop.

the u.s.-china bilateral relationship has multiple tension points come -- points, multiple tension and fragmentation points, and there is a great deal of conflict. let us hope that the pla stays out of hong kong so as not to add to that tension, and that the violence subsides as quickly as possible. we should be looking for a peaceful way out of this situation rather than further escalatory actions on either side. emily: alright, well, we will continue to follow this situation as it evolves. craig allen, of the u.s.-china business council, thank you. meanwhile, the sec dealt another blow to the cryptocurrency communities. regulators delay approving two

bitcoin exchange traded funds. the chair said it is unlikely the funds will be approved anytime soon. coming up, facebook has been paying hundreds of outside contractors to transcribe clips of audio from its users. we will have the details, next. and if you like bloomberg news, check us out on the radio, the bloomberg app, bloomberg.com, and in the u.s., on sirius xm. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: now to a bloomberg scoop. facebook has been paying outside contractors to transcribe audio clips from its users. the work has rattled these complex employees, who were not told where the audio was recorded, how it was obtained, only to transcribe it. facebook is not the only company

to come under fire for collecting audio snippets from the consumer devices. apple, amazon, and google have also been in the hot seat. sarah frier broken this story. first of all, say what? >> so this is an instance of -- it is really intense right now because a lot of people have heard facebook come out and say that they don't listen to their users' conversations. they are not listening to you on your phone, etc. however, there is a subset of facebook users who use the transcription service on their facebook messenger chats. say if i send you a voice memo, you would have the option to transcribe that memo. what facebook has done, in order to make sure that the ai is transcribing that correctly, they have also sent those clips to these hundreds of outside contractors who are listening to these people's conversations and judging their human

transcriptions against the ai. emily: it is also not just to determine the actually -- determine the act receipt of the accuracy, but also if they are violating standards. sarah: it is unclear about why , but facebook says yes, they have been doing this. they confirmed our scoop, but they put in the same bucket as what google and apple and amazon have done in trying to use humans to make the ai more functional. when you ask facebook to transcribe your messages, you probably are not expecting there is an actual person looking at these messages and trying to transcribe them. this is done autonomously, but these are your private conversations. it is kind of the same if you have a voice message on your phone that gets transcribed automatically by your phone provider. it is obviously from a bot, and there are a lot of errors, and they are trying to make that higher-quality by using these humans to make it better.

whatt runs afoul of everyone expects to be happening. emily: how would you differentiate between what facebook is doing and what apple, amazon, and google have also been accused of? sarah: apple, google, and amazon are all doing what they are doing for the voice assistants. if you say, "hey, alexa," or "ok, google," they are getting commands by recording your voice. you are communicating with the company. you are saying "hey, alexa, what is the weather today?" this is people talking to each other. this is me saying, emily, do you mind calling this source on my behalf, because i think you have a better relationship with them. somebody would be able to see that. i do think it crosses a different kind of line than these other relationships we have known about. emily: facebook putting themselves in the same boat as apple and google. saying much like google, they

paused human review of audio more than a week ago. they say they stop this now before your story broke. sounds kind of convenient. what do you make of their reaction in the midst of everything else going on with facebook? on top of that, not having transparency with its workers about why exactly they are doing this. does that lack of transparency indicate that facebook knew there was something -- [laughter] sarah: contractors who have spoken to me say they are very concerned that this is an ethical violation. if you look at the facebook data use policy, it says nothing about audio. it says we will look at your communications, trying to give you the right newsfeed, serving you the right ads. but it doesn't say there may be people transcribing your audio. on the flipside, we are in a different place with facebook than with other companies.

facebook came off a $5 billion settlement with the ftc that says they would not do anything without explicit user consent. they have tried to turn over a new leaf with their users. i'm told that the program to transcribe what these messenger people are saying to each other, this is a recent program that started in the last few weeks. even though they stopped it recently, it is also something they started even after amazon was getting critiqued. emily: sarah frier, thank you. i know you will continue to pull that thread. thank you for that great scoop. bloomberg's sarah frier. coming up, in a long-awaited, cbs and viacom finally announced its $11.7 billion deal. we've got all the details next. we are livestreaming on twitter. find us there @technology. be sure to follow our global breaking news network tictoc on

