welcome to "street signs." we're live in davos. here are your headlines this morning. shutdown averted u.s. lawmakers agree to push through a short-term spending bill to reopen the u.s. government as the world economic forum prepares for president trump's arrival. >> there will be a clash between globalization, between capitalization and capitalism on a world scale and also america first or putting countries

first. germany's dax hits a record high as global stocks rally, but guests here in davos warn investors not to be complacent of financial risks >> if everyone is complacent, if nobody sees risk on the horizon, that's when i get most worried and the white house slaps steep tariffs on imports of solar cells and washing machines prompting an outcry from producers in china and skouth korea who accuse the u.s. of violating wto rules. and sky shares rise after fox's bid is deemed not in the public interest. fox says it is disappointed but will continue to engage with the regulator. ♪

welcome to "street signs." we've got a long list of guests lined up for you today on today's show, we'll speak to the chairman of roche. the founder of damek, and we'll hear from the finance minister over in brazil we'll have the minister of energy for saudi arabia. the minister of energy of qatar. in a few moments, we'll head out live to a panel hosted by andrew ross sorkin speaking -- looking at some big tech issues with a panel, including dara khosrowshahi >> rachel is our global guru, author of "who you can trust" and "what's mine is yours. it was the first book to define the term sharing economy and

collaborative consumption, which "time's" named one of the ten ideas that will change the world. dara khosrowshahi -- >> he's working on it. >> he took what is clearly one of the toughest jobs in tech as the new ceo of uber. he knows a little something about the issue of trust or has dived into that pool in recent months, guiding what is the most valuable startup and private company through some serious public trust issues. shy tell you that he's an iranian immigrant, left the country at 9 years old on the eve of the iranian revolution in 1978, grew up in new york and went off to work for barry diller and has had a remarkable and storied career ruth porat is here former morgan stanley. politico a few years ago named

her as the most powerful woman on wall street today she's known as the cfo of alphabet, google she led google through what has been a remarkable restructuring and transformation the stock under her reign has swelled 30% if not more. we have another bomb thrower in the room he's named the king of the madman, he's that. he founded the world's largest advertising and marketing agency what about the mad women yes. #metoo >> marc benioff is here at the end. sales force ceo and founder. mark sold his first app, software called how to juggle for the trs 80 model 1, for those of you around then, to a computer magazine for $75. flash forward 30 years, sales

force is slated to bring in $10 billion in revenue for the current fiscal year. thank you all for being here here's how i want to begin the conversation dara, you have now lived trial by fire in this new job. all of us think about trust. we all get in the backs of ubers based on a star system something very strange happened to me, at least that i thought about over the past decade or two, all of a sudden we have trusted or -- i don't know if it's real trust or the illusion of trust, the idea that other people have told us that we should trust this driver because they have this rating or i have this rating. given everything you have experienced over the last several months, given the regulatory environment, why should people -- just want to start the conversation at base level. why should the people get in the back of an uber car. >> so, people should get in the back of an uber car first because you can click a button

and it will get to you, in three minutes, and it will be cheap. we are doubling down on making sure that the machinery of background checks and making sure that licenses are good, inspecting the vehicles, et cetera, that all that needs to happen in order for someone to be a licensed driver of a black car or taxi happens at scale so that we take care of. then the second is that the power of the community, and these drivers who are driving in -- most of the drivers in our system have had more than 2,000, 3,000, 4,000 trips the ratings are real we don't mess around with the ratings. when you get a 4. 8 4.8 driver, you know that driver has passed an array of background checks,

has a history. and that is much more information than you have when you hail a cab on a corner in new york city. we plan to do much more with driver ratings i think now for us driver ratings is a piece of information that you can have. we're hoping to take the system to truly stand for safety and to be able to have the drivers who are particularly good. who particularly provide a terrific service, be at a different level from the average driver also allow the user to opt into a higher level of service. right now the only higher level of service we define is a nicer car. i think the car and service are two different things we have to bring fidelity into the system >> rachel, you have a chapter in your book "who can you trust." she uses an example about an

