♪ taylor: i'm taylor riggs in san francisco. this is bloomberg technology. coming up in the next hour, streaming surge. comcast debuts its new streaming service. can it stand out against others? plus, climate control. microsoft makes a major push into removing carbon from the earth's atmosphere. we will get details from the microsoft president and chief legal officer. and keep pedaling. we'll talk to an analyst to

thinks peloton is not just a fad. that bullish sentiment coming up. first, we begin with a continued dominance of tech in the u.s. market. stocks upadmit, the 1.7%, nasdaq up more than 1%. is something bigger going on? >> it feels like 2019. this unstoppable rally keeps going. it does not feel like a relief rally, because yesterday after the signing of the trade deal, it was just the stocks that trumped 1%. the other averages posted average highs, s&p 500 and dow. typically a relief rally would come after a big selloff from the major averages. it feels a little bit more like perhaps the early stages of euphoria within the bubble paradigm. that starts with capitulation, then with dislocation into the

economic face and then -- phase and then euphoria. does that match the fundamentals? trading at ant, greater than 20 times forward pe. as you note last year, earnings fell by double digits. they are expected to fall for the fourth quarter and the first quarter of 2020. by the end of the year, analysts are looking for double digits growth for tech and chips. for the chips, the first half of the year is difficult. it seems like investors could be a little bit ahe of taylor: speaking of getting ahead of ourselves, i want to show you a chart here. another day, another new record high, another trillion dollar company. that would be none other than alphabet. you can see it catching up to the likes of apple and microsoft. what did alphabet do to join the $1 trillion club?

>> they have been executing. arethat reason, investors rewarding those shares, putting it into the elite status. in terms of what it means, when you have the dow hitting big psychological levels, does it mean something? probably less so. in this case, it truly is an elite status. three companies in the world, pointing to the dominance of tech and internet. relative to alphabet moving forward, it doesn't mean managers are going to have to wait the stock. more large-cap and tech managers are already overweighting. it probably does not help their fundamentals, but it is nice to when you have a large market cap. this has come on stellar performance and large numbers. that's very impressive. taylor: i want to talk about fundamentals and technicals.

we are coming up on earnings when we look at fundamentals. chart is pretty amazing. scary, even. the s&p 500 tech index and the blue boxes are where the index has been well above the 200 day moving average. investors are ahead of themselves. you can see a period in 2017 into 2018, that was not a problem. at that time, the rsi on the bottom indicator was well into overbought territory, close to 85 and 86. right now, we are 18% above the 200 and moving average, far more than earlier. i say only -- the rsi is only at 77 relative to 85. the need the service, a little at -- beneath the service, little bit of a bearish divergence. this earnings season has got to be knocked out of the park or we will see some quick

consolidation. taylor: thank you on all things market with bloomberg's abigail doolittle. comcast officially unveiled its entry into the streaming universe. the service, dubbed peacock, is not launching until april. while it will feature new original content, it is going to rely heavily on hopes that viewers will continue to tune in and pony up for old favorites like the office, parks and recreation, and brooklyn 99. there will be three different pricing tiers ranking from free to $9.99 per month. to tell us how peacock will fare against the likes of netflix and disney plus, our analysts are joining us. how does peacock stand out in this crowded market? >> what comcast has said and telegraphed is that it is free to a lot of people. you see in the marketplace,

netflix costs $10 to $13 depending on your package. apple service costs about five dollars. disney plus is seven dollars. from sixnywhere dollars to $10. the two that are coming up our hbo max and peacock. hbo max is loading as much programming as possible and charging a high price relative to the others. that is $15. peacock for its most basic plan is free. there is one basic package of five dollars and another at $10, but you will be able to access lots of shows and movies at no cost. they are framing it as an advertising play. in competitionst with the likes of netflix and hulu but also with facebook and youtube. taylor: does the pricing strategy mean anything? it seems like a race to zero. michael: i think lucas is right.