twitter. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: in long-awaited dealnews, cbs agreed to merge with viacom in an $11.7 billion transaction. it unites the most-watched u.s. broadcast network with the parent of paramount pictures and channels like nickelodeon. it followed a marathon session of negotiations as the two sides hashed out a price. what was it? what clinched the deal? >> i think they finally realized that after two, three years of going back and forth, that whatever misgivings they had, needed toboth just get bigger so they could compete in this streaming war. over the past few years, we have seen time warner sell out to at&t. we have seen fox and the murdochs sell a lot of their assets to disney. now most of the companies

playing in media entertainment are companies that are worth $100 million, $200 million. cbs and viacom even combined, they are worth only about $30 billion. but by coming together, they have a deep library of movies and tv shows that will follow into streaming services that will get much stronger. emily: how does this position , this now combined entity against all of the other newly merged now larger media companies? >> it is still small in comparison. most analysts and investors would tell you there are probably more deals to be made. i spoke to the ceo of the combined company and he acknowledged that more m&a is likely. it is not clear if that will be a buy or a sell. they have been linked to companies like lionsgate, discovery.

it is possible they will try to buy or merge with one of them. it is also possible that the redstone family, who will own the combined company, say it is time to cash out. now that we have assets that you have seen as weak, it be able to entice some larger company to scoop it up. emily: in a nutshell, take us on a little trip down memory lane, how hard it was to get to this point for these two sides. >> this dates back to when the patriarch of the redstone family was very much in control. he decided to split them more than a decade ago, which he believed would unlock a lot of value for viacom. this was a time when the cable tv business is booming. he thinks the cbs broadcast network and showtime network was kind of dragging viacom down. then youtube, netflix.

suddenly viacom looks like the weaker partner. old, incapacitated, how involved he was in the decision-making was of dispute. what we do know is sherry redstone, his daughter, thought it would be better for the company to get together. first, she fought for control of viacom. she ends up installing bob as the ceo of that company. she tries to get les moonves, ceo of cbs, to merge them. she resists, but he ends up having to leave the job because of accusations of sexual harassment. after discussions of putting them together again, we have an agreement to do it. not after a lot of of fighting and handwringing along the way. thanks so much for all those twists and turns. coming up, stopping the spread of online extremism. we will speak to one guest who has a plan for what tech

companies need to do, next. this is bloomberg. ♪

from the couldn't be prouders to the wait did we just win-ners. everyone uses their phone differently. that's why xfinity mobile let's you design your own data. now you can share it between lines. mix with unlimited, and switch it up at anytime so you only pay for what you need. it's a different kind of wireless network designed to save you money. save up to $400 a year on your wireless bill. plus get $250 back when you pre-order a new samsung note. click, call or visit a store today.

emily: this is "bloomberg technology." now to a topic we're continuing to follow, the rise of online hate speech and extremism. 8chan defended his ate after it was claimed perpetrator of the norway attack had posted on the site before. it was said in a youtube video that the website has been off-line voluntarily for the last week. i wanted to understand we have nothing to do with this crazy violence that has been happening. to discuss in washington, we have the executive director of the institute for constitutional advocacy at georgetown law and in washington, bloomberg's ben

brody. obviously there has been a lot of agitation around gun laws and what to do about gun legislation in the midst of this spate of violence, but also a new campaign among lawmakers about fighting online extremism. what is the latest? ben: the problem is there's not necessarily a lot that lawmakers can force the companies to do. you had companies like twitter coming to the white house last week and supposedly having a conversation about this sort of online extremism. but what sort of came away from it was we're going to work hard er with federal agencies and trade information better. this is something that has been ongoing really for several years now. in some ways we have run up to the limits of those kinds of cooperation and it is not necessarily stopping these kinds of attacks. what you get then is lawmakers looking to other kinds of things -- you need to look at platform liability, do you need to force these companies to take down gun

sales? those would involve legal changes, but it's something folks are looking at here in washington. emily: the problem is even if the site is down, you have potential perpetrators going to other sites, like another that came up in connection to this oslo attack where an alleged potential gunman posted not a manifesto, but a link to a facebook stream. how do you even begin to combat this? >> it's hard, but i do think there is progress, when you push hate, and especially the sort of hate speech that contributes to violence, into places where fewer people see it. so yes, there are bigger -- all sized platforms do a better job over time of policing their site, of enforcing their terms of service, keeping this material off those sites, it does show up elsewhere, but ultimately if it shows up in

