2017 has extraordinary brought it into eight very exclusive club. that is the fifth company worth and access of $500 billion, alongside apple, google's parent alphabet, microsoft and face book. it also means it has beaten alibaba to the milestone. news, 24 hours a day, powered by more than 2700 journalists in more than 120 countries, this is bloomberg. let's take a look at the markets closed, aboutust 4/10 of a percentage down. japan, we are seeing gains all across the region. ♪ emily: this is "bloomberg technology." coming up, the doj is hitting at&t hard. details on the lawsuit that could block at&t's $85 billion takeover of time warner. uber speeds up its driverless push, striking a deal with volvo. details ahead. plus, more dealmaking in the chip industry. what marvell's $6 billion acquisition of this company means in its continuing consolidation. let's start with the lead. our developing story the u.s. , justice department is suing to block at&t's $85.4 billion takeover of time warner. this is a major blow to the carrier to create a media and telecommunications empire. at&t's chief counsel said he is confident the court will reject the government to go claims and the company is holding a press conference with the ceo is expected to speak. we will bring you the headlines, as they come in, but first, our bloomberg news reporter ed hammond just listened in on the doj call and joins us. also with us, our editor at large cory johnson and bob , o'donnell with technalysis research president. ed, you have been listening in on the call. what is the justice department's rationale here? ed: they have come out swinging for this deal. they said it is legal, harmful to consumers. the rationale is yes, it is a vertical merger which traditionally would see those deals flight through, but they are saying that it just concentrate too much power in the hands of one company and it , it gives at&t too much clout to determine which competitors get which content. prioritizing its own stuff, through time warner. so it is a really interesting, and almost unheard of kind of case for the department of justice to come out against, what looks like a very pure vertical merger. emily: cory, in the weeks leading up to the head of the justice department taking over it seemed like everything was , moving forward and suddenly things have changed which begs the question is this politically motivated? does this have to do with the president's dislike of cnn? cory: there has been some reporting about this, jesse eisenberg at pro-public or one of them saying that this did come from the staff. that the suggestion was really about market concentration. now the lawsuit will try to , bring up whatever and including going into what the president has said both on twitter and perhaps in private to look at how that may have influenced the deal. and to kind of throw some money at this thing. but this is a pretty stuff that is pretty tough suit. the suggested that the concentration of power is interesting to see from this current fcc. emily: bob, what is your read here? bob: if this is in fact considered a consolidation of power, what do we think about the big tech companies? google, facebook, arguably there is a lot more power and influence in those companies, so if i am one of them, all of a sudden i am more nervous because the regulatory environment for just and the legal environment suggests, they could be going after large companies with influence. emily: ed, the you get the sense that could have a broader ripple effect or this is very specific to this particular deal? ed: it will have a broader ripple effect. absolutely, there is no way that this does not have at least in the immediate term, some chilling effect on dictated m&a's. this is a case of what we constitute power to be. -- on big-ticket m&a's. you have the traditional of power only in concentrated markets. this is a question of absolute power. if the doj goes through with it, takes this to court and succeeds in their case you will see lots , of people who would have done mergers similar to this in terms of integrating companies, they have to think twice. i think you're going to see people really pulled back from a some of the bigger, potentially more contentious deals. and then you throw in the unpredictability of trump. whether or not it was politically influenced, we do not know yet, obviously at&t thinks that it was -- trump is very vocal that he does not like the deal and does not like cnn. and guess what, cnn is one of the main assets that the department of justice apparently asked at&t to divest from. emily: the ceo of at&t has already said spinning off cnn is not an option, but there is an opportunity to negotiate. that they want cnn. could that be part of the negotiation? cory: it looks like the negotiation ended today or a few days ago probably, when the news of this came out. the suggestion that cnn might get spun off best they might have looked at that before today but now they are looking to go to court. we do not know really what was offered or not offered before, or just the behavioral changes that at&t might have promised as we have seen in earlier mergers. but it is important also to understand how the and and works within all of the cable empires at time warner. time warner is able to insist that if a cable carrier somewhere once a carry cnn, there are told that they can have it if they take at&t, cbs and all of our other offerings. time warner is able to sell many cable networks by having the crown jewel of cnn. it is not just a stand-alone business there. which is where they have cnn on all these other carriers and it is great source of revenue for time warner. and as a result, you have time warner really recognizing the need to keep that as part of their