uber driver named jason brian dalton who killed six people and seriously injured two others take this on >> it's not the best chapter for uber it was a kalamazoo killings. the reason i tell the story is not to bash uber but highlight something that technology is doing to trust in many instances it accelerates trust. we're living in an age of trust on speed every time we swipe right on tinder or accept a driver, in many ways convenience is trumping trust trust actually needs a bit of friction it needs us to slow down to say is this person or this piece of technology or this piece of content, is it worthy of our trust the challenge we have is that technology wants to automate the process. it wants to make it more

efficient. we see people, their car has not arrived in three minutes, or they can't get into their airbnb on one hand as kwconsumers we wn that speed, but we have to build the security, safety, trust and technology, which means friction to slow down the thing so interesting and tragic about the kalamazoo story is that it happened over a six-hour period. some passengers that got in the car said are you not jason dalton, the serial killer? when you read the police report, it's because they never thought that uber -- they never thought that the app would send them a serial killer. so i find this interesting that we're living in an age as to who is accountable in that situation in is it the individual or the platform's responsibility to

reduce the risk of bad things happening and be there when things go wrong. that's a lot of the tension we face we want the empowerment and we want the agency, at the same time we want the platforms to take aplot lot of responsibilid reducing the risk. >> dara what do you think? >> i think when you're given over 4 billion rides a year, you start to revert to the mean. in real life there's bad people out there. i think that over a long period of time -- one is we do have to be careful in representing a rating for what it is. it's a rating of how you drove not a rating of whether you're a serial killer or not we have to be plain spoken about what we can do, what we can't do over a period of time we can have data scientists create a platform that is safer

for example, we have a big service in mexico city during certain times of the day when requests come out -- when requests come out of areas of mexico city that are less than safe, we block those requests. because we want to keep our drivers safe that's based on data that shows that there's a certain kind of individual who is clicking on a car and then canceling a car, clicking a car, canceling again, when they like the car, they click on the car to bring it over and they try to steal the car. we prevent that kind of occurrence from happening. hurts our volume, but it creates a safer environment in this case for our drivers. we need the data to get the system to adjust and learn but when you have random events like this, with 4 billion rides a year, i don't know if data can

make up for that so we have to make sure consumers know we're doing our best, but a 4.9 rating is based on how someone drives, not their state of mind. >> i think it's interesting. i think what's happened in the first six year of a platform, whether it's facebook or uber, the platforms are allowed to create a lot of value and matching supply and demand i think what's now happening with regulation and the media, they're saying you can't extract all the value and matching supply and demand and not be responsible for what happens on the platform you can't have it both ways. >> that's where i want to go with ruth. how should we think about platforms? one of the most successful -- when i say successful, in terms of economic success, have been the new platforms created. at the same time there's a sense that the platform unto itself is not responsible necessarily for everything that happens on the platform we're just setting the stage, people are buying the

opportunity to be on the stage, but what happens on the stage is not our doing. we've heard this -- this sort of commentary from some of the social media companies and tech at large am i wrong about that? how do we change that? >> so, at our essence we are about creating platforms our view strongly is that platforms open up the world to people in ways that have not otherwise been possible. if you go back to your opening question about trust, trust for us is about creating quality product, having a reputation that you earn every day. those are intertwined. when you go braack to the missin which is to organize the world's information, the view is if you did that with quality and security, impartial information, good things would follow you would create opportunities for people and open doors that didn't exist sitting here today, seven of our

products have over a billion users each the platforms make it possible for developers around the world to have access to the same markets that everyone has through the play store or for students to have the sale information. they wouldn't come back to these platforms if they didn't believe the quality and the security justified the presence so the trillions of searches we have every day to us are a poignant point that people are entrusting that we'll give them the experience that they want and open doors that they went. when we look at the reputation side of it, we have a duty to users, advertisers, publishers if we're not investing to protect that, whether through the human trusted reviewers that we have, machine learning that we're using because of the pace of change and stars, or through guardrails and policies, we will

