النص 🔗
00:00:02
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio, news.
00:00:08
Speaker 2: Welcome to the Bloomberg This Weekend podcast with David Gura, Christina Ruffini, and Lisa Mateo.
00:00:17
Speaker 3: Thanks for joining us for today's selection of conversations.
00:00:20
Speaker 4: From the show.
00:00:21
Speaker 5: You can listen to our favorite discussions right here on the podcast, but also make sure to join us live every Saturday and Sunday morning starting at 7 a.m.
00:00:28
Speaker 6: Eastern.
00:00:29
Speaker 2: We're on Bloomberg Television, radio, and the Bloomberg Business App, bringing you unique takes and in-depth interviews on news, politics.
00:00:37
Speaker 4: Lifestyle, and culture.
00:00:41
Speaker 3: Tomorrow, the lame duck Congress will be called into session for the first time since the election, with many Republicans on their way out and some thinking about how to save their seats during the next election cycle. There's likely going to be some stalling and some heavy agenda lobbying.
00:00:54
Speaker 5: Joining us now to break it all down, Leslie Shedd, president of Verizon Communications, a former Republican congressional advisor.
00:00:59
Speaker 6: And John McCarthy.
00:01:00
Speaker 5: He's with Causeway Strategy Group and was a former advisor to President Biden. I should say, appreciate the analysis, John, on the BBC the morning after this election.
00:01:08
Speaker 6: It was great to hear you there on the World Service. enjoyed that. I know that you'd stayed up through the night to do it.
00:01:13
Speaker 5: Leslie, let me start with you and Christina a few moments ago read the latest post from the president about how Democrats have taken us back and he cited the sell-off in the stock market. You juxtapose that with what he said to Ross Douthat on 60 Minutes in this piece that's going to air tonight about the potential for working with the Democrats. In this lame duck session, what do you expect to be accomplished? How does the way that this election turned out perhaps liberate members of Congress to work with one another across the aisle?
00:01:39
Speaker 7: Well, what do I expect to be accomplished might be different than what I hope would be accomplished. You know, I would really love to see them get some actual work done. To me, this was not necessarily, you know, the voters saying they hate everything about Republicans or they love everything about Democrats. Instead, I just feel frustration. Frustration with the inability to get anything done. Frustration with the fact they feel like they're hurting. They're having a hard time paying for basic things like groceries. and they're not having elected officials try to help them. So my strong recommendation is come in, roll up your sleeves, get ready to work with people across the aisle, across the chamber.
00:02:20
Speaker 1: Make sure you're reaching out.
00:02:21
Speaker 7: And talking to people in the Senate, because getting things through the Senate is often harder than trying to get Democrats on board. So make sure that we're trying to get something done. And I would start with permitting reform. I think that that is something that can bring real actual help to American people trying to, again, afford just the basics of life right now.
00:02:41
Speaker 3: John McCarthy. Democrats also really need to get things done if they want to keep this momentum going. I'm going to quote from you now from a very esteemed source, and that is Twitter. On election night, I saw somebody tweet, today we lib out, tomorrow we bully Hakeem Jeffries. But this is a prevailing sentiment that Democrats, yes, they got the votes, but they need to prove that they were worth it.
00:03:08
Speaker 6: I think that that's right.
00:03:09
Speaker 8: I will say that I think the political calculus of this has somewhat changed. I think that most of the folks who are in Washington were kind of planning for a scenario where there was a small majority, maybe even a 10 plus, 15 plus seat majority. I mean, the margins of this are huge. And I think that it does present a bigger opportunity for Democrats to think through their strategy. To me, I think that Democrats really need to be focusing on how can they get caught trying. You know, when these elections happen, the moderates are often the ones who lose. The people who would be your dealmaking members of Congress have just lost their reelection. So I think that the legislative tools that Democrats need to use are past very popular pieces of legislation that polled well, that people voted for us for, and make the president veto it. Make the president the one to sit and say, again, I'm going to prioritize myself over you. I actually think that the metric of productivity is not what this election was about. I think that voters are frustrated that they feel that the people in charge of their Congress and the White House weren't focused on the things that actually matter to them. So the juxtaposition here that Democrats really need to lean in on is that we're going to pass legislation over and over and over again. We're going to be a check on Donald Trump, and he's going to be the roadblock. And that's going to be our argument to convince him to give us a full trifecta in 2028.
00:04:20
Speaker 6: Let's talk about these leadership elections. John, I'm going to stick with you here.
00:04:23
Speaker 5: I heard Annie Carney of The New York Times talking about the blowback that Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer have gotten. And she made this point that's really stuck with me, which is, These aren't popular positions. I mean, they're there to kind of do a whole lot of managerial work of the caucuses on Capitol Hill. And I wonder what a challenge that is for Democrats broadly. We'll start there with you, John. In having this desire from a lot of Democrats here to pursue accountability and transparency and oversight and the like, that is leading to dissatisfaction with the current men in leadership of
Load full transcript
the Democratic caucus in the House and the Senate. But the expectations might be misaligned. How do Democrats deal with that at this moment?
