i think i got it right you think it's april may is coming. "squawk box" begins right now. live from new york where business never sleeps, this is "squawk box. >> impressed >> good morning, everybody welcome to "squawk box." we are live at the nasdaq market center in times square u.s. equities at this hour, you can see things are just barely below fair value this comes after gains for the mashts last week crossed the board. in fact, the nasdaq actually saw its fifth week in a row that it's in positive territory the s&p and nasdaq set positive and to celebrate the enthronement of the new emperor

which you will see in ten days the stocks were up by 1.7% shanghai come position sit down by 3/4 of a percentage point in europe, you do see some red arrows across the board. modest declines but it looks like the biggest decliner is the cac in france. spain is weaker down by almost 1% in the united states treasury market taking a look at what's been happening the ten year note is yielding 2.505% just above 2.5%. in the press for boeing, it does not get any better. "the wall street journal" reporting the company didn't tell southwest airlines that the biggest 737 max customer had a safety feature designed to warn pilots about a malfunctioning censor had been deactivated. a statement to cnbc told boeing

the airline feature was turned off but only after that lion air crash in indonesia it would require the purchase of an additional package for it to work boeing tells cnbc the warning lights will now be included as a standard feature on the 737 max. weel street jourm are alleging safety problems. they're important stories and all of this comes ahead of the important shareholder meeting today. we'll find out what we can expect to learn today when the boeing ceo faces shareholders for the first time since the grounding of the 737 max there will be a news conference following that meeting and that will happen around 11:00 a.m

the idea that between american and southwest, we were in better shape. southwest didn't know. they found out afterwards. >> didn't know for a number of years. t the. >> the other piece of that story, i don't say that the faa was in cahoots with boeing, but it looked like they were having correspondence internally about this being an issue but then not doing anything about it. >> yeah, looked like it didn't go all the way up the chain of command at the faa what i will say is we knew about this this was a nuanced new version of an older story. there was a time in the last couple of months when we were reading about the safety features shut off and they were charging people additional to turn it back on. >> american airlines had had it from the get-go. >> i guess what we didn't realize is some of the carriers including southwest didn't know about it.

>> what was it about the anti-stall stuff, they can move where they was just an option. no, i don't think so i think they decided as a way of potentially raising revenue they would turn this off. >> a system together some type of interaction that causes -- >> well, yes the pilot wouldn't necessarily know the faulty reading is going in and to understand the mcas was kicking in and trying to correct a problem that doesn't exist. the sensors used to turn on lights saying, hey, there are two sensors and they're getting vastly different readings about what the angle of attack is for the nose but those two censors were off, you might not understand that m. cass was operating

>> you certainly didn't need mcas what's that do >> all of the plaechbs will be retrofitted. >> what are they doing now >> the planes are on the ground. >> they're grounded. >> you're saying southwest is going to sue boeing? >> southwest when they reported their earnings last week said, yes, it is going to be a problem. >> people are not going to want to fly southwest. >> american said it would be 350 million. they're going to put a number on some of these things so we have heard from the companies. southwest said they were grounding -- taking it out of their schedule through august 5th. american said a week later, august 12th. >> what about -- >> when you hear from the airline pilots, they say the training that's been recommended, they don't think it

goes far enough. the pilots think there need to be there >> they're taking them out. >> they have enough planes to do it they may not have enough planes later this summer, i don't know, in order to reach peak demand. >> my question is whether you say mullenberg, the rest of the leadership of boeing stay in that role, whether regulators will have the confidence of them to stay in that role we saw what happened when they didn't have confidence in tim sloane at wells fargo. are there other shoes to drop? if so, what does that mean what does it do to military contracts? is there a problem inside the faa? >> i think it probably depends on the time line of who decided what what you do know is they're going to be continuing

investigatio investigations we should also tell you we have an update on the bidding war brewing in the permian basin anadarko is planning to endorse a bid with occidental. if anadarko decides to scrap the chevron deal, it will be forced to pay a $1 billion deal they have not commented but the only look it's creating is occidental is up. >> chevron announced the deal. anadarko accepted the deal at a time when occidental claimed they had a bit on the table. what happened between then and today? >> shareholders. >> but is it just the

shareholders there's something to me and i get by him >> it's huge did you go >> i did >> my son did. >> no spoilers >> how do you do a three hour plot -- >> you go to the bathroom beforehand. >> no, i understand. >> we do a three-hour show here. >> no, i know. i'm worried about aup super hero movie. >> this is the 22nd film in 11 years. very complex and it ties up all of these lost ends >> you saw it? >> yeah, i saw it this weekend it was amazing kids >> it was amazing. it tied up all of these loose ends it made me so curious. you realize all of the foreshadowing. it complicated stuff to tie them altogether. >> for me, paul ruds, i a super

hero. >>'s funny as "ant man." they got really good as they lightened up "thor" is hilarious. >> is he political >> he's not political at all >> he isn't? >> no. >> didn't open his mouth. >> paul, he could be anthony. >> "ant man" turn into -- another thank you. >> you have got to see this. >> with the biggest box office opening ever, you didn't see it, sorkin disney avengers, right, end game >> yeah. >> i haven't seen you in weeks. >> you missed me >> i knew you were not here so in terms of that.

>> you felt it >> yes, it was obvious you weren't here. >> the super hero film took in $1.2 billion globally. that's the first time a movie topped a $1 billion mark in an opening weekend. they lined up to see the film. 90% there. >> it's not easy to break records when you have a three hour plus movie. they were selling out at 7:00 in the morning. >> it was global, too. >> end game was a smash over seas $859 million international record breaking numbers and a big win. disney shares are on a role. never been as high as the 140s before

here they are. coming up, uber's ipo road show is underway got the details with the company's pitch to invest as we head to break, here's a biggest look at the market with the winners and losers we'll be right back. kevin, meet your father. kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin kevin trusted advice for life. kevin, how's your mom? life well planned.

see what a raymond james financial advisor can do for you.

welcome back, everybody. spotify shares trading higher. revenue at $1.7 billion. monthly active users grew by 26 perts percent from the same period a year ago. premium subscribers hit 100 million. the stock is up 4.5%. >> uber. leslie picker joins us about the ipo road show. >> all ipos are inherently risky. the pitch uber has laid out for investors, the ride hailing company is seeking to convince them that it's not as risky of a bet that it once was uber is seeking a valuation of

$86 billion. that's about 28% lower than the $120 billion target they had pitched 26 months ago. uber is also seeking a more conciliatory government structure than most other unicorns gone publicly they're debuting with a single stock. uber says it's collaborating to expand into markets. the long term economics would suggest the ipo is very risky. it's amounting to $1 billion for the first three months in the year a portion is based on bets like investments and if competitive pressures don't abate in either's right hailing or food products business, the company could continue to lose money.

>> they do. >> if it continues like this, we'll never make money >> they did. >> didn't you do something, you looked at the map. companies that have come to market when they've been posting losses. >> yeah. >> that was facebook, amazon and others but you looked at it differently? >> yes they are pitching themselves reportedly as kind of this amazon-like company whereas they have a lot of losses now but they have businesses they are a transportation mecca. amazon when it went public is looking at an accumulated deficit of $6 million. in today ea's money, that's $9 million. uber has an accumulated deficit of $8 billion they lost $1 billion, you think

it's $9 billion? >> yes count your zeroes. >> yes. >> if you're graham and dodd, when you buy stocks because you hope it goes up over time but you don't think of it as pro rata share of the company that's never -- it makes no sense to buy a company that's not here. you can buy stock in the red cross. >> they compare themselves to amazon >> we department totally know. that's why they didn't buy it. >> then you wouldn't buy it. >> they lost $6 million. >> increasing dividend stream is the only reason to buy into it, right? >> ostensibly. the question is whether you think the platform turns it. i'm not saying it does.

>> does that mean it's a big mess when it finally snaps then when you get the autonomous. >> that's ten years from now >> 2018 for elon >> a fleet of headless taxis are you here for that? >> i was here for that >> maybe a retirement community in florida. >> that's what they're talking about. >> not being a smart aleck >> that's how you do it. >> it's a confined area. >> it would still be better than the retired people >> no, that's where they've been doing testing. i sound like i'm being a smart

ass but i'm not. >> there is a need, safety >> it's a way to get people around and it's an easy way to do it. you can set it up and you know there are sensors in place >> theoretically, everybody is driving slower there. >> i didn't say that, leslie. >> i said in theory. >> thanks. we have some sad news to tell you about this morning, guys we learned overnight that former cftc commissioner and cnbc guest bart chilton died of pancreatic cancer he worked at the cftc from 2007 to 2014. he was first nominated to the position by president bush

bart chilton was8 arol 5yes d. dear tech... you've been making headlines. smart tech is everywhere. but is that enough? i need tech that understands my business. i need tech that works at scale. dear tech... dear tech... dear tech... we're exploring quantum to develop next generation energy. we're using blockchain to help make sure food stays fresh. we're using ai to help create more accessible health care. we're using iot to create new kinds of digital wallets. let's see some more headlines about that. let's expect more from technology. let's put smart to work.

what do advisors look for don't just track an index, help me meet a client's need. is the fund built to sell or built to last? etfs are only part of a portfolio. so make it easy to explain. give me a quality fund that helps me get clients closer to their goals. flexshares etfs are designed and managed around investor objectives. so you can advise with confidence. before investing, consider the fund's investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses. go to flexshares.com for a prospectus containing this information. read it carefully.

welcome back to "squawk box. tesla ceo elon musk reaching a deal with the sec over his tweets he has a list of topics he cannot tweet about stone still needs to be approved by a judge he's not supposed to tweet about them

it could lead back to that in this instance he argued that the production numbers were public numbers if you're allowed to talk about them, we can get back into the schedule. >> not tweeting at all. >> don't do it, right? >> that's not exactly what this says airbnb will partner with rxr realty to convert portions of nyc's properties into lodging. they were essentially hotel rooms, living rooms and kitchens that can only be booked through the air b.n.b. platform.

units there. converting ten floors into high end apartment style suites don't miss airbnb ceo brian chesky you could leave your room and buy cnbc mugs, "squawk box" shirts that would be convenient >> the question is do they charge them the taxes that the hotel is paying in the city? >> i'm assuming if they're doing it this way they would have to >> that would be my guess, too >> i do not know the answer. later today when we return, earnings alert we'll get you ready for the flood of corporate earnings report cards we have an updated scorecard for the earnings season next take a look at friday's s&p 500

bins winners and losers. [knocking]

♪ ♪ memories. what we deliver by delivering.