business and at&t wanting to keep it as part of the time warner business to read emily: we are getting headlines out of the justice department. an official saying the lawsuit has nothing to do with president trump, influenced by president trump or anyone else in the white house. cory: that does not mean it will not come up in the trial. emily: right. ed: of course, they are going to say that. bob: it is absolutely the party line. we do have to think about -- we have to think about how people think about and consume media and content these days. >> the party line? at&t? [laughter] bob: we have to think about how people think about and consume media. all of that is changing, therefore the rules are changing. i think that is what we have to think about, the potential implications of what is going on here. emily: an at&t-time warner merger would pose a level of competitive harm not seen in decades. ok, ed, this is what a justice department official as saying, what is next? how does this process play out from here? ed: it is not sound like sentiment language. they will obviously go to court does it? they will obviously go to court on this one. it seems very unlikely they will find some resolution before and. -- before hand. they hadrally believes a winnable case. they believe there was political interference. they actually set immediately best they actually set immediately, when the justice department came out this afternoon, at&t put out a very aggressive statement saying the lawsuit is a radical departure from decades of antitrust precedent. so they feel that this is the doj essentially overreaching, and they honestly will go to court and hope to win the case. i think -- what we touched upon a moment ago this will have a , chilling effect on deals in the near term. emily: cory, in when at&t 2011 dropped its proposed bid for t-mobile, we covered that. could we see something similar happening? cory: companies want to keep getting bigger, eliminate competition, consumers have less choice. ultimately we are always going , to see deals like this, but what we have seen here is the world is very clear to this companies whatever guidance they , are getting about what the doj might accept, or what the fcc might except it seems like the , companies are not getting a clear view of these things in advance. i'm sure at&t is furious what is going on with the department of justice and the bankers that told him this deal could go through. emily: what do you expect the consequences to be if the deal does not go through, ed? ed: i like cory's point, blame the bankers. cory: the bankers don't think so. [laughter] ed: look across at what is happening to fox. a number of companies trying to buy assets from fox. there is still a lot of potential -- it's entirely possible you could see other suitors try to buy either or. theye deal falls apart, will come and try to buy it or part of time warner. if they go to court and this thing gets blocked, it's really does not bode well for people attempting these big contentious mergers. emily: all right, we will be following this of course, throughout the show. we will be listening to the live webcast at the start of the bottom of the hour in new york where at&t's ceo randall stephenson is expected to speak. and hammond, our reporter in new york, cory johnson, editor at large and bob o'donnell, sticking with me from tech analysis research. coming up, consolidation in the chip industry continues. marvell's $6 billion plan. the latest on what qualcomm investors want to see from broadcom. you can check us out on bloomberg tech tv. this is bloomberg. ♪ we are live streaming on twitter. weekdays at 5 p.m. in new york, 2 p.m. in san francisco. ♪ emily: a big takeover in the chipmaking business. marvell technology has agreed to buy cavium for $6 billion in cash and stock. marvell specializes in chips that control hard disk drives, a market no longer growing. cavium makes network processors. speaking of deals in chipmaking qualcomm investors say they , could be open to weigh broadcom deal, but for a higher price. you may remember that qualcomm had rejected broad comes when hundred five alien dollar acquisition offer last week. anand who focuses on the semi conductor industry joins me along with bob o'donnell. our guest host of the hour, president of tech analysis research. anon, first of all what do you , make of qualcomm's response? anand: it is logical to try to extract more dollars out of the deal but if you step back and look at the big picture, we think the combination makes sense. this places adjacent parts of the cell phone together and the ceo of broadcom might be able to settle disputes with apple which has been the primary thorn in qualcomm's side. that adds a tremendous amount of value to qualcomm and broadcom, if it were to be acquired. and also to broadcom, if it were to be acquired. emily: what about the price on offer? anand: as so far as is it possible that the ceo offers five dollars more or $10 more to get the deal done, yes. from a deal debt perspective, he is actually pretty well leveraged to try to make this deal happen. at the end of the day, the $80 a share that people are angling for is also a psychological high price. over the last five years. the ceo has historically not cowed to those higher price demands, usually. it might be a little bit of a transaction here, as to whether the deal gets done at that price. emily: there has been a ton of consolidation in the chip industry. take a look at the chart in the bloomberg. it shows you just how chip sales have been rising at its fastest pace since 2010 globally, yet more consolidation, bob, than ever. fewer players. mean, the issue is it is very hard to compete out there if you are a small or specialized layer. you are seeing a