Kamis, 05 Desember 2019

China gives little indication US trade talks are progressing - CNBC

Chinese Ministry of Commerce spokesman Gao Feng speaks at a press conference in Beijing, days ahead of an imminent US-China trade war, on July 5, 2018.

Greg Baker | AFP | Getty Images

BEIJING — China's official spokespeople are keeping quiet on trade talks with the U.S. amid growing uncertainty on when even a phase-one agreement can be reached.

"China believes if both sides reach a phase-one agreement, relevant tariffs must be lowered," Gao Feng, Ministry of Commerce spokesman, said Thursday, according to a CNBC translation of his Mandarin-language remarks.

The comments reiterated the position Beijing has expressed in the last few weeks, since both countries indicated a rollback of tariffs would be part of a so-called phase-one agreement.

On Thursday, Gao noted both trade delegations remain in communication, but disclosed few additional details about the negotiations.

He did not provide a direct response when asked about China's view on additional U.S. tariffs, which are set to take effect Dec. 15. Gao also did not provide details on the unreliable entities list. The commerce ministry raised the threat of such a designation in late May, shortly after U.S. President Donald Trump's administration put Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei on a blacklist that effectively prevents it from buying from American suppliers.

Trade tensions between the world's two largest economies have persisted for more than a year, with each country applying tariffs to billions of dollars' worth of goods from the other.

Both sides appeared close to reaching a phased agreement by the end of this year, but earlier this week, Trump said it might be better to wait until after the November 2020 U.S. presidential election to strike a trade deal with China.

"We do not set a deadline for reaching an agreement or not," Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokeswoman Hua Chunying said in response on Wednesday during a daily press conference, according to an official transcript.

"Our attitude has always been clear, that is, consultations must be based on equality and mutual respect, and that the outcome must be mutually beneficial and acceptable to both sides," she said. "We hope that some people in the U.S. will earnestly heed the call of its people."

In the last two weeks, frictions between the U.S. and China intensified after the U.S. government pushed ahead with legislation supporting protesters against the central government in Hong Kong, and the Uighur minority in Xinjiang. Chinese state media and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs have made firm statements against what Beijing considers U.S. interference in "internal" affairs, and suspended review of requests by U.S. military ships and aircraft to visit Hong Kong.

When asked Thursday whether the unreliable entities list is part of China's threatened retaliation to these developments, Commerce Ministry's Gao referred reporters to comments from the relevant department.

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMiYWh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmNuYmMuY29tLzIwMTkvMTIvMDUvY2hpbmEtZ2l2ZXMtbGl0dGxlLWluZGljYXRpb24tdXMtdHJhZGUtdGFsa3MtYXJlLXByb2dyZXNzaW5nLmh0bWzSAWVodHRwczovL3d3dy5jbmJjLmNvbS9hbXAvMjAxOS8xMi8wNS9jaGluYS1naXZlcy1saXR0bGUtaW5kaWNhdGlvbi11cy10cmFkZS10YWxrcy1hcmUtcHJvZ3Jlc3NpbmcuaHRtbA?oc=5

2019-12-05 08:35:00Z
52780455211231

Caver Unsworth testifies he felt ‘dirtied’ by Musk’s ‘pedo guy’ tweet - The Verge

People, including my editors, keep asking me who “won the day.” I have been thinking about other things, like whether the marble behind the Honorable Stephen Wilson is an actual slab, or just a veneer over particle board, and whether I will get kicked out of the courtroom if I go check it out before court is in session.

But mostly, I have been thinking about insults. The main point of contention has been whether “pedo guy” qualifies as an insult or a statement of fact. As Ken White, the lawyer and pundit, points out, insults — like hyperbole, shit-talking, and “other expressions not reasonably taken literally as assertions of fact” — are not defamation, which is why John Oliver can perform the song at the end of this Last Week Tonight segment with confidence. In White’s view, Elon Musk has a defensible case, though this is not the same thing as a winning case.

Insults are the kind of thing one might want to call a linguist to discuss, you know, as an expert witness. The core of the case — to me, at least — seems to rest there. For instance, say someone calls me an asshole. This is both an opinion and insulting; possibly it is also true. In any event, it’s not defamation.

“Pedo guy” is way less clear-cut as an insult than “asshole.” The relevant parts of Musk’s testimony today largely centered on his view that it was an insult. Unfortunately, I also heard a great deal of testimony that doesn’t seem remotely relevant to this question, from Musk and others.

By the end of the day, though, the plaintiff Vernon Unsworth gave compelling testimony about how Musk’s words had affected him. Unsworth indicated he’d taken Musk’s words as an accusation, not an insult, and felt “dirtied” by them.

“Rude and contemptuous”

Alex Spiro, Musk’s counsel, had more nervous energy than yesterday — he was practically vibrating. He began by asking Musk how he became involved in the Thailand cave rescue in the first place. Several emails were introduced into evidence, including with Rick Stanton, the head of the rescue operations, showing that Musk’s help was indeed welcomed. There was a great deal of detail I did not care about regarding the specs on the minisub. We were shown a video of the minisub in a pool. We were then treated to a series of Musk’s tweets where he said nice things about rescuers and noted that his team hasn’t done anything directly useful to the effort. Musk said that after he left for his Shanghai meeting, 20 to 25 engineers stayed behind.

