alix: it is 30 minutes into the u.s. trading day. here are the top market stories. musk's twitter bid. musk offers to buy twitter and take it private. the deal values the social media company and $43 billion. shares soaring as twitter reviews the offer. and the ecb sticking to its plan to end its bond buying program in the third quarter. we are going to set the implications with kristalina georgieva. thanks beat big. first quarter results with trade records driving enormous earnings beats. i'm pretty grouped out with guy johnson -- krita gupta.

a lot of breaking on the eco-front. and of course on the twitter fund. guy: if you took the day off to get ahead of the traffic, are you a genius or did you fail massively? a lot of things happened this morning and a lot of things have been turned on their heads. you have twitter, you have the possibility of a 50 basis point hike. i am a little surprised by these numbers. you got the university of michigan sentiment index. we go to 65.7. i'm trying to work out why. current conditions, 68.1, and the expectations index -- this is where things have really changed. it has gone to 64.1. is that a typo?

the inflation numbers stay elevated but below expectations. given where gas prices are, they are starting to track down a little bit. it is basically static to where we were last time. i'm still 20 get my brain around that expectation. how do we get there? the other thing to focus on is what is happening with twitter. people decided not to take -- muska decided not to take the board seat. twitter said it will review elon musk' is $43 billion offer to take the company private. he says the company has extraordinary potential and he

apparently is the person to unlock it. first, i want to do with the mechanics of this. how does an individual pay this much money for a company? does he just write a check? how does it work? >> it is being questioned, as with all of the stories on elon musk and twitter. there are more questions than answered. $54.20 per share in cash. i have spoken to a few on the buy side that point out a lot of twitter holdings are held by passive funds, index products. when is the last time in history where an individual, not an institution or an entity, but an individual, made an all cash offer for thorpe -- $443 billion? he said this was his final offer, no back and forth. i would say that we could see

him increase that offer. a year ago, twitter shares were much higher than they are now. guy: -- kriti: the elon musk vision for twitter includes subscriptions, and not twitter blue, but the other pieces of twitter they have been trying to monetize and have not been able to do as aggressively. what happens if the offer does not go through? with the elon musk bid gone, do twitter shares collapse? ed: the consistent land -- line from elon musk across all the regulatory filings in the last 10 days, two weeks, is the potential to be a platform for free speech. free speech. guy and i were talking about this on radio the other day. elon musk is fixated on free speech. jack dorsey stepped down as twitter ceo in the last weeks of

november last year, and agarwal became ceo, elon musk tweeted a meme that had agarwal pushing -- as joe's install and -- joseph stalin. the idea was that elon musk was not a fan and there were ideological differences. there was a concern about content moderation on the platform. he would expect that to start. guy: why is the stock at 47, not 54? ed: the market being sanguine. the market not jumping the gun. i'm referring to the text of the letter that elon musk sent to twitter. he says if the offer is not accepted, this is his best and final offer. if it is not accepted, i would

need to reconsider my position as a shareholder. it seems like every possible outcome is still on the table. this is the problem with the situation. if we are going on the regulatory filing, he says this is his final offer. what role is the s.e.c. going to play in this? this is the problem with how elon musk operates. there are notes that have come out very quickly. everyone is split. others think he is lowballing the price, that he will come back with a higher offer. a lot of people think it won't because of the complication of the deal going through. guy: -- kriti: we know and is going to be following the story for the rest of the day. the european central bank and its fight against inflation --

the ecb renewed a pledged to end buying in the third quarter. pres. lagarde: price rises have become more widespread. energy costs are pushing up across many sectors. the normalization of demands as the economy reopens also continue to put upward pressures on prices. kriti: eisen schmidt, his first interview since joining morgan stanley, chief economist. give us your takeaway of what we have heard going into the meeting. we know the market was extremely hawkish. this comment from christine lagarde perhaps interpreted as more dovish than expected. is that your read on the situation? eisen: great to be here with you. let me stress that we were not surprised. essentially, the outcome was

probably about as expected. first of all, they are sticking to the script that they basically announced in march. this dates back to december. december was the start of monetary policy. some app envelope behind that until october, and then some rate hikes. they were jumping ahead. they speed the process up. you see the surprise to the upside. maybe there is an earlier men's to this. -- earlier end to this with hardly any rate increases in 2022. in march, there is a new development. the same time, they have said there is surprise to the upside.

