paul kedrosky, thank you so much, oliver renick, thank you as well. keith, you are sticking with me. a story we are watching -- baidu has received an offer by two executives to buy all of its holdings in chi.com. they are offering to buy an 80% stake. spinning out qiyi essentially takes the company private. it could seek an ipo in china where it could potentially get a than it could in the united states where does not have the same name brand recognition. paypal launching its latest initiative and at making it easier to buy what you want. and later in the hour, can google search predict election results? we will take a closer look. ♪ inly: square gained the most three months after visa disclose details about its stake in the company. visa acquired square in 2011, but terms were not revealed until now. media reports initially suggested visa was buying a new 10% stake in square. visa clarified, saying that it current holdings were about 1% of square's fully diluted common stock. investors are still interpreting this is a good thing for square, which is

paul kedrosky joins us now from san diego. david is still with us. ch on the growth that we are seeing out of alphabet, google alphabet. the street is very excited about it. is this the kind of growth that is sustainable? >> it is, which is remarkable given the size and scale. some three-year-old startup, this is a company that is 15 years old. reason for that, the engine underlying this is closer to the ad market and i am it has to do with the fundamental shift from traditional advertising off-line to online but in particular, the shift toward mobile ads were something like 8% of advertising budgets are allocated to mobile but people spending in excess of 25% of their time in front of the little screens and that shift is something that google is really sitting on top of. is this simply a great story of an advertising platform bringing in millions of dollars and we spend too much time focusing on the possibility of wireless cars and the investment in artificial intelligence -- of driverless cars and the investment in artificial intelligence? >> this i

for more on what is at stake for the tech giant, let us bring in paul kedrosky joining us from san diegour take here? paul: you know that. it's this fundamental tension between privacy and law enforcement. in the limit of privacy, you cannot enforce the law. in the limit of law enforcement, you can't enforce privacy. apple's arguments was week based on an 18th-century law that has not been revised since then and one that did not anticipate the rise of iphones, devices where you can store so much information. they areg on it, what implicitly saying is that you can create this zone of almost extra legality built around iphones. from a law-enforcement standpoint and from a broader societal standpoint, that is just not acceptable. in the end, apple is going to be forced to give way in his argument to not going to matter very much. david: it strikes me that a lot of of it is that this is going to be really, really hard. it will take a lot of people and time. for a company of apple size and researchers, i wonder if a judge is really going to be that sympathetic. honestly, they could've made it

also with us, bloomberg news contributing editor paul kedrosky. l sweeney. emily chang is here. let's break this down. >> i am not sure we have enough people. stephanie: first of all, you have a buy on yahoo!. is it a buy because there is a buy on yahoo! or because you buy what she is selling. >> they are selling the court. that is why you saw the write-down, the asset sales, the points they have like ip, that an acquirer would need to value. the real question now is what kind of sale process is this? is it active, and what is a qualified big? also, what number would they take? what is reasonable? we said it is worth $6 billion or $8 billion or so. the real piecing is separating the core from the eight assets. that is how you maximize the value. we think it is about $40. stephanie: paul, do you want to weigh in here? paul: my biggest tech away from this was exactly that. i just feel like we were looking for clarity about the process. what is going to happen next? we did not get any clarity at all. we got an awful lot of strategic qualified possible