♪ ♪ welcome back you're watching "squawk box" live from the nasdaq market site in times square. good morning welcome back to "squawk box" right here on cnbc take a look at u.s. equity futures at this hour ahead of a big week ahead of earnings reports dau jones down trade talks between u.s. and china are resuming tomorrow. we're getting into the final laps, both sides have an agreeme agreement. talks could end without a deal. it is crunch time for

corporate earnings with 150 s&p earnin earnings earnings season has been off so far. only 17% has reported misses joining us right now to talk about this is jim paulson. r.j. gall low who is senior vice president and senior portfolio manager at federated investors earnings season has been a lot better than expected last week we decided we're probably not going to get an earnings recession. i think as we go forward i think

it's a good sign that companies and the economy didn't slow down near as much as we anticipated just a quarter ago. i think international economies are picking up as well so earnings may go from better than feared than just better and good and that could be the second driver of the rally the second half of the year. >> you think the wall of worry we've been climbing has served a purpose a and there's still room to run >> i think so, becky barons had the big money poll. one of the things that came out of that pole is that even the

bulls are anxious about this market even though it's come up and continues to go up i think there's still a lot of concern. in the second half it's starting to fade. it's not only recessing, it's recovering if we grow 2.5, 3% and earnings start to rise again, we may take this market from a multiple market advancing to one that's earnings driven again. >> paulsen, it's weird how guys like you sometimes end up in the right place for the wrong reasons, i think you've been pretty close you downgraded your inflation outlook. are you ready to throw in the towel on the long-running idea that that was going to be his -- >> potential overheating. >> this is like five years for

you now. no inflation. >> well, i don't agree with that, joe. around 3% on cpi, wages are above 3.5% the bond yield went up to 3 1/4% the fed tightened over the last few years all because of one reason we were over heating quite frankly, if the economy didn't shut down under the heat of the increase in interest rates last year, this recovery would have probably ended because of over heat pressure. if we start to grow again, i don't think that pressure will come back. certainly over heat's already been a part of this cycle and it will come back. >> what do you mean if we start to grow again? we grew it 3% last year whampt do you mean if we start to grow again. when did we stop growing >> well, i think that -- i think

we slowed down, joe. housing statistics came off. auto sales have weakened there has certainly been slowdown evidence. >> if this was slow, what were we doing in the mid odds we'll go to r.j. i don't know the whole reason we're doing so well is because inflation has not been the problem. >> i agree. >> although, r.j., you have now gone to neutral in terms of your view on yields because we've heard from the fed that they're slowing down talk a little bit more about that. >> sure. i think if you look back, you know, we are probably at the tail end if not the end of the fed's withdraw when they called off the dogs on

tightening, it sort of supported the improvement in markets and the outlook that you all have been talking about i think the fed is truly at neutral themselves the majority of the fmoc is not sure if the move is up or down. >> how is that impossible with what joe just talked about with growth being 3% and now it's 3.2%. >> inflation, as joe just mentioned, has been extremely benign they have been unable to hit the inflation target for years it's true, it was there briefly. on there, they're not sure how it works expectations are very important who have seen very low inflation for now. i think we might be moving from an era where the fed was preempted. it started with vol ker and now

it's reactive. the fed is so low it does not have to preempt anything they can allow it to build and they know how to stop inflation. how do you build inflation that's the challenge you have a dovish fed for a while. >> does that mean we are basically waiting to see the white of inflation's eyes before you ever see the fire again? >> i think we are. that feels like it should drive term premiums higher and steepen out curves, but if people are unsure how inflation works and doubt whether they can build inflati inflation, we have unemployment and inflation is too low in china, united states, europe and japan. so, clearly, waiting for the white's of its ooits might not be such a bad idea global competition is there.

it's a huge element across the globe and i think that's a big factor going across the board. the fed's curve is in doubt. i don't know if it's dead. i believe stronger wages and growth can feed through. >> r.j., i'd say if you're a gambling man or betting man, but you are. if the fed is trying to insight more i don't want to say like us in the '70s but do you think we're more likely to see success like that and see inflation picking up what would you tell investors bhas based on that insight? >> sure. now with the fed done their tightening, the ten-year has converged right around 250 if i had to bet, and we like to

make informed bets, not just speculation, we think that inflation -- they'll have some success in bolstering inflation. i don't know whether they'll be able to drive it sharply higher, but the fed's goal is to have it 2% target truly be symmetric in order to do that they need to print probably a number of readings where the year over year rate in fact exceeds 2% inflation should build gradually but if inflation expectations stay low, we don't face a lot of risk of it staying out of chrome that doesn't mean it couldn't tighten. they could if they did, the markets would react in a similar way >> jim, very quickly just to boil it down, you would tell people to continue to buy here based on what we've seen in earnings to this point >> i would, becky.

the surprise second half is staying strong this is even new for me. i thought we would slow down more to joe's point. we haven't shown evidence of that i think we'll move from a multiple driven market to an earnings driven market if it stays slower, the multiple which is 19 times trail could go above 20 times earnings if bond yields will stay at 260, the fed is on hold i think the multiple will stay higher either way the market can trade up as high as 3400 it wouldn't be super out of bounds in that environment i'll still stay tilted on that, on the bullish side of things. >> jim, r.j., good to see both of you thank you for your time. >> thanks. >> nobody's got that target, paulsen. like it. coming up, we're going to tell you about jack war's land rover plan to reward helpful drivers with cryptocurrency.

later we'll hear from boeing from the two stories in the wall street journal i don't see it was a winner if the option wasn't available?

welcome back to "squawk box" this morning now time for the executive edge. jaguar land rover testing crypto rewards. they want to install a smart wallet in automobiles that would collect iota coins those include enabling data reporting for things like traffic congestion and potholes. remember when wayz, did you ever report into wayz >> no. i'm usually driving. >> drivers could also earn rewards by coming and parking

and charging electric vehicles it's a crowd sourced system and you get some kind of compensation for it. wayz did it quite successfully for a long time and they didn't have to give anybody anything except decent maps. >> good information. in fed news, steven moore sounding off on the fed's decision to raise rates late last year. here's what he told abc over the weekend. >> well, first of all, let's go back to december i was the one, i was one of the first economists among thousands when the fed raised interest rates back in december i got very angry about it. i said this was economic malpractice. it was a terrible decision by the fed. the stock market fell by 2500 points in the subsequent weeks of that and then, of course, we had to reverse course. >> moore also apologized for some of his old hummor columns

that were disparaging to women coming up, a lot more on "squawk" this morning. smashing box office records. we'll talk more about what it means for the stock of disney. we'll do that next as we head to break, we'll check on what's happening in markets right now. through the at&t network, edge-to-edge intelligence gives you the power to see every corner of your growing business. from finding out what's selling best...

to managing your fleet... to collaborating remotely with your teams. giving you a nice big edge over your competition. that's the power of edge-to-edge intelligence.

welcome back to "squawk box. disney is scoring big time this box office this weekend. "avengers end game" with $350 million in north america alone, total $1.2 billion worldwide disney's 22nd movie from marvel studios easily beating the 2015 debut of "star wars: the force awakens," another disney franchise. want to find out how investors are reacting to all the disney magic. joining us is bill smead, ceo of smead capital management good morning to you. it was an amazing performance over the weekend, but the stock's also already had an amazing performance, bill, even over the past several weeks, on the heels of the announcement, or the anticipated announcement, really, of disney plus how much more room is there to go >> well, there's two ways to look at it i agree with you that it's had

quite a run in the short-run, and so, people should be very careful chasing a stock in the short-run. on the other hand, if you look at the chart over the last three or four years, the stock had been extremely quiet as investors perceived that the technology companies were threatening their audience and their past dominance >> and so, you look at the stock right now, we're looking at $142 a share. what's fair value? >> well, here's how we think about it at our company, is this is one of those really great companies, right there's maybe 20 of them, you know i think that the starbuckses and the mcdonald's and people like that fall into this category, the costcos of the world most of those dominant companies that have the enduring motes and the brand so closely tied to multigenerations -- most of them have all traded 25 or 30 times earnings in here and i think that people are looking at the 20 multiple

compared to the way disney traded the last two or three years and saying, gee, this looks high but again, i think charlie munger's been talking a lot lately about owning outstanding business at a reasonable price, and i don't think 20 times earnings for the future that disney has is unreasonable at a 2.5% ten-year treasury. >> bill, big headline late last week was the future of hulu and the ownership structure of that, including a debate about whether the parent company of this network, comcast, should sell its 30% stake back to disney and the sort of machinations and thought process over at comcast about whether they should ride the wave, if you will, and whatever is going to happen between disney plus and espn plus and the packaging that hulu will get with that, or whether valuations for some of these over-the-top services, including netflix, may have peaked and whether you want to sell now if you're comcast, what do you

do >> well, first of all, i think you need to look at these companies within a very long-term context. so, what i remember is you had the broadcast networks and then cable and vcr came along and people were afraid that that was going to ruin disney, for example. and cable came along, and what ends up happening, regardless of what you do with the distribution system for entertainment, it always comes down to content -- who's got great content? in comcast's case, they have a lot of great content also, but they also have the pipes for high-speed access. so, we remember talking to the investor relations folks three or four years ago at comcast about net neutrality, and they said, well, where do you guys come down on this? shouldn't you be charging the people that are picking up all the spectrum at 7:00 at night, like netflix and youtube -- shouldn't their customers be

paying a lot more than the normal people that are using access all day long at less-traveled times? and they looked at us and said, we don't care, because we're going to get people coming or going. i'm paraphrasing so, comcast is in a great situation because they control an awful lot of content and ability to create content. and then secondarily, if netflix wins the game, comcast wins the high-speed access game at the same time. >> but what does it say, though, about valuations right now for content plays, specifically ott plays, looking at the valuation of netflix we have it on the screen right now at $374. obviously, the value of hulu has jumped literally billions of dollars in the past six months alone! and so, the question is, if you're disney, are you paying top dollar to get people out now, if they were going to actually buy comcast out right now? would you want to wait

where do you think the valuations for these things are going to be in several years from now >> well, we are -- we believe we are in a financial euphoria period for the technologies that people are excited about right now. for example, you mentioned, netflix is depreciating the content they create. they're a platform, right? netflix is a platform the way macaw cellular was a platform. did they buying them by at&t make at&t rich the answer is, no, it made steve jobs rich, because steve jobs unlocked the cell phone in a way that no one else had unlocked it, and the platform continued to exist, but that's not where people got wealthy we question netflix because they're creating content in a, what you'd call a fits-and-start manufacturing process that has no history and does not have the brand ties and the

multigeneration that a disney or a universal would have at comcast. so, we think people are giving these -- the people making scripted tv and movie content, outside of people like disney and comcast, are like drunken sailors on leave throwing monies at actors and actresses, and they're going tove heartache, we believe, ultimately -- investors will have heartache from believing that that will work. because if you look at the history of movie and tv studios over 100 years, most of them fail. >> okay. bill, with a bullish call, sounds like, on disney and comcast, and a less bullish call on netflix thanks so much, bill appreciate your time. >> thank you. >> you bet. when we return, we're going to preview this week's fomc meeting after last week's hot gdp number is a rate hike back in play? we'll have that debate next. and later, we'll be talking to an uber investor who says uber made a big mistake letting lyft debut first stay tuned to "squawk" right here on cnbc

♪ measure up? a cfa charterholder does. you've worked hard to grow your wealth. make sure you're working with a wealth manager who can grow with you. cfa charterholders have the investment expertise to unlock opportunities other advisors might not see. learn what a cfa charterholdr can do for you at therightquestion.org plants capture co2. what if other kinds of plants captured it too? if these industrial plants had technology that captured carbon like trees we could help lower emissions. carbon capture is important technology - and experts agree. that's why we're working on ways to improve it. so plants... can be a little more... like plants.