conglomeration of different technologies team put together, think about what intel did. they did a change from cpu use another are competing in the mountains and other things. the companies recognize they have to have a combination of different components because whether it is automotive, computer, mobile phone -- all of these areas require multiple types of technology. and that is going to be important. one thing also -- two things i want her out there on the broadcom deal. there is obviously concerned from a monopolistic perspective about wi-fi and bluetooth, and you have to figure out what they are going to do, there is too much control consolidated there. the other thing is culturally, broadcom and qualcomm are different types of companies. there is a concern with a have an impact in terms of talent loss and things like that if this deal goes through because there has been discussion about that. anand: that is a great point. unlike other general consolidations, even large-scale consolidations, the difference is the ceo, who is in charge. emily: someone said to me he gets what he wants generally. [laughter] anand: he has a very clear idea of what he wants and a clear idea of what he wants to keep. and more importantly, what he wants to divest. wi-fi business does not overlap, and we think it is a roughly $7 billion business. the other part of it is that he this idea from far left field, that if you were to somehow put the licensing portion of the business for qualcomm, could that be sold off? hostcould clear a hole of problems for my regulatory perspective. emily: how does the cavium-marvell deal fit in? bob: it seems pretty straightforward. i think there is a nice combination of technology. two relatively smaller players coming together. what is interesting about that -- there is this general idea of edge computing. the idea of cloud computing coming down to the edge. cavium is now talking about arm servers. this combination gives them the capability to create very interesting products, components for products. i think that could be a big deal. anand: interestingly enough, the main competitor to both marvell and cavium is broadcom. emily: broadcom will be everybody's competitor given how many companies -- what are the consequences of that? anand: you have to be, in semis, go big or go home. you cannot afford to be a small player and think you can go anywhere. as bob said government you have to have manufacturing capacity, product and distribution. you cannot do that if you are a small company. bob: the only thing i thought of when i was thinking about this is what samsung said we want qualcomm? that is what i will throw from left field. because samsung does raw components -- they do screens, memory and they could do radios. you know? certainly, they have the menu, i am not saying anything like that could happen but when , you think about ways this world could go, that would not be the strangest deal ever done. emily: interesting thought. bob o'donnell, our analyst, you are sticking with us, and anand, great to have you here in san francisco today. thank you for stopping by. still ahead, alibaba goes shopping, picking up a slice of china's top hyper market chain. we will look at a deal worth nearly $3 billion. and a feature i want to bring to your attention our interactive , tv function, you can find it on tv on bloomberg. you can watch us live. if you missed the interview, you can go back to it, send our producers a message and play along with the charts you see on the air. this is for bloomberg subscribers only. check it on tv . this is bloomberg. ♪ emily: big news for tencent. they have become the first chinese company to be valued at more than $500 billion. three months after they topped $400 billion for the first time ever. tencent joins apple, microsoft, amazon and facebook for the only companies valued at more than $500 billion. another giant on the news, alibaba making another bet on brick-and-mortar retail. chen's largest e-commerce company, has agreed to take a $2.9 billion stake on the country's biggest operator of walmart style hypermarkets, 36% of sun art retail. joining us now is bloomberg tech's's selina wang and bob o'donnell. what is the motivation and how does it fit into alibaba's overall bet on offline? selina: this gives alibaba access to about 400 of these hypermarkets along china. this is just a string of deals they have done in off-line. they are now in grocery and department stores and electronic stores, and this helps them access consumers in lower, smaller cities that were not familiar with regular shopping on alibaba before. amount of data, e-commerce, -- the big long-term strategy is they want to use their colossal amount of data, e-commerce, combined it with the virtual world with the offline world to make shopping better. make the consumer experience better as well as streamline the inventory supply management. this also gives alibaba a lead with what walmart has been doing with jd in china. they have been trying to turn around the business there, and now alibaba also has a significant stake in this hypermarket world. emily: taking a look at the bloomberg, another chart. g #4955, you can see just how revenue growth at sun art is slowing down. so the hope is that this would reverse that trend. bob, any coincidence, you think about them announcing it during the big week for u.s. retailers and amazon especially? bob: obviously not, but we have to be very careful about comparing what happens in china and in the u.s. we talked about this before. you are certain things that will fly in china that will not fly in the u.s. retail is being rethought, rebuilt all over the world and people are experimenting. i think it is fair to say this is probably more experiment that anything