erode that trust and the return to the policy, what we're doing with machine learning so that everyone everywhere that the use of the technology this is creating opportunity. our view is through these platforms we create opportunities that otherwise did not exist. >> you said about bomb throwing, so on the platforms, the two big digital platforms, google and facebook, amazon coming, maybe 2018 will be the year when amazon starts to attack the two principles who control 75% of digital advertising, which is 30% of the world market, so between the two of them they're controlling 21%, 22% of the world market, world advertising market the issue coming back to ruth's obser observations is whether google and facebook are media companies

or technology companies. and if they acknowledge whi, wh they have not to date acknowledged that they're media compani companies, in practice they are starting to. they're hiring people to monitor editorial content. the big issue is can we trust all the content on these platforms. a few days ago, mark zuckerberg modified the facebook policy in relation to the news feed. and we will have different gradations we'll have more privacy or more privileged positions given to news feeds we can trust, according to some rating by consumers, and less privacy to those we can't that's the key issue for the big platforms in digital advertising, to acknowledge they are media owners we distribute 75 billion to

google, and about 2 billion to facebook, disney and fox about 3 billion. those are the orders of magnitude, but they're all media owners second thing, i'm not sure that today's much different -- well, it's very different, but it's really different to history. word of mouth advertising was the most effective medium in terms of recommending products and service to people. what we're seeing in technology is just an adaptation of that, or improvement of that technology will continue to improve. the way we receive word of mouth and recommendation will be improving over time. blockchain technology may be a further advance that eradicates some key issues. key issue from the consumer point of view, one is privacy, the second thing is employment are these revolutions in technology going to improve my position as a consumer

are they going to improve my position from an employment point of view? the populist revival we've seen over the last few years, just examples of people becoming more and more concerned about that issue. >> marc, you have been one of the few people in the tech world who have openly spoke about the need for regulation in tech land when you say that this industry needs to be regulated, what do you mean by that what does that look like >> let me finish up with this example which is uber. it's probably very important to talk about you know, dara was not here a year ago as ceo of uber. there was another ceo. then we all watched and witnessed what happened especially starting with this incredible article that susan fowler wrote that was her name, right

that an uber employee said hold on, there's some problems in the culture. and let me just outline what these issues are inside uber and that began something really amazing. which is a crisis of trust she said there was no trust in the culture. she said it was a culture only built for speed. that it was growth at any cost and that the ceo was setting that tone from the top and then as that frame got set by her, and amplified by many people in silicon valley who were there, then more evidence began around the culture and what was going on. even to the point where there was a phenomenon with the user community which was the delete uber app that turned into a real thing. it started to affect the revenue line then it got to the board level

then the board said hold on -- it's not like the board didn't know what was going on it was crystal clear what was happening with the company and the ceo -- >> i'd argue -- i'm not sure if the board knew >> okay. the board didn't know. >> should have known >> they should have known. >> shocked, an thd then, basica, we got to a point where kind of the whole super majority vote structure thing that's going on in silicon valley of i'm the entrepreneur, i'm in charge no matter what happens, that kind of gets blown up this idea that this is somehow acceptable, right? and it's not in the world of our connected products, for all the things that i think were actually just discussed, in the fourth industrial revolution, in this

multi stakeholder dialogue that we have at davos, trust has to be your highest value in your company. if it's not, something bad is going to happen to you >> you are saying leadership >> 100% culture issue. what's the most important thing to you and your company? what is the most important thing to you and your company? is it trust or is it growth? if it's growth -- i think you said a powerful thing, you said convenience trumps trust which doesn't have anything to do with our speaker on friday. but this idea of anything trumps trust, we're in trouble. so that is really what's up. what is the most important thing to you and your company. look at your value system. what's number one? if everything is important,

nothing is important you have to choose what is really important to you. in the example of the previous ceo, he had a different value at the peak of his hierarchy than dara has today i'm sure. so that's why every board, every entrepreneur is here we're in a new world we're in a new world you better be ready. we could go through all the different pieces, but trust better be number one >> you used the term quality growth i'll take that and translate it into a different term. quality growth means having a long-term perspective. you can have short-term growth that's corrupt but that's not durable for the long-term. i completely agree with you it's about culture. that culture has to be about respecting the user, respecting the opportunity, and looking for the long-term.