it is 40, 30, 20. we will see what happens. there is one small difference. what the markets established from the ecb perspective is hawkish. they said instead of keeping it open, they have met asset purchases ending. now i think we are more certain than we were before that net asset purchases will end sometime in q3. guy: the market has not taken it that way. the market has taken this as super dovish. the euro is trading sub 1.08. you have seen a big bid today. yields have come down really sharply. the markets today are dovish. are you saying that ms. lagarde

has missed communicated, that this is a more hawkish thing than the market is saying it is? jens: no, i'm just saying there are two sides of the coin. pressing a july hike, i do not think that was something you could get from communication coming out of the ecb. if anything, it has been highlighting the risk to growth. that would mean pepp would run for longer. as president lagarde was highlighting in the press conference, there is a separation between the e.u. and the u.s. it is a completely different economic set up. they are more exposed than anyone else. guy: is growth the biggest risk now for the ecb, or inflation? jens: so i guess there is -- that is what makes it so difficult, right?

there are shocks that lower growth and increase inflation. it is just a question of magnitude in terms of what you think you have to act on. president lagarde made the press conference. they have to warn of a situation of high inflation, because at some point -- they have not signed the alarm bell, but what they are stressing is that there have been signs of unease by some policymakers, is the way i would say that, as to how optimization expectations apply. the name of the game is policy normalization. what i read in today's decision -- policy will not be unless growth comes in very negatively. guy: we're going to leave you there. great stuff. thanks for jumping in. really appreciate your analysis. recently with the ecb.

he may be better able to read between the lines of what is happening. please come back. we look forward to hosting you again. yes eisen smith -- jens eisensmith, economist. you have an fx story beginning to develop. the problem is that a lot of what europe's inflation problem is centered on is energy. energy is priced in dollars. that energy got more expensive. kriti: i think the interpretation turned a little dovish. look at the confidence, trade numbers. the energy crisis -- this is not necessarily the crisis if you are about inflation. the supply side really was the conversation a few months ago. they are clearly looking at the demand side now. we will see if they stick with the narrative. guy: what happens with labor? the labor story is slower to develop in europe. once we start to see second-round effects, it gets

much stickier. bankers around the world are gathering for the imf meeting. we have an exclusive interview with the managing director. ♪

tom: good morning, everyone. bloomberg television and bloomberg radio, across the world, not the usual interview at the international monetary fund. an unusual time with spring meetings in one week. we are up front with the first interview with kristalina georgieva, the international managing -- monetary fund managing director. if she wants to go longer, we will let her go longer. so much to talk about.

thank you for having us here. it has been a wonderful conversation for the morning. i want to talk about a quote which i just spoke to angela stent about, the great author of putin. this is vladimir putin in russia , obviously for the russian audience. on the one hand, we help people, saving them from nazism. on the other hand, we take the measures to ensure russia's security. you are more qualified than anyone. your heritage, your grandfather was a patriot in bulgaria. you have lived under this. you personally must be thunderstruck. and with members of the greater georgieva clan in ukraine right now, what of the last 50 days been like for you and your family? kristalina: it has been horrific. a war is a terrible thing.

for my family, what it means is a threat to their safety. more difficult to find food and more expensive to buy it. no medicine. and above all, the sense that the war would not soon and. -- end. they are in kharkiv. adding out is close to impossible. they are very close to the russian border and very far from the polish and other borders of ukraine. but in this horror of war, what impressed me the most is the strength that they demonstrate for the future of ukraine. my sister-in-law messages "we

will win this war." tom: can they do it alone? the distinction of my interviews with the right and the left is this timidity about starting a world war iii. that is not your mandate as imf. but i would like you to comment on how you perceive the shock of the western world and their tentativeness, insisting not only ukraine but all of eastern europe -- kristalina: the reality of this war is it is about ukraine and it is beyond ukraine. it is about ukraine because its existence is being threatened. but also, the post war border is being threatened, and in this sense the war threatens all of

us. if we are to allow a 21st century military takeover of a country in europe, that is detrimental to europe. it is detrimental to the world. what we have two recognize is that the war is having consequences reaching far and fast. it affects millions of people through three main channels. one, commodity prices, especially energy, but also metals. and food prices are up at a time they were pushed already up.

