gottlieb's big pharma formula is simple: take away the d.e.a. oversight over prescription opioids, and give that authority to the f.d.a. then at this moment limit the f.d.a.'s ability to utilize its full oversight authority over these addictive products. that would leave a mostly unregulated marketplace for big pharmaceutical companies and their opioid painkillers to thrive while american families pay the highest price they ca can -- the life of someone in their family. perhaps, most alarming, is dr. gottlieb's connections to a pharmaceutical company called cephal leon. last month a "washington post" story was published that indicated that dr. gottlieb worked on behalf of one company, cephalon, to raise the amount of fentanyl that the company could market at the same time that the prescription pain killer market was exploding. dr. gottlieb advocated for the d.e.a., the drug enforcement agency, to raise the quota of fentanyl that cephalon could put on the market even while the company was o under investigati. this aggressive and off-label promoti

your money, your stocks, three sectors may have seen some of the biggest impact, biotech and pharma.er president trump says he needs to overhaul the health care system. they are quote, getting away with murder with high drug prices. telecom, fcc under president trump is pushing to remove net neutrality and for-profit colleges made a resurgence, when the president was elected because he would roll back some obama era rules that were stymieing some of these companies. are there still ways to play each sector even if the news isn't amazing. we have the guy doing that. thorn berg management, conner brown. i would have thought the pharma sector would get hammered the hardest because he has people on both sides of aisle saying drug prices are too high yet you're bigging gilead. >> it turns out legislation is hard, legislation is hard. as we think about the opportunities for legislation time pack stocks, what we really want a company that we think deserves valuation or higher valuation on the fundamentals. perhaps has some upside if legislation works out or the case of pharma weighs on valu

but it's not likely that with the republican party in the pocket of big pharma you will see those kinds of cuts. so what is going to happen is that when congress and that swamp that he is refilling, promised to drain but actually appointed more lobbyists than has ever been seen in washington, i think the likelihood that you will see anything like the budget that he has proposed to merge is very, very low. but still there is a danger. there is a danger that there will be a tilt, a tilt in the direction, and very dangerous direction in which he is proposing to go. >> fair to call this budget reverse robinhood? >> i agree, yeah, that's right. especially when you cut programs intended for ordinary americans, poor americans. and give more money to the rich and to the industrial complex and the military industrial complex. it's money going to the top and it's coming out of the well being of ordinary americanins. and you know worsening that great divide that has been growing bigger and bigger and the irony was it was that divide, which provided some of the impetus for his election. >> these ar

they join pharma companies. it makes incredibly fertile ground for funding.aroline: maybe not for our funding from the government at the moment. talk to us about the concerns that have come in. nih seems to have kept the money flowing for the short term. there is worry about the affordable care act changes, and the trump administration and their viewpoint on health care in general. reporter: a lot of local companies have major concerns about the immigration orders, which has been stayed by the courts, because attracting people means people from all over the world. as there are problems because of religion or country of origin, that will be an issue for innovation around the area. that is what a lot of the companies have said. when it comes to pricing, i think some of the concern around the changes to obamacare in this act of the just passed the house, needs to go through the senate. there are concerns we could get lifetime limits back. these are limits on how much insurers will pay for it patient care. we are talking about a drug that could potentially cost $

do you think some of the pharma names might benefit? >> yeah, pharma got a massive tax cut as part of the house bill. $30 billion over ten years for the branded pharmaceutical industry. so names like pfizer and gilead and eli lily will benefit on their bottom line each year with hundreds of millions of dollars in tax cuts. it's a positive for them. additionally, not a single provision was inserted to deal with drug pricing. that's a big deal with a lot of americans having concern over rising drug costs. >> what about the medical device makers, the medicinetronics ame like? >> the medical device tax, $24 billion over ten years, is eliminated. at the same time, because hospitals oftentimes negotiate and make payments for medical devices, the downward pressure on hospitals could actually extend further downstream to the medical device and the health care i.t. companies. >> what do you think the fate is of this bill? there were several times where we thought that perhaps they didn't have the votes. they finally did have the votes. will we s