♪ has been excellent. they really appreciate the military family and it really shows. with all that usaa offers why go with anybody else? we know their rates are good, we know that they're always going to take care of us.

it was an instant savings and i should have changed a long time ago. it was funny because when we would call another insurance company, hey would say "oh we can't beat usaa" we're the webber family. we're the tenney's we're the hayles, and we're usaa members for life. ♪ get your usaa auto insurance quote today. the growth effect. gdp coming in hotter than expected we'll tell you what it could mean for the fed and the democrats trying to run

against president trump's economic record. boeing's ceo prepares to face shareholders amid a flurry of bad reports about the safety of the 737 max plus, box office blockbuster. disney's "avengers: endgame" smashing records what it could mean for disney's stock and the future of the marvel universe. the second hour of "squawk box" begins right now ♪ >> announcer: live from the beating heart of business, new york, this is "squawk box. good morning, and welcome back to "squawk box" here on cnbc i'm joe kernen along with becky quick and andrew ross sorkin u.s. equity futures are down about 29 on the dow this morning. haven't seen much worse. 31 now, and this is, i think with disney actually indicated higher on that big opening for the superhero movie. the nasdaq's called down ten

s&p indicated down about three here's what's making headlines at this hour some bad press for boeing. the "wall street journal" reports that the company did not tell southwest airlines its biggest 737 max customer, that a safety feature designed to warn pilots about a malfunctioning sensor had been deactivated. that feature had been included in older 737 jets. in a statement to cnbc, southwest says that boeing told the airline the feature was turned off only after the lion air crash in indonesia and would require the purchase of an additional equipment to work they said in a statement to cnbc that warning lights will be now included as a standard feature on the 737 max we'll be speaking with the author of that "wall street journal" report in just a few moments. meantime, an update on a big potential oil deal this morning. the "financial times" reporting that anadarko is preparing to endorse a hostile $38billion bid from rival occidental. earlier this month, anadarko agreed to sell itself to chevron for $33 billion.

if anadarko decides to scrap the chevron deal, it will be forced to pay a $1 billion breakup fee. anadarko, occidental and chevron have not commented on these reports. and disney's "avengers: endgame" shattering box office records. the superhero film took in $1.2 billion globally over the weekend. it's the first movie in history to top $1 billion in its opening weekend. the federal reserve will be meeting tomorrow and on wednesday to discuss interest rates and figure out how to handle policy in a strengthening economy that's not producing much inflation at all. steve liesman joins us now with more mr. liesman. >> good morning, andrew. the fed is going to be thinking hard this week about whether growth could be stronger than it thinks, and whether that suggests the funds rate at 2.4% is in the right place. fed officials will likely discount the strength of the first-quarter gdp report the 3.2% number driven partly by trade in inventories but as those factors wear off this quarter, they could be replaced by strong consumer and business spending. so, morgan stanley's got a

bearish look at 1.1% in the second quarter barclays, though, upbeat with a 2.5% rate. it did bring that number down by half a point after the friday report barclays saying the economy has rebounded following the volatility in financial markets late last year, and the elongated federal government shutdown that said, private consumption and business investment will need to accelerate to keep the economy in expansion." now, i didn't get this, but of course, i was on vacation, so maybe, i don't know. but look, 71% chance of a cut in january. strong gdp report like that, and the market -- well, yields rallied, of course, and the fed funds rate follows the yields. but you can see an escalating chance of a rate cut later this year some people think that's crazy, but that is what the market is whatever growth does the fed has to puzzle over why inflation remained muted all of this argues for patience in my opinion on the part of the federal reserve and central bank. >> why did barclays bring the estimate for the second quarter down after a strong report in the first quarter? >> because the inventory and the

trade thing wear off in the second quarter but look, the other thing that was maybe a little remarked was that the underlying number, the final sales number was 1.3%. that was actually higher than what a lot of people expected. so, in that report, you take out those one-off things, and you had a strong -- you had a weaker base, but stronger than expected -- and then the consumer and business spending's supposed to pick up somewhat in the second quarter -- >> did you read the "wall street journal" article over the weekend about the idea of the melt-up? larry finkel was on our show a week or two ago talking about this idea of a melt-up, but the idea being that the melt-up is completely disconnected from fundamentals and is just a function of the sort of goldilocks situation we may well be in as a function of the fed >> house stocks are going to go into somebody else's department, not mine. >> we have a couple people here. >> i've always been bullish on the economy in terms of the expectations from december, which, i mean, i think some of the market views in december about the apocalypse was going to happen. look a little silly right now.

and the idea of following some of that market down -- i mean, to argue that the first-quarter strength or even the second-quarter strength is the result of the fed backing off on their policy in december and january is also a little silly so, i think that's important that you kept a kind of steady view on the economy, that it slowed down, but the whole expectation has not been to be incredibly weak ever >> joining us for more on what the fed will be considering this week, charles campbell, managing director and trading specialist at mkm partners, and john ryding, founding partner, chief economist at rdq economics we began the quarter thinking that the fourth quarter at which slowed from the fourth quarter of last year, that the first quarter was going to be maybe in the 1s, john so when this happened, 3.2 -- what are the chances this is revised below 3% and what are the chances that the volatile parts of it, like trade and inventory, were sort of a one-off and don't really tell us what's happening

or are we in a 3% world still? >> i think we're still in a 3% world. look, the quarterly gdp numbers are extremely volatile, and the first quarter, typically in the last seven years, has come in low relative to the trend for the year. >> that's part of what made it so unbelievable to be 3%, because it's been 1% >> we look at the year-over-years. on the growth rate from 3% to 3.2% in first quarter, so the first quarter actually hasn't really slowed, if you look at numbers -- if you look at numbers for companies, look at year-over-years, not quarter to quarter. year over year, the economy picked up. now, the inventory number was an aberration and as we used to say back in my old bank of england days, it's the change in the change in inventories that matter. so, the fight that inventories added means accumulation would have to rise at a faster pace to add to the second quarter. that's probably not going to happen trade was a bit of an aberration but remember, this is off the weak retail sales number, so

consumer's only 1.2%, but the consumer's probably in a 3% world. we had very soft business equipment spending and orders for those have picked up quite strongly in the first quarter, nondefense capital goods orders were up 10% from december to march. and the residential investment numbers actually looked oddly weak so, yes, there was one-offs, but i think steve's right, they're going to be replaced by underlying -- >> passing the baton to other things charles, we've had -- >> more important things. >> we've had sugar high people coming on. i mean, we have -- we set up these debates about the tax plan and whether it was good or bad we had barney frank saying, just assuming, look, the first quarter slowed to 1% i'm going to pull that bite, that sound bite for next time he's on. but saying, look, we're already down to 1%, so all the benefit from tax reform has already worn off. so, that was the consensus, that that's where we were how did we get to 3.2% and what does this say about this entire year

are we in a permanently higher growth rate environment right now? >> right. >> and if it was -- even if it was 2.75%, that's 50% higher than where we were and where we said we could be, really, with, you know, not enough people coming here for the workforce and productivity not increasing. supposedly, we can't do this are we doing it? >> there are two components. one is the gdp report. over 50% comes from exports and from inventories, all right? the highest percentage since, what, 2013 or so -- >> so that's the sugar high people are saying that that accounts for. >> right, but the consumer is doing pretty well. he's in pretty good -- he and she are in pretty good condition, in pretty good shape. so, i think that's going to remain intact for now. the fed has pivoted. we had under this fed leadership a couple of missteps in the q-3 and q-4. they righted the ship. they're now neutral, data-dependent markets are expecting a bias to the easing side by the end of the year against that backdrop, you have an easier regulatory environment, which cannot be

understated in terms of the importance of it to the private sector part of the economy in addition, you've got geopolitical factors, which under the previous administration, most spots overseas were hotter rather than cooler, from a terrorist, from a conflict standpoint. now, most of those spots are cooler it wasn't that long ago where we had north korea shooting missiles over japan. that's not happening now it might happen again in the future, but it's not happening now. so, on a number of fronts, things are better. and the economy -- look at corporate earnings the expectations came in over 7% between year end and the first quarter. we're now exceeding expectations you've got over 40 consumer discretionary companies which are up so far 23% in terms of eps growth, the ones that have reported, still have to report 2% earnings growth could, in fact, stay positive and in the grain. >> john, if your forecast for a gdp ends up being right, what does the fed do this year?

>> i think the fed could still be in play for a rate hike towards the end of the year. it's got to overcome a lot of internal assistance because their view now, the economy's in a good place, inflation's contained. so, inflation has to get over 2% and sustain a move over 2% we think that could -- we think that will happen in the second half of the year then it's just a question of how tolerant is the fed. we think gdp growth's 2.7% this year the unemployment rate -- >> that's a good number. >> let me ask you this, though if we start to see these things, my guess is that a fed rate hike would not come as a surprise to the market i mean, i think we're all on alert that the fed is now data-dependent if the numbers are really strong coming through, the market probably gets -- >> but look at where the market's priced right now. the fed funds future's not the perfect model -- >> not now, but they'll be there. the reason i bring this up is because we had a guest last week

who said the fed is kind of watching the market. the market will sniff this stuff out in advance, in which case you're not going to necessarily see quite as scary of a temper tantrum as you've seep in the past. >> it's not -- the fed also has to cause the market to adjust, right? >> yeah. >> so, there will have to be a little -- i don't know how big of an adjustment >> i don't know either >> if you told me you were going to grow at 2.5% or 3% and inflation was over 2%, and the fed was going to add a quarter or a half, i wouldn't be that exercised as an equity investor, but the equity market can be kind of crazy also >> in december, we were having arguments about whether the china trade wars or whether the fed were causing the growth fears, major ones. major -- the china people rolled their eyes it wasn't china china, the trade things are still on the only things changed is the fed. we're at new highs in the markets right now, s&p and

everything, and we're at 3.2% first -- so this is in spite of china? what's counterfactual if we hadn't done the china -- we'd be at 4%? >> and the other thing is the fed's not going to want to surprise markets, and you're going to want to probably cover this you're probably already planning on it. the st. louis fed is having a conference june 4th and 5th, where they are going to discuss policy framework, unconventional policy tools -- >> that's chicago. >> chicago, right, under bullard. all the guys will be there powell's going to be there. >> i'm going to be there. >> where they're going to discuss issues like even average inflation targeting. that means they could allow the -- deflate to run hotter than 2% without immediate implications -- >> john, stake chicago? >> yeah. are you going to be there? >> yes. >> okay, good. >> thanks, guys. when we come back, boeing in the hot seat a report in the "wall street journal" over the weekend claiming boeing waited until after the lion air crash to tell its biggest customer that a safety alert system was turned off on the 737 max we're going to speak to the

author of that report right after the brk.ea you don't want to miss it. stay tuned you're watching "squawk.

welcome back to "squawk box," everyone we've been watching the futures this morning, and after another up week for the markets last week, you're seeing some modest declines this morning. dow futures indicated down, but only by about 14 points.

s&p futures are off by less than two points the nasdaq down by 7 1/2 the nasdaq and the s&p 500 both closing at record highs on friday okay, let's talk boeing. big story over the weekend boeing hosting its annual meeting today in chicago in the wake of all the gathering coming after this news report over the weekend from the "wall street journal," finding that boeing did not tell its largest customer, southwest airlines, and other carriers, that a safety feature designed to alert pilots about malfunctioning sensors had been switched off. now, southwest says it did not know about that change until after the fatal lion air crash joining us now by phone from los angeles is the author of that report, andy pasztor, senior special writer for the "wall street journal." we thank you for joining us and waking up early to talk to us, andy explain to us -- >> good to be with you. >> -- how this happened. you know, we were talking in the last hour about what southwest knew, what it didn't know, and also this idea that, perhaps, this was all an effort by boeing

to effectively charge its customers more but if southwest didn't know about this to begin with, you would -- how were they trying to upsell them on the sensor product? >> well, i think it's really not so much a question of boeing trying to charge extra -- it's a question of the speed and the confusion, and i would say to some extent the bullheadedness of boeing in pushing ahead with its plan six months after the start of this crisis for the company, the first crash in indonesia -- the fact that we're still talking about what it told airlines, particularly its biggest 737 max customers, but other airlines, what they knew, what they were told, that we're still discussing that is i think pretty telling about the situation for the company and, really, for the industry the issue here is that boeing basically decided that these sensors were not important many airlines also decided that they were not important, but

they weren't explicitly told, they weren't discussed -- this issue wasn't discussed and so, there's a lot of confusion about exactly how this occurred what is clear, though, absolutely clear, is that this shows that this issue's not going away for boeing. >> right. >> and it's a really sore -- >> and in terms of your reporting on this topic, how far did this go? did this go all the way to the top, meaning do you believe that dennis muilenburg knew that southwest did not know this, that the pilots did not have the correct manual information even in their manuals >> so, let's put this into some context. it's a gigantic company, of course, with various branches and lots of products folks on the hill, investigators on the hill and at the transportation department and in the justice department are really scrambling to find out who knew what and how far up the chain it went. i don't think it's a question of whether the chairman himself knew or made the decision. it's a question of what kind of system boeing has in place and checks and balances to make sure that its senior engineers are