i think people are missing the point here. these guys are in this to protect their core business. comcast's core business is providing cable service, they want that $85 cable bill. they will do everything they can to protect that core business and give their core customer a reason not to cut the cord. netflix can only survive if they can charge every single customer. hbo is already charging customers, so they are just enhancing their core business model by giving customers more for the same price. these guys are all approaching the streaming wars differently. at the end of the day, i think the right solution is that all cable customers get all content on demand all the time. or $50 a month more to be able to watch i love lucy on my comcast subscription. that has been the problem. the deals that are cut with the talent that creates the shows,

you're only able to go back something like five weeks on broadcast television. that is what opened the window for netflix to get content. comcast realized they can keep their nbc universal stuff and bundle it and give it away for free. warner realized we can keep our own hbo content and bundle it for free. amazon is giving everything away anyway. netflix is way behind because they don't have a first window to monetize that content. disney, comcast, warner bros. all win. netflix and amazon lose. fortunately, amazon has another side business that they can rely on to funnel this. taylor: give me a reaction to the content wars. it is interesting to see how netflix is standing out with more oscar nominations. you have comcast coming in with

more original programming, but old disney, a backlog of material. in the content wars, where does comcast stand out? lucas: michael is right in that this fits into the comcast broader strategy, which is the streaming will never be the major business for comcast. they don't want streaming video over the internet to be the dominant platform. comcast's interest is selling you cable and increasingly selling you internet. it wants you to view comcast and buy internet from comcast, and it makes a healthy margin on that. they will offer peacock, even the paid version of peacock, as free bundled into those people who either get cable from their internet service. they are not going to compete at the same level as some of the other players. that leads me to believe that it will not be quite as successful.

it might be fine for comcast corporation. comcast will make a ton of money selling internet service for the for seeable future, but they have to figure out how they want to position peacock in the marketplace against netflix, amazon, disney plus. disney plus has a pretty clear brand proposition. same with netflix. netflix has a little bit of something for everybody. i'm not sure what comcast and peacock represents to the average consumer and they probably have to spend a lot of money to make it known. taylor: i wonder the capacity for these different streaming services per person, per household. lucas: the average household spends something like $85 on cable. as you can see from netflix's numbers, add $12.99 to that. we are spending $100 per month on video content. people are very comfortable

spending $100. above median household incomes $125.ne going to they will add as many services as they perceive they need to add. adding concept that is not necessarily original, they could the old stuff like "friends," th ey are not all exclusive. disney has old stuff like the simpsons, which makes it worthwhile for a guy like me. people have the capacity to spend $30 or $40 if they are below me in income. i see the streaming services proliferating. i don't think they are competing for subscribers for the first year or two. that will come when they start to saturate and people have three subtractions and can't justify the fourth one. taylor: the never old michael

pachter and lucas shaw. thank you both for joining us. coming up, microsoft joins a global movement to fight climate change. we will hear from its legal officer brett smith about plans the tech giant has in store. this is bloomberg. ♪

taylor: microsoft made a major investment announcement in the effort to fight climate change wednesday. it will invest $1 billion in companies and organizations working on carbon reducing technology. i spoke with microsoft president

and chief legal officer, brett smith, earlier. >> microsoft's commitment to put a billion dollars into innovation is a piece of a broader plan, but the fund itself will really be focused on accelerating innovation and climate reduction and removal technology where money is not flowing already. one area where we see paramount importance is the creation of new and better technology that will enable us all to remove carbon from the atmosphere. another area where we see a critical need for money where it is not yet flowing is, for example, project finance for renewable energy sites in developing markets. there are some parts of the world, especially in the united states and western europe, where capital is already flowing for new renewable energy. not everywhere. we want our money to make a difference.

taylor: are you really looking outside the u.s. to deploy this $1 billion? brad: certainly in part we are looking outside the united states. when it comes to the creation of new places that will generate renewable energy. but when it comes to technology innovation, it doesn't know boundaries or specific countries. i am sure there will be some of this flowing inside the united states, across europe and around the world. taylor: as you take a look at microsoft's goals, you have a plan by at least 2030 to be net carbon negative. where are we on achieving that goal? brad: in many ways, the most ambitious thing we are seeing today is as you just mentioned, we will be carbon negative as a company by 2030, not just for our company, but for our supply chain, for our so-called value chain. by 2050, we will remove from the

environment all of the carbon that microsoft has emitted either directly or for electrical consumption since we were founded in the year 1975. that is a big goal. we have a detailed plan, but we have a lot of work to do. that's why we say this is a decade-long ambition for us. taylor: you are working with your suppliers and customers to make sure they are doing their own initiatives in terms of being net carbon neutral as well. how are you folding in these goals with your contracts with suppliers and customers to make sure they are held accountable? brad: it requires a detailed plan which we have been putting together over the past months. one aspect when it comes to supply, naturally the supply of electricity for ourselves. what we are saying is that by the year 2025, we will have purchased power agreements in place for 100% renewable energy for all of our data centers, all of our buildings and campuses worldwide.