else because sales have been declining. the are some challenges there, and i think that selina's point about getting to those lower tier cities is incredibly important because we tend to focus on big cities, but the real mass growth opportunity is going to be in those lower tier cities. and if in fact they have strong presence in those places, that is a great way to step them up into this whole new vision of retail. emily: talk to us, selina, about the experiences they are try to create in the physical stores that they do have as an enticement to get shoppers to get out and go shopping. selina: part of it is an experiment. they have these huge supermarkets where it is a cash less experience, you check-in and checkout with their mobile payments, combined with their alipay mobile app as well. it is a very expensive experiment, they have invested billions and billions. they see it as more of an experiment, but not a direct comparison with what amazon is try to do with whole foods. emily: exactly. , not unheardkohl's of for something like this to happen in the united days. selina: at the same time, the off-line experience in china is woefully worse than it is in the u.s. in china, these off-line stores often have terrible inventory, management. there is a lot further that alibaba can take these stores than what amazon can potentially do with whole foods. emily: where do you see this going, bob? bob: i think we are going to see companies figure out a mechanism to share the experience even more. i'm not sure how that is going to go but my gut feeling is that people will pull it back a little bit from the buying everything online, and there is a recognition that there is something about retail that makes sense, especially for certain kinds of items. it is figuring out that balance. what is that right balance between off-line and online? what are the ways i can get people to think about different kinds of product categories? one big thing is what is the range of products? in china, everything is in the same store, right? we have some about here in the u.s., but not as much. so i think there will be some experimentation around different types of merchandise as well. emily: we will talk about that more later in the show. the fact that a smaller percentage of people are expected to turn out online for black friday, why is that? selina wang, thank you so much. bob is sticking with me. bob o'donnell, sticking with me. coming up, uber goes into high gear with autonomous driving. we will have more details on their order for more cars from volvo. this is bloomberg. ♪ ♪ it is 1:30 p.m. here in hong kong, i am debra mao with the first world news. janet yellen says she will lead the fed once the successor is sworn in. per term does not end until generate, 2024. 1-14ice chair from 20 to -- 2010 to 2014, she has been there and even was once the council of advisors in george session bill clinton's council of economic advisers. the justice department is going to federal court to block the $85 billion deal between time warner and at&t. any agreement that requires the cell of cnn is a nonstarter. disagreements, we have offered concrete and substantial solutions and as he had to court, we continue to offer solutions that will allow this transaction to close. >> a luxury apartment in hong kong is asia's most expensive. by area. and unidentified buyer paid 148 million u.s. dollars for two adjacent flats. the record, 17,000 u.s. dollars per square foot, was that by this apartment. the hong kong property market may be set for a -- david: a fun day, deborah. the a getting ready to little bit short of the all-time high. china closing at 2%, the best easily. if you go back to the summer of 2016, 1 .8% on the csi 500, that is the last time it was this high. it is not just china, have a look at taiwan, hong kong, give or take, a little bit short of 30,000. we have a few. weeks spots though, across southeast asia. indonesia,, thailand, a little bit under pressure right now, but it is much straightforward. let us have a look under the hood, on the chinese wavelength, here is that bottom back in 2013, the big party, you can see 50% retreated in the 35 13. having a look at the key movers here within the actual index, with about 90 minutes left in trade. a lot of it is coming in brokerages, financials. this usually happens in a get an update that just today. will attract this for you a bit later on. stay with us. ♪ emily: this is the "bloomberg technology." i am emily chang. our top story this the u.s. hour, justice department is suing to block at&t's $85.4 billion takeover of time warner. this deal is a major blow to the carriers bid to create a media and telecom empire. it was only two weeks ago the at&t's ceo randall stephenson said the company was preparing for litigation since they announced that the deal. >> am i surprised there are statements that there might be litigation, yes, i'm surprised. am i concerned? it might not surprise you since the day we have announced this, we have been prepared to litigate this deal. we have been working very diligently on a litigation strategy and plan. so we are prepared. emily: the company is set to hold a press conference momentarily where randall stephenson will be providing an overview of developments. we will monitor that and bring you all the headlines as they come. uber is buying 24,000 volvo suvs to ramp up its fleet of driverless cars. the order marks the first commercial purchase for the ride hailing company. the xc-90's will arrive at dealers between 2019 and 2021. the deal is also expected to boost volvo sales and lower the cost of their own autonomous cars for 2021. our guest host for the hour, o'donnell, tech analysis research president joins me now along with our editor at large cory