tom: i want to talk about the food in a minute. we see challenges. but i want you to comment on the scope and sale we see. another expert, janet yellen, who has a little bit of experience, says we are getting the magnitude right. yellen says we need to think in trillions, not billions. as you go to your spring meetings, and frankly your october meetings, we have the magnitude wrong of what this means? kristalina: janet yellen is right. trillions. we have not talked about this in 40 years. how can we transform billions into trillions? well, first by all of us working together. we cannot have fragmented deployment of scarce development

international finance resources. two, by embracing a simple principle. public money should be used for only one of two things. finance what private money would never finance. and remove barriers for private finance in emerging markets and developing economies. and we embrace entirely this principle at the imf. our concentration is when we have a problem in a country. is this going to open the space for jobs that come because vibrant investments are being made? when we look at the countries now in difficulty, we are determined to help them have

fundamentals that would make private sector led growth possible. tom: our eric martin is front and center on this, looking nation to nation up with the greatest challenges are. the nuance here -- the solution for these troubled nations, the price control to keep the price of bread down, wheat, rice -- the imf comes in and says let us help you fix it. but there needs to be a new mechanism, given the magnitude and shock. explain the process you will use to move from domestic controls over to something that is more modern, western, capitalist. kristalina: you are right. we have to get faster on this. what we are working with

countries to do is to target assistance. there is social protection that identifies who are the vulnerable. they need to be helped. what is the problem with price control? the rich benefit and the poor. but if the country does not have a social safety net, if they do not know who the vulnerable families are, they are bound to go for price controls. at this moment in time, in some circumstances we would say this is not your best. this is not your second best. but even with which prices are jumping, there is some logic. how do we think about it in the future? we have complementary

structures. one is what i would describe. target the public spending. don't throw good money in the direction of rich people. think about food in a more sustainable manner. remember, this year, food prices of climate change, because of climate shocks. in africa, you get no rain. we have to think about

sustainability and resilience in a more shock-prone rule -- world system. tom: if you are just joining us on bloomberg radio, bloomberg television, kristalina georgieva , the imf managing director. a conversation at a critical point between meetings of the next week. on climate change, i was at the paris accord. the advancements that have been made -- tell me about the derailment of the need to burn coil -- coal. how temporary is that, or has there been a seismic shift for climate change? kristalina: it is temporary. i don't see coal persisting for much longer. one of the benefits of high energy prices is they make the alternatives more viable. tom: we will see substitution? kristalina: how long does it take, i am not the expert. the direction to travel is clean energy. tom: just because of time, i want to get all these issues. we see peru, sri lanka, egypt, bigger problems. if i see these different

companies in maximum distress -- the arab spring in tunisia, almost a domino effect of unraveling. are we near not an arab spring, but a crisis or we get a domino effect of food crisis? kristalina: food crisis, we need to confront it right now. and we can. even if we front it, more countries would be in trouble. tom: the pandemic -- kristalina: because of the pandemic. in 2021, the interest rates are so low or negative. with tightening financial conditions, it is getting more

expensive. the good news is we see that, we follow it. tom: you have sri lanka coming in to dulles. kristalina: we would sit with three lanka, with egypt, with tunisia. we would discuss realistically what needs to be done. one thing that sri lanka has appointed a sri lankan economist to be an advisor. that gives me hope. tom: he has got to get reelected. what do you need from g7 to effect maximum imf tactics and issues? kristalina: we need from g7 support for deploying the full

set of instruments in the imf basket. and we need space to build it for the future. yesterday, i would propose a new instrument. we have a long-term financing instrument specifically for paid gnomic preparedness and for climate action. what we want is to think of building that resilience i talked about in a more comprehensive way. we mean banking sector. now, it is broader. we have to have the economy more vibrant. today is the way we would function tomorrow. tom: you came up with some real struggle in bulgaria. you do this thing and you are like, let's go.

what do you say to the imf supporting mr. pruden, direct, indirect? how can the imf address those nations who are not on the board, helping ukraine? kristalina: think of the interest of your people. over the last decade of integrated global economy, we have tripled the size of global gdp. tripled. who benefited the most? developing economies. their size increased 4.5 times. poor people are fewer. the middle class has expanded. an integrated economy in which we can work together benefits you. tom: what a wonderful start to the spring meetings. the imf managing director joining bloomberg on radio and

television. back to you. let's get a check on the markets. about an hour into the trading session, read on the screen, a risk off day. it is natural to see some of that cash taken off the table, but also thinking about what is happening in the s&p 500, having to do with what is going on in the bond markets. a lot of pain concentrated in the nasdaq, reversing the gain of yesterday. a lot of that comes down to the bond market. the 10-year yield up a whopping eight basis points. it is all about the margin of the move, not just yields higher, tech lower, but when you see these spikes as much as eight basis points. that is when you get bigger moves to the downside. we have to address what is going