they go to pharma and say they have x amount of customers. if you want access to our customers, this is what you will pay for our drugs. the result is lower drugs for our customers. the republican majority in the house of representatives did not want to do that. they decided instead of negotiating with pharma that they would pass the program without that. d a result, medicare part customers are paying higher drug prices than veterans who have access to the a health care and some people who have insurance plans with companies that negotiate with drug companies. host: john, republican, go ahead. caller: which is it, congressman? you don't like the medicare. you want medicare, but you don't like how the medicare drug plan works. luckily we had republicans out there that have the medicare drug plan that was available for people to it's not perfect, but at least they put it in. my purpose is this. you want medicare for all. don't you realize that half the people in the country -- 25% of the people in the country have medicare? that reimburses at 2

plus, amazon is reportingedly considering a move into the pharma space. a couple of big name stocks are on the move as a result of that news. meg has all of it coming up. first, we'll show you the dow 30 heat map. you have some stocks in the green. dow down 261 points. back after this. dear predictable, there's no other way to say this. it's over. i've found a permanent escape from monotony. together, we are perfectly balanced, our senses awake, our hearts racing as one. i know this is sudden, but they say: if you love something... set it free. see you around, giulia ♪ i count on my dell small for tech advice. with one phone call, i get products that suit my needs and i get back to business. ♪ ♪ tired of paying hundreds more a year in taxes and fees for your unlimited plan? only t-mobile gives you unlimited data with taxes and fees included. that'll save you hundreds. get two lines for a hundred dollars. that's right. two lines of unlimited data. a hundred bucks. all in. and right now, we're giving you even more. for a limited time, get a free samsung gal

and they stay, and they join pharma companies.an incredibly fertile ground for funding of these companies. caroline: maybe not funding from the government at the moment. talk to us about some of the concerns that have come in. the short-term budget seems to have kept the coffers going. there is worry about affordable care act changing and the trump administration's viewpoint on health care. doni: a lot of local companies had concerns about trump in the version orders, which have been stayed by the courts. attracting people means attracting people from all over the world. if there are problems because of religion or which country you are coming from, that will be an issue for some of the innovation around this area. that certainly is what a lot of the companies have said. when it comes to pricing, some of the concern around the changes to obamacare in this act that just passed the house, still needs to go to the senate, in that case we could get lifetime limits back. these are limits on w ch insurers will pay for a patient's care.

so anybody in pharma knows 90 percent of what we do fails. but we recognize that. put the things that they think work do they work to move forward? those have a better track record. so here is the results world go run with that so take it to the intermediate web first so let's see if that works so have the time we could get it to work a lot of those don't go any farther and to their credit they say put the brakes on that we don't want to waste of everybody's time they want more evidence of what will work. >>. >> thanks for your presentation and also the first question. mine is an extension of that. with methodology so then that can lead to the trial several unsuccessful because those trials are so expensive so as far as you're concerned is the inverse truth is there any way to quantify because you get negative results and things don't follow from their at least in some fraction of cases does that ever happened?. >> that is very hard wood the drug have worked if you tested that properly? but yes it is a major driving force it cost $1 billion to develop the drug but

billion-plus to the wealthiest in this country, the top 1% and 2%, to insurance companies, to big pharma. and other big entities. and that's often what it seems like it's really about. it's going to increase fiveholdfold, people are going to be paying five times at much for their healt care and it cuts medicaid to so many people who need it in had country. medicaid is not just people who will poor, and -- who are poor and trying to get health care and trying to get work, it's also people with disabilities, seniors in nursing homes. it's, quite honestly, incomprehensible that the republicans think it's all right to cut those programs. that's their tax plan. but here's the best part. they're making it now even worse, the words we're hearing and that they're bragging about are amendments to make it so that state by state they can turn down things like coverage for pre-existing conditions and turn down other essential health benefits, things like prediction drug care, maternal care, emergency room visits. that's what health care is all about. if you gut everything out of health care, all you