places where there are few er people see it and ideally fewer people responding to it with violence in the real world, that still strikes me as progress overall. emily: the owner said he is deliberately keeping the site off-line for now. larelso know cloudf stopped working with 8chan. in the youtube video the owner of 8chan said he's going to be talking with homeland security. has he been called to testify? what do we know about that process? ben: the house homeland security committee, the chairman is for mississippi and the top republican, mike rogers, have said they want him to come in and discuss with them. they did not say whether it would be public testimony or a conversation with staff, but it would be a continuation of efforts that this committee has been engaging in for the last

several months, especially as they look at the rise of online domestic terrorism and white nationalist here in the united states. they had facebook and twitter and other companies in in the last couple of months and now they will be pushing forward on that. when we talked to chairman thompson a couple months ago, he sure where it is going to go. there are first amendment concerns but we can't simply let this proliferate, even if the solution is just putting pressure on the companies to do more internally. we just can't let this keep going. emily: you wrote a piece with the five-step process to be taken by tech companies. walk us through that process, in a nutshell. >> it begins with opening channels between the government and the tech sector, as well as within the tech sector, to share information, better, faster, more effectively on these issues. those channels have been open

now, but they have been focused on international terrorism, content linked to al qaeda and isis and groups like that. clearly events are showing that is not the only source of terrorist threats to americans on u.s. soil. there needs to be more fulsome exchange of information about these types of threats that often get called domestic terrorism. there also needs to be strengthening by the companies of how they approach this issue. that's where there is a bit of a political trap, because companies in my view should do more to take down not just graphic violence itself, but the hate filled rhetoric that seems to contribute to and fuel violence in the real world. but here, if they ramp up their algorithms to take down the sort of messaging that is anti-immigrant and otherwise far right wing, they will automatically take down some rhetoric from those on the very far right. that is exactly what they were taken to task for by the same

white house just a few weeks before friday's summit. so it's a bit of a political trap, but it's also where to go if we're going to protect people from the sort of violence we have been seeing. emily: in the meantime, rumors have been flying about the death of billionaire and alleged sex trafficker jeffrey epstein, which news broke on 4chan 40 minutes before it even hit mainstream media. it goes to show how powerful some of these fringe sites are. now on social media you've got even the president of the united states retweeting conspiracy theories about how epstein was killed. how do you combat this stuff when you have this noise in the background at the highest levels of the u.s. government? joshua: it makes it so hard for people in government to try to tackle these issues. there are well-intentioned people working hard in government to try to do just that, but ultimately if the

commander is contributing to the problem, rather than helping to solve it, that undermines credibility with tech companies, with foreign partners, and it plain old aggravates the problem. that being said, there are those who continue to have credibility in this country with the public and with the tech sector. for them to try to have a conversation that almost puts the president to the side, it seems urgent and it raises the stakes for who this president will nominate as a full-time, not just acting, director of national intelligence. dnie are the issues that a in the modern era needs to think hard about. to have someone who is a straight shooter rather than someone who is contribute into the noise is critical. emily: so much to continue discussing. thank you both. coming up, argentina is moving toward yet another economic crisis after this weekend's election. how this will impact the country's growing tech industry, next. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: argentina assets extended losses following the weekend's shocking election defeat for president macri. a record low against u.s. dollar in monday session. the results set off a shockwave with the argentina stockmarket plunging as much as 48% in the second biggest one-day route globally since 1950. what does it mean for argentina's burgeoning tech sector? joining us on skype from italy to discuss, lisa aims to connect

startups in buenos aires. despite the fact that you are in italy, first of all, what kind of impact do you expect this to have on the tech ecosystem there? lisa: it's a very big challenge. there is a lot of uncertainty happening in argentina at the moment, especially with foreign investment. that is a very huge component in the success of startups in argentina. right now, we don't know what is going on. as you mentioned, the peso devalued by 30%, inflation is at an all-time high, about 55%. right now it is an ominous time in argentina. i would like to say i'm cautiously optimistic that we can continue with the current administration, because this administration has been enacting a lot of policy initiatives and programs to support entrepreneurship in argentina. emily: what kind of policies