on with the euro and that was lower, the two year yield higher, and in europe, we talked about markets interpreting christine lagarde has having a dovish tilt, but in the u.s., it is all about the fed, and it talks about a more aggressive approach. we had an interview with a fed official talking about 50 basis points on the table. he's second in command on the committee that makes those decisions, and you see a little bit of a spike in the two year yield. we should talk about what is happening on a micro basis. banks, twitter big movers when you talk about the individual stories. bank earnings have everything to do with the consumer and we've heard a mixed picture. trading looks great, a lot of preparation for what might be a recession in the coming years. you see that commentary trickle out slowly. trading revenue is pushing these enormous gains. and twitter, that bid from elon

musk, potentially taking over twitter, the offer under review, fueling twitter shares, up 2.2%, but premarket this morning up as much as 15%. the story when it comes to the u.s. corporate space will be those earnings. guy: why is twitter trending below the offer price? it is something we will have to discuss. kriti, it is macro versus micro, the earnings story front and center as after -- as ever, effectively kicked off by the bank earnings yesterday, we get citibank, wells, goldman sachs. will -- what will we get that will be useful in terms of telling us what is next? lori calvasina joins us. the banks are giving us information about what is happening with the u.s. economy, the global economy and their businesses. what is the take away from what we have got this far from the rest of the earnings season?

lori: it is an interesting day as usual. i think the banks always kick things off. we spend a lot of time focusing on the banks and so far what we are hearing about the health of the u.s. consumer from the banks is something i'm also hearing from consumer companies so far, which is the sort of rumors of the death of the consumers seem to be exaggerated, and that is not to say there are not real risks that we we need to take seriously, but one client after another is asking me why the market is up versus march, and i keep telling people it is because the market is not convinced a recession is coming. the risks are real and the logic makes sense but we are not seeing evidence of a breakdown yet and the market is correct in -- correct at the levels it is at now. kriti: curious about what these companies will do with the enormous amount of cash. not just banks, but you have tech and other sectors whose

stocks have been other -- have been under pressure the last two years but also have a lot of cash on their balance sheets. talk about how they will deploy that in an inflationary environment. lori: that is a good question and we have been using the bloomberg transcript analyzer tool to see what companies have been talking about in regard to cash deployment in terms of things like buyback, dividends, m&a, etc. coming into this season, discussion about buybacks is up, dividends is up. we are seeing that also for capex. i think capex, expanding capacity, is one way companies are trying to battle inflation. at the same time, we see fewer mentions of m&a, which is something investors always ask about. we are not seeing a big upswing in commons about debt paydown but i would not worry about that because we saw a lot of conversation about that in 2021,

which is telling me that companies knew the fed was starting to move and were getting ready for by cleaning up thlance sheets. guy: what are companies trying to communicate by focusing on dividends and buybacks? what are they trying to tell investors about the type of company they are? what do you think the message is ? >> they are trying to emphasize they are continuing to reward shareholders for investing in their companies. on the dividend side, we know that's something a lot of retail investors, the high net worth crowd as opposed to the reddit crowd, but that something retail investors do look to u.s. equities for. guy: is that an inflationary hedge? are they basically trying to communicate to investors that they are an inflation hedge? lori: i think so and we see that born out over time if you look at positioning in u.s. equities relative to cash in bonds, it

tends to track cpi over time, so that is borne out in investor behavior. companies are trying to say that we are managing these pressures and rewarding shareholders at the same time, so it is trying to send a message of confidence. kriti: speaking of a message of confidence, i'm curious about the recession risk. we talk a lot about this, and perhaps the u.s., europe more so, but the u.s. could see a recession down the road. but it doesn't seal like a lot of companies are that concerned about it from what i understand -- does not seem like a lot of companies are that concerned about it from what i understand. does that mean they will pass costs down to the consumer? talk about the margin picture. lori: if we start with margins, we know they have been talking about margin pressures for the past year and a half, but the margins are far outperforming the common carry we see, because we are seeing companies emphasizing, hey, we have these pressures but are able to manage