if you're focused on durable growth and durable success, you will avoid some of these issues. there's one thing to do with alphabet at google that i would encourage every company and i industry to do, it's our all company meeting where everyone is encouraged to ask any question, they do. we have a company voting board, you can vote on questions, whether is at the top of that leaderboard we must answer relative to what i've seen in other places, it drives the level of transparency and openness in the company. it surfaces the type of problems that are there and it gets us to grasp quickly what's at the core of our culture so we're protecting what we want for the long-term. >> firstly, marc mentioned dual voting structured or geared voting structures. implicitly you said maybe that's a problem. maybe that should be changed >> we have super voting shares

which we blew up essentially >> that's one thing. my own view is that that enables entrepreneurs to take the long view and therefore is an advantage rather than a disadvantage, but obviously there are cases where it doesn't work the second thing is we have seven companies that i call seven sisters, standard oil, jeff bezos may be the 21st century john rockefeller you have seven companies which have half a trillion or more market cap, alibaba and tencent and the fearsome five, in terms of brand value and market value they're the pinnacle the question is whether they're getting into a position whether they should be regulated or not. in europe we have gdpr which has affected the way that data companies and the plat fors operate in europe.

we have some decisions from the eu there are -- google faced three decisions from the dj, one of which came down. two more to come these regulatory issues for companies that are considerable size, that issue is going to become increasingly more important. >> ruth, can you ever get too big? can google get too big is that real >> that's one of the unanswerable questions >> i assume you get that question asked regularly >> our structure change from google to alphabet was helpful to give us a structure that enables us to invest in opportunities which hopefully will improve lives for billions. what we did by setting up google over here and the other bets as separate areas, we created this

opportunity for the focus you need to answer your question the other point we've made is that we don't have a monolithic approach to everything we took an equity investment into our life sciences business. we want to let these businesses grow and thrive. i think the structural change was an important and valuable one. >> i think on size, whether a company gets too big or not, the question of effectiveness is one question but as google and many internet companies get larger, the issue as it relates to trust is that there's an information asymmetry between the company and the user the company starts having so much data and information about the user, if you describe it as a fight, it's not a fair fight

i'll give you an example of expedia. when you did a search at expedia, i want to go from "a" to "b," the search might have taken five to six seconds long, and we used to show apeck picture of a beautiful desert island to get one thinking about their next trip. what if we test out those images let's try some other stuff so the user didn't know they were being tested out on so an image that one was a person missing a train, that created a bit of apprehension. my god, if i don't miss thbook trip, i'll miss a train. the next iteration was a user staring at his credit card and he was angry i don't know why he worked, but

he did work. then an engineer comes up, you have to realize these are very, very young people. they are taking action at low levels of the company who are trying to drive results. they're trying to grow so really smart engineer came up with an idea, he put up a picture of a cobra snake so you have this snake staring at you, saying you better book this ticket. that worked beautifully. of course we kind of camped down and said no way, you can't do this, you can't mess with peoples emotions like this we pulled all that back, but that's a small example of users being experiments, trying to drive results for companies in a circumstance where users have no idea what's going on >> are you making the argument to break these companies up? >> i'm not making the argument of breaking companies up i think it goes to core values

or what marc talked about one o the core norms is do the right thing period for that to go deep, deep into the organization whether through regulation or news organizations, et cetera, talking about this stuff because there is an information asymmetry here unfortunately many users are la lazy somehow we have to find a balance. >> isn't there a difference between -- in terms of consumers attitudes between mature markets and fast growth or other people call it developing markets what we see is there's more trust actually of government and data -- india is a good example with social security effectively, numbers and identities that sort of system in mature markets, because of distrust of