we've got big pharma. that builds up clusters of entrepreneurs.ve got radically decreasing costs. that means if you are a young researcher for these companies and you've got an idea, it doesn't require $50 million to see if it works. caroline: isntnational money coming in should mark -- coming in? technology, editing all three of the big crisper companies all have their r&d centers in cambridge. that is because you have that clustering effect going on. caroline: when you are looking at the investments you make, where are you looking in terof exits? to receive see money getting refueled back into the system? are angels exiting? ipo market has been muted. we see an opening of a window in biotech. in biotech, it has been wide open. capitalistshnology moving into biotech. there used to be health care on one side and tech knowledge he on another. now with the powers of machine learning in artificial intelligence, you see the converging of those spaces. caroline: you are in a number of companies. you have exited half of them. which should we look at? >>

host: windfall for pharma. guest: i'm not sure what that is beyond the appeal of taxes. peoplee are fewer covered, those are people who will not have insurance who will not be able to afford their drugs. upset about this bill because they will lose people from medicaid who now have insurance. they took lower medicare reimbursement exchange for getting more people covered. those people will not be covered. they will have their medicare cuts. hospitals have been unhappy. host: are we going to start hearing about a doc fix? guest: it should be fixed. host: that was a 10 year battle on capitol hill. on the comments about windfall for pharma, new york times says indoor tanning companies and other medical industries, this would roll back taxes on health insurance products. some of those industries may lose a little. guest: exactly. those were the taxes that were imposed by the affordable care act to make it revenue neutral, to make it paper the extra benefits. the federal government is paying the vast majority of the medicaid spending for the additional people. that is a big e

i saw this i cover big pharma, it's a way bigger exit package than big pharma ever gives its top executivesat do we, what are we to think about this as they jacked up the price of epipen? >> not only did they jack up the price of epipen 600%, 17 times over 10-year period, liz, the other thing this guy oversaw congressional investigation suddenly went quiet. we have medicaid and medicare fraud that occurred. we have lawsuits, class action lawsuits aiming at this company right now. so you know, maybe he earned it, maybe he didn't. there is a lot going on there. i think what we need to do now, take a lesson out of wells fargo book you need to disinfect the board. three board members stepping down amidst. one is being investigated by the sec for real estate deal he did with mylan. the other thing that cory did was he executed the tax inversion relocated mylan's headquarters overseas to avoid paying taxes here in the u.s. meanwhile he executed this business model on the backs of american families and specifically on the backs of american kids. liz: both you and i have, your child, and my nephew

, and on the other hand, although that politics will take -- also that politics will take care of pharmaes developing new drugs. they need an incentive and compensation pretty significant r&d efforts that pharma companies are undergoing. guy: marcus, good morning. it is guy in london. i remember speaking with the ago, andtle while him talking extensively about the diversified nature of this business, and how the three legs stool made sure the whole group was incredibly stable. you are putting the divisions into subsidiaries. can i read into that the fact that maybe you are looking to exit one of them? am i being a little too forward in that thinking? marcus: so, this is definitely not the plan. why do we dos -- this? growing bigness is an increasingly changing value chains have elevated the complexity for our headquarters. we have decided to years ago that we would go for divisional gop strategies which foster market approaches, and this requires an alignment of infrastructure because it is risky and complex if you want to run different systems in one legal entity. that is why we have re

in that meeting at the white house was the influential pharmaceutical lobby group, pharma.eldt 40 we are living with regulations to veldt a0 years ago. we have to keep safety first, but there are opportunities to modernise the system and to get medicines to the marketplace faster and to help patients. faster approval by the fda would mean more drugs on the market, which should increase competition and bring down prices. but the cost of that idea could be even greater in patient safety. this drugs company is testing cancer treatment. these are the countries that take most of the risk when getting a drug to market. it is a process that could cost billions of dollars, to 15 years, and no guarantee of success. “— 15 years, and no guarantee of success. —— the company. but surprisingly, companies that this are not convinced faster approvals are not convinced faster approvals area are not convinced faster approvals are a good idea. what is important is to develop effective therapies that are also safe. i do believe we should lower the bar. i think we have to work creatively with o

