♪ carol: welcome to bloomberg businessweek. i'm carol massar. jason: i'm jason kelly. carol: businessweek turns 90. jason: women on wall street. me too and why many financial firms still don't get it. carol: climate change helped fuel the uprising that sent

millions marching into the streets of chile. jason: all that to come. but here's editor joel weber. joel: we put together a holiday cover for you. jason: what a year. joel: this is one of the biggest stories of the year. and it started with we work, even pre-ipo chatter. as that coverage developed and went on and on, there was another story we started to think about, which was softbank, one of the biggest investors and -- in wework. carol: softbank, we did talk about it so much. what i love is that you guys go into the layers of softbank division fund. obviously the leader of it all, but also other players. joel: the visionary at softbank, especially at division fund, this outside force in silicon valley, $100 billion vc fund that can do a lot of work because it has so much money.

one of the ways it can do that is go into we work and bankroll we work, a business model that may not have been for the long haul. carol: funny you talk about the business model. joel: let's flood the zone with money. go big or go home. sometimes that works. we -- they have had some wins. other times it doesn't. the other thing it reveals is the culture within softbank and specifically the vision fund, where there's a lot of tension. carol: it's a big story. another is businessweek turns 90. joel: we're really old. that's great. jason: you look great for 90. joel: the magazine has been around 90 years.

we honor that with nsa on how -- an essay on how it covered the decade. there's a 1979 cover about the death of equities, that for a couple years after looked really good, but in hindsight didn't look so good. but it's an amazing accomplishment this magazine has been around this long while being the authoritative voice on business. jason: interesting talking to the people that put together that essay. their combined tenure is almost 90 years. joel: we don't go all the way back to 1929, when they first started, ready for the crash, but collectively, the people who worked on this essay can trace their lineage back to those who worked back then. in the course of three people writing the essay, we can spend the generation. jason: one of the things they point out in their essay, these seminal moments and how businessweek tracked what was going on, the zeitgeist in,

economics, the board room, so many things. carol: women. that's still an issue. joel: black business. when you look at how we covered it, it shows not only the evolution of the magazine, but the evolution of the country and of the world in capitalism. carol: my point is those conversations reminding us some of the issues we're still talking about today. joel: it's amazing how much stuff comes up that feels contemporary, from economics to women in business and finance, all of them, these stories have been with us for years. jason: thanks a lot. carol: more on the 90th coming up. let's get back to the cover story of softbank's chief. jason: here's sarah mcbride in san francisco. sarah: we work is a small part of their total investment portfolio. we make the point in the article

that masayoshi son's advisors were much more cautious about we work then he was. division fund only committed $4.4 billion to wework. fund onlyion committed $4.4 billion to wework. i mean only, but compared to softbank. the vision fund's commitment was relatively small. they got wework, and then they got much smaller companies that have gone wrong. but because they unfolded around the same time, people are paying a lot of attention to them. for example, wag and brandless. two consumer companies, they really only invested in a few hundred million dollars in. but because they're high-profile, people are paying a lot of attention to those.

in a lot of funds, when companies fail, they often fail pretty early on in the life of the fund, to where there's an interesting inflection point, where they also have a number of promising companies that aren't at the point in their lives were we can point to them and say these are spectacular companies, for example paying a reta in south korea has a lot of promise and another one, also in asia, is very problem -- promising. but the promise hasn't delivered yet. the disasters have. it's just a bad time. carol: it is a bad time. i feel like you dig into how investment decisions are made. you also give us insight into masa. tell us about it. sometimes you get one. sometimes you get the other.

sarah: right. so, masa can be extremely charming and very interested and engaging, or he can kind of get and a bad mood and pepper people with questions. and in the lead, we tell the story of one time on a call, where he paraded an -- berated an investor at softbank for not being optimistic enough about a company called full truck alliance, which is a company based in china, making good and steady progress. and masa apparently thought it could grow a lot faster and was telling the investor you have to figure out a way to grow even faster than it is now. and other people on the colbert -- on the call were cringing and felt that one investor got the ire of masa.