aware, that its marketing people are aware, and that they have a systematic way of informing their customers about what is available on the plane. >> andy, talking about accountability, the other thing you write about are these sequences of email correspondence that take place between folks at the faa who seemed to know about this, and yet, didn't alert southwest. does this go -- this goes, to me, to this whole argument that the faa is too close with boeing i mean, that's part of the critique right now. >> well, that's right. and the faa does have some responsibility, obviously, for approving the system, and then for how it reacted after the initial crash. there are some indications that midlevel people inside the faa who monitored southwest became concerned about the issue of these sensors and generally what the available system on the plane did, and they discussed it among themselves we haven't found any signs that it went up to headquarters at the faa or senior officials, but there was concern, and it really

wasn't proffered out by those midlevel folks in a very serious way. the other thing that we should just keep in mind is that boeing's problem is, obviously, the design and the accidents, but also its response to this whole issue, and they vacillated between being -- and saying there's absolutely no problem, we didn't do anything wrong, which is what the chairman did last week, and then some other times when they basically apologized and they're ready to take responsibility and try to move forward. >> what kind of liability do you think boeing may have when it comes to southwest what does it mean to the relationship that boeing has with these airlines as a result of this? >> for southwest, they're pretty committed to boeing, and it's hard to see how this has a major, significant, long-term impact but for regulators around the world and for other carriers who may not be so committed, the question of restoring trust is a major question mark. and i think at this point, for

your listeners, the major point is the technical issues i think have been largely resolved boeing and the faa and the regulators overseas know basically what needs to be done to make this a safer plane and to make the system less dangerous, or not dangerous at all. but how to sell that to passengers, airlines, and so on, that's really the challenge for them at this point >> andy, we want to thank you. we've got to run if we have this same conversation a year from now, do you believe that the current leadership of boeing will be the same >> i don't know. it's not for me to predict, but there's certainly a lot of people who are saying that there should be some changed at the top, i would say folks are saying both at the top of the faa and at the top of boeing. >> fair enough andy pasztor thank you very much again. appreciate your reporting. concerns are rising over the latest measles outbreak. what would be the economic impact to industries like airlines and lodging we're going to speak to national institute of allergy and

infectious diseases director dr. anony thfauci about concerns and what you need to know. stay tuned there are people out there who see things others can't. they're the ones who see a city that make those who live in it feel a little safer. who see the efficient shape and design of the ocean's wonders as the future of aerodynamics. at dell technologies, we see it too. if you'd like to transform your business, talk to us. and we'll show the world what impossible looks like... when it's made real.

welcome back, everybody. in the year 2000, the measles virus was considered to be eradicated in the united states, but it's 19 years later, and the disease is back and spreading quickly in certain parts of the country. airlines and other businesses are bracing for the uncertainty and the economic imthis outbreak joining us right now is national institute of allergy and infectious diseases director dr. anthony fauci. doctor, thank you for being with us today. >> good to be with you. >> first of all, run us through the numbers. how bad of an issue is it at this point >> right now in 2019, there have been 695 cases of measles in 22 states that is already above the next highest year that we've had since 2000 so as you said correctly, this is the worst that it's been since we declared measles eliminated in 2000 and by eliminated, you mean there are no continuous cases over a 12-month period so, we're seeing a resurgence of

measles, which is really related definitely to the fact that parents have not been vaccinating their children there's this movement of vaccine hesitancy or even downright antivaccination movement, which has led to a decrease in the relative percentage of people who are infected in certain communities, i mean, who are vulnerable in certain communities. that really is a problem we're seeing a big outbreak in the williamsburg section of brooklyn in new york city, in a closed community of jewish people who did not vaccinate their children to the level to keep the blanket of protection over the community those are the kind of things that are going around at different parts of the country, which could lead to some serious return of a situation that we essentially eliminated a long time ago >> what does this mean you boil it down i mean, many people are vaccinated if you're vaccinated, can you get it again

i saw some reports last week that maybe some people were only vaccinated once, not the recommended two times. if you were vaccinated between the '70s and '80s. >> sure. if you're born before 1957, the chances are that you had been infected with measles, like i was. i was born before 1957, so i was infected with measles. i am protected for the rest of my life. if you've had two of the shots -- namely, the standard way the cdc records -- you get your first shot at 12 to 15 months of age, the second shot at 4 to years of age if you got those two, you're 97% protected. >> what if you don't know? should you get it again? does it harm you to get it twice? >> well, no, it doesn't. and that's a very good point that people are considering right now. certainly, if you don't know, or if you only have one, there are a couple of things you can do. you can go and get tested to see if you have antibodies, or you can just skip that and get a boost, particularly if you're in an area where there are outbreaks and you're not sure of your status or if you know you

only had one it would make sense to get that extra boost to bring your protection up to 97% >> does measles kill i mean, there have been people who have been pushing back at me online saying it doesn't kill. >> well, that is completely untrue and i hope that the viewers get that point prior to the vaccine availability in the mid-1960s, globally there were 2 to 3 million deaths per year from measles. in the united states before we had vaccines, there were about 2 million cases, about 500 deaths per year, about 1,000 cases of encephalitis, which is brain swelling so, the misinformation that measles cannot be a serious disease is just not true >> it's hard to put a number on some of these things, particularly when you're talking about a disease that kills, but unc did a study and found that vaccinated -- vaccine-preventible diseases cost the economy about $9 billion several years ago.

>> right. >> and if you look at the cdc, they said back in 2013 that every measles case that is hospitalized runs up a tab somewhere between $4,000 and $46,000. those are dollars that could be spent elsewhere. what are your concerns from an economic perspective >> well, i think that if you wind up getting more infections and diseases that were vaccine preventible, those are entirely avoidable burdens on the economy. because when people get sick, they lose work, they lose the finances from work, they have hospital costs, they have direct and indirect costs these are completely avoidable, and it's really a shame that in the 21st century, in 2019, when you have vaccine-avoidable diseases, that we're not getting vaccinated and essentially putting those diseases to rest like we did with measles in 2000 and unfortunately, it's creeping back on us >> what advice would you give to industries like the airlines in terms of protecting their employees, protecting their passengers >> well, i think what they need

to do, particularly, and several airlines are already doing it, is to make sure they go back and check the vaccine status of their employees, of their flight attendants, of their pilots, to make sure they're fully protected. >> are there other areas of the economy, other industries that you think about in a situation like this? >> no, i think you pointed them out. i think it's important, travel industries, because people are afraid when they go into a closed place that there is a person, for example, on a plane that might be infected that you can actually transmit it to the people one of the problems with measles, unfortunately, on the one hand, measles is one of the most transmissible viruses that we know. and on the other hand, the vaccine for measles is one of the most effective vaccines that we know. >> you know, dr. fauci, i think one of the points that is often lost on people is thatvaccinatie creating immunities for people who cannot get those vaccinations -- babies, the elderly, people who have cancer or other reasons for having an

immune system that's been compromised. >> that is a very important point, and i'm glad you brought that up. that's referred to as herd immunity when you have in the community about 93% to 97%, 95% of the people who are vaccinated against measles, you create an umbrella of what we call protective herd immunity, so that the virus doesn't get the opportunity to spread in the community, and the vulnerable people, such as people who are on cancer chemotherapy, who have immune suppression, and even infants from birth until they get their first vaccine in one year, those infants are vulnerable so, you protect the more vulnerable when you increase the level of vaccination in the community to that critical level. for measles, it's somewhere between 93% and 95%. if the community is protected at that level, the vulnerable people will be shielded and will be protected >> so, doctor, when you have the -- when it's eradicated and

you have that 12-month period, there's some basel level, right? it's not really zero >> well, it was only in the united states, too, it wasn't globally. >> we import it on a plane >> that's exactly correct. measles throughout the world -- for example, last year there were over 100,000 deaths from measles outside of the united states so, continually there's the situation of people coming into the country. and if the country is not protected by that veil of herd immunity -- >> herd immunity. >> -- that's when you get the outbreaks. >> okay. we have herd mentality on wall street, doctor. >> wall street. >> so, yeah, we understand the herd that's a new usage for herd -- >> herd immunity we like it. >> yeah, herd immunity. >> dr. fauci, thank you very much for your time today we appreciate it. >> good to be with you. okay, coming up, more on "squawk. we're going to speak to uber investor bradley tusk about uber's road show and what investors can expect as we head to break, look at

u.s. equity futures at this hour dow off about 25 points. we're back in a moment

we see access to fresh food being the global norm, not the exception. at emerson, when issues become inspiration, creating a better world isn't just a result, it's a responsibility. emerson. consider it solved.

still to come on "squawk box" this morning, uber investor bradley tusk of tusk ventures is going to be joining us to discuss ipo valuations, the ride-hailing company's future, and much more. and then, another round of trade talks begin this week. treasury secretary steve mnuchin saying negotiations are in the final stages we're going to hear from former senator and ambassador to china, max baucus and a record-setting weekend at the box office for "avengers: endgame. can it lift the rest of the movie industry we will discuss that and more when "squawk box" returns right tethis pnc bank has technology to help make banking easier,

like.. pnc easy lock, so you can easily lock your credit card when its maximum limit differs from its vertical limit. and clover flex, for when you need to take credit cards when no one carries cash. or requesting a call to help get a new credit card- one that hasn't followed the family goldfish. pnc - make today the day.

welcome back to "squawk box," everyone we've been watching the futures this morning, and so far, we are seeing some modest declines. s&p futures off by one dow futures down by about 24 the nasdaq off by five but remember, you had the s&p 500, the nasdaq close once again at record levels on friday. >> okay. let's talk uber, because uber's on its road -- or on the road -- it's on its roadshow to the ipo after lyft's shaky first weeks of trading what is the investor appetite for ride-hailing companies joining us now is noted venture capitalist and uber investor bradley tusk, ceo of tusk

ventures we've gotten in some of the numbers now. >> yep. >> we have a little bit of a better sense of what this company looks like. >> yep. >> and i think the prevailing question that's still on the table is, you could compare yourself to amazon or whatever company you want, but what is the path to profitability? >> the path to profitability is two roads. one is more than just ride-sharing you heard about this, this morning, or your team did. so uber eats, uber freight, lots of different products, logistics. two is, you know, as we're seeing the rate of people getting driver's licenses decline, ultimately, that leaves people still having to get from point "a" to point "b" in some fashion. so i think what uber's always believed and still does, is there's still a much bigger market out there to tap into. >> okay. let me ask it this way. >> yeah. >> do you believe that today it is riskier or less risky to invest in uber than it would have been to invest in amazon at this same time or stage in its life cycle >> i would argue less risky for a few reasons. one is uber's had the benefit of

watching amazon go through this process and kind of 20 years of all amazon -- >> but a lot of things had to break the right way -- >> sure. >> -- for amazon to get to the place it did today >> yeah. >> right >> but it did all of those things, and i think uber's got at this point now the sophistication, the capital, the brand, and clearly, there's enough market demand between people who need to get places and things that need to get places, that if they can capture that market, they're going to be really profitable. >> but we were talking in the last hour about this idea that with amazon, you knew that, potentially, if they were willing to raise their prices, not even so much, just marginally, there was a chance they could become profitable relatively quickly i'm not so sure that's as true in the case of uber, insofar as there is huge competition in this space, both from lyft and taxi cabs in the main business they're already in. >> the one key thing -- and this matters to both uber and lyft -- is that they both went public effectively at the same time and so, the kinds of games that

both companies have been playing for years and years, where they undercut each other -- they don't have to worry about it because they don't report earnings or anything else -- neither are in a position to do that anymore so it is possible that the price of an uber or lyft might go up, but the subsidization will have to kerr. >> but the catch there is historically, they might have been trying to price each other out of the market, but we're forgetting about the third player -- >> taxis >> taxis the incumbent player, which is to say, people took ubers and lyfts, especially at the uberx level, in part because they were the same price as taxi or cheaper, originally. if that price goes up, i'm not so sure people aren't just going to stand outside with their hand out. >> they might, but taxi prices keep going up as well. we're going to have a big congestion surcharge here in manhattan. and the other thing, in the ten years since uber's been out there kind of eating taxi's lunch, have you seen a material improvement in taxis across the u.s. do they provide better service, better cars? i mean, have they really responded to the crisis at all i don't see it. >> and you think people are willing to pay for that.