heard back from purdue pharma saying they have got a deterrent for the opioid crisis. the second state suit filed after one in mississippi against makers of these prescription opioids. >> stocks as well, meg. meg tir rel with the breaking news. steve weiss. >> let me go point by point. retail sales, there are so many retailers that are independent retailers selling through amazon that are making money that didn't before. you can't focus on that. in terms of real estate. housing happens to be one of the pillars of the economy. so let me continue to go. in terms of the u.s. in a bubble, i went back and i looked. i'd be hard-pressed to find any emerging market that didn't decline worse than the u.s. when the u.s. stock market hopped and didn't take longer to recover. i don't want to be in other markets if i think the u.s. is going to implode. bonds, i was very surprised. about the emerging markets and the u.s. and some of the risks that steve 34e7gsed to you. if things do unravel, why would you want to be in the emerging markets at this particular time when they've had a

a very narrow use allowed for gw pharma. i'm not going to tell you to load up here.to linda in washington. linda. >> caller: yes. jim, my stock is -- ticker lite. >> now, optical components are some of the most dangerous stocks in the world. this company had a fabulous quarter, but you know what, i need you to take some of the table. i'm too nervous because they tend to be hit or miss. mark in new york, mark. >> caller: oh, booyah to you, jim. >> i like that. that's a fresh one. what's going on? >> caller: oh, okay, i have a two part question here. only advent -- vr game -- the self-driving cars, going to need the machines to build these chips. so what do you think of acquired materials and also how do you feel that the stock is up against land research? >> okay. this is really -- i'm going to tell you, land research is my number one. then after that it's applied materials. that sector is hard, but lam is hot and that's the one i'm most comfortable with. that, ladies and gentlemen, is the conclusion of the lightning round. [ buzzer ] >> announcer: the lightning round

those of course our pharma and biotech. they seem to be having a pretty decent solid day. as a pickup pfd the rest of the sector is watching and waiting. it specifically because we don't know how the senate will look at this and take either a trimming share elsewhere in the markets its oil that is also really keep it at caps on what we see for our portfolios, 5294o1k. this is a five-month low. due to signals that they won't call too. we also had rising u.s. production. it is created a global glut. it's getting crushed on 5%. two of the biggest ones on the dow. exxon has is about one and half percent. to the markets overall. i mentioned that it was holding onto the green barely by just a quarter of a point. for a second and looked like it was going to go positive but it was still down about 21 points. even if they pass the revamped healthcare act. many are still asking what's included in what's being left out. it's a live picture near the rose garden. you can see there were quite a few smiles there. they're probably still back at the capital and try to figure out how to pro

airlines, banking, health care, pharma, agriculture, telecom, tech. industry after industry, a handful of giant corporations control more and more and compete less and less. massive consolidation means less repetition. which means prices go up, quality goes down and many people's jobs are eliminated. massive consolidation means that the big guys can watch -- walk out smaller competitors. the big guys can crush innovation. the big guys can grow fat and lazy, jacking up prices and feasting off yesterday's glory. show consolidation and contributes to flat wages and income inequality. concentrated market power also creates concentrated political power. the kind of power that captures our government and that is exactly what has happened. as president trump house to the power and influence of these industrial giants and financial titans. mobil is nowxon the secretary of state. enough people in the white house to open an office. [laughter] it is scheduled just this week to vote on a nominee for associate attorney general who work for years at the chamber of