Eventually, Musk testified that he was upset because Unsworth denigrated the efforts of Musk’s team of engineers and because Unsworth falsely said Musk was thrown out of the cave; he also did not appreciate the “rude and contemptuous” tone of the interview. (Musk is something of an expert in rude and contemptuous: there was that time on a quarterly conference call with analysts, Musk cut someone off with, “Next. Boring bonehead questions are not cool.”)

The tweets at the center of the defamation case were “obviously a very off-the-cuff response,” Musk testified. He also said the tweets were deleted “within hours of publishing,” partly as a result of media attention and because “a lot of people said you probably shouldn’t write that.” Musk also said that he did not know when he tweeted that Unsworth was central to the rescue. “I thought he was some random ex-pat guy.” Musk also said, accurately, that lots of people are mean to him online and he is frequently criticized.

We are then shown the tweets in question again. Musk explains that “obv” means “obviously,” that “no problemo” is “a phrase Bart Simpson uses — the Simpsons used to be cool,” and “really did ask for it” refers to what Musk views as an “unprovoked attack on my team and me, with a bunch of false statements.”

As for Musk’s follow-up statements: “Bet you a signed dollar,” Musk explained, is a low-stakes wager meaning “it’s not impossible.” He then said: “It’s possible that if someone goes to Colorado a lot, they’re going for weed.” Musk paused. “Not if they’re coming from California though.”

Musk’s Twitter usage was particularly high-volume last year. Musk sent an estimated 100 to 200 tweets per month, he testified. He also said that he views it as a mitigating factor that he didn’t name Unsworth in the tweets. According to Musk, the first time anyone asked him if “pedo guy” meant “pedophile” was at the deposition. This seems unlikely; at least one journalist surely asked Musk about this.

Spiro got out a large calendar for demonstrative purposes. “The jury is familiar, hopefully, with the month of July,” Spiro said. Spiro then began asking Musk questions about the private investigator he retained to look into Unsworth — an investigator who turned out to be a con man. Musk said that before he sent the “strange that he hasn’t sued me” tweet, the con man P.I. had passed false information to an employee (Jared Birchall, who we hear from later) who told Musk about it.

The email to Ryan Mac at Buzzfeed was brought up again; he must be getting sick of it. We are treated to a discussion of what “off the record” means — according to Musk, that means not for publication. (I see several journalists make faces; most of us understand “off the record” as a mutual agreement. A source cannot demand it unilaterally, which is ultimately why Mac published his story.) A second email is pulled up with “on background” at the top. Musk explains that he believes “on background” means the information can be used, but not attributed to him. (In my experience, every source has a different notion about what “on background” means, and this has to be negotiated every time, which is a goddamn nightmare.)

“If I write something on Twitter, it will get reported”

L. Lin Wood, Unsworth’s attorney, was up next for the re-cross; thankfully, he had dropped the bumbling manner from yesterday. Wood said Unsworth doesn’t have a Twitter account, and wondered how Unsworth was supposed to know Musk had apologized. “Most things I say on Twitter get press,” Musk said. “If I write something on Twitter, it will get reported.” Musk adds that it seemed appropriate to him that the apology was on the same medium as the insult.

Wood then pulled up just an absolute fuckload of Musk’s tweets, and asked Musk if they belong to him. “I don’t remember every tweet,” Musk said. This did not seem to be the point, as procedurally Wood was trying to get the tweets entered into evidence. Many of them are about the minisub — which is referred to variously as a minisub, a pod, or a tube, but which I will continue calling a minisub for consistency’s sake. Musk said he was soliciting feedback from the public. “I tweet a lot, in general,” Musk said, accurately.

It looked to me like Wood was trying to suggest the volume of minisub tweets smacked of a PR stunt, particularly after Musk testified that he knows his tweets will be reported on. Musk insisted he was soliciting feedback. “There are some pretty smart people out there,” Musk said. Tesla vehicle design, in particular, is something he cites as having incorporated a lot of Twitter feedback.

Wood switched tacks to language. He and Musk discussed pedophilia, which may refer to thought (a sexual attraction to children) or action (statutory rape). Musk said that if an adult were to marry a 12-year-old, that is probably pedophilia. “Pedo guy,” however, is more flippant, Musk said. “Mother-effer doesn’t literally mean incest,” Musk said, because he apparently did not want to say “fuck” in court.

As this discussion of the meaning of “pedo,” “pedo guy,” and “pedophile” was happening, Unsworth began to look progressively more unhappy. He puffed out his cheeks. His mouth worked. I couldn’t see Unsworth yesterday — he was obscured by a poster board — but today I didn’t see him look at Musk once. Unsworth appeared to be upset by the discussion, but his back was to the jury.

“All the press I read, including the British press, viewed this as an insult,” Musk testified. He also said he remembered the coverage as being negative about him. Wood began asking about specific countries’ press, which is how I discovered Musk doesn’t read news from Scandinavia, the Netherlands, or Belgium. Judge Wilson interjected to ask what languages Musk does know, since the judge thought that might be faster. Musk said he spoke a little Spanish, French, and German. Judge Wilson tells Wood that he will allow inquiries about news from South America, the Carribean, and German-speaking Switzerland.