but other companies, in particular the ones who pitch he likes your company, you feel like you're walking on air. sometimes he tells young startup founders you're the next jack ma. and they leave feeling so good, especially if it's a company where they've been rejected many times before. carol: i think was interesting is how you say what sets the fund apart is when the vision fund and masa decides to be in front of it, they really push the founders to be aggressive in their business, maybe expand out. sarah: right. so, they give them the kind of money where they can expand much quicker than they would have been able to do otherwise. sometimes a company that might have been looking for a 58 $60 million and zip getting several

hundred million from softbank. softbank gives a lot of money, but then they want you to deliver. let's say you were planning to roll out in one state. now they want you to do a national rollout and think about what your overseas expansion plan. so, they do set it up for a company to grow very fast, but not every ceo can deliver on that. carol: coming up, me too has yet to have its moment on wall street. jason: why some still don't get it. carol: this is bloomberg businessweek. ♪

carol: welcome back. i'm carol massar. jason: i'm jason kelly. joint is every day on the radio. also, catch up on our daily show.

listen and subscribe to our podcast. carol: you can find us online at businessweek.com and our mobile app. in the finance section, a story on the me too movement in wall street. jason: they've been following this story closely throughout the course of the year. this piece is a sobering article on how the finance industry still doesn't quite get it. carol: here's more. max: sometimes we look at each other. where is me too in the financial services industry? we know from years of chronicling hedge funds and banks and private equity and asset management that wall street, like other industries, including journalism, has profound imbalances, and women quietly say they're harassed and are discriminated against and they fear retribution. but we haven't seen that moment of change. and what this piece is about is this sort of system, this machine of silence that explains

why. carol: i do think after me too in the entertainment world, without wall street's next, and it didn't quite happen. i have a word for you: arbitration. max: arbitration is one of those things. if you brought that word up to and a half years ago, i would more or less draw a blank. i was on the phone with a wall street veteran who said to me, if you want to understand why we're not seeing me too on wall street, you have to look at the invisibility cloak. arbitration. that's the system parallel to the courts. it's behind closed doors. it's a private justice system that used to be relatively obscure, and wall street itself really helped it expand so it now covers essentially two out of three workers at big u.s. companies.

and wall street, unlike other industries, run its own arbitration hearings. and wall street is definitely a master of arbitration. it helps explain a lot. carol: the finance industry's mastery of this prevented the past two years from touching it, meaning the me too revolution. max: if a wall street executive were here with us -- carol: men and women? max: the senior executives are all meant. -- men. but the research executives are sometimes women. service katya and gavin lynch. they say, look, arbitration, they say is quicker. it's cheaper. it's quieter. but it's just as fair. that's what they'll say. that's the defense. women will say it stops us from banding together and instituting major change. the class action lawsuits we've written about, can't have those with arbitration.

jason: let's talk about systemic and cultural aspects, as well. you dig into this, too, in this piece of the cultures of a lot of these firms are set up in a way, both structurally and eat ethos-wise, it doesn't feel safe to be those kinds of place, even the advocates within the firm, hr for instance, aren't really on the sides of the employee. they're sort of on the side of keeping things under wraps. max: our focus was on three crystallizing moments. one was candidate fitzgerald. another was ken fisher. gavin lynch, who did amazing work out of london, jealousy inducing. but what was really upsetting about it, and katya talked about this with rebecca, it's not just that it paints a picture of guys

behaving extremely badly. what's profoundly upsetting about the lloyd story and another one, at mng also in london, is that it gives you a sense that these women went to hr and talked about being assaulted or accosted, and hr was basically like, it will be bad for your career if you say anything. don't smile around him. i think that was a little response from human resources. don't smile around him. jason: maybe dressed differently. change your behavior in order to avoid these situations in the future. carol: coming up, climate change and uprising. jason: plus, climate defense bringing down the cost of a controversial weapon. carol: this is bloomberg businessweek. ♪

