orrect? anyone would know the name. open channel d, please. take it. what proof is this? open channel d. code one scramble. waverly here.. ask him. mr. kuryakin? senor waverly? who is this? angela abaca. oh, yes, yes, hohoare you, my dear? i assume mr. kuryakin found you, good. oh, and happy birthday. thank you. everything under control? a few minutes ago, the president's wife was almost killed, with a thrush modified rifle, which confirms your suspicions that thrush is supplying the revolutionaries with arms. yes, i dare say. there's a great deal of oil in querido, unfortunately, i made rather a display of myself, which means i won't be able to operate in secret from now on. you're asking for help? naturally. yes, and as quickly as possible. if secret three had succeeded, there would be a revolution now. obviously they'll try again. oh. well, mr. solo. well, i regret missing the birthday party. very well. mr. solo will contact you when he reaches querido. nora abaca? yes? may your next birthday be less, um... explosive. so. senor kuryakin. now that you are with us, what

you looke mistaken and at the outright basis and if you ,orrect for the cost of hedging the treasury bonds are quite high. >> we actually brought up a treasuriesthe u.s. sincee bond yield spread 1989 and it doesn't mean anything, substantially. we might see a lot of appetite for the u.s. treasury. potentially, they can go out return onthe total funds. ensure and they have to hedge with the currency risks. from europe to the u.s., it could cost 1.8% and that is a good chunk of the pickup here and you look at the spread on the corrected measure and i do not think this will stop the selling off. >> how much will they lose, if we see this extended into other trade arrangements. >> it has this substantial impact and we have questions andt international trade the rising u.s. race has not been very good for currency and you have this double pressure, stays and wek, have seen the yen markets becoming less sensitive to the u.s. rates. i am not too alarmed. i would say that they are negative, overall. >> thank you very much. aheadhave a jampacked day . we have u.k. and public finances and rate

bolten: i was going to say yes, but the shorter and more orrect answer would be no.t me answer that -- no, it does not sound right, it sounds like a big mistake to have them announced -- to have the senior adviser and the chief of staff announced as co-equals in the white house. that on its face sounds like a real mistake. in the sense that you need the chief of staff to be the emissary to and from the president. and only one person can really be the final word on setting the president's calendar, on deciding which issues will go to him in which format, on setting the strategic course for the white house. and very importantly, on reflecting the definitive word on what the president has decided. imagine a situation in which the president says something to his senior adviser -- ok, go and do hat. and steve bannon says -- it means bomb iran. and reince priebus says -- it means he was mouthing the words to a beach boy song. >> is it more of an issue because of who steve bannon s? mr. bolten: it would be an issue anyway but the provocative past that he has makes it worse.