The jurors are then sent away for recess while the lawyers argue about whether a Google alert can be introduced to the court. Whatever Wood wanted to introduce has a headline from Vox — a media outlet that unfortunately Judge Wilson is not familiar with, and which he spells aloud — that uses “pedophile.” Ultimately the exhibit was excluded from the proceedings.

When everyone returned from their brief break, Wood asked Musk if anyone at Tesla had pointed out that his tweet had tanked the stock. Musk said that he got concerned notes from shareholders, but since Tesla is publicly traded, anyone can see its price at any time. Wood asked Musk to give a current estimate of Musk’s net worth. Musk hedged: he has stock and debt against that stock; the stock value fluctuates. Wood asked for a range. Musk said he didn’t know. Wood then reads from Musk’s deposition, where the estimate is about $20 billion. Musk said that with SpaceX and Tesla stock combined, yes, that sounds right. There is no mention of how much debt Musk has outstanding against the stock.

Musk was then dismissed. As he exited the courtroom, he turned back to the jury, waved, and then left.

He’s a Brick… house

The next witness was Jared Birchall, also known as James Brickhouse. Birchall, in contrast to every other witness today, did not wear a jacket; instead he was wearing a white shirt with blue checks. Birchall said he was 17 or 18 years into a career in finance and was hired by Musk to run Musk’s family office.

Wood asked Birchall a series of questions that established, mainly, that Musk is Birchall’s boss. It didn’t sound like Musk micromanages Birchall, however. Wood displayed a non-disclosure agreement that Birchall entered into with James Howard, a con man who purported to be a private investigator. Howard had attempted to contact Musk, saying that he had dirt on Unsworth.

It emerged that Birchall had dealt with Howard largely under a pseudonym, James Brickhouse. I was somewhat disappointed that Birchall didn’t think up something more fun, like Pierce Inverarity. Birchall said he came up with the name himself and that Musk hadn’t known about it. He’d used the Brickhouse pseudonym before, to book travel and buy domain names.

Birchall couldn’t sign the NDA under the pseudonym, though, as that would render the contract unenforceable, so he swapped out his email display name to “Jared Birchall for James Brickhouse.” Every other communication, however, took place under the pseudonym, except one, when Birchall accidentally sent an email under his own name.

According to Birchall, Howard had cited Paul Allen and George Soros as previous employers. Birchall did not, however, try to contact anyone to determine if this was true. So here’s a valuable hiring lesson for everyone: call the references.

Wood displayed another email from Birchall to Howard. “We would like you to immediately move forward with ‘leaking’ this information to the UK press,” the email reads. Bullet points follow, containing false information about Unsworth that I am not especially interested in repeating. Birchall said the email was meant to “encourage investigative journalism.” In the email, Birchall pointed to a line where he wrote “share the facts,” and said he understood the bullet points to be facts and he wanted to make sure the press was given correct information.

Then it was time for lunch.

Justballs.com

When we returned, Michael Lifrak, another of Musk’s lawyers, began asking Birchall questions. Birchall was aware of Musk’s Unsworth tweets but said he did not discuss them with Musk. Lifrak asks if Musk would harm Unsworth in any way. “He would never do that,” Birchall said.

When Birchall received the referral for Howard, the con man PI, Musk had clearly expressed that he expected litigation. Lifrak displayed a Birchall email to Howard: “We believe there are planned attacks in the media and/or a lawsuit that are imminent. With that said, we aren’t looking to frame anyone.” Lifrak asked if anything was published with the false information Howard supplied. Birchall said no.

We then move back to the Brickhouse pseudonym, which I find easier to remember than Birchall’s actual name. Birchall said that working with a public figure means trying to maintain that person’s privacy and described that as the core of what he does.

At this point an email is displayed wherein “James Brickhouse” is trying to buy the domain name justballs.com. If you are frightened to click the URL, please know I have done that for you and its contents are (1) “This page is under construction — coming soon!” and (2) related searches, virtually all of which have to do with baseball. There was no testimony about why Birchall would be buying justballs.com on Musk’s behalf or what Musk was planning to do with it.

The reason Birchall used his pseudonym in this transaction, he explained, was because if people knew Musk were involved, they’d likely raise the price. In any event, Birchall did not succeed in purchasing justballs.com.

Birchall then said that when he relayed Howard’s information from Musk, “as human nature would have it, the most alarming things were what I had shared.” Referring to Musk’s email to Buzzfeed, Birchall said the language was harsher than he would have used but the content was what he understood Howard’s investigation to have unearthed. At the time, Birchall did not know Musk had emailed Buzzfeed. I imagine he rather quickly found out. Lifrak rested.

“Leaking to press is a PR stunt, isn’t it?” Wood asked on recross. Birchall repeated that he wanted to encourage investigative journalism. Musk had gotten a significant amount of negative publicity from the “pedo guy” tweet. Leaking, then, would be a way to “balance” the coverage. Wood said that meant Howard’s hiring wasn’t a litigation defense strategy; it was a PR strategy.

This led to a grouchy exchange about what phrases Birchall used with Musk when he gave Musk the phony information, leading to a series of sustained objections to Wood. Wood appeared to be growing frustrated.