00:05:01
Speaker 8: Well, I think that, as you said, these are not popular positions. Part of being the leader is giving people the leeway they need to win the race they have to win. Sometimes in these tough seats where these leaders are unelected, both from the left and from the right, You know, sometimes your populist base doesn't want you to support the leaders. Sometimes you're in a swing seat and they don't want you to support the leaders. The leadership typically does not care. I do think that if you kind of use the Pelosi piece as a model from the last couple cycles, I think you'll see the next few weeks members are just arriving in Washington today and tomorrow to come in for new member orientation meetings. They'll be meeting with leadership. And I think you'll see some people start to change their minds a bit once they see things up close. I do think that there is a difference here between Leader Jeffries and Leader Schumer. I think Jeffries is really going to consolidate the caucus quite easily behind him. I think that there's some enthusiasm for him. Leader Schumer, there's a lot more frustration about. But that said, every single person who tells you about that frustration in the Senate then won't put their hand up to be leader either. So I don't see either of these men changing.
00:05:57
Speaker 3: Leslie, speaking of Mike Johnson stepping down, who do you think is going to be running for minority leader on the Republican side? And then a little bit similarly, what do the next two years look like for Republicans in the House and Senate? Do you think we hear more open opposition to the president when it's there from the Republicans that are there? You know, you so aptly coined the YOLO caucus. They've got two months left. But for those who are sticking around, does this change any any way how they govern?
00:06:24
Speaker 7: So first of all, the race is going to be between, it seems like at least right now, Steve Scalise and Jim Jordan. Both of them have significant ties into the conference. Both of them have been raising money, have been campaigning and helping.
00:06:38
Speaker 1: I think really the.
00:06:39
Speaker 7: Republican conference is going to have to ask itself in this time right now, do we feel that we need steady leadership, that we need people with experience, somebody like Steve Scalise, or do they want to go a new route? Do they want to try something new with Jim Jordan? So it'll be interesting to see what happens there. You know, with regards to what happens within our conference, I think a lot of that is honestly going to be dictated by both the Democrats and by the president. And by that, I mean, if the Democrats overreach, if they go too far, if they try to put things up like Medicare for all, or they really prioritize, you know, vengeance and retribution over getting things done, I think that that will push the Republican conference into being much more hostile and being much more, you know, ready for fisticuffs, as they would say. It seems to me the president has said, you know, he wants to try to work with Democrats.
00:07:31
Speaker 1: The question is, how does that play out?
00:07:34
Speaker 5: Leslie, what's your broad takeaway from what happened on Tuesday night? We were talking about Speaker Johnson not seeking re-election to leadership here and, in a sense, taking the fall for what happened. But this was really an election in which the president chose a lot of these candidates, or at least blessed a lot of the ones who ran on the Republican side. Do you see this as a referendum on Trumpism? How does the Republican Party reconfigure or recoalesce here in light of what happened on Tuesday night?
00:07:59
Speaker 7: I mean, look, there's no way to soften this. It was a resounding loss for Republicans. I think that the president ran on this idea of lowering prices, of getting inflation under control. And while Republicans took great strides to doing that, including passing the tax cut bill, including executive orders that the president has been passing, at the end of the day, the fallout from the war in Iran... And the tariffs negated a lot of the benefits that had been done. And so I think to me, what this says is affordability is the number one issue right now.
00:08:33
Speaker 1: And they want to see a Congress.
00:08:34
Speaker 7: They want to see a government working together to get things done to actually address these problems.
00:08:41
Speaker 1: So to me, that is the number one priority.
00:08:43
Speaker 7: If I'm advising any Republicans out there, it is roll up your sleeves and figure out ways that we can get things done and show the American people that we are able to govern.
00:08:53
Speaker 3: John, I hate this question because I have yelled at almost everyone who has brought this up in the last week. But looking to, help me, 2028, every time we have a Democrat on, I ask them, who's the leader of your party? Despite this huge wave and this huge victory for Democrats, it is still unclear. Is that something you think will emerge in the next two years? Or is that something that is still going to be an issue for Democrats?
00:09:18
Speaker 8: I've said over the last two years that I think that the leader of our party is will emerge as our nominee in 2028. I will say that there is also a big opportunity here for Democrats because the top 10 kind of people you think of when you think of the Democrats are people who are retiring or too old across the board, former presidents, former speakers, things like that. The biggest thing out of Tuesday that excites me is that some of the biggest stars in our party are actually from tough to win places like People like Rob Sand in Iowa and Gina Hinojosa in Texas and, you know, Adam Hamilton in Kansas. These are going to be people who just emerge with this
great star power that helped reintroduce the Democratic Party to tough states for us. So I think the leader of the party will probably come out of that model. I also think that it's important to remember in our primary process for Democrats, we don't have winner-take-all primaries. You win by actually being kind of the most popular in the most places. So being able to run up a delegate count in an urban center and not win in rural communities is not helpful. I think the takeaway from Tuesday is actually that a moderating force will come over and we'll get someone probably from the center of my party in 2018.
