This is "taking stock" on bloomberg.
I am pimm fox.
For a look at headlines, mark crumpton.
Shares of hsbc dropped 4.5% after missing earnings estimate and the ceo said growth in emerging markets is slowing, subdued in western economies.
Service industries group in july at the fastest pace in five months according to the institute for supply management nonmanufacturing index.
The reports indicate the u.s. economy could improve in the second half.
History is made in london has two volunteers took the first public byte of a test to hamburger.
The testers said it was lacking in flavor, but it felt like a conventional hamburger.
It was founded by sir j brennan, who hopes the idea can fight hunger.
We will talk about the potential for a terrorist attack at 7:00 p.m. eastern tonight on boomer tv, "bottom -- bloomberg tv, "bottom line." thank you.
On friday, time warner cable blackout cbs programming from several markets including new york city, los angeles and dallas.
Time warner cable said they made a proposal to offer cbs on an a® la carte basis.
The time warner cable explained his company's position.
We are about connecting customers with the entertainment that they love.
We are not when you give up.
We cannot give up.
With more on what happens next, i want to bring in and rbc capital markets analyst and alex sherman.
This is a story that keeps on giving.
What is the story now?
Time warner cable has made an offer to cbs to do what?
One offer is what you talked about -- the idea that time warner cable is willing to carry cbs on an a® la carte basis, meaning customers that want cbs can pay for cbs, and those that do not do not have to.
That is a concept that has been thrown around for years among people who have an idyllic view of what cable could be -- paying only for the channels you want.
I putting this idea out there publicly, time warner is making a statement that providers are ok with the concept but the networks might not be.
The other option is we will go back to the terms we originally agreed to last week, he for cbs decided they did not want to deal -- before cbs decided they did not want to deal with them anymore.
They did not give the details, but basically they agreed to a price and limited mobile rights, so time warner does not have access to all cbs governing in and out of the house.
David, would you make of all of this question will this continue every nfl season -- this?
Willis continue until the nfl season?
You have the nfl preseason, the pga open, and my and -- mygut -- my gut and friends tell me the nfl season is probably the catalyst to bring this to an end.
I think it has very little to do with a particular agreement.
If you look at the research we have written, there is a clear argument that cbs has for demand in something that approaches two dollars a subscriber over time.
If you look at what they invest in programming, what their ratings are against top 10 cable that works which probably get a comparable subscriber fee, it would seem logical.
Two dollars almost seems like a bargain.
They are investing a times the amount in programming and have five times the audience, so why are we in this place?
The distribution industry is facing an never ending increase in program costs, and they are trying to draw a line in the sand in this one.
Alternately, they know they will lose, but they feel they have to push back at some point to win the battle.
Is cbs a good stock to buy?
It is our top pick.
Cbs is the closest thing to a pure play in content in big cap media, and we are bullish in content.
The reality is the monetization of content -- there is a massive opportunity here.
And can put that content on mobile, as you described, it could be a fight of putting programming on mobile applications.
In order for these companies to stay relevant they need access to programming in and out of the house.
Content companies say we will give you that, but you need to pay for it, which is part of the two dollars cbs is asking for.
Some would argue you should invest in content and programming.
Nbc universal, right?
Part of the increase is the utility -- they are asking for a material price increase, but let's talk about how different the world is in terms of three or five years ago in terms of the way we consume content.
Video-on-demand, standard, pc-based viewership, tablet viewership -- this is all increased utility that we now use and arguably we are willing to pay for it.
I do not know how long that lasts.
For this cycle, we are using those things more and it makes sense we would have to pay more.
That could be the perspective from the walt disney company because they have the espn business.
Nobody is further ahead than disney with the watch espn and watch abc apps.
They are available all the time.
Is this something that les moonves of cbs is looking at, saying i want to do the same thing?
They are investing in a small company that focuses on being able to geo- target so that they can effectively monetize streaming content.
It is definitely what they are thinking about.
The consumer benefits, but you have to pay more for that utility.
Also, part of the time warner cable offer -- they said we will go back to these mobile rights, and it actually benefits time warner and cbs to get the mobile rights out there because the more cbs is watched on mobile devices the more they can monetize the content as nielsen gets more accurate ratings.
Eventually, cbs would earn more money by having the content out there on as many platforms as they can.
Alex sherman, david bank, thank you.
The california general obligation funds have been raised to an a by fitch with the outlook, stable.
Samsung and apple -- legitimate import battle, or tit for tat?
We have details next.
This text has been automatically generated. It may not be 100% accurate.