jason: welcome back. i'm jason kelly. carol: and carol massar. you can also listen to us on the radio. 106.1 in boston. jason: am 960 in the bay area. in london and through their bloomberg businessweek app. carol: a controversial weapon. jason: but the concept is pretty cool. sky vacuum to capture carbon from the air. here's peter coy with his story on this issue's tech session. peter: climate change is an economic issue. how do you solve this problem? there are obvious things you do. build more windmills and solar plants.

but the people who believe you can capture carbon directly from the air, that has to be part of the solution. jason: how does this work? peter: carbon dioxide is an acid, and chemical terms, but binds with bases. if you have a chemical and you run air through big fans, then it bidns with this chemical, forms a salt, and then you put the salt through another loop of the equation of the plant, and then you get a different salt, and then you can run that through a heater, and that splits off the carbon dioxide into a pure stream of carbon dioxide, and then you send back a line that gets hydrated and putback into the process.

carol: this is the periodic table at work. it really is. it goes back to basic imagery. it makes so much sense, very logical. why aren't we doing it already? peter: well, we are doing it on an experimental basis. i focus on three companies. one is carbon engineering. one is global thermostat. and the other is climb works, based in switzerland. the one outfront is carbon engineering, which is finishing up the design work on a plant that will pull out one million tons a year of carbon dioxide from the year. carol: sounds like a lot. is it? peter: it's a huge amount compared to what's been done before, but a pittance compared to the size of a problem. jason: so, why not do this? peter: it's expensive, more expensive than other solutions. but the cost is come down a lot, so it's no longer crazy expensive, just on the high-end. it's cheaper than other options, like say, battery airplanes that we've talked about in the magazine. and furthermore, there were,

-- will come a point where we will have a string on reducing putting carbon dioxide into the air. at that point, you'll have to think about supplementing it with taking something out of the air. carbon dioxide was produced by your grand parents, sitting out in the atmosphere all this time. carol: the important part of this, it's meant to complement or supplement what's already being done in terms of combating climate change. jason: that's a real good point. someone reading it would be, pollute all you want. we'll just vacuum it up. peter: that's what some people say. it's the wrong message. don't say you have a free ticket to pollute. no, definitely not. you want to be doing everything, the low hanging fruit and high hanging fruit. jason: i love how you refer to this as the high hanging fruit, which you don't usually talk

about. how likely is it this gets adopted in a meaningful way? peter: i think it's very likely. again, it sort of has to happen. nothing else will do the job. it will be expensive, but we see the cost on solar and wind come way, way down. this will come down, as well. carol: there's another story on how the decade-long drought sparked a popular report -- revolt in july. jason: here's christina lindblad to explain. christina: most of them art however they stay meager about the them speak penions, andl, people feel like the education system is producing inequality. carol: the usual suspects. christina: yeah, exactly. but we looked at the prospects and that's been affecting central chile, where most of the population is.

and so we looked at these water -- i mean, literally, that have been playing out, and how these protest -- you can't say they literally jump from the rural areas to the city, with her vacantly being echoes of unequal access to water, unequal access to education, to opportunity. carol: tell us about the impact on livestock. i think of farmers in chile. how has it played out? christina: we talked to people who have lost more than half of their life start in the last couple of years -- livestock in the last couple of years. avocado farming has spread, of course, to feed this global demand for good of a cutters. demand for avocados. avocado farmers are being

accused of exploding their water rights and tapping rivers, illegally. so, all these far -- small farmers have rainfall has been lacking. carol: so the avocado farmers are fine. christina: yeah. if you look at the photos, it is stark. they should not be grown in some of these places. so, yeah, it's just one of those things. jason: one of the issues this brings to mind is income inequality, obviously, but obviously -- this notion of economic choices that favor business over consumers, or people, and businesses over what most would argue is a basic human right. christina: well, that's right, and i think people were initially surprised at the violence of these demonstrations.