government is much more important. so in a way the newer countries, the newer growth countries are much more responsive both to government and to the private sector in terms of use of technology >> i want to pause at this and go to mark and get back to the question of if you do want to regulate these industries, how you do it. this is from tom goodwin he writes uber, world's largest taxi company, owns no vehicles facebook, the world's most popular media owner creates no content. alibaba has no inventory airbnb owns no real estate something interesting is happening. the reason i raise that particular quote is because all of you have talked about culture inside your companies. but fascinatingly enough, especially when you think of uber and airbnb, so much of the forward facing consumer experience was -- is not with

employees at all when you think about that culture, how do you get there? i also want to get you on the regulation question too. >> i think on the regulation question, we have a former competition commissioner of the european union, vice president of the european union sitting in the front row, i'm sure she would be happy to chime in on this you know, number one is when you look at other industries -- so let's look at financial services industry, sitting here a decade ago, you had to pay for services they were talking about cdos, credit default swaps, all these great new products they built, accelerating the economy and making this stuff work the regulators were not paying close enough attention to what some of those issues were that

were happening in the innovation i don't think that's unlike what we see with the cigarette industry for a long time we have this great new product, you'll love it it's addictive it's not that great for you, outside forces will shape your attitudes and how you'll use it. you know a lot about this with your clients, and also the food industry look at sugar. we often see the signs and where things are pointing. and, you know, that's really the point of regulators and the point of government to kind of come in and, you know, point true north in the tech industry we've been remarkably clear of those regulators for pretty much the whole industry, life span. but i think we're seeing signs -- maybe we're not completely there yet, but we're seeing signs, especially this

year especially looking at the elections and the way the social networks are, and when you see ceos who fully abdicate and say i had no idea that was happening. >> who are you talking about >> there's so many of them i can't call them out. so i just think that we are -- the signs are pointing to more regulation when the ceos won't take responsibility, you have no choice but for the government to come in and go what's going on some of this technology is so powerful, sophisticated, deep, so multi dimensional even these companies don't understand how it's being used in nefarious ways we all know that when the ce oshg go get on stagd says there's no way that could

happen, and then two weeks later, yeah, it's there. then another reveal, another reveal i get enough of that in the government >> do you think the regulators have moved fast enough >> no, they have not there needs to be a more aggressive movement. i think this will start to happen because i think as we move more aggressively into the fourth industry revolution and the technologies today become more sophisticated, ai becomes more dominant, when these things start to impact jobs -- that kind of thing, that's when i think you will get more government >> marc, i make you king for the day, though, how you are doing it you're the regulator what are you doing >> you act like you do at every other industry you have trust and verified process, come in and make sure things are happening exactly as they say they're happening and i think that we have lots of

good examples from other industries on lou to make that happen >> rachel? >> i think the challenge for regulators, if you take this up a level, we are in a trust shift. so for a long time trust existed in traditional institutions. we're seeing how that's eroded trust flowed in a top down higher up fashion. there was a linear relationship between the company and consumer what's happening is that is become blown up in many ways, and now we have a distributed form of trust that flows sideways, whether that's strang strangers, peers, colleagues this is a challenge for regulators a lot of regulation is designed for traditional stugs. it institutions when you start looking and you talk to regulators and talk about how do you regulate a platform, how do you break up these network monopolies the way regulators think is where is the center?

where is the center of accountability that's a real problem when you have millions, billions of users who are the product. so i think we're seeing this play out with facebook this week they said the users are now -- they're the ones that rate the content. there's been a backlash. we have to ask ourselves what we want do we want facebook to be the arbitrator of truth? do we want a group of experts to decide what news is trustworthy or do we want to decide? i think that's the challenge regula regulation is stuck in an institutional mindset and it has not adapted fast enough. >> just one more point i think that it is -- there's no way that regulators are going to be able to keep up with the speed at which technology is moving i think it's too much of an ask. i think where the regulators can play a part is for accountability i think that often the higher up

you are in organizations, the less accountable you are my ask would be to be hard in accountability so that a ceo knows he or she's job is to know what's going on in the company if they don't, they get caught, they're out. that's what the regulator can do i dothink that -- try to talk here -- the press is playing a very big part and a good part in bringing much of this out. i think that there's more information now about what is going on with these companies deep down. i'm a little mixed because at uber there's been a ton of leaks of what's happening at uber. that's not necessarily a great way to run a company if i step back, the leaks, the susan fowler exposure, it not only started a real cultural change that was painful for uber