00:10:19
Speaker 3: And a lot of new, young, telegenic candidates, a Democratic strategist who will remain nameless, told me, yeah, we're only running hot people from now on.
00:10:27
Speaker 6: Only hot people.
00:10:28
Speaker 5: All right, Leslie, perhaps last question to you here just on Texas. I know it's a state with which you're very familiar, very familiar with its politics as well. I won't ask you how surprised you were by the outcome here, but what does it mean to see the kind of reconfiguration that we saw on Tuesday night? How does Texas pick up the pieces after what happened here? How does Texas Republicans rather pick up the pieces?
00:10:47
Speaker 7: I think the Texas Republicans have got to get back to figuring out things that they can do to help people in Texas and running on those instead of being focused on a lot of these culture war, you know, clashes. The question really you have to ask yourself, is Texas a one hit wonder, right? Do we see significant change take place again in four years and six years from now?
00:11:09
Speaker 1: Or is this a trend?
00:11:10
Speaker 7: And it could very easily become a trend, but why? One of the things I feel like this election taught us more than almost anything else is that anything can happen in two years. I mean, two years ago, I was talking with people just like you guys about how, you know, the Democrats party might be dead and how, you know, just absolutely in despair Democrats were. And here they are now with, you know, on track to get 260 seats in the United States House of Representatives.
00:11:35
Speaker 9: So.
00:11:36
Speaker 7: I caution Democrats, you know, don't be overconfident. Don't don't focus on retribution. Try to get things done. Otherwise, you're going to have a 2028 election night like I did.
00:11:47
Speaker 1: And it was not fun.
00:11:49
Speaker 3: Leslie Shedd from Rising Communications, John McCarthy, Causeway Strategy Group. Always nice to see you both.
00:11:55
Speaker 5: Stay with us for more on Bloomberg this weekend, right after this.
00:12:11
Speaker 6: User agreements, terms of service.
00:12:13
Speaker 3: You seem like the kind of person who would read these.
00:12:15
Speaker 1: Do you read them?
00:12:16
Speaker 6: I occasionally will scan through them. I knew it. Who among us, be honest, has ever actually read them top to bottom?
00:12:23
Speaker 3: Never.
00:12:23
Speaker 4: All right.
00:12:25
Speaker 3: We've got new reporting from Bloomberg. Our investigative journalist, Ryan Gallagher, says you might want to start because there could be tech spying on you from inside. Ryan joins us now. He wrote about these privacy concerns in his latest article for Bloomberg. Ryan, please don't make me reach David Gurra level of nerddom. I cannot read these things. Let me ask you this. If I'd read them, would I even know what I was looking for? What is the main thing that you're talking about here?
00:12:52
Speaker 10: Yeah, thank you. The terms and conditions are really crucial to this story, but just to backtrack, what our story was about is a company called Penlink that we found out is essentially harvesting location data from hundreds of millions of phones through commonly used apps. It could be like a weather app, even gaming apps. Sometimes we found a religious prayer app that was harvesting this location data that was being repurposed by Pinlink to sell location data to law enforcement agencies. And none of this is made clear in any of the apps in the terms and conditions that they would share data with these specific companies. So you actually could read very, very closely the terms, and you still wouldn't be any clearer that this was actually ultimately happening to your data.
00:13:44
Speaker 6: Tell us a bit more about Penlink here.
00:13:46
Speaker 5: This is a company that was founded in Lincoln, Nebraska, as you point out, is in league with or buys this startup Cobwebs.
00:13:53
Speaker 6: And begins working on this technology. Who is using it?
00:13:56
Speaker 5: So they plant these, how would you characterize these? SDKs, I think you refer to them as. What is embedded in these apps and what are they using them for? Who's buying this information?
00:14:05
Speaker 8: Yeah.
00:14:06
Speaker 10: Yeah, they're called SDKs without getting too deep into the jargon. Essentially, these are trackers that are within apps that people download. And the developers of those apps include the trackers to generate revenue. So it could be through advertising. It can also be just to gather information about their customers, which they then sell on to data brokers. And there's this kind of grey marketplace around this. It's actually a very massive marketplace where People are making lots of money selling and reselling user data that's collected through these apps. And in the case of Penlink, Penlink is buying the data in huge quantities. We're talking about hundreds of millions of people, billions of location records of people all around the world. And they're selling that to people. Agencies in the United States, such as Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, departments of the Department of Defense. We find more than a dozen state and local law enforcement agencies are buying this from Penlink. And also about a dozen or so law enforcement and intelligence agencies around the world in other
countries, including Israel, the UK, El Salvador, the Netherlands, Germany. So all over the place. And the law enforcement and intelligence are interested in this data because they use it to track down their suspects and people they're interested in.