but then there is all of the other emissions that are generated as part of our supply chain. we will be implementing by next year new tools and processes for our suppliers. we will want to see consistent measurement of their emissions. we want to help our suppliers with new tools so they can reduce their emissions. we will be talking with our suppliers in the coming months. i think you can expect to see us forward with new economic incentives so that as we are buying goods and services, we are focused on encouraging our suppliers to reduce their emissions, and if they do, i think they will find it easier to sell their products to microsoft. taylor: that was brad smith of microsoft. we will hear from him again next about how microsoft and other big tech could benefit from the u.s. china phase one trade deal. this is bloomberg. ♪

taylor: more from microsoft president brad smith. smith spoke out about the long-lasting tensions between the u.s. and china. he says the divisions between technologies risks a c technoloy cold war. i asked him to elaborate on his comment. brad: it was a good and important step. it adds stability, it creates a foundation for additional progress. it adds to business confidence. we were definitely very happy to see it and supportive of it. i think we should all want to see continued progress made by the two governments together. taylor: you were talking about a real threat of a technology cold war. what does that look like to you? brad: i think that a phase one trade deal doesn't necessarily put to rest the other technology

issues that have become part of the geopolitical landscape. these are not just the two largest economy in the world, they are the economies that have the strongest tech sectors. both governments are focused on the national security implications of technology products. the 5g conversation has become a conversation around national and economic security. i don't think that is going to change because of a phase one trade deal. we should all expect this to be a complicated issue, an important issue, and one that is going to be topical on an ongoing business throughout the decade. taylor: you only get about 2% of global sales from china. i wonder if that has been more of a concerted effort to protect yourself until these issues are resolved? i am thinking ip theft, forced

tech transfer. does this perhaps change anything for microsoft's fundamental business? brad: today, the u.s. government has concerns about certain aspects of chinese information technology coming into the u.s. you see the thing where the shoe is on the other foot in china. i don't think that is going to change anytime soon. simply because of a connection that the governments in each country see between information technology and their national security. i think that means they are -- there are still very important opportunities for collaboration. there's a lot of basic research that happens in the technology space that is really global. there's the creation of software code, including by open-source

developers. it takes place on a global basis, people writing code in china, the united states, europe, and ultimately bringing it together. i think the world is going to need our two countries to work together, even while we manage these tensions. if you take something like sustainability, if you look at carbon, the two countries that have the biggest impact are china and the united states. we need to work together to solve some of the world's big problems for our own sake as countries and for the world as a whole. taylor: i want to move as well onto the jedi pentagon contract and the subsequent amazon lawsuit. they are effectively saying you didn't deserve it. how do you respond? brad: every contract we have is important. some contracts are different and even unique. for microsoft, our jedi contract

to support the united states military is not just an issue of commercial responsibility, it is a question of national responsibility. we welcome and embrace that. we sought this contract out. one of the reasons we did is we recognized not only would cloud technology become vital for the nation's defense, but we knew we had the wherewithal to build a better product. it is worth keeping in mind that the procurement process for this contract from start to finish was almost two years. one thing that we did was put more engineers on it and focus on constantly improving our product to meet what we knew would be the defense department's needs. i look at this and i think there is an interesting lesson for all of us. certainly in the world of business, but maybe in life more

broadly. first, never assume that you are so far ahead that you can't lose. never conclude that you are so far behind that you can't catch up. every day, we focus not just on catching up, but leading. i think that when the full story is told, when people understand it, what they are going to find is that this country has dedicated people who work for the department of defense who focused on one thing and one thing only. buying the technology that would best protect the country. taylor: that was microsoft's brad smith. coming up, how foxconn is making a deal with fiat to help charge up the road. that's next. this is bloomberg. ♪

taylor: this is bloomberg technology. we join bloomberg daybreak australia to bring you the latest in global tech news. i'm taylor riggs in san francisco with shery ahn in new york and haidi stroud-watts in sydney. let's take a look at the top global tech stories. >> it could get harder for u.s. tech companies to secure foreign investments. u.s. treasury treasury department regulations will force companies that handle sensitive personal data like social media and health care firms to go under increased vetting. the rules will take effect february 13.