in chile, of all places, because it has been a model over latin america over how it in tried this neoliberal model. that constitution dates from the time of dictatorship. jason: like pinochet? cristina: it's a water law that gives in perpetuity. they can trade them. once upon a time, the thought was free markets would help people be careful in the management of finite resource. there really has not been the case. mining and export oriented agriculture have really -- the government has prioritized those kinds of uses for water. we have now communities in chile that depend on water getting trucked in, and when they open the faucet, nothing comes up. jason: it's amazing. i do wonder, what is the political backdrop here?

a lot of this unrest, as you said at the beginning, has been tied to the political system. is there any sense that may change soon? what's the latest there? cristina: the outcome might be quite radical as they agreed on two means of the constitution. the consensus is that the constitution needs to be rewritten because it enshrines this model that is no longer, that has caused distortion. jason: essentially not valid as a country. cristina: right. they haven't started talking about how water is going to play into that, but we could see changes in that, as well. it's a complete rethinking about what you want to be as a country. jason: coming up, businessweek

traces its origins to 1929. what a year to be born. carol: not an easy here to make its debut, but there was so much going on. jason: we do indeed. this is bloomberg businessweek. ♪ ♪

jason: welcome back. i'm jason kelly. carol: i'm carol massar. silicon valley's take on a tax haven. jason: an arms race between two suburbs. the target? millennials. carol: speaking of millennials, you know what's not a millennial? jason: this magazine? carol: it is turning 90. it's covered business through the decades. jason: to share some of the

highlights, here's a guy who knows a lot about it. this is jim ellis. jim: it was a different magazine. we were a different place, different owner. there were a lot of things that was surprisingly the same. it's been a big thought we would do more than report the news. what we want to do is add insight and add analysis so that the reader can not just sort of chronicle of what happened this week, but also why it's important, why it matters, and what might become. of it in the future that's the value that has come on in the coming years. carol: this section kicks off identifying three people who spanned the entire lifetime, 90 years of businessweek. you are one of them. not that you go back 90 years, but what's fascinating is editors and individuals passing down the history of the magazine. jim: that's one of the nice

things about our magazine, the condo woody. i've worked with pete -- continuity. i've worked with people for 90 years. we've seen a lot of things happen in business, and there's a lot of context that we already know. we're not rushing around, oh my god. what is it? i was there at the opening of disney world. i'm embarrassed to say i was there for that. i've been a lot of things here. a lot of us can shift between stories and hopefully we can add a lot when we work with younger reporters because we seem these -- we've seen these stories before. jason: one of the roles i believe you played was that you were the chief correspondent, dealing with the outlying bureaus. in a different context, bloomberg, that feeds the magazine in a lot of ways and

gives it a feel that's far beyond a bunch of people in new york. tell us about that. jim: that's one of the strengths, being able to have a bureau system or a system of reporters around the world, sort of close to their companies, but also picking up information that's often difficult to get if your seven time zones away. but having people in asia back before handing over hong kong, when china was open, to be early on stories like that, and then understand on why things either happen very fast or they don't happen nearly as fast as people in new york. we've benefited from having this bureaus back in the day, but especially now, because bloomberg has a huge editorial staff that we're able to draw on. carol: tell us about bringing women into the magazine, and the consumer, how it's evolved.

jim: it changed because market segmentation begin this big deal, and new businesses were popping up because technology was inventing new industries, new things more consumer focused. and what happened is we had to figure out ways to cover that, but also management had to figure out ways to manage that. the idea of professional manager came about. we were early on covering women. initially, we covered women, a handful of entrepreneurs. hazel bishop, who invented non-smearable lipstick. it became a huge business. and the woman who was the marketing chief at tupperware, she made the cover. we didn't get serious about what happens within corporations and the challenges until 975. -- 1975. we did a large project, a bunch of stories, i think, are still great.