00:15:32
Speaker 3: I guess this is legal because it's in the disclosure? Because if you want to get a trace on someone's phone and you're an investigator or a police officer, that requires a warrant. Why doesn't this?
00:15:44
Speaker 10: Yeah, and this is actually absolutely central to the story. And the reason why this technology is actually very controversial at the moment There are a lot of senators in the US Congress and lawmakers in the House that are trying to regulate it because it's a grey area. If a law enforcement agency wanted to get location data on a person from a telco, let's say, for example, AT & T or Verizon, they would have to get a warrant to obtain that information. They have to go to a judge and get a judge to agree that it was necessary. There was probable cause to, you know, the person had potentially committed a crime. But with this data... there's no requirement whatsoever that they have to go to a judge. So it's a kind of a loophole that they can circumvent the normal process. And a lot of people view that as a problem because it means the agencies are not being overseen by any judicial element. And the concern is it could be abused to, say, track down a protester. There's a lot of anti-ICE sentiment in the United States at the minute, and we know that ICE is using this system So there's a lot of concerns around that specifically and people trying to close those loopholes. But as it stands, there just is no, it's a gray area and it's a massive loophole.
00:16:59
Speaker 5: I want to ask you sort of what the companies are saying about the way this technology is being used. So Penlink, Cobwebs, they were purchased by Spire Capital, this private equity firm, just a few years ago. Sean White, a partner at that firm, said to you, and it's quoted here in the piece, that it's been used here to find missing children, return them to their families, identify suspects at the scene of a crime like a bank robbery. and identify human and drug trafficking organizations operating in the United States. What more color did they give you about the precautions, so much as they are there for this not being misused, either by governments, people in law enforcement, or the private sector as well?
00:17:35
Speaker 10: Yeah, well, they didn't want to go into specific examples. We did find our own examples through the sourcing that we had, for example, that they... when they were working with their law enforcement customers in this, some of the examples and use cases that they were presenting, there was one example we found where they were using it to identify pro-Palestine activists and protesters. There was another one where they were using it to track down members of the Hell's Angels. And then
there was some more like quick, serious national security examples where they were using it to track down Iranian spies and Serbian militia groups. So there's a massive cross-section of examples that the reasons that this could be ultimately used. And I think the concern, we spoke to people in, for example, the ACLU and groups like that, who worry that when you don't have the regulation of this kind of technology, there isn't clarity on how it is ultimately being used and the constraints on it. So it can potentially be used for virtually anything. And the other interesting part of this is that the technology was originally created as a tool for Israeli counterterrorism operations. It was invented by an Israeli startup company. And it's now become, it's kind of proliferating among local law enforcement agencies, like small, very small companies. state and local law enforcement. And one example we had was they were using it to track down this guy who was stealing cigarettes from like a store. And that was in Arizona. So the other element of this is you see a kind of a mission creep where it begins as something to go after like hardcore criminals, terrorists, really bad people, and then becomes increasingly used for smaller scale crime and sort of any other number of potential uses as well.
00:19:27
Speaker 3: Ryan, we've only got about 30 seconds left, but I'm wondering what the legislative landscape looks like. It looks like Montana has banned law enforcement from purchasing location and personal data from commercial vendors without court permission. But is the national, you know, is the DOJ going to want a national moratorium on this? Because it seems like those federal agencies are the ones who are going to want this data.
00:19:47
Speaker 10: Yeah, there are a few different states. including Montana, that you mentioned that have been taking their own action on a state level. But on a federal level, there's no indication at the moment that there's any serious movement for change. So I think, yeah, it's one to watch.
00:20:03
Speaker 3: All right, Ryan Gallagher, thank you so much. We really appreciate it. This was absolutely fascinating.
00:20:07
Speaker 6: Yeah, it's an incredible piece in the magnitude.
00:20:08
Speaker 5: We cannot underscore enough here how widely used this seems to be.
00:20:14
Speaker 3: Stay with us for more on Bloomberg this weekend, right after this.
00:20:30
Speaker 5: The 2026 NBA season is finally in full swing as rumors of expansion to Las Vegas and Seattle.
00:20:36
Speaker 6: Continue to grow.
00:20:37
Speaker 5: In March, all 30 owners voted in favor of exploring expansion to the two cities with a bidding process expected to generate offers in the $ 7 to $ 10 billion range for each team.
00:20:47
Speaker 6: I know you're a big Nuggets fan.
00:20:49
Speaker 3: You know me and the sports ball. Listen, if I have to choose a team, obviously it's the Colorado.
00:20:52
Speaker 6: You were sad when the Sonics left, weren't you?
00:20:55
Speaker 3: Okay, but the expansion to Emerald City might not be a, wait for it, slam dunk just yet.