johnson. , cory, what you make of this purchase? cory: i think it shows how all of the major carmakers pushing really rapidly towards more autonomous vehicles, more self driving features. whether it is self driving or not, they are not getting to that hurdle. it's interesting to me that the way it looks like this will work is volvo will make a cutting-edge vehicle but not a self driving vehicle and uber will do the final steps with hardware and software. probably using the hardware that they got out of the vehicle. emily: it is interesting, it gives us some sort of vehicle into overs self-driving efforts because they have this whole team -- we have seen them around. photos of them -- how does this kind of partnership mean for the broader auto industry, bob? bob: cory brings up some main points. the main automakers are figuring out ways to do this. just remember that we are actually several years away from this stuff really being safe and working and well enough. i think the issue that we should be thinking about is the fact that uber is in a position where it if they don't start moving towards autonomous cars, the longer that gig economy questions start to be raised as they have in london and other places the more the whole , business model gets challenged. i think there is an effort to focus away from some of the issues and focus on this is where we are going to go. i think the implications are pretty big and not everybody has thought through what they are going to be. cory: i don't know the regulatory environment. i don't know if these cars will ever be safe. no one knows. there is certainly a lot of hope but there are enormous problems that may never be fixed. or is elected say in silicon valley we have yet to fix. , they have enormous they may never be fixed. the norm is implications for the uber business model because if you think about the relationship between the car, the driver and the passenger and getting paid is everything for uber. the notion that they could somehow -- the driver is a pretty cheap win. a pretty cheap way to get a car moving around. the notion that these cars would be better, given the price points at this point, impossible. emily: we just don't know it yet and an early uber investor has said he thinks this is decades out rather than a few years. we can imagine that is one area that he is disagreed with the former ceo. bob: by the way, it is not just the cars because the amount of hardware you have to add to the cars -- those cars you see are hundreds of thousands of dollars each because the technology to do the autonomy is still very expensive. and it is going to be a while before that comes down in price. emily: what do you think about the fact it is volvo as opposed to any other carmaker? cory: they have been working with volvo with a lot of things but a lot of carmakers would love to get $1 billion. i have seen some on the streets of san francisco. volvo love this as well because it will lower the cost because of the investment. they can use this money to invest in these cars so everyone out there driving, could drive one of these cars. it is ensuring the production of this car into the u.s. emily: it is interesting given gm's relationship with lyft. gm was talking to uber. there is a lot of incestuous ness amongst these various players. bob: everyone is trying to figure out how to get their piece of autonomous driving. absolutely everybody the , ridesharing companies, software companies, startups, everybody sees the potential opportunities, but there are so many questions that remain out there. again, he feels like it is a little bit of -- hey, we are going to keep distracting you from what some of the core problems will be here, especially of this economy issue becomes a problem here in the u.s.. emily: bob o'donnell of technalysis, thank you. you are sticking with me. cory johnson, editor at large, thank you as well. we have been monitoring this live webcast coming out of the time warner center in new york where at&t ceo randall stephenson is expected to speak. we are listening in. we will bring you any headlines as we have them. all of this in response to the doj saying they will challenge this merger between at&t and time warner. sticking with uber, the company has been hit with an $8.9 million fine by colorado for hiring employees with serious criminal or motor vehicle offenses. ? >> the colorado public utilities commission says it launched an investigation after a driver was accused of assaulting a passenger. the commission found 0 felony drivers were allowed to work in the state, which included drivers with major traffic violations and former prison escapee. coming up, it is the annual holiday showdown. black friday versus cyber monday. will online shopping take a dent out of brick-and-mortar retailer's big day? that is next. this is bloomberg. ♪ emily: welcome back. we are following a live webcast happening at the time warner center in new york. that is at&t ceo randall stephenson speaking. he is responding to the doj saying they will sue to stop the at&t-time warner merger. randall stephenson has said in the past they have been prepared in case litigation came their way. we will bring you more headlines as we have them. we are listening to the webcast happening now. first of all, after months of hype, the justice department arrived to save the world, but not the box office in general. warner bros. generated $96 million in the box office, $30 million short of estimates. it sent major movie stocks tumbling today. amc fell by as much as 5% with regal and imax is it a little bit over four points of their low. thanksgiving may be a few days away but the holiday shopping frenzy is well underway. traditional brick-and-mortar stores like walmart are making preparations