i was surprised. i reread them for this project. i was surprised a lot of the things people say today, that a man says owoma says the same thing and it's considered to be shrill. how can you be so pushy? whatever. those quotes have been -- could have been said by silicon valley this year. we're still talking about that. likewise, we started out not doing much coverage of minority business. a lot of the coverage we had was pretty bad. and i had a chance to read some of the early stuff all the way up to the 50's. in the 60's, because of the changes in society, all of a sudden everybody decided we will think about that. businessweek turned into a big place to talk about black empowerment in business. it was interesting to see how we took that. we got more sophisticated.

by the time the 1970's came along and i came along, we were doing a lot more coverage and sort of wondering about not just the positives about that, but what about the economic changes that seem to be stalling out. we have been really, really good on trying to say this is how society goes. business people need to know more than numbers on the accounting sheet. jason: for more on the 90th anniversary. carol: we turned her businessweek as paul o'dwyer, who is back in 1995. pollock: it was a book largely covering industrial america. it was largely written by men. it was largely a stable version of various other industries. and then there's this journalist that took it over. he really changed it. he brought in women. he opened a washington bureau, which i was located. he did a lot of things that live

ended up, and i think it became the forerunner to businessweek. carol: absolutely. we were talking throughout the week about the 90th anniversary, i think you used to think it was separate. politics was here, business was here, technology. now it's interconnected. paula: they didn't have their own washington bureau. there was an organization which serviced all the publications, everything from modern plastics to engineering news and people had a very trade mentality instead of narrative mentality or profile mentality or investigative mentality, or even talking about how politics enters into a lot of the business stories. so the washington bureau really changed the look and feel of businessweek. jason: let's talk about that because it does feel like the late 1980's and into the early 1990's was this seminal moment

when washington seemed to wake up and say hold on a second. there's business going on that maybe we need to keep an eye i think about the lbo area that got kicked out. paula: step back a little bit and you have what we call the decade of greed that was the 1980's. that was when people crashed onto the scene. but they were doing things that probably corporate america called for. there were a lot of ceo's that had an imperialistic viewpoint about themselves, and they were using shareholder money for fleets of airplanes. some of them had many air forces. there was takeover battles, especially one involving rj, emblematic of the era. you had people like mike milken, who used bonds.

and henry kravis, who landed on the cover, and i believe it was 1988, as king henry, who upset all of that, and who shook up the ceo world. it went a little too far. as we know, mike milken ended up in jail. and it kravis is still going strong. some of the people involved were shady characters. carol: big business certainly got its time, but so did advocacy groups. paula: a lot of things happened. it wasn't just decades of greed. i think a lot of big ideas developed in that period. you had consumer advocates see that -- advocacy that came off of ralph nader's book. he burst a whole generation of people who would go to run advocacy organizations or agencies in washington, like the epa or consumer product safety commission. it was also the era where corporate governance came into being, where shareholders got a

voice and could vote on resolutions and could turn out ceo's or approved or not approved mergers. it was also the era when consumerism rose up. and it was the era when the retail investor came to be because people started to have to manage their retirement money through 401(k)s, so we finally had an investor democratization going on. jason: from floating tax havens to putting many city states on land. the latest from the institute. carol: interesting idea. new york's commuter town. jason: this is bloomberg businessweek. ♪

jason: welcome back. i'm jason kelly.

join bloomberg businessweek every day on the radio. you can also catch up on our daily show by listening to us on our podcast. jason: you can also find us on our bloomberg mobile app. a formal google engineer and international waters expert is negotiating with officials to put many city states in their countries. this is a real thing. carol: definitely a real thing. here's land ho for silicon valley. >> you've heard of c studying, this idea that's gained currency in silicon valley. libertarian circle, anyway. you build these little floating fortresses just far enough offshore that they wouldn't be subject to u.s. law. carol: tax haven. >> yeah. carol: is that what this is about? >> that's part of it. that's not the biggest part of what he's after.