but incredibly positive. the leaks led uber to finally understand they had to make the changes it's making as a company to break from the past and go forward as a company that does the right thing. and the press played a very, very big part in it. so i'm hoping that the press can be a big part of the solution going forward. >> i would add, building on the point about the pace of change, how do you have regulation that keeps up, there's one strong example in place now that's the eu code of conduct. setting a standard, making it clear what's expected. that's what should be the rallying point we need individually and collectively to be investing to ensure that kind of experience >> one thing that's interesting and quite disappointing is that a lot of regulation is calling for transparency you hear this a lot. you hear the way to build more trust is to be more transparent. trust and transparency are not

synonymous you have recently given up on trust if you need things to be transparent. i don't understand that's why we want the call is for the organizations to be transparent, we need them to be trustworthy this is not a brand attribute, it's imbedded into the dna of the organization every decision made, every design decision made, we can trust those intentions the call should not be for more transparency, it's we understand the intentions of these companies, and we believe the intentions of these companies are aligned with ours. >> that is the professor of oxford university. one of many people on andrew ross sorkin's panel in davos akiko, you saw dara khosrowshahi getting a lot of flack from his fellow panel members, wasn't he? >> yeah. i thought it was interesting he was talking about the rating system that uber has saying that

a rating is based on how that person drives, not necessarily the state of their mind. that goes to the heart of this discussion happening in the tech sector as we see some of these problems emerge, who is responsible for that if you talk about the russian interference in elections over the u.s., how much responsibility falls on facebook and how much is on users all of this happening in the broader context of a tech lash, questions about whether big tech names like alphabet, amazon, facebook are becoming too big or too anti-competitive and some would argue too addictive. something that's been discussed here on the ground here hearing a lot of that here, but an interesting discussion coming from some of the biggest ceos in the tech sector. we'll continue the conversation there. "street signs" will be right back jimmy's gotten used to his whole room smelling like sweaty odors.

yup, he's gone noseblind. he thinks it smells fine, but his mom smells this... luckily there's febreze fabric refresher for all the things you can't wash. it finds odors trapped in fabrics and washes them away as

it dries. and try pluggable febreze to continuously eliminate odors for up to 45 days of freshness. pluggable febreze and fabric refresher. two more ways to breathe happy.

it has been a busy period for m&a in pharma and biotech. deals sealed this week totaled more than $20 billion. all of this coming as the companies look to add new

hemophilia and cancer drugs to their lineup celgent already own of juno therapeutics to talk more about this we are joined by christoph franz, ceo of roche great to have you on today >> good morning. >> the sun is finally out. >> it is beautiful today >> i would like to start bigger picture here in the conversations at davos so far there is an incredible amount of optimism that this global economic recovery will continue despite the risks that we see on the horizon, whether this is on the geopolitical front or the trade front frame it up for us, how things look from your perch >> basically i have been here for more than ten years. i share your perspective there's a positive mood right now among business leaders here in davos

i think the reason is that we see growth perspective in not only some specific countries but on a global scale. the growth is achieving numbers which we have seen only before 2007 so the economy is taking up and for the time being it is growth which has been created by a lot of investments so we see healthy growth, and that is reducing the danger of some sudden crisis and i think there's also learning learning for ten years how to stabilize the financial system, which for a company coming from the real world like our pharmaceutical business, it's a healthy situation. >> when you look at the far pharmaceutical space, what is the most significant risk? >> i think in the pharmaceutical

space we have business fairly independent from business cycles, and from an individual company's perspective in our company we are always focusing on inventing new medicines so the biggest challenge for us is when we lose exclusivity for some medicines that we replace innovation by new innovation that's exactly what the companies are about. we have to be an innovation powerhouse >> you talk about losing exclusivity. roche expired the patents for three drugs, lucrative ones. you talked about the -- that six medicines have already been approved by regulators a lot of times these new med since take a while to gain trust. how do you think revenues will be as a result of these patents expiring >> first of all, we hope that we will be able not to see any kind of decline, but being able to