apple's main chipmaker is reporting quarterly sales well above analyst estimates. they also posted fourth-quarter earnings better than expected. taiwan's largest company investing in technology to make sure it maintains market lead over samsung and intel. the rollout of 5g phones this year is expected to lead to faster growth. for the first time in more than seven years, morgan stanley is recommending selling tesla shares. according to analysts, optimism around the electric carmaker's growth in china is now priced into the stock. tesla's stock price has more than doubled since the beginning of october. those are your top global tech stories we are watching today. >> sticking with electric cars, a company that assembles iphones is getting into the ev market. it is joining with fiat chrysler. it will be responsible for the design components and supply chain management. fiat will handle the actual assembly of the cars.

joining us now in new york is our bloomberg auto reporter. tell us about their experience both in the ev industry and fiat in the chinese market. >> that question gets to the bottom of the idea that this is a puzzling joint venture as our reporter in detroit has on the story pointed out. they have a lot of supply chain expertise in china. a lot of that with lithium-ion batteries that go into iphones and also go into electric cars. those are two very different products. don't just ask me, ask apple. everyone is familiar with the idea that they flirted in going into this industry and decided against it. fiat chrysler has struggled in

the u.s. market -- excuse me, in the china market. they have really struggled. it is a problem that will not be solved if they are able to pull psa, themerger with french carmaker that is struggling in china. analysts are confused about what to make of this. taylor: the obvious first focus on china is obvious, given that we have talked about tesla's success in the ev market there in china. i wonder if it is soon enough to catch up to tesla. i would if they think they will be successful there. craig: that's a great question. the idea that this is essentially two companies that are inexperienced in bringing electric vehicles to market does raise questions about whether it's too little too late. it's also worth pointing out that there are a lot of electric

vehicle joint ventures in china that we don't hear a lot about because they don't do a ton of volume. they are essentially pumping out compliance cars to allow for these companies to be able to -- to hit the tougher emission standards that car companies are being held to in that market. about when we think electric vehicles in china, one of the first comes to mind is china and the shanghai factory. could this venture pose a significant challenge to tesla? craig: we don't know yet what sort of volumes we are talking about. the venture still doesn't have a formal agreement. we don't know how big their ambitions are. we know that foxconn is a huge company and does serious volumes. another question that will be interesting for them to have to answer is this is a taiwanese company. there are issues of whether or

not this is a ticket for fiat chrysler to be eligible for subsidies. that's one of the ways in which tesla is able to potentially succeed with this new factory you just mentioned. not have a did great day today. they were downgraded with morgan stanley. what is the significance of that ? craig: taylor riggs had an interview earlier this week with jmp securities. they noticed the stock has taken off in a serious way very quickly. you heard of echoes in morgan stanley's analysis with what was jmp had to say earlier this week, that the valuation might be rich at this point. taylor: we were starting to wonder who are tesla's competitors in the ev markets.

are they starting to catch up? craig: it is a sense that fiat chrysler joint venture with hon hai, it is a sense of just how many competitors there will be. there's a question of how many to take seriously and how many will stay compliance projects that the companies don't have a choice but to explore. there will be a ton of competition in this, both because of the need to hit tougher standards and the sheer volume. we heard hon hai say in this story that they look at the opportunity in this market to do volume. that's why they are focusing on china first, then maybe after that they look at exporting elsewhere. shery: we have a ton of eco data coming out of china this evening. are we seeing any signs of a recovery in the chinese car market? craig: not that i have seen.

through the year end for china, there was ongoing real challenges with the auto market. some questions about whether the electric vehicle segment will see some relief from -- the government has sent a signal that they are going to hold off on dialing back of subsidies because that was a big impact the back half of last year where we saw growth for quite a while, even when the broader market was slowing down. once subsidies were dialed back, the electric vehicle market joined the rest of the industry in having tough times. taylor: craig on the hill, talking about the subsidies. i want to talk to you about pricing strategy in china. tesla was trying to cut their pricing models. they are well below the luxury vehicles. they are on par with local operators there. what does this mean about

pricing strategy in china for these electric vehicles? craig: with tesla, what you are seeing is a strategy of trying to get more in line with where you see the mass market. they are still a little bit higher, but i think that's ok because in tesla you have a premium brand that people will be willing to pay up for for that technology and the cool factor that elon musk has brought to the industry. if you are fiat chrysler and hon hai and just entering this game and getting into building a brand and just jumping into the market now, you are probably going to have to get to a point where you can offer these models very cheaply. that is where we see quite a bit of volume for the electric vehicle segment. a lot of these compliance cars have limited range and aimed for company and government fleets and more so about checking a box has opposed to going after the consumer. taylor: thank you to bloomberg's