that's specialty pharma.ere you have to have an iron clad stomach to be able to play. >> last week, two weeks ago, when you came out with that. >> now it's time to sell. >> i appreciate that. >> so why did you buy? >> two weeks ago they didn't have to play down some debt t. enterprise didn't move too much. it's a sliver of equity underneath a mountain of debt. when you look at the maturitys, that i have some time now. this is a very turbo charged option with life. you get that volatility, life can go zero. >> absolutely. >> this is a stock on a day like today it got thrown around a bit. this is a story. this is obviously a special story and you either believe in it and i definitely believe in what karen is saying. you have a place where they pushed maturitys back. they took 6 billion out of the way. they don't have to di vest. they can generate free cash flow, which they are doing with an alleviated debt load. i think there is value here. >> ahead, l brand surging in the after hours session, we'll bring you t

>> i said we needed to have some power to be able to negotiate with pharma.id medicaid expansion hel d helped -- >> did you tell him it was bad to repeal obamacare? >> i gave him a list of things i thought should be done. he agreed with them. >> did he seem to understand all them? what's this grasp on health care policy? >> there was no argument from him. >> good answer. >> when i talked about the need to have leverage on pharma to get prices down, he called gary cohn in and said, hey, i agree with him. that's not in the bill. >> he might say, hey, i agree with him, now, gary, you go off and get that done. does that -- >> what's young with that, steph? >> because the president continues to make promises that are not necessarily in line with what conservatives believe and they're really hard to do. >> what's wrong with that, joel? >> well, forgetting what steph said whether there's anything wrong with that, dispatching someone who has the clout to help can be. what i'm taking issue with is paul ryan saying they had four months to figure out how to govern. they

imports are going to be taxed, so we have abandoned the idea of having french pharma firms? >> we are not going to cover overnight the imports that you will be banning. in the years to come, if you are elected, all drugs will increase in price, all imported drugs, to show the incoherence of what you propose. >> it's not true. >> you can check this in your files. the real problems are the medical deserts. where there are many counties of france, where there is a shortage of doctors or nurses, we must invest in medical centers. we must reorganize public and private medicine to facilitate patients' experience so that they can get out of hospital more quickly to go to medical centers to have easier access to specialists, and in order to relieve the accident and emergency department, and i'm particularly thinking of our territories overseas. there is a need to boost health care in guyana, in particular. almost all of our overseas territories have an inadequate health care offering. we spend more money on evacuating patients from our overseas territories to metropolitan france whe

airlines, banking, health care, pharma, agriculture, telecom, tech. in industry after industry, a handful of giant corporations control more and more and compete less and less. massive consolidation means less competition, which means prices go up, quality goes down, and many people's jobs are eliminated. massive consolidation means that the big guys can lock out smaller, newer competitors. it means the big guys can crush innovation. it means the big guys can grow fat and lazy, jacking up prices and feasting off yesterday's glory. and studies show that consolidation even contributes to flat wages and wages and inc inequality. it creates concentrated political power. the kind of power that captures our government and that's exactly what's hping as president trump bows to the power and influence of these industrial giants and financial titans. the c, o of exxonmobil is now the secretary of state. goldman sachs has enough the white house to open a branch office. the senate has scheduled this week to vote a nominee for associate attorney general who worke

. >>> a new york county is suing johnson & johnson, perdue pharma and other companies, accusing them of engaging in fraudulent marketing that downplayed the risks of opioid painkillers. the suit alleges the companies downplayed the dangers of misuse. the county claims they incurred costs directly related opioid addiction. j&j noted that its drugs carried fda warning. >>> a "new york times" interview with a former united health care employee, now a whistleblower, says he asserts that there were overcharges to medicare to the tune of thousands of dollars. shares of united health care were off nearly 2%. the company says it rejects the allegations. >>> less than one week after ford executives were grilled about the lackluster performance of the company's stock, the automaker is making a big move. it is cutting up to 10% of its global workforce. investors hope the step could jump-start shares of ford, which were flat today, down nearly 9% so far this year. phil lebeau has more on ford's latest move. >> reporter: despite having its second most profitable year ever in 2016, ford is prepari