A great deal of irritating cross-talk

The next witness, Rick Stanton, was the one who bewildered me the most today. He was the leader of the cave divers who rescued the Thai soccer team and their coach, and he sat very upright in the witness stand, like a clean-shaven Jason Statham. Stanton, a retired firefighter, has been involved in rescues around the world and has done cave diving for most of his adult life, he said.

Unsworth cracked a smile when Stanton referred to “spelunking, as you say.” Apparently this is more commonly called “caving” in the UK. Stanton testified that Unsworth got him involved in the rescue, and that within 6 hours of Unsworth passing Stanton’s name to the authorities, Stanton was on a plane to Thailand.

Matt Wood, son of L. Lin Wood, conducted the direct examination, and to minimize confusion, I will be calling him by his first name and will continue referring to his father by their (shared) last name. Anyway, Matt began asking questions about the rescue and conditions in the cave. Judge Wilson broke in: “Clearly the witness did something heroic, but that’s not what this case is about.” The judge instructed Matt to get back to what’s more relevant.

Stanton obviously thinks highly of Unsworth; his testimony about Unsworth was glowing. During the two weeks Stanton was in Thailand, he was in “constant contact” with Unsworth, he testified. Stanton confirmed he was also in contact with Musk, and that he had instructed Musk on the minisub. At the time Musk and Stanton corresponded, the method the divers used to rescue the soccer team was a totally untested technique, Stanton said. Musk was a possible plan B.

Matt began asking Stanton questions about the minisub. Spiro, Musk’s counsel, objected. Judge Wilson sustained the objection; the question of whether the minisub worked was not relevant to the defamation claim, the judge ruled.

Spiro rose to conduct his cross-examination. He asked how many people were involved in the exploration and rescue; Stanton responded that six to eight people laid the guide line under water in the caves. Stanton again credited Unsworth with giving the team advice and creating a map. There was then a tedious discussion about maps I am going to elide because I don’t see what it has to do with defamation.

Then, Spiro asked if there was a rule against speaking to the press. No, Stanton said. “A rule is enforceable.” There were guidelines against speaking to the media. Unsworth didn’t ask if he could speak to the media, but it also wasn’t Stanton’s decision. Stanton became aware “after the event” that Unsworth had spoken to CNN.

Spiro hauled out his giant calendar again, and began asking Stanton questions about a conspiracy theory that the divers had purposely not rescued the boys. This got Stanton’s hackles up. Spiro attempted to clarify that he personally didn’t believe it was true. There was then a great deal of irritating cross talk between Spiro, Judge Wilson and Wood; I was unable to write quickly enough to keep up with it. Several jurors glanced longingly at the clock.

Spiro displayed a WhatsApp chat between Stanton and Unsworth dated August 6th, 2018. Unsworth asked Stanton if Stanton had saved his emails with Elon Musk. Stanton said yes. Unsworth asked Stanton to find them and forward them. Stanton testified that he gave Unsworth the emails without knowing why Unsworth wanted them. There were no further questions for Stanton and we all took a break.

I kept wondering why Stanton was there — to establish what we all knew already, that Unsworth was a hero? To establish the minisub wouldn’t work? I couldn’t see the relevance of either of those things to the defamation claim. His testimony about the emails wasn’t necessary — as Unsworth, who took the stand next — would also speak to them.

“I still feel dirtied”

When we came back, Vernon Unsworth took the stand, wearing a blue suit with a pale pink shirt and more saturated pink tie; like Stanton, his hair was cropped close. Stanton had stayed for Unsworth’s testimony and was seated in front of me.

Unsworth said he had been a financial consultant since 1987 and splits time between London and Thailand, about three months in each place. He had first visited Thailand in 2011, with his companion, and first explored the cave system in 2012. Unsworth estimated he’d spent hundreds of hours on solo trips through the cave.

Unsworth said that he’d actually planned to enter the cave the same day the soccer team did, but realized he needed to renew his visa. He first became aware of the missing children and their coach when his companion awoke to an awful lot of missed calls, including from her father. Unsworth was asked to help locate the people because he knew the cave system so well. When he arrived at the cave, he discovered water in a crucial section. He tried to stop the water getting in, using sandbags and digging equipment, but couldn’t do it — and had become concerned that more water would cut off him and the other rescuers.

At this point, Taylor Wilson, the lawyer who was conducting Unsworth’s examination, was scolded by Judge Wilson about his questioning style. Unsworth was providing narration, Judge Wilson said. Wilson-plaintiff’s-lawyer was encouraged by Judge Wilson — presumably no relation — to ask questions differently.

Then we came to the CNN interview. Unsworth explained that based on the video he’d seen of Musk’s minisub, he determined it was unworkable. As for his untrue statement that Musk had been asked to leave, Unsworth was essentially repeating gossip. “It’s what I heard generally around the cave rescue area on the day of the 10th,” he said. There’d been an order that the only people to go into the cave on the rescue days were the rescuers.

Unsworth testified that he doesn’t use Twitter, which makes him wiser than me. His companion showed him Musk’s tweets — he doesn’t recall when, or in what medium, specifically. His lawyer Wilson asked him what he took the tweets to mean. “I took it to mean I was being branded a pedophile,” Unsworth said. “It’s disgusting.”