00:21:00
Speaker 6: I'm on you for that.
00:21:01
Speaker 3: You're welcome. Owners who have the final say on expansion worry that adding a Seattle team might not get them the desired financial returns. Joining us now to break this all down is our senior sports reporter, Randall Williams. Randall, why do we need more basketball teams? Do people actually want them? And is this going to happen?
00:21:17
Speaker 9: Do people actually want them? Absolutely.
00:21:19
Speaker 11: If you ask any Seattleites, they will tell you they want their beloved Supersonics back. I think it'll happen, but the skepticism is around whether when you add another team, of course, you divide up media rights, you add.
00:21:33
Speaker 9: Another 12 to 15 roster spots. And what does that do?
00:21:35
Speaker 11: What is the larger ramifications of that to the NBA? But at the same time, it's potentially six to seven billion dollars that all of these teams are going to get, which is going to be 200 to 300 million dollars for a piece. So I think that they will expand to Seattle. It's just they have to get past themselves.
00:21:56
Speaker 5: Talk a bit about the case that Samantha Holloway is making. She, of course, a billionaire, the daughter of David.
00:22:01
Speaker 6: Vonderman of TPG. I just want to take this moment to note again, Seattle has the Climate Pledge Arena. I love arena names, but that is one of the top.
00:22:11
Speaker 3: I had to read that a couple times because I thought I was misreading the sentence.
00:22:13
Speaker 6: But yes.
00:22:14
Speaker 5: But what's the case that she's making? Talk about the group she's put together here. Bill Gates' ex-wife is among those who have put some money up here.
00:22:21
Speaker 11: Yeah, she has consolidated power unlike any other group that's in the running. I mean, I've been told that there are people who have looked at competing against her and have just decided that they don't want to because she does control Climate Pledge Arena. Part of her group also is Andy Jazzy and, of course, Hollywood producer Jerry Bruckheimer. And so if you control the arena, you have Melinda French Gates and Andy Jazzy in your group. then there's going to be people who are going to look at Seattle and be like, you know what, I'd rather not spend another $ 2 billion building a competing arena. I'll just invest my money elsewhere. And so she's consolidated power in a way that nobody else has. And what that's also done is put some sort of a cap to it. Like if you are the NBA, you want this to be a very competitive process. And when she has all of this say, then I think that the NBA sort of is a league that wants the leverage and she has it right now.
00:23:13
Speaker 3: Why isn't Vegas having the same problems?
00:23:17
Speaker 11: Well, Vegas is much more competitive. I think Vegas has been the NBA's 31st city for a
long time. They have the summer league there. They've had the in-season tournament there. And there are people who just want to own the team in Las Vegas because of the luxury suite potential, because there's going to be people who are flying and vacationing in Sin City all the time. And they believe that that location can be one of the most competitive valuable franchises in the world. And so you have three different groups that are interested in Vegas and they are bidding astronomical numbers to try to win it.
00:23:51
Speaker 5: It was just a few weeks back, there was talk of Live Golf 2.0, Live 2.0, that this league, which has been so down and out after losing the pledge of support from the Saudi Arabia's investments, was going to rebrand itself and be reborn here.
00:24:06
Speaker 6: Lowe, it seems like that's not going to be the case.
00:24:08
Speaker 5: What were these backers unable to get together? They were making the case to players that they should either stay with or join the state.
00:24:15
Speaker 9: Christina, that was very clever. Thanks, buddy.
00:24:17
Speaker 6: I'll be here all week.
00:24:20
Speaker 11: The bottom line is that when the Saudis put a $ 5 billion rocket ship behind this league and they pulled it, Live Golf was in a free fall. Of course, they had BC partners that was going to put $ 300 million into this. Over time, you just saw different announcements of cancellation of events. You saw golfers pull out. And evidently, that was the beginning of the end. When you have $ 5 billion, and of course, I think slowly and gradually, they were making a return on investment, but not clearly at the pace that the Saudis and any other investors who maybe considered saving this wanted it to. And so that, I think, will be remembered for changing golf.
00:24:59
Speaker 9: But ultimately, this is the end.
00:25:01
Speaker 3: Do we know why the Saudis decided to cut their losses and just pull out their money? Was it just clear that it wasn't working or did they need to reallocate those funds elsewhere?
00:25:10
Speaker 9: I think it's more of a reallocation thing.
00:25:12
Speaker 11: Of course, you have the war in the Middle East, you have oil prices going up and all sorts of things. And of course, $ 5 billion is a lot of money for anybody, even for them as they spend on all sorts of things. When you look at the competition, them going up against the PGA Tour, was that sustainable? And how much more money would have had to have been spent in order for them to be legitimate competition. That could have been, you know, 10 to 15 years down the line before the U.S. audience even recognized live golf as the legitimate contender.
00:25:44
Speaker 6: Randall, we've done baseball. Sorry, we've not done baseball. We've done basketball. We've done golf.