the only ones making money the wealthy, the owners of the insurance companies, the owners of the pharmaompanies, and the doctors and the groups have their own set of problems. the bill will make things worse. we will have less preventative care and sicker people. host: north carolina, supports the effort. good morning. caller: can you hear me? host: you are on. needs: i agree the bill to be tweaked quite a bit. our military, congress, state employees should have the same insurance everyone else has. if we have something for us, it should be available for them. special treatment because it is congress for the senate and they get what they want, but everyone else gets what is left over, we should be treated the same. when you are in office, you are supposed to be working for the entire state, not just the republican part or democrat part . make people pay what we pay, and things will be better. host: opposing the effort. because theyose it are doing this health care policy so they can come up with $1 trillion for a tax cut for the wealthy. host: what makes you connect those dots? longr: i

in the house of representatives did not want to do that.f they decided instead of negotiating with pharma they would pass the program without that, as a result medicare part d customers are paying higher prices than veterans have access to healthcare, or to some peopla with plans whose companies have negotiated better rates with thr company. >> john, republican, go ahead. >> good money. which is it congressman? you don't like the medicare, you ought medicare but you don't like how the drug plan work, luckily we have republicans out there who had a medicare drug plan is available for people, it's not perfect but they put it in. my purpose for calling is this, you mentioned that you want medicare for all. don't you realize that half the people in the country have, 25% of people in the country have medicare.in that reimburses at 25%. half of the people in the country have not medicare health care coverage that reverses at 70%. if you have medicare for all which is already on the bankruptcy sigh, if you medicare for you'd realize the doctors and providers and hospitals wiln not be able to sur

and yes, they are looking at pharma.ain, let's think about who is in the cross fire here of pharma. it's walgreens, cvs, cvs bought walgreens and it's a traffic driver. as amazon goes into each category there's no hiding. certainly you look at companies as oliver was saying and everybody is trying to do the best they can. they're trying to execute. but that doesn't mean investors want to be on the journey of this execution trip if prices and margins are going to be the battle here. >> oliver, do you cover ralph lauren? >> we do. we do. i'm -- >> i wanted to get your quick thoughts -- i wanted to get your quick thoughts on the new ceo. they took a 25 year veteran of procter & gamble who last ran the beauty brand and the shaving brand. not doing much to help the stock today or the past year. >> yeah. i think what's happening in retails, this radical transformation. you're looking for leaders that understand the consumer around consumer insights. kind of reinventing the companies whether that's merchandise or supply chain.

health care businesses, giving us a 600 million dollars revenue base, which we are developing in the pharmandustry and in addition to that probably another $1 billion at your visit to health and wellness through package goods and other areas. >> you and others were critical of tech and tech advertising has been working out. >> there was a discussion rupert and neil ferguson about the duopoly of facebook and google. yesterday's news on snapchat -- >> you spent a lot of money on snapchat. >> we did last year, about $198 million of 400 formally dollars of revenue. 408 -- $404 million. you look at the numbers yesterday, they will probably do around double what they did last year, maybe a little more. the point of last that conversation was the dominance of this book in google. you saw the facebook results through the facebook results were very strong. we were up with facebook by 30%. google was so because they are more effective by dollar strength and having said that, facebook and google continue their dominance. we also discussed last night the rise of amazon because amazon is a threat to goo

and of course we need to have -- go head to head with big pharma on this. i was told it wasn't possible, but i saw it's possible to cut the price of a medicine that was hugely expensive. the price was reduced almost by a third or half. that's considerable. at some point it's all about political resolve, that political will no longer exists because we're in the hands of big pharma, big finance, and people with private interests behind that. you have them on your team, private interests who used to work there. yes, we're surprised, we saw mr. macron, there was a reimbursement of high blood pressure. why high blood pressure? because his health adviser in fact was one of the biggest lobbyists of servier and servier is the big pharma firm involved in fighting high blood pressure. >> translator: i share some of the recommendations made by mrs. le pen. but on the drugs, 80% of drugs are produced abroad. if you want to increase the prices of imported drugs, with madam le pen, there will be a tax, 3 or 10%. so imports are going to be taxed. >> translator: so we've a