Wilson, the lawyer, asked about the emotional impact. There was a long pause. Unsworth was visibly upset. “Feels very raw. Feel humiliated, ashamed, dirtied.” Unsworth’s voice broke. “I was given a life sentence without parole. At times I feel very vulnerable. It hurts to talk about it.” Unsworth said he felt very isolated and had tried to deal with the shame he felt on his own.

“I was obviously aware of the media coverage,” Unsworth said. He wasn’t sure how many times it was repeated. The media coverage was “very hurtful. I find it disgusting. I find it hard to read the words, never mind talk about it.” Unsworth said he’d lost self-confidence, though he had good and bad days. Wilson, the lawyer, asked if Unsworth still felt humiliated, and Unsworth said yes. “I still feel dirtied.”

The jury appeared rapt.

Unsworth has received awards for his participation in the rescue, but they haven’t changed his feelings about Musk. Unsworth said he nearly didn’t attend the ceremony to be accepted as a Member of the Order of the British Empire; he went only for his mother, niece, and companion. When he looked at the press coverage, though, he saw a comment about the “pedo guy” tweet, which sank his spirits. Wilson asked him how he felt about the MBE. “I enjoyed it as much as I could,” he said.

Since his role in the rescue, Unsworth has been a consultant for three books and two documentaries, both for National Geographic. He has made about $3,000 for his work. He’s also given pro bono presentations in Thailand about the experience.

Bill Pryce, one of Musk’s lawyers who had the general air of a middle school principal, rose for the cross. He displayed the WhatsApp chat between Unsworth and Stanton, noting that the date was August 8, the same date that L. Lin Wood had sent Musk a letter explaining he was preparing a civil complaint. Unsworth said the date was a coincidence; he just wanted to inform himself about the correspondence.

Pryce then pulled up text messages Unsworth had sent to a friend. Unsworth had, in the texts, described the Navy Seals as having “given up” as of July 5, before the rescue took place. Unsworth explained he didn’t mean that literally. Pryce pounced, and began asking Unsworth about other colloquialisms Unsworth had used, such as “lost the plot” and “tetchy.” I was not super clear on the point here.

The emails between Stanton and Musk that Stanton had forwarded to Unsworth were then forwarded to Unsworth’s lawyers. Pryce displayed another email of Unsworth’s, in which details Stanton sent to Unsworth about the cave system were forwarded by Unsworth to Jonathan Head of the BBC. “For your eyes only and not to be reported on!!!” Unsworth wrote in the email. “Hopefully you will understand why Elon Musk’s submarine would not have worked.” Another text from Unsworth was displayed, where he’d sent a request for the measurements of the minisub.

The cross was difficult to watch. It seemed clear Pryce was trying to establish that Unsworth was pursuing his argument with Musk; part of the defense’s argument between men strategy. But given how Unsworth behaved when Musk was testifying — while he was facing away from the jury, who couldn’t see him and thus won’t consider his expressions — I am convinced that Unsworth does feel humiliated, dirtied, and ashamed.

What remains in question is whether “pedo guy” should be counted as an insult or a statement of fact. Though Musk gave testimony that he felt it was an insult, Unsworth gave testimony he felt it was an accusation. I don’t know who the jury will find more believable.

One thing, however, seems true, though it is not testimony and I don’t know if the jury will consider it: this entire process has been more grueling for Unsworth than Musk. Unsworth has been in the court for the entire trial, listening to testimony he clearly finds hard to bear; Musk showed up for his testimony and vanished.

The trial will resume tomorrow at 9AM PT.

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMic2h0dHBzOi8vd3d3LnRoZXZlcmdlLmNvbS8yMDE5LzEyLzUvMjA5OTY2ODAvZWxvbi1tdXNrLXRlc3RpbW9ueS12ZXJub24tdW5zd29ydGgtdHdlZXQtaHVtaWxpYXRlZC1kaXJ0aWVkLWRlZmFtYXRpb27SAYABaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cudGhldmVyZ2UuY29tL3BsYXRmb3JtL2FtcC8yMDE5LzEyLzUvMjA5OTY2ODAvZWxvbi1tdXNrLXRlc3RpbW9ueS12ZXJub24tdW5zd29ydGgtdHdlZXQtaHVtaWxpYXRlZC1kaXJ0aWVkLWRlZmFtYXRpb24?oc=5

2019-12-05 07:40:58Z
52780460410583

Rabu, 04 Desember 2019

Stock futures point to a rebound for Wall Street with renewed optimism over U.S.-China trade talks - MarketWatch

U.S. stock futures climbed early on Wednesday as investors took cheer from a report that Beijing and Washington are still working toward a phase one trade deal, offsetting fears of a delay sparked a day earlier by President Donald Trump’s remarks.

What are stocks doing?

Dow Jones Industrial Average futures YMZ19, +0.46%  were up 113 points, or 0.4%, at 27,600, while S&P 500 futures ESZ19, +0.35%  climbed 11.15 points, or 0.4%, to 3,102.25. Nasdaq-100 NQZ19, +0.46%  futures rose 37.75 points, or 0.5%, to 8,289.

On Tuesday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA, +0.64% ended 280.23 points lower, down 1%, at 27,502.81, for its biggest one-day point and percentage drop since October 8. The S&P 500 index SPX, +0.53% finished with a loss of 20.67 points, or 0.7%, at 3,093.20, while the Nasdaq Composite Index  COMP, +0.46% retreated 47.34 points, or 0.6%, ending at 8,520.64.