to handle the black friday crowd, while e-commerce rivals like amazon are trying to lure customers with cyber monday deals. according to a new deloitte survey 70% of holiday shoppers , will be physically in stores on black friday, while 72% of shoppers will be online cyber monday. joining me now is sarah, who covers the consumer and retail industry. she's our bloomberg gadfly columnist. and still with me is bob o'donnell. sarah, i will start with you. we have a survey that shows a lower percentage of people will be turning out online for black friday. and that in fact, a good number of people will actually be going to physical stores. what do you make of these mixed results we are seeing? sarah: i think it really reflects the moment we are in generally with online shopping revolution which is that people do ping-pong back-and-forth between these two channels. i think the vast majority of shoppers do shop online and stores and you see that reflected in their plans for the holiday weekend. i can tell you from interviewing people for the past five years on thanksgiving and black friday and in stores, some of the reasons they are out in physical stores is about the prices but also it is a social activity. i talked to tons of people who are there with their relatives or children, just looking to get out of the house, and that will not change this year. emily: bob it is interesting, , for the last several weeks, i've been getting a lot of email in my inbox and it seems like black friday started on november 1. bob: that is exactly right. the whole meaning of black friday is gone. it is meaningless at this point. emily: well, i have to say i , thought about it and i was like i am waiting until black friday. i know it will come down even more. bob: the point of it being a social event is very true. that has been the case in our household, it is more of a social event, yes, there are a couple of deals, but people like to physically go out and try things. it is interesting because those deals have been coming for a long time, so it is not really -- i think that hammers home that it is not about the price because you could get that same price in a lot of cases on other days. so it is about the experience. emily: sarah how much shopping , is actually happening on mobile now and how is that affecting things here? sarah: i think that is an interesting thing to look at. mobile is where a lot of the traffic is. for most retailers over 50% of , the traffic to their website now so it is crucially important. you have fast page load times, make sure your app is working well because people are really , turning to that for information. i think it is also interesting that mobile is a very important part of the in-store experience. you see people using their devices inside the store to see if there are other colors available, sizes available online. they want to read customer reviews. maybe see if a product holds up well over time, so mobile is really integral to this whole weekend at this point. emily: bob, when we look at the numbers on cyber tuesday or whatever it is, because there will still be deals happening, what do you expect to see? [laughter] bob: i think we will see growth in retail. i do think as sarah said in the beginning we are in this moment , in the online shopping experience where people feel like ok, i have done a lot of that. there is something to be said about the other side of it. i think retailers have also learned over the last few years from some of their mistakes they , are trying to make the experience of shopping more interesting and more compelling. things like the loyalty card clubs and things like that are getting people to think about working both online and in the store the same way. the mobile point is interesting, it used to be that show roaming, you would go to the show room in retail and then gone by a mine. almost the exact opposite is happening now. where you do some preparation online, you're going to the store's to see it and then you do more research in the store. i think that reflects the maturity of the online shopping process. and how you are involved with it. emily: sarah, are you seeing any changes in strategy when it comes to the retail stores, the department stores as we approach this holiday? sarah: yeah, it seems like they are really varied. for example target has been , doing 10 days of deals for the last two years, trying to fire off the confetti cannon and give you deals all the time. they pulled back and thought it was too distracting for consumers, that they want to have good deals on thursday and friday and win that way. i think we see a lot of variety. some are going for this long stretch of deals, trying to get you in the store as many days as they can and others are trying to save their firepower for that big day. emily: the other thing is deals in november are one thing, but it seems like deals are happening all year long. i feel like every weekend gap is 50% off, j. crew, 30% off and it does not seem to bode well for these companies. bob: exactly. on the other side, you have amazon prime days throughout the year that feels like a black friday event in the middle of the summer or whenever. so again i think that notion , that we built up for years and years and years around black friday and cyber monday, they are just starting to lose some of their meaning. everyone is experimenting with how and when they can get people to come in and the manner in which they can get them to spend their emily: when it comes dollars. to the numbers, sarah what will , you be watching specifically? sarah: i am really watching for the strength of the black friday and cyber monday e-commerce numbers. i think cyber monday is expected to be a $6.6 billion day online and i think black