carol: tell us what he is after. jeff: he's the guy that cofounded this east heading institute a little more than a decade ago with money from peter thiel, a conservative be a -- billionaire. carol: silicon valley guy friendly with president trump. jeff: that's right. this was a while before he forged that relationship. but when they tried to get c studying off the ground, the idea was that it would build the economic and legal framework to build these of the coast of wherever and let thousand jerry havens bloom. that did not go well for the rv and peoplereasons

who were not excited to have these seasteads pop out of their homes. private companies organized with the help of the seasteading institute. they objected on the grounds that this would be pretty disruptive to canoeing and surfing and other industries. carol: let's make the pro and con case. what is good about doing this? jeff: this is all a prelude to his new venture. whereas peter thiel has not checked with the institute in over five years and is not like to talk about in interviews, it's on his unofficial do not talk list. the organization that freeman started, a venture fund called perdomo's capital is very much on the donor list. he will put up more than half of

the $9 million to get started to try and get set up what i would call seasteds on land. carol: who once this? is there a demand for this? jeff: freeman and some of the people working with him on the ground say there's interest from organizations, whether global economic development groups or just interested millionaires, to set up these kinds of many city states. carol: autonomous states, right? jeff: exactly. the pitch, although they are not working ostensibly with local governments -- they are leaving that with secondary agencies -- is that they would set up these semi autonomous regions, tracts of land, with judges who they

would hire to run things. and they would be immune to local law. carol: that's what's interesting. there's a line that the justice system is more important than the tax breaks and he talks about laws. he's saying let's create these. there will be some but there's a lot of freedoms and it's going to be economically successful. jeff: his argument is rule of law is the most important thing in this common-law institute has been retired and they are hoping british judges is the ideal model over any other, when why that as opposed to any other code of laws or ethics? didn't have the best answer for people worried about colonialism.

carol: he's got as far to say we've solved poverty. jeff: that's one of his pitches. carol: some other well-known folks in the tech community. jeff: particularly bitcoin abdicates, the guy known as bitcoin jesus, into the idea of building their own system. jason: coming up, a couple suburbs talk about new rochelle. they've got their eyes on young professionals priced out of manhattan and brooklyn. carol: plus, we talked luxury watches. this is bloomberg businessweek. ♪

carol: welcome back. i'm carol massar. jason: i'm jason kelly. you can also listen to us on the radio. 106.1 in boston. carol: am 960 in the bay area. in london on dab digital, and always on the bloomberg business app. jason: the arm's race is heating up between two suburbs in new york city. new rochelle and yonkers. carol: the two biggest towns are affluent urbanites, but are sick and tired of feeling poor. >> they are not very cool places to live, but these cities are in an arms race, trying to compete for new millennials and juncker professionals, who are looking -- younger professionals who are looking around and finding they can't afford to live in

manhattan. what they're doing is they're spearheading new developments. they are building new units, luxury sky races -- rises and apartment buildings and hoping people start to move into these new units and start building a family in new rochelle and yonkers. carol: in terms of real estate, the amenities involved. there's some, hatchet touring? dish throwing -- throwing? axe throwing? they are trying to do things that appeal to a younger generation. vilda: exactly. both cities would like to open axe throwing bars. that's something they think will appeal to young, attractive people moving from manhattan. jason: such an interesting appeal. i live in the burbs, a little north where we're talking about. there has, for long been, not everyone can be as hip as carol, living close into the city.

the reality is it's always been binary. we either live in the city or you're going to the burbs. this is trying to find a middle ground. essentially, expanding the footprint in many ways of new york city. vilda: it is, and the drawing point for both of them, and they would say this, they are 25-30 minutes from downtown manhattan. you can be at work just as fast or faster than you would be living in brooklyn even. jason: that's an important distinction. i've talked to colleagues here in the new york bureau of bloomberg and my commute is shorter and, i daresay, a little more civilized on the commuter train than many of those because have pushed further and further out. vilda: that's right and that's what they're betting on. they're hoping this mass migration will move in. these are places where the tax bases were hollowed out in the 70's and 80's. they really need to reinvigorate.