What’s driving the market?

Stocks climbed in Europe and were set to rebound in the U.S. after Bloomberg reported, citing sources, that despite signs of fresh tensions, Beijing and Washington were making progress toward a phase one trade deal.

Those sources said that a phase one agreement would be completed before another set of China tariffs is set to kick in on December 15. Stocks slumped on Tuesday after U.S. President Donald Trump said at a news conference in London, where he was attending a NATO meeting, that he had “no deadline” when it comes to concluding the two-year-old U.S.-China trade talks.

“It still baffles me that investors hang on every Trump statement and tweet,” said Craig Erlam, an analyst with OANDA Europe. “His trade deal optimism changes on a near-daily basis and yet investors are very sensitive to it. It’s probably a reflection of the relative lack of other talking points.”

Read: What a ‘no-deal’ U.S.-China trade scenario would mean for stocks and bonds

The sources told Bloomberg that Trump’s comments shouldn’t be read as an indication negotiations were at an impasse, nor would U.S. legislation aimed at supporting Hong Kong protesters and ethnic Muslims in the far west of China affect a deal.

Private-sector employers hired just 67,000 workers in November, payroll processor ADP said Wednesday morning, a much weaker reading than analysts had forecast, made worse by downward revisions to earlier months.

Fresh data on the services sector of the U.S. economy is also due Wednesday: the Markit services sector purchasing managers index is released at 9:45 a.m. Eastern and the Institute for Supply Management’s nonmanufacturing index is due at 10 a.m.

At 10 a.m., Federal Reserve Vice Chairman Randal Quarles will testify before the House Financial Services Committee. The hearing is about banking supervision, not monetary policy.

What stocks are in focus?

Shares of Tesla Inc. TSLA, -0.48% moved up in premarket trading after an analyst upgrade. Citi analysts said shares were likely to hit $222, up from a previous target of $191, but that still implies a hefty decline for the stock, which closed Tuesday at $336.20.

G-111 Apparel Group Ltd. GIII, -7.87% shares fell in premarket hours after the owner of fashion brands like Calvin Klein missed sales expectations and lowered its guidance. The company said tariffs were biting into its business.

Shares of Campbell’s Soup CPB, +0.88% slid 2.5% after the company reported earnings that were weaker than a year ago and cut its 2020 sales growth guidance.

Investors will also be watching for third-quarter results from Restoration Hardware RH, +0.51%, Slack Technologies, Inc. WORK, -2.39%, and H&R Block Inc., HRB, +0.81% among others.

What are other markets doing?

The yield on the 10-year U.S. Treasury note TMUBMUSD10Y, +1.35% ticked up three basis points to 1.74%.

In commodities markets, the price of a barrel of West Texas Intermediate crude oil CL00, +2.98% edged up 1.60% to $57.

Gold for February delivery GCG20, -0.14% fell 3.30 to $1,474.90.

The U.S. dollar edged down fractionally against a basket of its peers.

European stocks were higher, with the STOXX Europe SXXP, +0.86% up a little more than 4 points, 1%, to 402.76.

In Asia overnight, the Hang Seng fell 328 points, 1.3%, and the China CSI 300 ticked down 1.3 points to 3,849.82.

Related: Don’t get so excited, this economist says — the trade news isn’t that good

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMijQFodHRwczovL3d3dy5tYXJrZXR3YXRjaC5jb20vc3Rvcnkvc3RvY2stZnV0dXJlcy1wb2ludC10by1hLXJlYm91bmQtZm9yLXdhbGwtc3RyZWV0LXdpdGgtcmVuZXdlZC1vcHRpbWlzbS1vdmVyLXVzLWNoaW5hLXRyYWRlLXRhbGtzLTIwMTktMTItMDTSAU9odHRwczovL3d3dy5tYXJrZXR3YXRjaC5jb20vYW1wL3N0b3J5L2d1aWQvRjAwQTRCQjgtMTY4MS0xMUVBLUEyM0UtNUY4NjkwRkJBNUE0?oc=5

2019-12-04 13:25:00Z
52780455211231

Dow Jones Futures: China Trade Deal Hopes Set To Buoy Stock Market Rally; Alphabet CEO Larry Page Exits With Google Stock A Buy - Investor's Business Daily

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

  1. Dow Jones Futures: China Trade Deal Hopes Set To Buoy Stock Market Rally; Alphabet CEO Larry Page Exits With Google Stock A Buy  Investor's Business Daily
  2. U.S. Stocks Rise as Investors Peg Hopes on Trade Deal  The Wall Street Journal
  3. Dow tumbles on Trump's China remarks  NHK WORLD
  4. Dow Jones Today: China Trade Deal On, Small Caps Poised To Lead Stock Market Rebound  Investor's Business Daily
  5. Dow Jones, S&P 500, Nasdaq 100: Weakness Brings Support into Play  DailyFX
  6. View full coverage on Google News

https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMiiAFodHRwczovL3d3dy5pbnZlc3RvcnMuY29tL21hcmtldC10cmVuZC9zdG9jay1tYXJrZXQtdG9kYXkvZG93LWpvbmVzLWZ1dHVyZXMtY2hpbmEtdHJhZGUtZGVhbC1zdG9jay1tYXJrZXQtcmFsbHktYWxwaGFiZXQtY2VvLWxhcnJ5LXBhZ2Uv0gEA?oc=5

