San francisco. Good morning to you. Another ugly week despite some solid gains today. Dows up 175. The nasdaq is now down almost 14 for the year. Rich wong of xcel telling usa today saying, i personally dont think the environment is anywhere as close to as difficult as 2008 or 2009 or 2001, but try telling that to people in tech, kara, especially given the losses in f. A. N. G. How is this playing out in your view, both from a sentiment standpoint and more practically . I think practically, people feel good about it, odd enough. In a lot of the places im going, a lot of the vcs are happy about it. A lot of people think there was too much money rushing in, especially from the hedge funds and the larger institutional shareholders that were shoving the prices up enormously. Ive been hearing this for a while from a lot of prominent vcs, they couldnt have been compete. A little like San Francisco real estate, it suddenly got crazy crazy, and then goes back to just normal crazy. So i think everyone feels like most of them are pretty logical, whats happened. At the same time, theres going to be a lot of reverberations among the companies that cant raise anymore money. And that can be problematic. Weve heard from a lot of these companies. The ceos for years have said, we dont really Pay Attention to a stock price on a daytoday basis, were focused on the longterm. And while thats true, i wonder if youve heard more ceos Start Talking about their stock price and valuations more specifically. They say that, right . Thats the line, right . I dont think about winning the oscars. Thats just crap, im sorry. They do think about it. Obviously, it has repercussions on their employees, on being able to buy things. When you lose 40 of your wealth, you Pay Attention to that. Or your alleged wealth. I think thats not true. It does have repercussions. And there are a lot of buying opportunities among some very Good Companies that arent going to see more investing and it will split the wheat from the chaff, which has happened since silicon valley, almost continually. Kara, is there a specific reason you think to believe that this wont be as bad as 2001 or 2008 . Or is that Wishful Thinking . In other words, are people putting specific metrics behind why it might be different this time and go back to normal crazy and not drop down below that . Yeah, i mean, i think that probably a lot of the companies are very substantiative and interesting. I mean, a lot of them have a lot of money theyve gotten, you know . Whatever uber may be lugosin money, but its a really substantiative company and its got a lot of cash and people are handing it over hand over fist, because they feel like the growth of Companies Like this and air b b and others are an important shift. So i think youll see the better ones who have the money saved doing just fine. I dont think theres as many, really, wacky ones. I dont know, jon, you were around, too. A lot of them are very interesting and the question is theres probably too many of them and theyre at too high a valuation. I guess its the 2008 comparison i dont know about. Because 2008, 2009, a lot of those companies were real, too. They went public and theyre getting beat up now. Linkedin comes to mind. Yeah, linkedin, definitely. I just think a lot of these multiples got ahead of themselves. I mean, its not to say theyre not Great Companies and interesting companies, its just what wall street was wall street was valuing them on growth, growth, growth, and a lot of these are just not going to grow to the sun the way they always think they do, and then they never do. But thats not to undercut the fact that theyre Good Companies. We did just talk to spencer raskopf this morning about how you hire and retain with a lower stock price. His argument was, actually, its better now for us than it is if you were going to work for a true startup, where your series a funding is even now suspect. Do you buy that . Yeah, yeah, i guess people will run to safety. Thats probably true. That people dont immediately say, hey, im going to do a startup, im leaving Google Microsoft twitter whatever. I think thats probably accurate, to say. Kara, this week we got the report, though, from the New York Times that pandora may have considered selling itself. And it makes you wonder, at these levels, whether well see a game of sharks and minnows. Whether there will be companies who just decide, you know, our valuation has been found out. We need to go and sell to a bigger company. Do you expect that to happen on a larger scale . Yeah, i do. I mean, ive talked about it a lot. A lot of these companies, youre looking at yahoo being looked at. I always say twitter probably should be sold. I think a lot of people are saying that now. Youre going to see a lot of assets being moved around. Its a really its an interesting time. And i think theres probably going to be more asset sales than usual. And people cant make a go of it. Even if its a very good company. So if youre a big company, you look around and see what you can tuck in, that would be great for the assets you have. So i see a lot of that is going to happen. And a lot of companies are going to consider it. Lots of those pandorasized companies, too. Speaking of which, lets get to twitter. Earnings, of course, disappointed this week, but the stocks in the green this morning, kara. This is what adam bayne told us on squawk on the street yesterday, take a listen. Were focused on live, because we think live is actually a really powerful part of the platform. Whether its live video or live information, we think weve got a massive opportunity when it comes to live. And weve made a lot of changes. In fact, a change last night where weve turned on a way to bring the best of twitter to your timeline. All right, so, your talk on the degree to which theyre tinkering with the product, the business model, takeover, have at it . Uh, okay, live. Live. Also live. Everything is live on the internet. You know, facebook is live. What