we need to go head-to-head with the big pharma on this. i was told it wasn't possible. but i saw it is possible to cut the prices of medicine which are hugely expensivexpensive. the price was reduced by a third or half. it is all about political resolve and that political will no longer exists because we are in the hands of big pharma, big finance, and people with private increase. you have them and someone in the private interest who work, yes. yes. >> we are surprised we thought it was the reimbursement of high blood pressure and why high blood pressure? because his health advisor was one of the biggest lobblobbyist the biggest drug used for blood pressure. >> when you want to tax you want to tax imports and increase. there will be a tax. and imports going to be taxed. >> so we have abandoned the idea of having french pharma firms? >> we are not going to cover overnight the import you will be banning. in the years to come, if you are elected, all drugs will increase in price. all imported drugs. to show the incoherance what you proposed. next the real problem -- >> th

they could succeed in the contract manufacturing space where they are making drugs on behalf of big pharmaes globally. haidi: what is it about biologics in terms of it being a class of products that makes them unique? biologic drugs are grown from cells, which requires a more complex manufacturing process than typical pills, which might be a mixture of chemicals. that makes biologics more effective and capable of being target is towards certain diseases, but it also means the manufacturing is complicated. many of the new medicines are biologic or cell-based. in 2015, 6 of the world's 10 best selling drugs were biologics. building a plan is quite costly, similar to one where a semiconductor plant is as well. this new samsung plan being built doesn't have any notes or bolts, and everything is welded to fit together. haidi: fascinating. a huge amount of infrastructure required to set up this unit of the company. thank you so much for that. our health report talking about samsung biologics. coming up. the belgian road promising to expand trade and investment. we take a hard look at the likely

mark: still ahead, then -- bill ackman says he will probably stay away from pharma after the big lossant. this is bloomberg. ♪ ♪ mark: live from london and new york, i am mark barton. vonnie: i am vonnie quinn. this is "bloomberg markets." bill ackman says he will probably stay away from pharmaceutical companies do this after his pershing square fund lost $4 billion on valeant. he says its company has recovered since and not -- is -- looking for a wider francine lacqua asked ackman about the listing. bill: we are looking for more liquidity. launched pershing square almost 14 years ago. of hours.ng-term plan we have been trading at about a 15% discount. coming to london, we have more liquidity, will access more investors. with the discount, the, ftse 200 eligible company. by as early as june. francine: you said you have been unhappy with this discount. how do you expect that to be adjusted? bill: there is actually more demand. as a 50 250 company, we achieved that potential. we could have as much as 12% incremental demand from index funds. plus the fact that this is really a north amer

we are locked in a system, which is 75 years old, and now the the insurance companies and big pharma with wall street with the vantage of accelerated insurance ,laims per year, on average each american who has a job with $5,000 per to pay year for health insurance. juntas bill that the ryan has pushed through, it is dating it hundredting that $50 billion will be taken from -- $850 billion will be taken from medicaid. there's a lot that is wrong with the affordable care act. we need to move from this lower standard of insurance mandate to either a blended system of th ande and public heal eventually a single-payer system. host: ok. wall street points that number billion for medicaid cuts. look at how the vote yesterday is playing out across the country. ins is from the newseum washington. alaska, the alaska governor rips the republican on the revision. don young being one of those that was undecided yesterday. cheers passage of health care bill in the house. gopfrancisco, house passes health legislation, and it was california republicans key to that victory. congressman darrell issa a