2019-12-04 13:08:00Z
52780457415318

Dow Jones Futures: China Trade Deal Hopes Set To Buoy Stock Market Rally; Alphabet CEO Larry Page Exits With Google Stock A Buy - Investor's Business Daily

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

  1. Dow Jones Futures: China Trade Deal Hopes Set To Buoy Stock Market Rally; Alphabet CEO Larry Page Exits With Google Stock A Buy  Investor's Business Daily
  2. Dow Jones, S&P 500, Nasdaq 100: Weakness Brings Support into Play  DailyFX
  3. Why The Dow Jones Industrial Average Owes Apple And Microsoft A Big Thanks  Yahoo Finance
  4. Dow Jones Today: Stocks Sell Off On Trump Trade Comments, Biotech Stocks Stage Stealth Rally  Investor's Business Daily
  5. E-mini Dow Jones Industrial Average (YM) Futures Technical Analysis – Could Strengthen Over 27522, Weaken Under 27393  FX Empire
  6. View full coverage on Google News

https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMiiAFodHRwczovL3d3dy5pbnZlc3RvcnMuY29tL21hcmtldC10cmVuZC9zdG9jay1tYXJrZXQtdG9kYXkvZG93LWpvbmVzLWZ1dHVyZXMtY2hpbmEtdHJhZGUtZGVhbC1zdG9jay1tYXJrZXQtcmFsbHktYWxwaGFiZXQtY2VvLWxhcnJ5LXBhZ2Uv0gEA?oc=5

2019-12-04 12:49:00Z
52780457415318

Google third era: what’s next now that Sundar Pichai is CEO of Alphabet - The Verge

Yesterday’s news that Sundar Pichai is taking on the new role of CEO of Google’s parent company Alphabet was not exactly a “knock you over with a feather” kind of announcement.

In a strictly technical, definitional sense, this is an “era-changing” moment because there’s a new CEO for Alphabet. Larry Page and Sergey Brin, the founders of the company, are stepping back from running things and any time the founders change jobs, it means something. Arriving randomly on a Tuesday afternoon, it felt surprising and big.

But it also felt a little like a non-event, just a formalization of how things have been working anyway. The consensus is that Page hasn’t been doing the necessary, public-facing part of being the CEO of Alphabet and maybe not much of the non-public work, either. So somebody needs to steer Alphabet, and Pichai is the obvious, steady choice.

Google tells me Page and Brin will continue to stay on as Alphabet employees — they’re not going away, they’re just handing over the reins. In their letter, they wrote:

We are deeply committed to Google and Alphabet for the long term, and will remain actively involved as Board members, shareholders and co-founders. In addition, we plan to continue talking with Sundar regularly, especially on topics we’re passionate about.

Their characterization of how they’ll be “actively involved as Board members, shareholders and co-founders” is a vital part of the story. As Kara Swisher has repeatedly pointed out, they retain special, company-controlling shares of stock. It gives them leverage over not just Pichai but also the board itself. So the circle you have to square is that the co-founders have near-absolute power to do whatever they want with the company — and that they apparently haven’t been doing much.

Those aren’t strictly contradictory ideas, but instead weirdly orthogonal ones: Pichai is in charge, but he doesn’t have ultimate power. Page and Brin are not in charge, but they control the company. It’s a situation as convoluted as the corporate structure of Alphabet itself.

Alphabet was formed in 2015 as a weird holding company for Google, designed in part to distance Page and Brin’s various pet projects from Google’s core business. That’s when Pichai was put in charge of Google as the CEO. Since then, I think Pichai’s tenure has been marked by a few major stories that are really the same story: he has spent a significant chunk of his time cleaning up the messes that resulted from Google’s culture up to that point.

Pichai’s rise through Google’s ranks was well deserved because he has calmly and consistently delivered good products. From the very first Google Toolbar to Chrome to Google’s online apps to ordering its scattered hardware efforts, he steadily took on more of Google’s user-facing products until, eventually, he took on the job of CEO.

All of the stuff Google made was innovative and smart but also directionless and unpolished. Pichai’s job was to take Google’s products out of permanent beta. At the same time, he’s had to ensure future technologies — especially those based on AI — turned into real products. From a purely product perspective, which of course includes the lucrative ad products that make the whole thing go, Pichai has been very successful.

Pichai is not a corporate suit — Google is still Google and will still toss out weird ideas and still do weird stuff to the web and Android all the time — but there’s a sense of direction in the past few years that was lacking before.

These distinctions are necessarily arbitrary, but I find it useful to split Google into three distinct eras. The first is the early startup days from the Stanford dorm room up until Eric Schmidt’s “adult supervision” led Google to IPO and to buy YouTube and DoubleClick — roughly 1996 to 2007. Next is Google’s monumental growth across mobile, ads, the web, and everything else you can think of — roughly 2007 to 2015.