00:25:47
Speaker 5: Let's talk baseball if we could. So we've just been through this World Series. My son's super excited watching the Brewers pull off this victory. Now dealing with the crushing reality that there might not be a season coming up here. We've got this deadline of December the 1st.
00:26:00
Speaker 3: Is that serious?
00:26:01
Speaker 11: You should tell him there's not going to be a season. There won't be any baseball until June or.
00:26:05
Speaker 9: July, maybe. That would be my guess.
00:26:07
Speaker 5: Where are we here as we approach this deadline, this collective bargaining deadline? Where do things stand and what's kind of driving the disagreement we have here between players and owners?
00:26:15
Speaker 11: Well, the players would like a salary floor, which means the owners have to spend a minimum amount of money and the owners want both a floor and a salary cap, which would limit player spending. It would send the players, it would cause the Dodgers problems. to have to cut a bunch of players and send them elsewhere. And so the players, the MLB Players Association and the baseball period are the last league without a salary cap. And so the players are obviously not going to want to cap their spending. And this is going to be a fight for the soul of baseball that is going to go on for many months.
00:26:45
Speaker 9: I don't anticipate the season starting on time.
00:26:47
Speaker 11: I think you might have like a prorated season, maybe 60, 70 games if they're lucky.
00:26:52
Speaker 6: Here's what I hear from my sons.
00:26:53
Speaker 2: Yeah.
00:26:53
Speaker 6: They're paid so much money. Why is this an issue?
00:26:56
Speaker 3: I was just going to say, the proposed hard salary cap is $ 258.
00:27:00
Speaker 4: 2 million.
00:27:01
Speaker 3: We can't make our peace.
00:27:02
Speaker 5: It's very hard to explain this to them in particular because, again, the money is so eye-popping.
00:27:08
Speaker 9: Yeah. I think the longer this goes on, the worse it gets for everybody.
00:27:10
Speaker 3: Well, that's what I was going to ask you is, could this come back to bite them in the long term with fans?
00:27:16
Speaker 11: Yeah, I mean, baseball is on a hot streak right now. You look at the last three World Series, all of them have been very unique.
00:27:21
Speaker 9: You had L.A. versus New York in a classic matchup. You had L.A. versus Toronto.
00:27:26
Speaker 11: And then you have the Tampa Bay versus Milwaukee in a bit of an underdog match that I think the series ended up very well.
00:27:33
Speaker 9: People watched it.
00:27:34
Speaker 11: But now with all the innovations that baseball has had with the pitch clock and, you know, the challenge system and all of those things without it, you sort of. stop the momentum that's happening. And you worry that if a salary cap or if a minimum floor gets in, what happens?
00:27:49
Speaker 9: Do the fans come back?
00:27:50
Speaker 11: I think they will eventually, but again, the momentum stops and that's not something that anyone wants.
00:27:56
Speaker 6: All right.
00:27:56
Speaker 5: Bloomberg This Week on Sports Report. Randall Williams, thank you very
much for joining us here on this Sunday.
00:28:02
Speaker 2: Stay with us for more on Bloomberg This Weekend, right after this.
00:28:18
Speaker 3: Welcome back to Bloomberg This Weekend or BT Dubs. I'm Christina Ruffini with David Gurra. David, you forgot your coffee.
00:28:24
Speaker 6: I did.
00:28:25
Speaker 9: I can.
00:28:25
Speaker 6: This is where we.
00:28:26
Speaker 3: Sip our tea and learn things from Lisa Mateo.
00:28:29
Speaker 4: Scary things.
00:28:30
Speaker 3: Where she tells us some of the stories we might have missed throughout the weekend. I got to tell you, we were both covering the election and various other things. So I'm sure we've missed a lot. So Lisa, catch us up.
00:28:38
Speaker 4: There's been a lot.
00:28:39
Speaker 2: OK, so have you been to the store like a Target or Walmart, any of the stores? Holiday music is playing, right?
00:28:43
Speaker 6: Yes, it is.
00:28:43
Speaker 4: It is that time.
00:28:45
Speaker 3: There was a pedicab driver down my street blasting Mariah Carey, and I was like, it is too early for Mariah.
00:28:51
Speaker 4: We are never too early for Mariah Carey.
00:28:53
Speaker 3: She comes out after Thanksgiving, Lisa.
00:28:55
Speaker 4: So the shopping season has begun, right?
00:28:57
Speaker 6: It's begun.
00:28:57
Speaker 4: People are out there.
00:28:58
Speaker 2: But the thing is, the list on your Christmas list could be shrinking, the number of people on it. That's because Business Insider says Americans are getting more choosy about who receives.
00:29:08
Speaker 4: A present this year.
00:29:09
Speaker 8: Good.
00:29:10
Speaker 4: There's higher prices. Everything costs a lot, right? So this is an Ipsos poll. Two-thirds say they intend to buy fewer gifts overall.