friday is expected to be $5.5 billion. what is really important, those are respected to be the fastest-growing days of the season even though they are coming up the biggest week. i think those will be a good indicator on where the consumer's head is that in how much online shopping we will see over the season. emily: sarah, thank you so much for waiting in. bob o'donnell of technalysis, you are sticking with me. still ahead, of at&t-time warner presser is underway. we have been listening to randall stephenson who that said his company will offer solutions to close the deal but divesting cnn is a nonstarter. we will continue listening and bring you comments as we have them. this is bloomberg. ♪ emily: back to our top story -- the u.s. justice department is suing to block at&t's $85 billion takeover of time warner. randall stephenson is speaking at a press conference, saying they will offer solutions to close the deal but divesting cnn is a nonstarter. joining us now is our senior analyst of litigation. bloomberg intelligence. bob o'donnell is still with me in the studio. jennifer, you have been listening in on this call and read the doj's complaint, what are your takeaways? jennifer: i think it is not a surprise, really to me. the way i read the complaint, it is a very typical vertical theory of her -- harm. that the company will have what is considered must have content and it could be profitable for them to engage in a strategy of raising the price of that content to distribution rivals because in the long run, to the extent that the distribution refuses to take the content or pay for the content they would , lose subscribers that would move over to at&t or directv to get that content. emily: randall stephenson has said they will offer a solution, they have said that divesting cnn, rob is a nonstarter. , they said cnn maybe the crown jewel of time warner. that said, you have any -- an acknowledgment from at&t's lawyer is now saying that we know the president has talked about his dislike for cnn. bob: you cannot ignore the political side of this equation. there will be discussions back and forth. the problem is we will never really know how much of an influence it had. the interesting side of the vertical combination is that of course, that just happened a few years back with comcast and nbc, and that seemed to be fine. there is arguably legal so there is arguably legal precedent there and now it is being applied to most differently, and i'm sure that is the route that at&t will follow you react emily: jennifer we know this deal was on track a , couple of months ago. how strong is the argument that there is a problem here? that this vertical integration would be anti-competitive? jennifer: it is going to come down with the evidence which has yet to be seen. from what i saw in the complaint they were quoting several , documents they seemed to have pulled from at&t and directv which did not look good. those are just blurbs and exurbs, so we do not know what those documents said as a whole but it will come down to what , the economists do and what they show in terms of the incentive and ability of the company to engage in the kind of discriminatory strategy that the doj is alleging they would engage in. also, how strong their efficiencies are and rationale for the deal, to the extent of the deal could have consumer benefits and the strength of those arguments on their side. emily: what specifically does not look good? jennifer: some comments that -- again, these are just excerpts, so you don't really know the entire context for the comments, but comments such as needing to combine the content with the distribution in order to have a better model to better compete against some of the newer, more inundated options like this skinny packages through sling tv. some of these suggested that some of the rationale for the deal was in fact to be able to have greater clout in the marketplace. emily: so, explain to me, bob isn't any merger intended to , improve a company's ability to compete? bob: it certainly is. you could make the argument that at&t is worried about its ability to compete with the skinny bundles, with the content that is being delivered via facebook, google, all these other new media platforms. all of a sudden, that does change the dynamic. i think that becomes the question mark. we are seeing the unbundling of a lot of the stuff and the ability to do over the top services is changing the whole cable tv and satellite tv distribution mechanism. a lot of these changes will happen anyway. the question is will this deal drive those changes or not? emily: we are still listening to randall stephenson speaking with at&t's lawyers. what is next? jennifer: at this point, this starts the litigation. the complaint has been filed, and what will happen is that the parties will ask for this to be at the dead it and it very likely will. we will see a short period of discovery. the companies are likely to see this information on how politics might have played into this and a trial date will get set. four to six months. emily: art, jennifer, we will have to leave it there. bob o'donnell, my guest host for the hour. thank you both so much. we are going to continue to monitor this press conference. you can check out the headlines on the bloomberg terminal. thank you all for watching. we will see you tomorrow. this is bloomberg. ♪ >> back to the ballots. merkel says she is open to a new election. guy: beefing up the bill. new reports say theresa may has won the backing of our cabinet ministers to offer the eu more money with conditions wil. anna: janet yellen said she will need the fed, giving president trump more scope to reshape policy. guy: a court battle with justice department over its proposed time warner merger.