I see the founding of Alphabet in 2015 as an explicit attempt to start Google’s third era. But what it really was was a midlife crisis. Splitting off experimental divisions into separate companies inside an umbrella corporation might have made sense in theory, but in practice everybody knew the truth: it was all Google and so-called “other bets” on the side.

It didn’t really start the new era, is what I’m saying. But now that Pichai is running Alphabet officially alongside (above? contiguous with?) Google, he can do the same product cleanup work for the Alphabet companies.

That is, if Page and Brin will let him. They did promise to “continue talking with Sundar regularly, especially on topics we’re passionate about.” It’s something to watch out for in the future, but it’s also not the most important job Pichai has right now.

His most important job lies within Google still, and it’s not just cleaning up the effects of Google’s culture on its products. Instead, it’s stabilizing the culture itself. After that, it’s navigating the new world of regulation, antitrust, the techlash, and well-justified privacy concerns from its users (aka everybody who goes online).

Google’s internal culture is changing rapidly, and the list of how employees are beginning to lose faith is not short. There’s the James Damore mess, the Google Walkout that followed the revelation of Andy Rubin’s payouts, the scaled-back TGIF all hands meetings, and most recently the accusations of employee retaliation — just to name a few big moments off the top of my head.

Only so many of those scandals can be laid at the feet of Google’s previous management. If I could only pick one major failure of Pichai’s now four-year-old tenure as CEO, it would be the inadequate and increasingly antagonistic way the company is interacting with its most politically active employees.

And external pressures on Google are just as difficult to navigate: at some point the US federal government will get its act together and enact more tech regulations — or even antitrust actions. The EU is already there on both fronts with the GDPR and the new rules about Android.

If the first era of Google was developing the technology, and the second era was growing to a massive scale, the third era is contending with the effects of that scale.

That reckoning isn’t happening because the founders formalized their already reduced roles by handing over the CEO title. It’s happening because both internally and externally, we don’t know how to deal with a company as big and powerful as Google. We just know that Page and Brin aren’t the ones to figure that out anymore.

The third era of Google was already here and has been for some time — yesterday’s CEO announcement just made it official.


More from The Verge

+ The Verge guide to using social media

Adi Robertson has written an important piece here -- and the design on our site is also really good. Don’t miss her appearance on The Vergecast or her Twitter thread. One thing I keep thinking about is how this is a useful guide for people who are sincere in their desire to find the truth (or something like it) online -- but what if fewer people want that than ever?

You should think about how you’ll share some of these insights with your friends and relatives who have fallen prey to misinformation and clickbait. I would caution against just sending them the link. Instead, pick and choose a few of these tactics and talk with them about those specific things. Start small.

+ PlayStation 25th anniversary issue

Promised you yesterday this would be good and here it is: it is good. Read it all!

+ The rise and fall of the PlayStation supercomputers

I want to call out this piece by Mary Beth Griggs specifically, because it is a wonderful snapshot of a real thing that happened in computer history that turned out to be a fluke, but a really fascinating one.

+ Google Photos launches private messaging for quickly sharing photos

Jokes about Google’s umpteenth messaging app aside (it’s hard to set the jokes aside, believe me I know), this looks like a good and needed feature. Sharing photos in Google Photos involved a lot of teaching people about how obfuscated URLs work and while I stan the web forever, it was just too complicated.

+ Congress is split over your right to sue Facebook

Excellent look at this issue from Makena Kelly:

Republicans and Democrats disagree on other issues like nullifying state privacy laws and empowering the FTC, but tomorrow’s [well, now it’s today’s -- Dieter] hearing could focus heavily on a private right of action. “We can pass any laws we want,” Waldman said. “But if there’s no way to enforce them, then what’s the point?”

+ New Star Wars game show that sounds like American Ninja Warrior coming to Disney+

Do not be a hater about this. Ahmed Best is good and so are kids competition shows.

+ Ring reportedly outed camera owners to police with a heat map

+ Qualcomm’s new Snapdragon 865 flagship is here — without integrated 5G

Qualcomm is doing its annual junket in Hawaii to announce its new products. We attended (and paid our own way, of course) last year, but didn’t make it this year. There is a lot of 5G chatter, obviously, and all that 5G feels much more real that I would have expected a year ago. But all of this has the flavor of iteration, if I’m honest, even though that’s not entirely a fair assessment. Will be interesting to see what gets announced today -- the event is ongoing.

+ Motorola vows to release lightning-fast flagship phones in 2020

Good, and overdue. I guess now that all the top engineers are done with the RAZR they can cycle back to making top tier phones again?

Let's block ads! (Why?)


https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMibmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LnRoZXZlcmdlLmNvbS8yMDE5LzEyLzQvMjA5OTQ4OTYvZ29vZ2xlLWFscGhhYmV0LWNlby1zdW5kYXItcGljaGFpLWVyYS1jdWx0dXJlLWFudGl0cnVzdC1yZWd1bGF0aW9u0gF7aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cudGhldmVyZ2UuY29tL3BsYXRmb3JtL2FtcC8yMDE5LzEyLzQvMjA5OTQ4OTYvZ29vZ2xlLWFscGhhYmV0LWNlby1zdW5kYXItcGljaGFpLWVyYS1jdWx0dXJlLWFudGl0cnVzdC1yZWd1bGF0aW9u?oc=5

2019-12-04 12:00:00Z
52780457571104