00:29:15
Speaker 2: 46% said they're getting gifts for fewer people. They're also cutting back on things like going out during the holidays, like for dinners. They're not hosting the holiday parties anymore because it's a little bit too expensive and stressful, to say the least. But just a lot of people looking to save money, and it's hard. You have to cut down. I know in my house, I have a list, and I have an amount, and once they get to that amount, Mama Mateo cuts them off.
00:29:41
Speaker 4: Like that's it.
00:29:42
Speaker 5: I just want to say preemptively, very glad to be on that list, Lisa. Thank you very much for keeping me.
00:29:48
Speaker 4: Your dollar number is very low.
00:29:49
Speaker 3: You sure are getting my good wishes and possibly a card this year. I mean, that makes sense.
00:29:54
Speaker 4: Yeah, it's tough. So you have to kind of see, pick and choose.
00:29:57
Speaker 3: Where you're going to go. My mother is a, and I know she's listening, a volume Christmas purchaser. She likes the optics of having lots of presents. And we've had to intervene the last couple of years and be like, We live in small apartments. We are grown-ups. Just a few things, Mom. Just a few things, Mom.
00:30:12
Speaker 6: That's a lot of wrapping. That's a lot of wrapping. Direct to camera. You want to say that again?
00:30:15
Speaker 3: Just a few things.
00:30:18
Speaker 6: Just a few things.
00:30:18
Speaker 1: What do you guys do?
00:30:19
Speaker 6: You know, we have it in the apartment. But quantity. The kids love quantity.
00:30:23
Speaker 3: I know.
00:30:23
Speaker 4: That's stuff to open, right?
00:30:24
Speaker 6: You know, even if the items are small, put it in a large box.
00:30:28
Speaker 9: Wrapping. Do you do the wrapping?
00:30:29
Speaker 3: Oh, fine.
00:30:30
Speaker 6: Let's go to the next story.
00:30:31
Speaker 1: Do you not rap?
00:30:33
Speaker 2: We found something of interest in the Gura household.
00:30:36
Speaker 3: None of us enjoy.
00:30:37
Speaker 1: Rapping, David Gura.
00:30:37
Speaker 6: I'm also just a complainer. As you may have learned.
00:30:41
Speaker 4: I'm going to stick with the holidays, okay?
00:30:43
Speaker 6: Yes, please.
00:30:44
Speaker 4: I'll go to this.
00:30:44
Speaker 2: Okay, people who are splurging, they're splurging on holiday.
00:30:47
Speaker 4: cruises, okay? This is from the Wall Street Journal.
00:30:49
Speaker 3: It's a very cruise-heavy weekend.
00:30:50
Speaker 10: Yes, it is.
00:30:51
Speaker 6: This is a Christmas cruise. Is there a sponsorship of the show that I don't know about? Right, did they not tell us?
00:30:54
Speaker 2: I wish.
00:30:55
Speaker 6: This ends with us on a ship.
00:30:56
Speaker 4: But this is a different kind of cruise, okay? This is one filled with rabid fans. It happens every October.
00:31:01
Speaker 2: We're talking about the annual Hallmark Christmas Cruise, okay?
00:31:05
Speaker 4: Yes, Christina, yes.
00:31:06
Speaker 10: Sail away, folks.
00:31:07
Speaker 3: Go ahead.
00:31:07
Speaker 6: It happens all the time.
00:31:09
Speaker 4: Sold out, okay?
00:31:10
Speaker 10: Sold out.
00:31:10
Speaker 2: Four night extravaganza. Super fans get cheesy holiday movies. Prices start at about $ 1, 500 a person. Run to almost $ 4, 000 if you want the suite with all your girlfriends, okay?
00:31:21
Speaker 3: I do not.
00:31:22
Speaker 4: So here's what you get, Christina.
00:31:23
Speaker 2: Book your next trip. You get the Hallmark movie actors. You get them to sign things.
00:31:26
Speaker 6: Could you name one?
00:31:28
Speaker 3: Wait, yes. Melissa Joan Hart is in them because I know her from my era and I've seen her on acts.
00:31:33
Speaker 9: She's in a lot.
00:31:34
Speaker 3: Yes, she does some.
00:31:35
Speaker 4: I was watching yesterday because it already started.
00:31:37
Speaker 3: You get activities, you get cookie decorating, you get caroling, karaoke. Unless that activity is being highly medicated, this is not going to go well.
00:31:46
Speaker 4: But people go all out.
00:31:48
Speaker 2: Like they hang stockings on their cabin doors and people fill them.
00:31:51
Speaker 4: This is an event, guys.
00:31:52
Speaker 6: It is sold out.
00:31:54
Speaker 4: You
don't understand how big this is.
00:31:55
Speaker 6: I do not. That is fascinating. Wow. My heart feels warmed just hearing about it.