have supported the tech sector in argentina thus far? lisa: of the four years ago there was -- a couple years ago there was something called the entrepreneur law. it created tax breaks for investors and opportunities and was a huge step forward in terms of how the government works and bets on entrepreneurs to increase and improve the local economy. that, in addition to quite a few afferent programs -- one is local incubator program that invests between 10000 and 30,000, money for startups and entrepreneurs. there is something which is a meditational program. there's lots of different policy and programs and innovations to serve the entrepreneurial market because president macri knows it is entrepreneurs that can save

argentina. emily: what happens if these policies do not remain in place or if they are upset as well? lisa: what we need right now is policy continuity, in order to avoid a macroeconomic crisis. we are all hoping that the current administration does stay on course and we do remain a country that is looking toward being part of the global capital market. if that doesn't happen, it's going to be a big challenge for argentina, for the future of its economy. we could be potentially facing another crisis like what happened in 2001, and it will not just be an economic crisis, it will be a cultural crisis. emily: talk about the kind of startups and companies that have thrived there thus far. you have an emerging fintech, ag tech sector, crypto as well.

tell us more. lisa: anybody can tell you that finteching industry and industry with the centralized government in argentina is challenging. there have been successful fintech startups that have emerged from the region. cryptocurrency, argentines were when the first to embrace cryptocurrency. tons of startups are focusing on cryptocurrency for decentralized .onetary reasons also a lot of software development is coming out of the region. there's a new outsourcing hub for off shoring technology services and the labor force. the harvard business review ranked argentina as number one in technology scaled locally. emily: we will continue to follow the situation as it unfolds there. lisa besserman, thank you so

much for joining us. in the meantime, snap has unveiled the third version of its video recording sunglasses. spectacle three will allow users to record with two cameras instead of one. they are also more than twice as expensive as the previous model, $380 a pair. it overestimated demand and had to write down almost $40 million in inventory in its earlier versions of glasses in 2017. still ahead, wework anticipation stirring, poised to file its prospectus for its ipo this week. we will talk about how much wework is worth as we wait. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: this seattle seahawks quarterbacks russell wilson and microsoft's ceo are among those

who bought a stake in the major league seattle soccer team. they acquired the stake owned by hollywood producer, joe ross. wework ipo could come as early as this week. this would hold the full financial picture of the office start up for the first time. the company said in april it has filed paperwork for the initial public offering confidentially with the sec. equities in is an online marketplace for ipo shares from privately held companies. what are you going to be looking for when this crosses? >> i will be looking for the softbank ownership stake in the s1. the second part i will look at is non-gap financials, which is a euphemism for fuzzy math that wework has used to describe its financial health. those are the two areas i will

be focusing on. emily: what kind of fuzzy math has been a concern when it comes to wework? phil: the one we have heard is a relatively new idea that we work has done to show the unit of economics that they run, but it doesn't take into account a lot of the costs and expenses that come with running a real estate company. that's one thing investors will be focused on, because it's nothing that they can compare to a traditional technology company. emily: how popular have wework chairs been on the secondary market? -- shares been on the secondary market? phil: despite the brand awareness for wework publicly, in the private market there has been relatively tepid demand for the company, which may hint the valuation is higher than investors are looking for and it may not bode as well for the company to become a public entity. emily: how does it compare to other names that we might know? phil: we saw pretty active in markets in spotify leading up to

their ipo, and they have pretty high awareness even while they are private. we would have expected to see something similar for wework, but it's been a little more tepid, which is interesting, because the founder himself has has sold off something like 700 million dollars worth of shares as the founder, which will be one question he will have to answer over and over again in the investor days before the ipo. emily: what questions do you have about governance in general? there's been an issue with several companies that have recently gone public about founder control, whether a founder can take money off the table before the ipo. this one in particular definitely raises some eyebrows. phil: yes, if i had more than two eyebrows, i would raise all of them. you have a structure which is an opportunity for the investors and initial founders to get a 7% haircut on their taxes, but it's pretty rare out there. that will prevent the company from being in the s&p 500 for years to come. you have a founder selling a lot of liquidity pre-ipo.