but she can't get more funding from pharma which is who we trust to fund in this country because they look at the santa d say great idea if it works, you killed our market, you've killed our business. so, i think this notion that market forces lead us to a rational place in the healthcare just doesn't work. that's the simplest way i can say it. one is because the market depends on a lot of forces that not only don't they exist in healthcare but they can't exist in healthcare. you need to be able to make a choice. when you are lying on a stretcher with your appendix burst, you're not in a great position to do that. mostly doctors are choosing for us. you can work with your doctor to choose better, but as we see now, the choice is often rather limited unless you are willing to fly to another city after they've had so much healthcare consolidation there's one or two choices. so the fact that colonoscopies are a lot cheaper in baltimore doesn't help me if i'm in new york. so it isn't a market in that sense and likewise where there is hospital consolidation and therefore, you know, all the

we'll talk to two pharma executives about the cost of care as the final hour of "squawk box" begins right from the most powerful city in the world, new york, this is "squawk box." good morning welcome back to "squawk box" here on cnbc live from nasdaq marketsite in times square i'm joe kernen along with andrew ross sorkin and becky quick. futures up. up 16 or so on the nasdaq. we had a rare down day yesterday in the averages after seven straight up days in the s&p. at least so far today back on track trading higher. >> among today's top stories let's get you started with what we're saying about vietnam. the country says it will sign deals for up to $17 billion for u.s. goods and services. the country's prime minister will meet with president trump at the white house today. ge power's ceo says that general electric is worth about $6 billion with vietnam. a shake-up at uber. a head engineer of the company's self-driving car unit has been fired. anthony levandowski is at the center of a dispute between uber and waymo. uber says that he refused to comply with a judge's request to turn over do

but she can't get pharma funding which is who we trust to fund the drug development because they look at this and say great idea but if it works you killed our market. i think the notion market forces lead us to a rational place in health care doesn't work. i mean that is the simplest way i can say it. i think why is that? it is because a market depend ons a lot of forces that just not only don't exist in health care but they can't exist in health care. i mean you need to be able to make a choice; right? when you are lying on the stretcher, you are in a gown with your appendix burst, you are not in a great position to do that. mostly doctors are choosing forest. you can work with your doctor to chose better but as we see now the choices are often rather limited unless you are willing to fly to another city. many cities have had so much health care consolidate there are choices. likewise, where there is hospital consolidation and all the studies show that leads to higher prices after a point, not better care, the ftc will occasionally come in but their philosophy is well, if a concern

whether it's health care, i.t., pharma, these guys medical devices killing it. stocks up better than $12 today. surging, which i owned it. michigan missed this one. >> it was a rough week for financial shares along with the others. higher today. you own this stock. >> citigroup is a bell weather there, but all that said, had a hard time getting past 62. it should be 10 to 20% higher just to get to parody with its buck value. >> blackstone? >> silicon valerie, some aig and black stone. >> okay. none of the big banks. >> we thought the best way we could take advantage of rates gone higher and pockets of growth, particularly on the west coast was being west coast centered. silicon valley bank and first republic high net worth. also pay a high tax rate and in terms of aig and black stone, those are diversitied companies, black stone covers whel wen it comes to being a beneficiary of global growth, u.s. growth -- >> do you think black stone will turn into a c corp. because if it does, that's a huge home run for investors. >> i think it should. >> do you think it will

if the president decides big pharma is quote, getting away with murder and institute some type of pricebout it, doesn't that put in more offense or riskier category? >> well i think so. j&j is a classic health care company, one of the strongest, and don't forget, they are the beneficiary of the single biggest trend and that is the aging of populations around the world, not just in the united states. so we're going to need their consumer products. we'll need the pharmaceutical products and we'll certainly need their medical supply products. liz: okay. you know we're near session highs if not at for the nasdaq so there is a decent day here. hank, you and i have known each other a long time. how long have you been at haverford? >> just 26 years. liz: when you started, how much assets under management, i want viewers to know why they should be listening to you back then? >> we had about 350 million in assets. liz: today you have? >> a tad over 7 billion. liz: tad over 7 billion. slow and steady. not that slow. hank, thank you so much. >> thank you. liz: hank smith, haverford trust chief inv