them. pricing is one way they are managing through, so we have seen a surge in commentary about pricing in recent call transcripts, and what we are noticing is that analysts are pushing companies to say is the pricing strategy working? are you getting pushback? for the most part, companies say they are still able to pass those prices through. i think the demand discussion is of the utmost importance. we are generally seen characterizations of demand as strong, not quite as strong as if you quarters ago, but still strong -- as a few quarters ago, but still strong. the appetite to spend among corporate and consumers is still robust. it is hard for investors to say there's evidence of recession out there. it smells like something different if you look at with the companies are talking about. guy: given what you are saying about the recession, given what you are saying about what companies are saying, do you

think the fed will be comfortable with that? there's the fear that the fed is looking at this and saying we are not getting the reaction from the corporate sector and markets we need to drag inflation down to levels we are comfortable with, say sub 3%. do you think the fed will look at what's happening with corporate america in terms of wages and margins and say we need to go harder here? lori: i will leave the sort of fed calls to my esteemed economist, but i was talking to him about this issue recently and one thing he told me was as we get later in the year, if some data looks a little bit squishy, and that is his quote, he said i think the fed will acknowledge that. and i will say we did in investors survey recently about their faith in the fed and it is low now. a big contingent of people who think they will tightening go too far and impinge on growth and another contingent who thinks they will let inflation

go out of control. i have a little more faith in the fed than either camp and we will continue to look at the whole picture. kriti: lori calvasina, thank you for your time and insight. one of the top movers of the day. twitter shares higher as elon musk makes an unsolicited bid for the company. let's bring in ygal arounian, wedbush securities manager. thank you for joining us. looking at twitter shares

$54. we are both puzzled. why is the stock so low? ygal: well, the stock is up materially from before when elon musk came into it. there's uncertainty whether -- or not. it is not a given. it does not mean the board will accept that price per share. that is why we feel that way now. guy: let's talk about the question that underlies this. the offer is a take it or leave it. maybe the stock is trading lower because maybe, ultimately, the market believes the board says we will leave it, and then muska walks away -- then musk walks away, everything changes and the stock goes down. i wonder whether that's a scenario that's being priced in. do you believe this is a take it or leave it issue? ygal: there's a couple things. on the ticket or leave it point, maybe, maybe not. the could be a negotiating tactic. elon musk has been known to change his mind. just because he put it out there

that this is a take it or leave it offer doesn't mean that that's the case necessarily. he is coming out this from the point of view of twitter needs to be better about speech, plays an important role in society and his view that twitter and its board has not done that justice, so if that's really what he's after here, giving a higher offer and thinking about valuations at higher prices, that is not what it should be about, right? it is about what he believes the role it should play in society is. so i don't think that that necessarily means it is a take it or leave it offer. there's probably some volatility. it puts more pressure on twitter, the board and ceo, to put up the kind of results that will make investors confident in

the story. that is user growth, revenue growth being on track to meet targets, so that is a higher hurdle, especially with where the stock is today. kriti: one of the interesting narratives of the last couple years when it comes to twitter is what might happen when president trump left office? president trump was active on the platform. i'm curious what happens to twitter shares if for some reason elon musk, as you pointed out, could potentially leave the offer, but he is perhaps equally or even more active than president trump on twitter. does that eat into the brand value of twitter? ygal: you are asking, if elon musk leaves the platform and stops using twitter, does it damage the platform himself -- itself? kriti: four feet -- or if he simply chooses not to go through

with the deal, any of those scenarios. ygal: i think what elon brings to the table for twitter, which makes sense in the strategy, is it is more valuable in a private environment than in the public one. what public market investors will value in twitter are different than what elon musk is valuing in twitter. for investors, it is about user growth, where twitter fits in the digital advertising/social media landscape. it is about the numbers. that is it for public market investors. if you leaves, are not sure what the value would be -- value would have been for the public market investors side. in terms of if he backs away,

stop using the twitter platform, i think it is bigger than anyone user -- than any one user. he's a big personality but there more to it than that. guy: you wonder what the future of president trump on twitter would be assuming a musk takeover. let's talk about twitter versus tesla. this is a big check potentially. is this a zero-sum game? is it ultimately if you wants twitter -- if he wants twitter, he has to sell some tesla? ygal: maybe. he would likely bring in private equity and some other investors. that is most likely scenario. he will be the largest -- then the 9% stake he has now.