you have a bit of a narrative change for the company between now and eight or nine months from now. if you recall in december or january the company was planning to raise $10 million from softbank that ended up becoming $1 billion from softbank. what we will look for in s1 is if the company has a founder heavy voting structure, where the founders control the future of the company while retail investors have a piddling one vote per share compared to the founders. emily: the company is experimenting with different lines of business that may not be as well understood as the core business. phil: that's right. two areas to focus on, wework has expanded from catering smaller businesses and startups and moved up the chain more to enterprise offers -- more larger conglomerates and building a more enterprise offering. the benefit to investors is the

they have locked them into longer term leases and there. the second is that the company has made three acquisitions in the past year or two, one as recently as last week, to bolster their technology offering. when i think about we work, trying to solve the office admin function you might have as a business and trying to take that away from you to save you a lot of money, they are focusing investors on that area, which they have to, because with the company valued at $47 billion and 26 times their last 12 months revenue, you better have a good story as why you are valued compared to other real estate comps that trade to 1.5 times revenue instead. emily: we are watching for that s1. we will have all the headlines as that crosses. thanks so much for sharing that insight there. i want to return to apple, the smartphone maker getting a nice reprieve from u.s.-china trade tensions.

apple shares soaring tuesday after the trump administration delayed the next round of tariffs until mid-september, including a 10% levy on mobile phones and laptops. apple has said the tariff in -- will affect all its products made in china including iphone, ipad and mac. joining us from l.a. to discuss is bloomberg's mark gurman. it's a little bit complicated. there are number of apple products that will still have tariffs on september 1 and several that have been delayed until september 15 if they going -- if indeed those tariffs go into effect. mark: like you said, there are two sets of lists. the big one is december 15. that is when the iphone, the ipad, the ipod touch, that's when they will get hit. you might want to know why that is such a big deal that it happens december 15 instead of september 1. right now it is in mid august, so we are about a month away from the next iphone launching and two months from the next

macbook pro, the 16 inch macbook pro they have been working on, and upgrades to the ipad pro. those product lines are some of the most profitable and highest revenue generating products for apple. the iphone last year, even though they've been shifting off of services, still makes up half the company's revenues. new iphone season is when a lot of these phones are sold annually. they will get a nice 10% reprieve on that for the two months the new iphones and ipads are going on sale. the other list are the lower selling products, people are talking about them. they don't make apple as much money as the other products, the airpod, the apple watch, home pod, and things like battery cases and apple watchbands and imacs. emily: so do we know how much of the tariff will be passed on to consumers? how much this will increase, in the short-term, the price of the

airpods or apple watch, and in four months, the iphone? mark: we've been talking about tariffs and what the impact will be on apple for months now. my thinking is that the impact already happened. apple saw this coming. there has been discussions about this for the past two years or so with the trump administration. you look at the big price hike they made to the iphone x a couple years ago, $1000. you look at the storages of the iphone x max, you look at the ipad pro last year, you look at the additional apple watches. you have to look at the premium you have to pay for the airpods if you get the wireless charging case. these premiums have already been built into the price and consumers have already been paying for it for the last year. emily: so the run-up in apple shares, could it just be a short-term bump?

we have no idea near-term what will happen with the trade talks. there is a most more certainty that over the long-term this is a new normal between the u.s. and china. mark: i would say if were talking about january and february for the reprieve, let's say they were supposed to go into effect in january and then moved it to march, investors would be overreacting. we saw and 8% jump in the stock price today. the move from september 1 to mid december specifically for the iphone, ipad and macbook align. that is very significant, because a lot of new phones will hold between september 21 -- sold between september 21 and september 22 and the holidays. december 15 is the in when people are going to shell out a ton of money for holiday gifts. that period is really important for apple. emily: thanks so much, mark. that does it for this edition of "bloomberg technology." we are livestreaming on twitter.

find us there @technology. follow us on tictoc on twitter as well. this is bloomberg. ♪ ♪

from the 5am wakers, to the 6am sleepers. everyone uses their phone differently and in different places. that's why xfinity mobile created a wireless network that auto connects you to millions of secure wifi hot spots. and the best lte everywhere else. xfinity mobile is a different kind of wireless network designed to save you money. save up to $400 a year on your wireless bill. plus get $250 back when you buy an eligible phone. click, call or visit a store today.

>> the following is a paid program for cranberries. craig -- crepe erase. give clinically shown to you smoother, firmer, younger looking skin. >>