craig trudell. much more ahead. stick with us. this is bloomberg. ♪

taylor: according to one, peloton is more than just a fad. shares rose wednesday after it was written none of the lower-priced bike alternatives represent a legitimate threat to its dominance in the space. james joins us now. walk me through your thesis. james: ultimately, i think long-term the way investors will value this stock is based on their situation business. as much as we talk about equipment sales, which are the majority of sales today, i think

down the road, they are building toward a large profitable and ultimately sustainable subscription business. the valuation of other similar if the valuation of other similar companies is any indication, investors are jumping all over themselves to be part of a company like that. yes, there is competition, but i think the bigger point here is that this entire segment is poised for extended growth. that is the result of a lot of people transitioning from a club or gym experience to an at-home experience. the size of that market is going to be up substantially and peloton stands the best chance of dominating that market. taylor: you mentioned valuation. are they a hardware fitness company or a software tech company? that changes the valuation. james: absolutely. today, they are clearly some

combination of both. if you asked the management team, they want to be valued as the latter. it way we put together our valuation is based on the sum of the parts. we are valuing their current business, which is 80% hardware, based on a fast-growing but nonetheless hardware comps, whereas we are valuing their subscription business at a much higher multiple. albeit not quite as high as the companies that have sustained success on that front. companies like netflix. planet fitness in the fitness space is garnering a premium multiple. certainly if you think about software as instruction service companies, those companies are garnering impressive multiples. ev sales, we think about their

subscription business at six times and the equipment business at three times. if you put them together, we get to 3.7 times their sales just the $37 we are putting out there. taylor: walk me through your analysis on the bottom line. its ceo said we could be profitable, but the board doesn't think it's in our best interest to just turn out a profit. are you comfortable with that? james: i am. that comment rubbed some people the wrong way, but i would argue at least in my experience, when companies transition from being high growth, low profit or no profit in this case companies to being lower growth, more profitable companies, they tend to get dinged in terms of the valuation. and net-net, the stock ends up going in the wrong direction. given that the end goal is a big profitable, sustainable subscription business, i think everything that management is doing is with that end goal in mind.

certainly over the next few years, within reason, if they see a trade-off where they can invest money and stimulate growth, even if they have to sacrifice margins to do it, they will be more than willing to do so. it is worth noting that a gross margin level, these are profitable businesses. taylor: give me more of your analysis, what is the number one key line item you would like to see the company turn out? james: subscribers will be the big number. again, so much of this is based on what this looks like three years, five years or 10 years down the road. the single most important number of people will look at is the subscriber growth number. within that, the number of subscribers that roll off of their $39 subscriptions over the

course of a quarter. then a distant third is the gross margin of their subtraction business. i don't expect a whole lot of leverage out of it this year, but over the next couple of years, as they get more and more subscribers, you are not going to see as much investment in terms of new studios and new trainers. we should be able to leverage that line item as well. taylor: james hardiman, thank you for joining us on your latest call. facebook backing away from plans to sell ads in whatsapp. it is being said that whatsapp has expanded a team finding best s into thetegrate ad process. what do we know about what's at -- whatsapp's web strategy? >> they have talked about putting ads inside of the status feature which is similar to stories. that makes a lot of sense,

because facebook sells those types of ads in other properties. the thought of looking through the stories of your whatsapp friends and coming across an ad doesn't seem as intrusive as other types of messaging ads. what the wall street journal is reporting that the plans have been abandoned. what i am hearing is that it's more of a postponement. it's not necessarily that whatsapp is never going to run that it is 2021 if not later, whereas some thought it might happen this year. taylor: frankly, they might have to. out, theyalysis turns paid $19 billion for this company. how do they monetize that? kurt: they have not made much of that back until now. whatsapp has been focused on growing its user base. they make a little bit of money by charging businesses to send messages to users. that is what they are pointing to as their key priority right now. how can they let small businesses, especially in emerging markets like india and

brazil, how can we have people that don't have a website or any other way of communicating with their customer base send messages? then they charge on a per message basis. a cent or two per message. that is a more likely immediate business plan for whatsapp where ads may be coming in the future. taylor: we are getting some analysis from our bloomberg intelligence analyst saying this reported retreat likely underscores regulatory pressure against app integration, though it should not affect the fundamentals. this regulatory pressures against facebook trying to integrate themselves? kurt: when you look at how facebook would monetize whatsapp, you look at the ad stacks that they built. the ad technology that exist inside of facebook and also powers instagram and messenger. -- and powers facebook messenger. maybe there is something around using that same technology power