see stable and even slight growth perspective in the next years to come. this is only possible because we have seen something we have not seen in our 120-year history six new treatments have been approv approved, and we see these treatments have come fast to patients when we look at last year, already 50% of our growth have come from these new medicines. that's a positive signal and is creating confidence for future of the company >> no question we're seeing a shift in pharmaceuticals, and a question of whether amazon could enter the space. last year they applied for pharmacy licenses. are you in the camp that thinks amazon will make an entry into pharmaceuticals? if so, how disruptive do you think that will be

>> to be honest, i'm not a specialist with regard to distribution we've seen particularly in the united states there's been a big consolidation with regards to distribution of pharmacies this is a trend that might continue to evolve in this case, big players can play a role. but everyone joining this industry has to be aware we have special safety requirements, it's heavily regulated you need cool change for substances in order not to deteriorate. patient safety is first. that's something we have to keep in mind. >> great to have you on today. christoph franz joining us from roche. coming up, we will speak to hussain sajwani. that's on the other side of the break. >> geopolitical tensions will be

a key focus for discusses in davts th davos this year. the lebanese deputy prime minister tells cnbc that the relationship between the countries is now strong. >> we count on the support of saudi arabia, and we believe that saudi arabia has always supported lebanon positively it's not an intervention as much as it is always a positive support to allow the lebanese to solve their own problems within a stabilized environment >> the kingdom does not undertake yune unilateral actio any situation. but rather tries to collect friends and engage in coalition building to meet challenges. we see this in all of our recent developments whether it's the issue in yemen, the issue of terrorism, you take

the issue of acting in syria, in iraq, the kingdom has always maintained a very positive attribute. you can catch more of the conversation there with the lebanese prime minister tomorrow, that's at 4:30 central time hadley is joining me on set to shift gores a bit and talk about property in the middle east. >> we are joined eed by husse by hussein sajwani there's been pushback around the controversial decision on jerusalem. is there a danger that the brand could suffer as a result of president trump's popularity and as it ebbs and flows >> we as an organization, we signed a commercial deal with

the trump organization to build with us two golf courses we opened the first golf course february 20th. we're happy with the design, the quality. it's one of the best golf courses not in the middle east but around the world the second golf course is under way, i don't see an impact or affect on our business we're doing business as usual. our sales will be up >> you also mentioned you're looking to sell about a 15% stake in the company what's the right price you're looking for? >> the question was was i willing to sell some stake in the country. is it 5%, 10%, 15%, depends on the market, the price and timing >> what's your outlook for the dubai property market in particular, given what we've seen over the past couple of years, and there's fears of

overcapacity there >> i don't see a danger of capacity we have half a billion units in dubai. we are growing at 3% to 4% in the last three years we produced less than 10,000 units. going forward, i don't see more than 10,000 units. i see the market as stable i don't see a surprise of a crash or the market going up by 30%. i see a stable market. last year's growth of 6% that's a healthy stable market going forward. >> i wonder if we can quickly talk about some business opportunities here in the region you talked about the softening property market in the uk and the potential for investments there. what specifically are you looking at >> we're looking to expand, looking to grow.

our cash flow is strong. our balance sheet is not fully leveraged, we're looking at europe, north america. i think uk, especially london provides a major opportunity, especially with the softening of the property market after brexit and the pound is more reasonably priced >> okay. we'll have to leave it there our thanks to both of you for joining us here. that's a wrap from davos we will continue our coverage all throughout the day and the week >> thanks. that's it also from london i'm willem marks "worldwide exchange" is coming up

netflix rises very strongly. the streaming giant is now worth more than 1$100 billion followig strong subscriber growth and upbeat guidance. back to business in washington president trump signs a bill to end the government shutdown. and the most powerful business leaders and heads of state are gathering in davos, switzerland today. we'll bring you a front row seat it's tuesday, january 23, 2018, "worldwide exchange" begins right now.