they need to bring new people in if they want to stay relevant. carol: i've got to say, i spent a fair amount of time in new rochelle. chris near the water and so forth. but you go around the cities their huge, but you can see the streets that are troubled in the cities having a hard time. of doingts of decades well and coming undone. they are trying to reinvent themselves but i don't think it will be easy. vilda: it's certainly not easy. and there are risks here. there's going to be this huge amount of inventories they might not be able to fill. the other thing is walking around the streets and talking to people who currently live in yonkers, new rochelle, they're afraid their landlords will look around and say maybe i can do some minor renovations in the buildings i currently own, and i can hike up rent. a lot of residents are fearful their cost-of-living will have to go up and they will be driven out of those areas.

carol: from luxury housing. to luxury watches we go. jason: just in time for the holidays, you are shopping for me, i know. here's our interview with the ceo of luxury watchmaker zenith. >> if we want to keep young generations interested into mechanical watchmaking, and not have them not wearing a large, or only a smartwatch, we have to be a difference maker. jason: watches are, pardon the pun, are sort of having a moment. people are discovering the artisan nature, the craftsmanship carol was alluding to. why do you think that is? why are people pivoting back, and maybe away from the smartwatch? >> first of all, we live in such a fast world. i mean, this with the internet, between the social media --

don't forget, the mechanical watch is one of the few objects that will last forever. if in 1000 years, you have a watch and you have a watchmaker able to put some oil, it will still work. how many objects in this room will still work in a thousand years? when you buy a cell phone, when you buy a smartwatch, you know the minute you buy it it's already obsolete. people need to attach themselves to something that will last forever. carol: i think about the conversations we keep, this disposable society that we become, were used to hold something -- ever dads would fix something that became broken. i wonder if we are channeling back to that. what are you seeing in terms of consumers? especially the younger consumer. what does the younger consumer want in a watch? >> i think they buy history. they want authenticity. we are bombarded by marketing, communication, publicity everywhere, and they want to buy something with consequence.

they ask how it's made, how long does it take? physically, what's behind the brand and what's behind the price? we have to show you how many hours the watchmaker is working on the watch. that's very important. also, we need to show creativity and innovation. jason: bloomberg businessweek is available on newsstands now. your must-read? the 90th anniversary. i love it. 90 years, not a millennial to say the least. that magazine, it's seen some things, and had huge issues of the day. carol: that's what's remarkable, whether racial issues, women on wall street. we're still talking about them today. you talk about influence and that is key in terms of pushing governments on policy. this is really the word of record, if you will, when it comes to business. jason: and continues to be. check out our daily podcast. it's available on apple podcast, soundcloud.

and at bloomberg.com. there are extras this week with the ceo upon the spirit -- ceo of obama's. carol: good stuff. more bloomberg television starts now. ♪ what are you doing back there, junior?

since we're obviously lost, i'm rescheduling my xfinity customer service appointment. ah, relax. i got this. which gps are you using anyway? a little something called instinct. been using it for years. yeah, that's what i'm afraid of. he knows exactly where we're going. my whole body is a compass. oh boy... the my account app makes today's xfinity customer service simple, easy, awesome. not my thing.

scarlet: i'm scarlet fu. this is "etf iq," where we focus on the assets, risks and rewards offered by exchange traded funds. ♪ scarlet: tale of two years. etf flows show caution reigned for most of the year until risk took over in november. how does that set us up for 2020? we get passive aggressive with the big three. blackrock, vanguard, and state street sound off on what is fueling the fire of etf adoption. and the holiday season calls for an etf whose motto may as well be "let the good times roll."