00:32:03
Speaker 3: I'm sure he does. Field assignment for David. I think that would bring Lisa and I endless joy.
00:32:07
Speaker 2: I would not take that assignment. I can't even imagine David Gurra at that. But yes, so people are going all out. Anyway, I want to get to another one.
00:32:16
Speaker 4: This is colleges.
00:32:18
Speaker 9: Okay.
00:32:18
Speaker 4: It's something called melt.
00:32:21
Speaker 3: Okay.
00:32:22
Speaker 2: This is when, you know, when you go to college and you say, I'm going to apply for this one and I dedicate, I put down my deposit and.
00:32:28
Speaker 4: And then they don't show up.
00:32:29
Speaker 6: What?
00:32:29
Speaker 4: So colleges are having issues with this. No, I don't know about this.
00:32:32
Speaker 2: Yes.
00:32:32
Speaker 4: Okay, so listen. This is from the Wall Street Journal. My mother would have murdered me.
00:32:34
Speaker 3: Hi, Mom.
00:32:35
Speaker 4: I know because you put the money down for it.
00:32:36
Speaker 2: So colleges are struggling to stop this melt. So basically a lot of people, you put the money down, but then they realize, you know what, I'm having a financial challenge.
00:32:44
Speaker 4: I can't do it. I'm just going to take the loss.
00:32:46
Speaker 2: But then other people who do have the money.
00:32:48
Speaker 4: They're putting multiple deposits.
00:32:50
Speaker 2: On different schools because they want to see and haggle over the summer who gives them the best money. financial package how much I don't know the answer so how much do you put down to enroll it could be a couple hundred I think for my daughter maybe it was like 150 or so well all right I do yeah but so they kind of do that they turn so schools are trying to do different things get the kids to stay like they're doing these orientations where you know they get to meet their roommate and they get them all excited so that they won't drop out and go to another school but it's tough because some people are on that wait list you know you're on that wait list.
00:33:22
Speaker 6: For your school to plan yeah.
00:33:24
Speaker 4: So it is so it's becoming an issue there Melt. Who knew it was called that?
00:33:29
Speaker 9: All right.
00:33:29
Speaker 4: Another issue facing schools. Remember the SATs? You used to take your little pencil.
00:33:33
Speaker 9: I do, yes.
00:33:33
Speaker 3: David Gurr, what did you get on the SAT?
00:33:36
Speaker 6: Tell us more about this.
00:33:37
Speaker 3: Yes!
00:33:37
Speaker 4: David Gurr nailed that SAT. He did. So now the kids take them on computers. This is since 2024. There's no more number two pencils. They've been doing it on the computers.
00:33:46
Speaker 3: I took my GRE on a computer and I thought that was weird.
00:33:49
Speaker 4: What does it lead to, SAT? It could lead to cheating, AI. Yes, this is an issue now.
00:33:55
Speaker 2: New York Times, AI bots, new cheating schemes forcing to changes at the SAT.
00:33:59
Speaker 4: So it's called AutoSAT. So it went on sale in March.
00:34:03
Speaker 2: It's $ 500, and it's basically only payable by crypto.
00:34:08
Speaker 4: And it uses AI to.
00:34:09
Speaker 2: Project answers onto the student's computer screen during the test. And it tells them which is the correct answer. So all this technology we have and all these things coming out. And the reason they found out is because the SAT department found a posting on social media about it.
00:34:25
Speaker 6: College board is on it.
00:34:28
Speaker 4: College board is on it.
00:34:29
Speaker 3: You're taking the SAT on your own personal computer?
00:34:31
Speaker 6: I don't know the answer to that.
00:34:32
Speaker 2: No, they take it on, I think it's on the school computer.
00:34:35
Speaker 5: No, no, no.
00:34:36
Speaker 4: You do bring in your own computer.
00:34:37
Speaker 3: Yes, yes, yes. Well, that seems like a risk anyway. When I took it to Jerry, I had to take it on someone else's.
00:34:42
Speaker 4: My daughter had to bring her school iPad. So it is a school. Yeah, it's not personal.
00:34:46
Speaker 10: All right.
00:34:46
Speaker 4: Yeah.
00:34:47
Speaker 6: I'm so glad I don't have.
00:34:47
Speaker 2: To ever take a standardized test ever again.
00:34:51
Speaker 6: So worried about those number two pencils. Stupid bubbles.
00:34:55
Speaker 3: I once was off a line and all the answers were wrong.
00:34:58
Speaker 6: All right. A lot of anger here.
00:35:01
Speaker 3: Thanks for joining us on today's Bloomberg This Weekend podcast. Don't forget to tune in live for the show every Saturday and Sunday morning starting at 7 a.m.
00:35:09
Speaker 5: Eastern. We're on Bloomberg Television, radio, and the Bloomberg Business app, bringing you unique takes and in-depth interviews on news, politics, lifestyle, and culture.