guy: appreciate it. fascinating day. we have been building up to this over the last few weeks. ygal arounian of wedbush securities, thank you. next, back to the earnings season. wells fargo's analyst call underway. charlie is talking about wage pressures coming down a little, maybe not being as great as they were in the fourth quarter. we will bring you the highlights from the results we have seen today and what we are getting on these calls coming up next. this is bloomberg. ♪

kriti: this is bloomberg markets. coming up, a guest joining bloomberg markets: the close -- riddick: -- >> a huge day for wall street

earnings. goldman sachs, morgan stanley, citigroup and wells fargo out with results. trading was better than expected in the quarter. the analyst call is underway and citi's will star in 10 minutes. one of the key takeaways will be these enormous streaks of trading revenue. a lot of this is coming off elevated volatility we have seen, some assume. looking at a fixed handle of 21, close to our normal. flex we have talked about this. volatility could have been stifling but there are some businesses that blew through the roof. open sax posted a beat and a significant rise in extinct -- goldman sachs posted a beat and a significant rise. morgan stanley fell in line with last year, more than $2.9

billion for morgan stanley in trading revenues, higher and higher than the historic for what we have seen before with morgan stanley. for citigroup, even with a slight decline, they beat expectations. equities, morgan stanley taking the lead again, with almost 3.2 billion dollars of equity trading revenue in a tough environment. guy: these banks used to make a lot of money in russia. they will not make that money going forward. what we have learned about the exit going forward? sonali: we are learning how the losses are being contained. citigroup was the most exposed and their exposure has dropped $2 billion to about $7.8 billion. they still have loans, counterparty exposure in derivatives, but it is much more contained and we know that it is about $1 billion for the russia

closure alone when it comes to citigroup's positioning. another $900 million when it pertains to other risks surrounding the uncertainties of the ukrainian invasion. kriti: there's a massive debate -- are we in for a recession? does that on the horizon or are we simply in a slowing growth environment? where to the banks stand on that? jamie dimon has been vocal, saying the consumer and the economy is fine. what are the rest of the banks say? sonali: not only is david -- is jamie dimon saying that but also david solomon with his risk list, one of them accelerating deglobalization, and he said that plus inflation impact, the risk of rising rates, could be meaningful for markets. with that said, the backlog for

morgan stanley and others is robust, stable, and -- simply prolonging activity in equities and the m&a market, and you saw that little bit today from that elon musk news. guy: let's talk about the outlook for advisory. musk is represented by morgan stanley, goldman representing twitter. on the earnings calls, the talk of m&a has gone down dramatically. sonali: as equity volatility stabilizes a little bit and valuations are suppressed, that gives some opportunity for private equity to start showing up. the other thing here is that you see billionaire led deals in elon musk. elon musk, by the way, has counted morgan stanley as a

banker before. they have hired them to do many jumbo loans for his mortgages here. so you see the banks catering to wealthy individuals and corporate clients, finding chances for big deals in between. kriti: you mentioned fundraising in particular. we talked about the advisory business. talk about the ecm business. sonali: that activity was high last year and has begun to fall off this year. this is something more investors say they are prolonging equity raising activity, but with m&a, i have to say goldman sachs still got in more than $1 billion worth of advisory fees alone and morgan stanley saw their fees more than double in the business, so underwriting will have to come back here. guy: she will keep track of these calls and be back to update us on what we are learning. shelley bassett, thank you very much indeed. this is bloomberg.

♪

guy: coming up on the end of the shortened week for europe. the stoxx 600 up .7% led by travel stocks, out with positive guidance. the story i think is in fixed income and foreign-exchange. the euro being crushed. the initial statement i saw from the ecb looked moderately hawkish. clearly the market did not take it that way. christine lagarde forward -- christine lagarde came out and poured more cold water today. peter praet joins us next, former chief ecb economist, for his take. this is bloomberg. ♪

at xfinity, we live and work in the same neighborhood as you. we're always working to keep you connected to what you love. and now, we're working to bring you the next generation of wifi. it's ultra-fast. faster than a gig. supersonic wifi. only from xfinity. it can power hundreds of devices with three times the bandwidth. so your growing wifi needs will be met. supersonic wifi only from us... xfinity.

guy: wrapping up a short week. we have an interesting thursday to factor in. stocks are higher broadly.

the action in fixed income and foreign-exchange, the euro trading 1.07 against the dollar. the countdown to the closed starts now. >> the countdown is on in europe. this is bloomberg markets: european close with guy johnson and alix steel. guy: counting you down to the close, this is the price action. stocks are a bid in europe. doesn't feel like a big conviction story in equities. the stories and foreign-exchange and fixed income. let's talk about the foreign-exchange side of things. 1.0777 is where the euro-dollar is now, seeing it