is it, dead . Adams funny, he makes me laugh. I also like when he says, im glad you asked that question. That was a good interview. But i think theyre trying to tweak the product in realtime and rather publicly, which i find interesting. I think it still has, you know, removing the dot before a name or changing around the thing to make it not as difficult as use are all sort of table stakes to me. And i think its a bigger question of how do you get people to really engamg with the product. They have had a billion people coming through there and not everybody has stayed. And so, you know, we did a good piece, kurt wagner did, about how twitter is lonely to be at when you first get there. So theyve got to do a better job. Facebook is not lonely, because when you get there, you have your friends, and theres always a response. With twitter, thats not the case. Theyve got to make a product that, as live as it may be, its got to feel lively and interesting and engaging to the customers. And thats hard. Thats a difficult thing, unless youre a narcissistic journalist like myself, and then its great. Its a great place to be. Kara, the thing that confuses me about this live message is a couple of the major things theyre doing feels not live. Moments being one. Yeah, all those pieces were live at one point, but now theyre trying to piece them together into a narrative thats not live. Also, this algorithmic tweak theyre doing. Its not all about things that are just happening now. So for them to be saying live, where some of the tweaks theyre doing seem timeshifted seems weird. I think theyre talking about realtime. If the super bowl is happening, everyones talking about it with twitter. I think thats more what theyre talking about with twitter. But i think the question is, is it relevant to you in realtime . Or the debates last night or the debates coming up or stuff like that. Or you engaging with it during live events. And theres always some event happening in the world, some news event. So i think they want to be the place where people jump to for instant news. I think thats what theyre talking about. And at the same time, theyve got to do those while you were out, and things like that, because it becomes relevant for people. Because a reverse chronological timeline is not right for most people. It man for you and i, but not for most people. Finally, kara, kaylas got some news on visa and square, which square is having an amazing day today. That proposal overnight is propelling square shares. This is actually a disclosure of visas envelope in square, from april 2011. So this is from almost five years ago, and this is because of the dual class share structure, once you pass a certain point, you have to disclose that you are converting from one class to another class, in order to sell. But visa is still subject into to the lockup. I understand this is not a stake by any stretch of the imagination and keep in mind that the deadline for disclosing these positions is tuesday, after the close. So we could still see more filings. And it would be wrong to make the judgment that these are new stakes in square. Especially because jack dorsey, kara, as you know well, has said many times, how important being platform agnostic is to square. They can process visa, they can process mastercard, they can process apple. And i believe, kara, if we have this sound bite from jack dorsey, from when we interviewed him in november around the ipo, take a listen to this. Because we asked him this very question, if eventually it would make sense to be owned by mastercard or visa and heres what jack dorsey said to us then. You know, i cant speak for other companies, but i think we have a lot of power in our independence. As you said, like, we can really be a platform that is agnostic to devices and to networks. And i think thats really important, because and our sellers shouldnt have to care what comes across the counter. They shouldnt have to care how their buyers are paying. And buyers should be able to pay with whatever they want. Its really important to us to make sure they dont have to think about that at all. They can accept every form of payment, and that means they make every sell. Having visa as a strategic investor is still beneficial for square, but do you agree that the market possibly misinterpreted this . I agree that reporters got it wrong this morning. I mean, i agree it was a stake they owned, according to jason del ray, who i just spoke to, and it just was disclosed. And its great to have them as a partner. I do think dorsey is still thinking about becoming independent, staying independent, excuse me, but, you know, its not the craziest thing to think that visa might want to buy a company like square or mastercard might or American Express might. But being a strategic partner, which theyve been since the beginning, this is a stake they had before the ipo, i believe. But its a stake theyve had a long time, and all it is is a disclosure, and of course, you know, not great reporting made it seem as if it was something new and maybe everybodys wondering if theres going to be an acquisition. I dont think theres anything pending or happening right now, and its not the craziest thing to happen about, but right now they happen to own a big stake, and thats that. Between all of that we just covered, and pandora and netflix, which we didnt get to, we might have to have you on every day. I hope you dont mind. Every day, i cant wait. I love getting up this early, its so fun. Kara swisher, have a great weekend. Coming up, a lot more on the markets rebounding. The dow is up 200 points. An exclusive with the ceo of qualcomm on concerns about enterprise tech and trouble in the cloud. Another stock in that sector getting slammed on earnings, down 17 this morning. The ceo will join us a little bit later on. Theres a lot of places you never want to see 7. 