>> yeah. they have been already for the last ten years. >> but they have been at a rate that is losing uber money for every ride they order. are shareholders going to be able to continue to pay for that, willing to pay for that? >> yeah, look, i think that's where some of the subsidization will end i think that's where uber has to both have other markets like freight and eats and things like that, where they'll have to keep taking advantage of people just saying i don't need a car anymore, i don't want to pay -- >> we are in an economy where half the population can't afford to miss a paycheck, and they don't have $400 in the bank. the people that are using uber are in the upper half. they're not -- >> sure. >> and if prices go up from here, you're going to have fewer people and it's not really a -- >> it's not necessarily -- >> they're still on buses. >> look at the state of mass transit here sitting in the middle of times square, it's unreliable, you can't count on -- >> i know it goes up i'm getting the bills. but just for kids, if they use it all the time, it's a luxury every time they need to go get a

blow-out for their hair -- >> and what if you said, okay, i'm going to get rid of my car, no insurance, no maintenance, no parking, no gas. are you sure it's still more expensive? >> depends on where you live it doesn't compete with a car. >> but i was surprised to hear -- i didn't realize, leslie was telling me today that uber said in its own prospectus that if they don't see a drop in competition, either in uber eats areas or in the car, the ride-hailing service itself, that they might not ever become profitable, that that is a risk. >> yeah, i saw that. i couldn't tellhow much that i the lawyer saying you need to put these things in and how much they actually believe that. >> what do you think >> i think it's a little bit of a lawyer's i have a hard time imagining that forget about the people like me who were in uber really, really early and will do well regardless people have been coming to the company to work there over the last couple years, they don't have that huge bump in valuation, so if they don't think that there's some path to profitability, there's no real reason to go there. >> how dependent in terms of path to profitability do you

think they are or will be on this idea of autonomous driving in the future, that you take the driver out of the system because that to me -- >> yeah. >> -- if true, is interesting. yet, i think depending on who you talk to -- elon musk will give you a year, other people will give you a decade. >> elon will have autonomous cars on mars by like 2025, right? so, yeah i mean, i think one is we're not that close on this yet, level five autonomy, which is considered the true self-driving concept is nowhere here yet and even if we were, there's no regulatory framework to have it. so the idea that tesla will have robotaxis on the streets next year is insane but ultimately, could autonomous vehicles bring down uber's costs and increase its margin? sure. >> and final question -- bringing down the valuation last week, you look at that as just uber trying to be conservative in the way that pinterest was, and then you saw it rocket up in the market, or do you think that there's a real concern here, given the way lyft has performed? >> i think that lyft is a

cautionary tale now, and i think had -- let's say lyft were up 22% instead of down 22%, i wouldn't be surprised if uber's valuation was more like $100 to $110 billion, versus $84 billion, where they're setting now. >> will you be selling on the ipo? >> i have a lock-up. >> will you sell at the end of the lock-up? >> i will sell when it's smart to do so, but yeah having this much in my position in one company is not smart. >> more to talk to you about in the future, i'm sure, bradley. thank you. >> thanks, guys. coming up, with the u.s. economy hitting on all cylinders, how democrats are preparing to take on the trump economy in 2020. we will talk and have two sides of that, although one of our guys is romney's guy i don't know -- anyway at the top of the hour, former senator max baucus joins us to discuss trade talks. "squawbo wl rhtac k x"ilbeig bk.

the u.s. economy off to its best start for the first quarter since 2015 gdp grew by 3.2% in the first quarter. looking ahead to 2020, running against the trump economy presents a challenge for the democratic presidential hopefuls for more, let's welcome hoover institution research fellow lanhee chen and bazell schmeichel, former new york state democratic party executive

director who lectures on policy and politics at the city university of new york and guys, i don't think the world has changed where it's not no longer "the economy, stupid." i think many times it still is the economy, stupid. but we have no idea where the economy's going to be a year from now. >> that's right. >> and it happened with president obama when you were trying to help romney get elected. and the economy was in dire straits. by the time november came around, it was doing much better, and the rest is history. >> yeah, this is the tough thing, right you're planning. so, in 2012, we're planning a campaign at the end of 2010 and beginning of 2011, you're looking at the economy you're trying to think about how to make a case in the same way democrats are looking at the economy now. things look great. we don't know how things are going to look a year from now. the trend ends up being more important, i think, than the actual state of the economy. so, if we have a great economy now and things start looking down, i think that creates a problem for president trump, even if the numbers remain relatively good. that having been said, you know,

it's hard to see how you'd make the case against what the president haas done with this economy. >> but lanhee, even though -- or bazell, you can -- even though we're talking sub-4% unemployment, and we're talking, you know, about some wage gains, there are people in the democratic party talking about people being left behind and as good as some of these numbers are, they're still saying it's not an economy that's working for everyone. >> well, it's been uneven growth, and that's to be sure. you go to parts of pennsylvania, which is why gee joe biden's doing his maiden rally in pittsburgh you're going to see that kind of uneven growth. but the economic stats like crime stats, even though the crime numbers can go down, if you don't feel safe, there's still a problem there. and i think that's what democrats are trying to tap into look, we have 20 candidates in this race, ranging from age 37 to 77. we're not going to have a cohesive economic message for quite some time, and that's okay because as lanhee said, you

know, we have a little time to do that. so, we're still talking about things like affordable college, increasing the minimum wage. and even if there are democrats that are not doing that legislatively, we're, i think, in a position to force some businesses to do it on their own. and i think that's where democrats can talk about winning. >> i did see a piece over the weekend -- five key points that many on the -- if you go out to the far left or mid-to-far left -- medicare for all, get rid of the electoral college, forgive student loans and free college. there are a couple other that i'm just wondering -- i can't remember the last two, but there are also outlier, i would say -- maybe they're not. for me, they look like outlier positions. but i'm wondering how joe biden -- >> how he starts to trade -- >> how he honors that side of the party to get the nomination and then tacks back to the middle, if he were to do it, in

the job election. >> in his mind, and my guess -- he's called himself labiberal, u he's liberal in his version of what the democratic was. i don't think we are there so i do think he's going to have to move to the left to capture some of those younger voters, particularly -- i mean, if our candidates are trending young, he's going to have to move that direction substantially -- >> do you think he's the eventual candidate is he your pick, basil, or -- >> i'm still waiting to be courted, quite frankly but things like affordable college -- i teach at two universities affordable college is really hitting home for a lot of the folks that i interact with -- >> well, who's not for affordable college that's different than free college and debt forgiveness. >> but i would also say this about joe biden. what he's thinking he can do is tap into those white working-class voters -- >> i know. >> -- who left the party at least ten years ago -- >> and it's hard to underestimate that. >> and the thing with those voters is their sort of economic anxiety, for many of them -- not all of them -- is also tied to racial and ethnic anxiety as

well so, that's not a straight economic message there's a little more to that, that very few of our candidates -- maybe joe biden is one of the few that can actually tap into both of those concerns and bring some of them back to -- >> i'mnot sure -- here's the problem for joe biden. i'm not sure where he goes on economic policy, right he's not going to go to where elizabeth warren is, i don't think he's going to go to wealth tax. is he going to say what cory booker has said, which is that we've got to expand the earned income tax credit to promote work will he say look, i'm for higher taxes on some percentage of the population am i for some different treatment of capital gains it's not clear to me -- with joe biden getting in as late as he has, it's not clear to me where he goes. the key to a primary campaign is differentiation. >> yep. >> you're talking about fighting over a very narrow slice of voters so, how do you differentiate in that context i think biden's going to have to figure that out. and right now, the differentiation he's getting, i would argue, is not good for him, because he's seen as the backward-looking candidate he's seen as let's take us back. let's restore what america was

that's not where the democratic party is, though. >> and i agree with you. in fact, what's going to be challenging for joe biden is, if he slips out of the top three, for example, in terms of polling, in terms of fund-raising, that's a huge problem for him. and that means that whatever message he has isn't working. >> but do you think the democrats can run at all on the economy? i mean, that to me is actually a very fundamental question. given how hot the economy is today under trump and the current administration, whether you could even try you could run on lots of other things, right? you could see biden's commercial and talk about charlottesville and all sorts of other divisiveness in the country, character. those may be fair places to play, but i'm not sure that on the economy itself, that actually, that's going to be a successful outcome. >> even though your favorite discussions on this show are that capitalism is broken? i mean, if it's broken, why are things going so well >> and that's what voters do believe. and i think that's where candidates have been successful. they do feel that capitalism is broken think about where donald trump has been spending a lot of his

time these days, in the midwest. it's a clear issue with how voters feel about the economy and the midwest. so, we can run on this issue again, whether we have a cohesive message about it is -- >> so we'll keep debating. >> i think it's a loser. i mean, i just think -- i think they have to, don't get me wrong. but i think it's very hard to swim against the tide on this one. >> you think -- i think when it's all said and done, it's like a biden/kamala or something like that. >> that's a great ticket. >> yeah. >> i think it -- >> i think that's fair they've got to balance -- >> then they go with the next generation will take over -- >> it's like a wedding, something a little, something borrowed, something blue. >> that in my mind tickles all of the democratic party's roger nous zones. >> any of you think bernie -- >> that is such a gross -- >> sorry. >> lanhee! >> not to bring that into politics. >> it's too early. >> but bernie's going to be mad if he deserves to get it and doesn't get it -- >> of course he is. >> he's not going to get it, is he >> no, and he's going to be out

there doing his bernie thing and the question will be, when we get to march of next year before super tuesday, there will be two or three people there's 25 now 14 of them want book deals and the rest of them, we're going to get to march and the super tuesday states, and we're going to have two or three bernie's probably going to be in the mix. and if he doesn't get it, yeah, he's going to be a problem for the democrats, i think. >> are you feeling the bern, andrew >> you know, i don't feel different -- >> there's an ointment for that, preparation "h." >> can i make a bit of a comparison 2004, remember we had joe lieberman -- i was working for him at the time. >> love joe. >> love joe. >> who dat new party. >> jomentum. [leaf blower]

you should be mad at leaf blowers. [beep] you should be mad your neighbor always wants to hang out. and you should be mad your smart fridge is unnecessarily complicated. but you're not mad, because you have e*trade which isn't complicated. their tools make trading quicker and simpler. so you can take on the markets with confidence. don't get mad. get e*trade and start trading today.

boeing's ceo set to face shareholders for the first time since the grounding of the 737 max. we'll take you there live. trade front and center this week as negotiations with china resume in beijing. we'll tell you what to expect. box office hero. disney's "avengers: endgame" bringing in more than $1 billion. will it be enough to salvage a rough start to the year for the theaters >> do you trust me >> i do. >> the final hour of "squawk box" begins right now.