ads inside whatsapp. i have no idea, but it's an interesting theory that perhaps bringing all the technology together for these different platforms might be part of the issue. taylor: i think of whatsapp on the retail side. there is a business plan to this. how does that fold into facebook's strategy? kurt: right now, facebook is 99% advertising. which is why facebook has talked about putting ads inside of whatsapp. when you look at what they might be able to do outside of ads, what is exciting if you are a facebook investor is diversifying their business a little bit. saying we are not 100% reliant on the ad industry, but we can sell a more enterprise product to businesses, and if that works, we have messenger that also has 1.5 billion users. maybe we can figure out a business model that works for both. taylor: we heard from speaker of

the house nancy pelosi today. in says facebook is shameful allowing this information. .- allowing misinformation i want to get your comments on some of the more negative rhetoric we are getting out of washington dc. where do they stand on their facebook political ad policy? kurt: nothing has changed, unfortunately. this policy is, as you know, they will not fact check politicians, including in ads. that means that a politician could lie and spread it to as many people as they want. nancy pelosi has a personal reason to feel the way she does. there was a deepfake video about her on facebook that showed her appearing to slur her speech. she had already been personally impacted by this idea that misinformation could circulate on facebook. i am not surprised to hear her come out with a strong stance. taylor: thank you for joining us. still ahead, apple is teaming up

with the national basketball association. why the nba chose apple music playlists. this is bloomberg. ♪

taylor: on thursday, apple and the nba announced a partnership that includes an apple music playlist featuring independent artists. the playlist will have about 40 vibes andh hip hop will be refreshed weekly. we're joined by our reporter who covers the nba. what do apple and the nba get from this partnership? mark: when i heard about this, my hair caught on fire. this is the most exciting thing for me in a long time. apple and the nba. essentially, it is a playlist that the nba is going to use to curate the song selection they have on social media. let's say you are watching your

favorite series of lebron james highlights from last night, you will get something from this music playlist in the background. it will also be available in the apple music app. for apple, this puts the more upfront with what's going on culturally with music. music is a big part of the nba. for the nba, it is giving them more eyeballs. they have their bread with 60 million subscribers. what people don't know, viewership of the nba, the regular tuesday or wednesday minnesota timberwolves versus portland trail blazers game is not getting as many viewers as it once did. taylor: your analogies are very funny. on a more serious note, is apple serious about trying to get nba fans to go over to apple music? mark: absolutely.

the nba, despite viewership counts going down, is one of the most viewed sports platforms across the whole world. the nba is massive, not only in the united states, but it is the biggest deal of deals and china and parts of europe right now. that collaboration could spur people who watch the nba away spotify toward apple music. they want the playlist that is going to be curated by apple and also promoted by the nba. the cool thing is going to be when we start to see players in the nba like damien the like -- lillard, they will start appearing on that playlist down the road. that's when you will see the most interesting parts hitting the sink. taylor: where does this fall in terms of their broader strategy? you noticed they trail spotify in terms of music. is this also part of an extended push to catch up to spotify?

anything apple does to add to apple music is almost single-handedly about trying to gain the market share lead in addition to try to make the experience better. the two go hand-in-hand. every additional partnership can't hurt. apple adds an nba membership. it will not insult anyone to un subscribe but it would potentially gain some subscribers. that's important for their long-term growth. taylor: thank you as always for joining us. that does it for this edition of bloomberg technology. bloomberg technology is live streaming on twitter. check us out and be sure to follow our global breaking news network at quicktake on twitter. this is bloomberg. ♪

when you move homes, you move more than just yourself. that's why xfinity has made taking your internet and tv with you a breeze. really? yup. you can transfer your service online in about a minute. you can do that? yeah. and with two-hour service appointment windows, it's all on your schedule. awesome. so while moving may still come with its share of headaches... no kidding. we're doing all we can to make moving simple, easy, awesome. go to xfinity.com/moving to get started.

>> the following is a paid presentation brought to you by rare collectibles tv. announcer: the california gold rush is considered to be one of the most impactful events to affect america's young economy during its first 100 years. it has had a long-lasting impression in numismatic history as well. the people of california needed a way to standardize the value of the new gold. th