95. [ beep ] but youll be glad to see it here. Fidelity where smarter investors will always be. If only the signs were as obvious when you trade. Fidelitys active trader pro can help you find smarter entry and exit points and can help protect your potential profits. Fidelity where smarter investors will always be. Getting some interesting comments coming out of the q a portion of dudleys appearance today. Our Steve Liesman has been watching that. Steve . Carl, thanks very much. Bill dudley making some important comments on this issue thats been debated of negative Interest Rates. He says negative Interest Rates should not be part of the conversation right now for the u. S. Economy. He says there are many steps the fed would consider, and he is not spending a lot of time thinking about negative Interest Rates. Thats important, because the fed would not be negative Interest Rates would consulting with the new york fed president. Im talking about the effects on banks. He acknowledged the market volatility and the timing of financial conditions, but says hes still undecided if the economy is the cause of this or its a sentiment issue, and he says they have time to figure this out. If tightening conditions last, it will be taken into account with more monetary policy. He says the u. S. Economy has momentum and banks are fundamentally in fine shape. Probably going to take a little bit longer, he says, though, to get back to the feds 2 inflation objective than they thought several months ago. So kayla, on these issues and these comments, the market was at the session highs, stock market at session highs and you could see oil bumped up. Donate know if thats part of what was going on, but the market at session highs on these negative comments from negative Interest Rates from bill dudley. And with that, lets take a look at the markets. The dow is currently up 236 points, the s p at 26, and as steve just said, we are at session highs. With us now is Tony Crescenzi with pimco. Tony, there is so much to work with in the markets these days. How do you prioritize whether its oil, whether its global headlines, whether its fed speak, thats going to move the market on a given day . Its all of the above. And it actually began a long time ago, in 2014, when markets started to think about the possibility of the Federal Reserve in 2015 would raise Interest Rates. It caused the dollar to rally that, of course, had an impact on oil, as you just mentioned, oil, and had an impact on china, forcing it or compelling them to devalue their currency last august. And that also set in motion all the instability created by those things, actions by Central Banks, that steve just spoke to, about bill dudley, regarding negative Interest Rates. The implementation of negative Interest Rates. So theyre all historic, theyre related, and they intertwine. And all at the same time. So right now, weve got to let markets adjust to these things, the normalization of Interest Rates is something to adjust to. The integration of china to the Global Financial system is something to adjust to. Negative Interest Rates, adjusting to the markets sending a loud and clear message to the fed, and thankfully, bill dudley is saying, well, were not actively considering this right now, because it has had negative consequences for the Global Financial market. Adjusting would be a nice way to put what weve seen in the markets this week. And we were largely spared of china, because it was close. What happens when china oppose next week. We have a long weekend and come back tuesday morning. Based on offshore trading, it looks like its currency will strengthen. Its been a source of stability, not because its been closed, but the currency hasnt moved much. And there is an important meeting of the g20, the group of 20 nations, on the 26th of this month, in shanghai. This will lead up to a meeting toward the end of the year, on september 6th, in china as well, a different city, the leaders meeting with xi jinping and president obama where all the leaders will get together. China will want to send out a sense of stability with its markets, which means they will have to do mopping up by the second quarter. Because it takes time for markets to stabilize if theyre unstable. So investors should be looking for signs of stability, signs of comforting words from the g20 on the 26th of this month, and for actions to be taken throughout the next several months to create more Stable Foundation for Global Financial conditions. At the expense of the reforms weve always heard about they had in mind . No, because china is still seeking better quality over quantity. And whats happened in china is really historic. One could say that its a change in the monetary order. One we havent seen since nixon took the u. S. Off the Gold Standard in 1971. There are three periods, arguably. 1945 through 71, the britain system, its a managed system, where investors knew pretty much where currencies would go. But since 71, its been a freefloating freeforall. Arguably last year when china was included in the basket, it became more integrated in the Global Financial system. Thats good in a way, because it reintroduces statecontrolled back into the system. But its very bad right now, because this element of state control is different, because we dont know what this state, china, wants with respect to its currency, in terms of the speed of movement, the depth, and the direction. It will become clearer, and im sure the g20 will make it clear to the chinese officials to communicate a little better and im sure chinese officials know that themselves. And well see improved communications over time. Tony, based on what you see in the markets right now, what do you see as the likelihood th that low oil prices will cause this domino effect that people are really fearing and spread out into other areas. Thus far in the s p, we seem to be bouncing off that 1812 level. But it seems like, if this oil effect really goes somewhere, it could get a lot worse. Well, its very destructive to look at todays retail sales report in the United States, where the socalled con