♪ >> announcer: live from the most powerful city in the world, new york, this is "squawk box. ♪ hey, what's the matter with ya ♪ i did see that good morning and welcome back to -- that was chris -- >> that's part of it chris pratt. just their part of it, too. >> he's like haul. i don't know about these superheroes -- >> chris hemsworth is pretty tall, too, like 6'8" he's super tall. he is. thor. >> live from the nasdaq market site in times square, i'm joe kernen along with becky quick and andrew ross sorkin futures right now indicated down about 21 points on the dow jones, indicated down a point and a half on the s&p 500. nasdaq indicated down seven or so treasury yields, i notice that -- i don't know, i was looking at them, they were back down to 2.5% just can't get out of their own

way in terms of, you know, 3.2% growth, 2.5% ten-year. >> what happened >> so, yeah, we're tethered. we're tethered with low inflation around the world, i think. >> we've got a lot to focus on this week. one of the big focuses is going to be earnings on wall street. we've got 150 s&p companies actually reporting results so far. we feel like we've already been through the bulk of the earnings season, but check out all of the names coming up this week -- apple, ge, mcdonald's, pfizer, yum! dow, cvs, adidas, lots of companies. alphabet kicking things off after the closing bell spotify shares are trading higher after the company reported a loss of 79 cents a share. that was much worse than the 35-cent loss that had been expected but revenue of $1.7 billion was above wall street's expectations monthly active users grew by 26% from the same period a year ago, and premium subscribers hit 100 million. that's up 32% from a year ago. in trade talks with china resume in beijing this week. treasury secretary steve mnuchin

and u.s. trade representative robert lighthizer are due to meet with china's vice premier tomorrow kayla tausche joins us now with more >> hey, andrew on tuesday, it begins two days of negotiation in what secretary mnuchin has suggested will be the final rounds of trade talks between the two countries. the chinese vice premier will then come to the u.s. on may 8th, possibly closing a deal that would then be signed by the two countries' presidents. the date and location of that is still undetermined, but the president in offhand remarks last week said president xi jinping would come to the white house, quote, soon some major sticking points remain, however, in the talks. the two sides agreed to the structure of a mechanism but multinational companies are skeptical it would work. there is also a question about how tariffs will be used to enforce it and whether new products could see chinese tariffs if agricultural products are removed from that list and then what does china get in return for any concessions it makes to the u.s.? those are some major questions here the u.s. did not send a representative to the country's

infrastructure forum as it has in years past at china's request. that forum wrapped over the weekend after a speech from president xi that pledged to keep opening up the country's markets to foreign players, but there is a little bit of a grain of salt from some senior administration officials that i spoke to over the weekend. they noted that even if these talks were to reach a soft conclusion this month, that that would still be a record time in a relationship that still has a lot of issues. so, we will see whether it happens this month, maybe next month. cautious optimism is how i'd characterize it, guys. >> okay. we will cross our fingers. in the meantime, we want to bring in a guest joining us is former u.s. ambassador to china, max baucus. what do you think is left on the table, given what you've heard now, both from kayla in terms of her report, but also some of the comments that the treasury secretary made last night, i believe to "the new york times"? >> i think a big problem still is the united states would like a stronger enforcement mechanisms the problem always with china is

they'll say a lot, they'll make a lot of promises, but it's kind of difficult to see china follow through on them. i tend to think, though, that the enforcement mechanism may be somewhat strong on words, but not very enforceable, because there's no international enforcement mechanism. on the other hand, trump could threaten more tariffs to try to force china to do what the united states wants it to do but i think the real question here is what's next? what's going to follow this trade agreement? i think there will be one. there has to be one. it will be within five or six weeks, i think, but there will be an agreement. >> but when you say what comes next, who do you think the permutations of what comes next could be >> well, i think there will be an agreement my friends in china say they very much want an agreement. they also, frankly, like president trump pushing them that is, i'm talking about the private sector in china. they love it that china's -- that trump's trying to push

china to open up and get more economic reform. on the other hand, when this is all concluded, there will be some progress. the good news is it will be over, and that reduces some uncertainty. the difficult problem is, some of the supply lines between the two countries has already been disrupted and the longer negotiations going on, if there's no agreement, american companies are going to start looking at other countries -- they're going to look at thailand, vietnam, not so much china. china knows that, and china doesn't want that. but the next problem's going to be huawei. the next problem's going to be the belt road initiative that you just discussed there are going to be a lot of issues that are going to come up in this relationship this relationship's going to become more tense, not last. >> that's what i was going to ask. when an announcement of a deal is reached, does this mark the beginning of a new level of cooperation or a new level of something that looks very different?

>> i would not call it a new level of cooperation i'd call it just another chapter in the relationship between the u.s. and china it will be somewhat positive, because an agreement will be reached. >> right. >> but all of the other questions, we'll keep facing them and the big problem is, our two systems are so different we're open, transparent. they're authoritarian. i mean, we americans just don't quite understand it yet. >> ambassador, you mentioned huawei >> yeah. >> what to do about huawei and there seems to be two issues when it relates to huawei. one is a national security issue. >> right. >> but there's a separate issue, which is simply about where the united states stands as a competitor, if you will, relative to how far ahead huawei is when it comes to 5g technology >> well, we've been asleep at the switch, frankly, in not developing 5g nearly to the degree that huawei has second, the 5g that we're

starting to develop is inferior to the 5g that huawei is developing frankly, we've got to get our act together some people ask, what's the democrats' economic strategy going to be? the real question is what's america's economic strategy going to be? we've got to build up america. it's the old infrastructure we keep talking about it's also the new infrastructure -- >> i've talked to people in silicon valley that say we may be three to five years behind already. >> right, exactly. >> so unless you're going to try to tie huawei's hands behind its back through tariffs and all sorts of other things, and claim national security issues when they may or may not be real, to try to get, give some time to the u.s. companies to get there -- i'm not sure you do. >> i agree with that and i think the uk is somewhat going on the right direction of trying to find some way to find accommodation between those competing interests. i think a black-and-white of huawei is stupid world's too complicated. we have to find ways to cut back -- back doors, software

that makes it more difficult to hack, allow huawei in some parts of our economy, but the monot tt sensitive like security. >> we're having this conversation a couple years from now, you think we'll be talking about huawei routers and other hardware all over the united states on our networks >> my view is, we should not just stiff-arm and totally close the door, because that's going to force huawei and the chinese and other countries that are dealing with china huawei to be more against us. we've got to find an accommodation. maybe it's some routers, some servers, in some locations, not everywhere, not the most sensitive parts of america, but somewhere. >> and just to be clear, you think of it as a national security issue or you think of it as a competitive issue? you know, you listen to the ceo of huawei, and he will say until he is blue in the face -- i am not controlled by the chinese government, they don't have a

back door into my system, i don't do these things, i don't know what everybody's talking about. >> yeah, that's what he says i think we have to take it with more than a few grains of salt i think it's primarily a national security issue more than it's competitive. you know, we americans think we like to compete. we think we can do better, so let's just compete and over time build a better product that's sold worldwide and deal with huawei in a way that's safe for us >> okay. ambassador, thank you so much for your time this morning appreciate it. good to see you. >> thanks. coming up, blockbuster "avengers: endgame" smashing records, bringing in more than $1 billion in its first weekend in theaters. i think that guy's 6'3", which is like 6'8" in hollywood. >> you should see him, though. i read this hilarious article where he showed up at his daughter's school. the media was following them it was a field day and thor stepped up and race, of course,

beat all of them can you imagine, you show up at track and field day to race the other dads and thor's there? >> no. no i would hope that it would be like robert downey jr. we're going to talk broader entertainment trends with eric davis from fandango, next. plus, we'll get you ready for boeing's big shareholder meeting dain chicago stay tuned to "squawk box" on cnbc ♪

baeb to "squawk box. an update on the bidding war in the permian basin. anadarko is prepared to endorse a hostile bid from rival occidental anadarko confirmed this morning it would resume negotiations with occidental. earlier this month, anadarko agreed to sell itself to chevron for $33 billion. if anadarko decides to scrap that deal, it will be forced to pay a $1 billion breakup fee in a statement to cnbc, chevron says "we believe our signed agreement with anadarko provides the best value and the most certainty to anadarko's shareholders." we will see where that all heads, but likely higher, i assume if chevron wants, they're going to have to pay more. >> right. disney's "avengeors: endgame" brought in a record $1.2 billion at the box office

in its debut weekend it opened in a record 4,662 theaters and earned an average of $72,000 per theater is the superhero blockbuster enough to save them from the likes of netflix and amazon? eric davis is managing editor of fandan fandango what does this mean for fandango alone, people lining up for these seats? >> yeah, it broke records in terms of presales, all-time presales this movie now holds the record. first 24 hours, it broke that record it sold five times more tickets than "avengers: infinity war" in its first week so, there was a survey that deadline put out yesterday that said 62% of people bought their tickets in advance for this film so, that just goes to show you -- >> because you don't want to show up and find there's no tickets, there's no seats. >> 8,000 sold-out show times at the end of last week this morning i heard it was more like 16,000 sold-out show times across the country so, justmassive anticipation, and we do not see event films

like this come around too often. >> that was going to be my next question -- is this a once-off, or does this mean that the box office is back >> well, i mean, just for disney alone, they're just getting started. we still have an "alladin" movie, "toy story 4," a ma liff cent movie, a lion king movie, which will be a huge juggernaut in july and the granddaddy of them all, "star wars: episode ix" at the end of december, which we've never seen a studio have two franchise finales like disney will this year. i think they're just getting started. and the blockbuster season is just getting started we still have a pikachu movie coming out next week and then a gone zilla movie, so a lot, a "men in black" movie. >> what do you think of the idea of the stratusification of films broadly, meaning they will be just these event movies and nothing else because we talk about the future of disney plus and ott and how that's going to change the whole game. >> well, i definitely think these big movies -- i mean, look, to make this kind of

money, historically, they're going to be wrapped around big ip, highly anticipated films, but what we're also seeing is these kinds of movies bring a lot of people back to the theater that don't necessarily go, and it reminds them, i kind of like it hey, they redid my theater, now it's comfortable again, i can order dinner here so we're seeing that kind of bleed into other genres. last year, horror was big, "quiet place" was big. the third biggest movie of the year is a horror movie from jordan peele with "us. four documentaries last year wound up in the top 30 highest grossing documentaries of all time so, we're starting to see that bleed into all these other categories -- "a star is born," drama, huge numbers. "crazy rich asians," huge numbers. and so, it's bleeding everywhere >> what was surprising about this one was that they were able to get big numbers even with a three-hour-plus movie. usually, that squeezes the number of showings that you can get in, but theaters that were opening at 7:00 in the morning is that the future of movie theaters, too? >> i think if you have movies

like this, yeah, you know? you're definitely going to have movie theaters that are going to say, sure, we'll stay open 24 hours for 72 hours just to play this around the clock. and i knew people going to see it at 4:30 in the morning, which was nuts but you know, that's the kind of movies that when you have this kind of anticipation for a film, you want to see it whenever you can see it i would also imagine that "star wars" movie in december is going to elicit some of the same kind of anticipation. >> the debate that's taking place when you look at the academy awards -- steven spielberg's side versus the netflix side -- what happens >> well, i think that netflix will be in there i don't think netflix will be discounted from the oscars i definitely think their films will -- as soon as they play by the academy rules and they're in theaters for "x" amount of time, i definitely think netflix will be at the table along with amazon and -- >> but is it a statement on an industry that's under siege? >> well, i just think that, you know -- i give spielberg credit. i feel that way, too

i feel that, you know, we don't want to lose that big-screen experience it's part of our past time and i think sometimes you have to make a little bit of noise, and sometimes you have to be a little controversial to say, hey, everybody, let's not discount the movie theater experience, because if we don't have that experience, we're not going to be happy. we want that in our lives. >> especially if you work at fandango, where you're selling movie tickets for theaters. >> there's a reason why i do work at fandango i grew up in the theater i spent -- i was at the parties. every weekend i was at the theater. and so, i value that experience very much, and i hope -- >> just to ask you, in terms of ticket sales, obviously, this was a huge weekend this was a really big deal but what have ticket sales been through a fandango site, let's say now versus five years ago? >> oh, well, i mean, yes, they've groan exponentially, i would say, yeah. we're seeing millions and millions of tickets sold -- >> because now people want to reserve a seat before -- >> yeah, definitely. especially when you have these theaters that are being retrofitted with all of these kind of comfortable chairs there may be less room in the theaters and you want to go at a specific row, you want to be in a specific place -- >> so it's not a statement of

more people watching movies. it's a statement of how people watch movies in the theaters >> yeah, a little bit of both, i think. >> it's really depressing to me that "star wars" and stupid superheroes. i mean, how about the -- >> because you didn't buy in as early as you want. >> how about the scorsese -- >> yes, that's for netflix but it will be in theaters it's interesting, when they released first teaser for that, i don't know if they even mentioned netflix. it said only in theaters this fall so scorsese is another one, like spielberg. that experience means a lot to him, so he'll make sure -- >> but you don't think if it comes out on a friday, people are not going to watch that at home on netflix? >> i mean it all depends on what they do. they may put it in theaters for a couple weeks before they put it on netflix. netflix is just messing around with the way they release these movies some will go day and date. some of them will be in theaters for an exclusive engamement. >> do we not think there will be day and date, meaning netflix is not going to release "the irishman" at the same time >> we do not know. they haven't said yet. but they have gone a couple different ways with their films.

>> it's not like the death of unique, nonseeltsel pictures, is it can we get back to that little bit, please? >> look, every time a big movie like this opens, people say there's no more original movies, but like i said, the third biggest movie this year is an original movie with jordan peele's "us. and i definitely think the original movies will be there. and if anything, these movies making tons and tons of money will give studios a little bit more leeway to give riskier projects the green light especially with disney, with fox. i think fox is going to be that studio where they're making the r-rated -- >> what's "the lion king"? live action or something >> it is going to be live action. >> why the hell are they going to do that >> it's funny -- >> watch the commercial for it. >> it looks amazing. >> ipz don't want to be an extra, an elephant, i don't think. oh, your co-stars are lions? >> you could be one of the jackals. >> jon favreau did it, "the jungle book. it's all motion captured -- >> check it out. look, look, you're missing it. >> you're missing it. >> if you can make an elephant fly -- >> look. you just missed it again. >> is scar going to be in there?

>> they're all going to be there. great cast. >> yeah? >> beyonce is in there, too. >> it looks pretty good. >> that's going to be cool. >> donald glover huge movie. >> it's going to be a huge movie. >> all right, i can go with that. >> it doesn't look creepy. it looks cool. erik, thank you. appreciate it. also a disclosure, comcast, the parent company of nbcuniversal, owns fandango. one of the best -- i think that was a great deal for comcast, years ago nobody was thinking. >> you missed -- okay, coming up -- >> bribe was on last week. that's when you needed to be here if you wanted to suck up. >> airbnb -- i wasn't trying to do that. >> okay. airbnb out with a new plan to take on traditional hotels. and a new report this morning says a major hotel chain is trying to get into the home rental business. tas ensqwkoxg you all the deilwh "ua b" returns.

oh, wow. you two are going to have such a great trip. yeah, have fun! thanks to you, we will. aw, stop. this is why voya helps reach today's goals... ...all while helping you to and through retirement. um, you guys are just going for a week, right? yeah! that's right. can you help with these? oh... um, we're more of the plan, invest and protect kind of help... sorry, little paws, so. but have fun! send a postcard! voya. helping you to and through retirement. there we have it, facebook opening for trade. >> now it's there.

>> in the first 30 seconds of trading, 82 million shares of facebook -- >> retail investors saying, we were screwed >> they don't know if their orders have actually been killed at this point. >> it's a little bit of an embarrassment. >> the ipo of the year. >> facebook has broken the record for volume. >> insiders own it at $1.11. >> millionaires and billionaires were minted today. >> absolutely. welcome back to "squawk box. airbnb is making a big push into new york real estate and taking on traditional hotels. airbnb is partnering now with major new york developer rxr realty to convert portions of new york city commercial properties into a new category of urban lodging these units are essentially hotel rooms with living rooms and kitchens that can only be booked through the airbnb platform ceo brian chesky will be on "squawk alley" later today at 11:00 a.m. you don't want to miss that. on the flip side, the "wall street journal" says that marriott is preparing to unveil a home rental business to take on companies like airbnb details could come as soon as

next month it follows a pilot program in europe marriott shares $136.45. okay, coming up, personal income and spending data just minutes away we'll bring you that. plus, uber making its pitch to investors ahead of its ipo. we've got the details straight ahead. ♪

see that's funny, i thought you traded options. i'm not really a wall street guy. what's the hesitation? eh, it just feels too complicated, you know? well sure, at first, but jj can help you with that. jj, will you break it down for this gentleman? hey, ian. you know, at td ameritrade, we can walk you through your options trades step by step until you're comfortable. i could be up for that. that's taking options trading from wall st. to main st. hey guys, wanna play some pool? eh, i'm not really a pool guy. what's the hesitation? it's just complicated. step-by-step options trading support from td ameritrade

we are just a few seconds away from the latest personal income and spending data we've been watching the futures this morning, and right now it looks like the dow futures are down by almost ten points. s&p futures down by less than a point. the nasdaq off by two points the nasdaq, in fact, was up last week for, i believe, the fifth week in a row. s&p futures -- or the s&p and the nasdaq both closed at new all-time highs on friday as

well so you're seeing just a very a little bit of giveback this week we have over 150 companies in the s&p 500 that will be reporting earnings and obviously, wall street will be watching that very closely. in the meantime, the ten-yea note right now has been yielding just above 2.5%, 2.513% at the last tick. obviously, a lot to watch as we get those numbers. jim iuorio's standing by at the cme. jim? >> hi. we've got personal income comes out as plus 0.1, which is less than expected. personal spending comes out at plus 0.9, which is higher than expected real personal spending comes in plus 0.7, higher than plus 0.5 the first two are the ones that are much more important. personal income. you know how sometimes we debate whether or not the market wants a weak number because it takes the fed out of it? no debate here the market should like a low personal income because that means there's not wage growth and it's not going to spook the fed. the s&ps when we came in were down about one, now about steady on the day, so no real reaction.

the ten-year was 2.51% coming in now it's 2.505%, so not a real reaction in either one to complete it out, the pc deflator month over month was plus 0.2, little less than expected year over year was plus 0.5. the only thing that was was spending, which should be a positive number. back to you. thanks, jim. uber's ipo road show is under way as executives make their pitch to investors, and leslie picker is here with more leslie >> hey, andrew that's right, uber executives continuing on their road show meeting with investors in london today before heading back to new york tomorrow. the company is seeking a valuation as high as $98.5 billion on a fully diluted basis. that valuation, of course, is part of what uber and its bankers think the company is worth when taking into account its future financial projections. so, here is what uber is guiding the street, guiding investors about its future the company says its so-called

take rate, or the revenue the company captures from its so-called core platforms gross bookings will be 20% that's actually equivalent to the take rate from 2018. uber is also pointing to profitability as defined by adjusted ebitda as a percentage of gross bookings. in 2018, that number was negative 3.6%, so losses there in the long run, though, uber says that the company does not define specific time frames, that it, you know, is looking for, in order to get to profitability. it's just the long run, effectively. >> the take rate is what percent of the revenue that they take themselves, 20% of that -- >> exactly that's the amount of money that they are making, the percentage of money that they are making from their core platform so, that is expected at least on a percentage proportion basis to be equivalent in the long run, whereas on a net adjusted ebitda standpoint, that is expected to flip to be profitable, be on the

positive side, in the long run, depending how you define long run. it could be 2 years, it could be 20 years so it kind of just depends. >> leslie joining us now theresa gow, co-founder and managing partner at aspect ventures she is a member of the cnbc technology executive council's advisory board everybody knows uber and i just wonder whether that sort of will be the most important thing in buying the ipo or pricing it, rather than the future profitability of the company. a lot of times, it doesn't really matter. people know it, people get excited about it we've all had an experience with it does it matter that it's not profitable and may never be profitable >> well, i think that it doesn't matter that it's not profitable right now, clearly not only about uber, but if you look at the tech ipo market right now, investors are buying stocks that are high growth, going after multibillion, or in this case,

trillion-dollar markets. >> high revenue growth. >> high revenue growth, despite the fact that there is not yet any earnings visibility. and i think right now investors are showing patience around earnings and waiting for profitability. so, i think it's clearly a growth story right now the market seems to like growth stories, and these stocks are generally performing well >> i mean, they're pricing it for some interest. i mean, if -- we all heard the $120 number, and now the midpoint is 80 and change. >> only slightly above the private market valuation so, i think they're clearly looking at the differences in the aftermarket performances of some of the recent ipos. you know, obviously, they will trade in unison, i think, with lyft, since they are competitors and in the same space. and i think that they are probably wisely trying to make sure that the ipo buyers will still have some upside. >> they're clearly trying to differentiate themselves from lyft and also trying to describe themselves almost as an amazonlike company is that an app comparison, or do

you think fair, unfair >> i think it's still too early to say, right? because the potential value of the platform as it relates to autonomous vehicles is still early days so, i -- look, they have a really smart execute and he's a great human being, so i think he's got a great vision. i think that's futures, right? they're investing a lot in av, and we're still tbd when we'll actually have that in the marketplace. and to be a platform, other people need to be using your technology in the same way other people use aws now, clearly, that was many, many years after amazon's ipo, before they became a platform. so, just depends on how much patience investors have. >> it's just weird when a company has to say, don't judge us on what our core business is, you know what i mean >> amazon did it that for a while, too. >> but we have all that, we've got taco bell delivery which appeals to me. which, i've said many times uber eats but are all the bells and whistles in the ancillary businesses is that -- are those businesses

innately more profitable than their core business? >> i think that they probably are. again -- >> it costs money to build those out. >> although quite a bit of them -- as you mentioned, joe, a lot of them are still early days but you bring up a good one, which i kind of overlooked a little bit i went straight to the autonomous vehicles, but uber eats is a real business -- >> it's taco bell. i didn't just say -- >> but uber trucking you think all of these other businesses get there before -- do you think that this can be a profitable company before you get to autonomy? >> i -- >> or should that even be part of an investor's thesis? how about that >> i think that it is -- it's possible but probably not -- it won't be super profitable until there's some form of autonomy. it could be in trucking and delivery, not necessarily in the core passenger platform. but you need to have some level of significant automation in one of your core businesses to get significant profitability. >> then what's your bet on

autonomy broadly speaking now in terms of where the technology is, where regulators are >> so, i don't know that much about regulation, but i invest in early-stage tech companies. we have a couple companies we invest at sort of the very early stages, series "a. in the software space, i'm serving various autonomy players, mapping or visualization. i've actually seen some hesitation in terms of when people think -- so, they talk about autonomy sort of level one, which is some driver-assisted, level five full autonomy almost everyone i spoke to, no matter how optimistic or pessimistic they were, in the last 6 to 12 months, everyone seems to be pushing out level five by about 12 months. so, people are still -- even the bulls are still bullish, but they're being a little bit more cautious. >> theresia, you said something that caught may attention. you said right now the market is valuing growth and i think that's something i think about a lot with these stocks if you're going to buy into it,

you need to realize that there could very likely be a lot of volatility, because this is something that goes in and out of fashion with the market at any point in time. and if you're not a company that can point to hard-core profits, and here's our dividends and here's these things, you need to realize that, just investor sentiment is going to play a big role in how your stock trades. >> absolutely. and i think you -- so, there is definitely investor sentiment and the market obviously moves from seeking growth versus seeking profitability. i believe we're clearly in a growth type of market. however, i will say that in terms of a market being large enough for two significant venture-backed competitors, people sometimes ask about, you know, lyft and uber, is there really room for both of them look, they're going after trillion-dollar markets with massive technology disruption, even before autonomous there's still some pretty significant disruptions. and i think about my personal experiences in the real estate space where i was an early investor in trulia, you know, zillow went out before we did.

both companies did well as public market stocks, both performed well in the aftermarket for the first 6 to 12 months. obviously, then they sort of made 5 or 10x their values from ipo and ultimately became one company. but that's an example where the market is large enough and there is definitely room for two technology disrupters. >> so, alpha girls are four ladies in silicon valley that were able to become stars in the cut-throat, high-stakes, male-dominated world of venture capital out there, and you're highlighted in there compared to when you were making inroads, is it better, the same? do you see things are easier now because of pioneers like you, or it's still tough >> oh, well, it's humbling to be called a pioneer i don't know about that. i would say that i think things are better in the sense that the numbers are there more and that people are talking about the need for different points of view, and that's diversity along

a bunch of dimensions. that certainly wasn't something spoken about 10 or 15 years ago. but if you actually read the story and the reason why magdalena, sonia and i i think agreed to be interviewed by julian is that she really wanted to paint a realistic picture of what's going on in the face of -- you know, people perceive it's a very closed society all four of us were outsiders, and we're had some lucky breaks, we've worked hard, we've done pretty well. >> before we go, we're out of time, but i've got to ask you about the foosball and you actually let bryn win at foosball. >> don't tell him that i lost the deal anyway >> but if you're -- do you still play >> i have to -- so, after -- we were growing so much that we had to, like, give the foosball table away, so -- >> but were you actually good? because i had some experience. were you really good because you can't let a crappy player -- it doesn't look real if you let him win, if you actually are good. >> i'm pretty good some people say you shouldn't

spin the foos, so that's kind of -- >> do you have that move with your wrist >> yeah. i just didn't do that. >> no, i didn't either but you know, the front three guys >> yes. >> i saw guys that can do things -- like from this -- they go all over to the other guy, then they pull it and just move the goal -- >> i used to have that move. >> and the move with your wrist. have you played? >> i have played. >> you can get really good. >> not professionally. >> we should get a squawk foosball table >> we need one -- >> but we should get it made up. >> we need another person. >> who's the ringer besides joe? >> i never got as good as i could be, but i did learn a couple things with the three front guys. >> we need one in the green room. >> it's fun. we've never played ping pong, either. >> we did play, didn't we, back in the day >> you play. >> i love to play ping pong. i think we need a ping pong table and a foosball table and we'll get -- >> actually pretty good. >> thank you. >> okay. >> thank you very much appreciate it. >> thank you >> thanks, leslie. when we return, boeing's

ceo's going to be facing shareholders today for the first time since the grounding of the 737 max. we will tell you what to expect from the shareholder meeting and the news conference that follows it that's nex your daily dashboard from fidelity. a visual snapshot of your investments. key portfolio events. all in one place.

because when it's decision time... you need decision tech. only from fidelity. you need decision tech. onmillionth order.r. ♪ there goes our first big order. ♪ 44, 45, 46... how many of these did they order? ooh, that's hot. ♪ you know, we could sell these. nah. ♪ we don't bake. ♪ opportunity. what we deliver by delivering. who wanted to get away who used expedia to book the vacation rental which led to the discovery that sometimes a little down time can lift you right up. expedia. everything you need to go.

boeing's ceo set to face shareholders today at the company's shareholder meeting in chicago, the first such meeting since the grounding of the 737 max. and ylan mui joins us now with what we can expect good morning >> reporter: good morning. well, that meeting will be

happening in just over an hour here at the field museum in chicago. we did get an early look at ceo dennis muilenburg's remarks, and he's been telling shareholders the same thing he's been telling the public when it comes to the 737 max planes, that when it comes to safety, there are no competing priorities and that the company is making steady progress toward getting these planes certified and back in the air. but we also know that boeing is chasing a new batch of negative headlines from over the weekend. the "wall street journal" reporting that boeing didn't tell southwest or other carriers that a key safety feature had been deactivated that feature would have warned pilots about malfunctioning sensors. and southwest did confirm that to cnbc. the "wall street journal" also reported, though, that the faa considered grounding those planes before the global grounding. southwest wouldn't comment on that but did say that it is working collaboratively with the faa. also, reuters reported that pilots are now requesting more in-depth simulator training on that updated mcas software

that's going to go on the 737 max planes guys, if that happens, that could push back the timeline for getting these planes back in the air, even further. already, analysts are worried that the airline's expectation of flying these planes by the end of august, that that's too optimistic back to you. >> ylan, thank you we are joined by elio fred garcia, president of logos consulting group, also carter copeland, an analyst at melias research hilo, let's start with you seems like there's a story every day or two on boeing what's the battle they face at this point. >> the battle they face is the key to maintaining or restoring trust is to show you care, and their response hasn't consistently showed they care. i've been baffled by their continued assurance that the plane is safe, while also saying, but we're working on a software fix and i couldn't understand the relationship between those two statements until the "wall street journal" story yesterday, where i think i figured it out,

and that is, when they say the plane is safe, they mean when pilots know how to fly it. but it's clear from the "journal's" story, which apparently has been confirmed, that they didn't tell the airlines clearly enough that the standard safety feature from prior 737s was optional on this one. some airlines didn't have it. >> here's what i don't understand joe made this point earlier and i haven't been able to figure out the answer to it if this was an optional safety feature that they were going to be charging extra for, how come the airlines didn't know that it was offered or that they would be charged for it? >> it may have been known in procurement. >> right. >> but it didn't get to the pilots and one of the things that i do is teach engineers crisis at columbia, and i tell them in the crisis, you've got to stop thinking like an engineer. you've got to start thinking like the people who use your technology and i don't think boeing was thinking like a pilot. they were thinking like the technologist we know this plane is safe, and

pilots now how to fly it and i think the disconnect was, the pilots weren't aware that the safety feature had been turned off >> carter, let's talk about the perspective from wall street, because i think your views reflect what we've heard from most of the analysts covering this company, that this is a momentary blip but that with the stock at these prices, you'd still be a buyer, correct? >> yeah. we certainly feel that way look, i think there was a breakdown in communication, and we can look at all that. the question for the market is, you know, how do we move forward from here and what's reasonable? and so, you know, now we find ourselves at a spot where last week's earnings results and the commentary there sort of gives you a little bit more visibility in terms of bounding financial outcomes, and you know, that we've all suspected, and i know we've talked about those financial hits being relatively small in the grand scheme of things i think the disclosures last week would confirm that. i think we're also coalescing around, you know, a timeline that the faa is looking for the end of may, and then you've got

a joint panel that will push you out a couple months beyond that -- >> although you hear about some of the pilots complaining about some of those -- that joint panel -- the early recommendations already, saying it's not enough, that they want more than just computer time they would also -- computer training they also want flight simulation time >> yeah. i think that's fair. if that's what the customer demands and it pushes the timeline out, then that's fine but if you have a timeline that you can have some level of confidence in, even if it's a month longer or two months longer, i think, frankly, that's bounded by the financial impact that boeing called out last week, which i think has a little bit of conservatism built into it. >> but the question i would ask both of you, though, is is there a culture problem here, and is there a management problem here? and does that portend a change at the top, meaning is the ceo potentially going to get pushed out? we've seen it in a whole number of cases, whether it be the case of banks -- tim sloan at wells fargo. regulators decided they didn't have the confidence in him to run the company anymore. they switched him out. do we think that 12 months from now, we're going to be looking at the same company?

>> i'm not convinced that there's an equivalence with wells fargo. there was malfeasance there. there doesn't seem to have been malfeasance at boeing. at boeing, it seems to be a tragic misunderstanding, that pilots believed they knew how to fly this plane boeing believed, apparently, that planes and boeing tol tl airlines how the plane to be flown. the disconnect is the pilots are unaware. i would take as much time as possible that the pilots are competent. that's what's going to get through the crisis they now need someone responsible. >> you got multiple layers up to organization and all the way up to corporate the launch of this product and certification and early use of this product if you start to go to who should have known what, you got to go

back to a couple of layers >> that's true in the case of wells fargo. we have whistle blowers coming forward in the case of this particular plane, there are examples of problems with deliveries of planes the military on record with congress assaying there is a problem in terms of some of the planes they were delivering. we can look at this one finite slide and give them the benefit of the doubt i am anxious because there seems to be a series of these things >> well, there is a desire to connect them all, too, andrew. i am not sure if -- that's the only point >> and i would argue that they have two strikes against them now. they can't mess up going forward. they need to be hyper-cautious

and responsible and concerned of the user of their product and the people that get into the plane and fly in it. that has to be a priority. >> absolutely. >> carter, my bigger question is all of the small things that wall street seems to be able to get its arms around in terms of its financial impact, is there longer term problems either from credibility and customer relationship perspective between boeing or from the faa perspective and the way it used to work where other agencies around the globe kind of follow what the faa did what does it mean for the picture? >> there is an intersection of all of this stuff. before debating a dollar of boeing's earnings in the future's period and in terms of the stock price of what we think of value, that's a small number. what's a big part of the boeing

in stock prices has been this lower risk and decision making that has produced higher returns and those things have been connected. investors want to see not only a resolution for this but follow through, basically, we get it and we are going to try to over exaggerate the fix on this in a way of a lasting impact. that'll have a bigger impact and that'll matter a lot more than aps. >> carter, thank you for joining us >> let's get down to the new york stock exchange, jim cramer is joining us now. it is like an onion, we are pealing everything out of boeing >> anything you saw that would change you on the stock? >> the only thing i felt overlooked, the ceo of southwest, if he did not take it personally, that's a little

crypt cryptic. let's say one of those moments where your brows go up because you didn't want to hear the ceo -- well, is it the faa it is the regulator. regulator i think should be much more under fire here than they are. it is boeing dedicated to safety i thought your guests talked about engineering verses files cbuyers i am going to not change my view on that. i think the faa should >> so that would in your view mullenburg survived a year or two or five years from now

>> that is complicated issue did he make some mistakes? i do think something went wrong. if something went wrong, you got to earn it i am waiting for him to come out and say it is my plane and my company, not going to happen, whatever happens we'll fix it and own it a little bit. >> maybe we'll get into a full-blown bidding war with anadarko, is that where we are headed >> chevron is out today. people think that mike's not going to go for it i find it hard to believe. chevron lay down a series of reasons. so i am surprised that chevron is not lower, i expect them to come back. >> you probably did not get to

see any movies you were in your own marvel cinematic universe >> it was strange that this was more of a college essay that we got. it was not the way it was. let's talk about the first amendment, i don't know how many people -- >> okay, will you go see this mov movie? >> you will? >> she's working this weekend so we'll see it in the canext weekd >> don't read anything, stay off online >> there is way too many spoilers out there >> that guy got beat up in hong kong as he was shouting out spoilers as people are going in. >> jim, thanks

we'll see you in a couple of minutes. don't miss the sbbig interview tonight. michael roman, coming off 3m stay tuned, you are watching "squawk box" on cnbc.

a final check on the market. dow jones opening up slightly higher the dow is up a little 1.5 points nasdaq is up three points and s&p. make sure you skrojoin us tomorw "squawk on the street" begins right now. ♪ good monday morning, welcome to "squawk on the street." i am carl quintanilla with jim cramer david faber is in california, he's going to talk to doj, and goldman sachs, david solomon and makan delrahim >> our road map begins with boeing reportedly failing to tell airlines shutting