Return to Transcripts main page

First Move with Julia Chatterley

G7 Pledges to Support Ukraine for "As long as it takes"; Chinese Officials Claims Zero-COVID Policy to Stay for Five Years; Dozens of States Set to Ban or Restrict Abortion; PETCO Revenue Rose 4.3 Percent in the First Quarter; U.S.: 50 Percent of World may Lack Clean water by 2025; Hollywood Traders Call $30M Weekend for Elvis" & "Top Gun". Aired 9-10a ET

Aired June 27, 2022 - 09:00   ET




JULIA CHATTERLEY, CNN HOST, FRIST MOVE: A warm welcome to "First Move". Great to have you with us this Monday as always! This as shockwaves from

Friday's U.S. Supreme Court ruling that overturned the constitutional right to abortion continues to reverberate across the world.

Major U.S. firms from Disney to JP Morgan and Apple promising to provide financial support to workers who may need to travel for healthcare in other

states. But what about smaller business employees, we're clearly hearing warnings about the economic impact of that Supreme Court decision. One

study suggests denying women access to abortion will be damaging for the U.S. economy as a whole. We've got one of the authors of that report coming

up on the show.

In the meantime, it's also day two of the G7 Summit in Germany fresh vows of military support to Ukraine coming from G7 leaders and the Head of NATO

earlier today too, details on all of that coming up as well.

In the meantime, the global bulls trying to build on last week's solid stock market gains here's a look at U.S. Futures and European shares. And

as you can see, they are mostly higher.

It follows Monday momentum in Asia too, positive momentum that included a more than 2 percent rally in Hong Kong. The HANG SENG now down just 5

percent for the year as Chinese tech stocks continue their recovery, compare and contrast that to the 17 percent fall in the S&P 500 so far this


That's the comparative performance that you can see in front of you Thursday, is the last day of the month, the quarter and the first half of

the year on global markets, some suggesting that these calendar quirks could benefit stocks in the days ahead. So we'll be watching for that too.

Optimism growing, also that the Fed might not have to act as aggressively to bring down inflation as once feared, if the global slowdown to some of

the work for them and take some of the heat out of rising prices.

OK, let's get to our top story now and that's Ukraine. Sources say President Zelenskyy is calling on G7 leaders to help end the war before

winter. He spoke in a virtual address to the G7 Summit, the leaders of the world's biggest Western economies pledged to continue ramping up financial

aid and sanctions against Russia.

And as G7 leaders gathered in Germany Sunday Russia targeted Ukraine's capital, at least one person was killed in a missile strike that hit a

residential block and a kindergarten Frederik Pleitgen joins us on all of this. Fred, the truth is if you want to see the war ended by winter, and

then payments that are provided to Russia to support this war in effectively supporting this war, need to stop. And that's part of the

discussion today perhaps caps on Russian oil, how would that work?

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPODENT: Capital on Russian oil prices and then also, of course, trying to stop Russia from

exporting gold. It certainly is something that certainly seems to be pretty difficult the EU states that are part of the G7.

And of course, the United States as well Julia, they're saying they want to continue to ramp up the sanctions pressure, they believe that it is already

having a certain effect on Russia, not just by the way that Russia is able to pay for its military operation.

But of course, also Russia's ability to get to certain goods, certain high tech goods that itself needs to produce weapons to continue the invasion of

Ukraine. So they do believe that there are some effects and all of that is already happening.

On the other hand, it was quite interesting because I spoke about this topic about a week and a half ago with the spokesman for Vladimir Putin

with Dmitry Peskov. And he said he believes that the sanctions are not going to have much of an effect on Russia's capability to continue to

prosecute what they call their special military operation because they believe that Russia is simply too big to isolate.

It's quite interesting when we talk about, for instance, a cap on oil prices one of the things of course that the Russians have done, as a lot of

European countries have stopped or have stopped importing Russian oil or at least important significantly less than they had before.

They've obviously sold it elsewhere. At the same time, the oil price has gone up so much that Vladimir Putin is actually making more money than he

was before off those oil sales. So it's certainly very difficult.

And all of that, also having a lot of effect, of course, also on European economies as they pay a lot more for energy, so certainly it is something

that appears to be very difficult.

I think the G7 Understand that they would need to find almost a global solution to all of this as the Russians do believe that, that they are able

to prosecute the invasion of Ukraine a lot longer.

But I think it's also really important to point out because it's very difficult to overestimate just how important that money is. Because one of

the things that are clear from what's going on in Ukraine right now is that the soldiers that Russia has on the ground, there are contract soldiers.

And the Russians have to pay them a significant amount of money to actually go into Ukraine and fight there, so that oil revenue that they get very

important for Russia's military operations in Ukraine and obviously trying to stop Russia from having that oil revenue as important for the G7 nations

that, of course, are meeting right here in Germany right now, Julia.


CHATTERLEY: Yes, it's such a vital point. You need money if you're going to pay mercenaries to go and fight for you. And I know that the talks today

include India, Argentina, South Africa, Senegal, and Indonesia to the question is, can some of the substitute buys that Russia is now using be

brought on board with these price caps, we'll see?

Frederik Pleitgen, great to have you with us thank you. Now Russia has denied reports that it has defaulted on its debt after missing a critical

deadline on Sunday. Clare Sebastian joins us now on this. Clare, what do we know because it was they were already in a grace period so this is not a

missed payment? This is the end of the grace period passing in this confusion over whether or not the money has been paid.

CLARE SEBASTIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Julia, this is confusing, and it is murky. The Kremlin is saying this is not a default, because they made

these payments on these two bonds in the currency that the bonds were issued in, in dollars and in Rubles that happened apparently, on May 27.

That's also coming from the finance ministry.

And the Kremlin says allegations of default are incorrect. It says, because the necessary currency payment was made as early back as May. They are

saying that the problem here is that the funds have been frozen by Euro Cochlea, which is a Belgian based financial services sort of clearing house

and bank their role is in theory to take the money from Russia and distribute it to the various individual bondholders.

Kremlins saying that that has been stuck at Euro Korea, we think perhaps because of sanctions. So they're saying, look, we have the means we can pay

this all along the Kremlin and the Finance Ministry have sort of dismissed any allegations that they could be heading for default, as artificial,

because they say that they have the means to pay. And there are a lot of variables, there are different clauses in these bonds.

There are things like, you know, it couldn't have to be settled in court, according to one expert I spoke to. And of course Julia, we're not actually

getting rating agencies ratings on Russia, because sanctions prevent that EU sanctions. So it is really complicated. It is very murky.

But in a sense, it doesn't make much difference to Russia in the near term, because they're already locked out of financial markets, international debt

markets in particular, this doesn't change that. But it does sort of cement their status as a pariah on international markets. And it does mean that

will be even harder to recover from.

CHATTERLEY: Yes, and you raise a great point. And I think we should make that clear for our audience as well. They don't need to raise money and

perhaps can't raise money on financial markets because no one wants to lend to them, at least in the west at this moment.

But countries don't like defaulting on debt unless they absolutely have to because they'd like to be seen as a reliable partner. And that was when -

that was what the Finance Minister said last week, when he said, look, we paid the money he was making the point that we they still want to be

perceived as a reliable partner, this war aside?

SEBASTIAN: Yes. And I think the question as to whether this matter to Russia has significant nuance, because memories in Russia are pretty long.

And they still remember the default in 1998.

That, of course, was a very different case than they defaulted on $40 billion worth of domestic debt it caused inflation to spike over 80


And many people lost their savings overnight. So I think some of this is messaging to the domestic audience. This is not the same as 1998 you're not

going to see your savings evaporate overnight. And that really a matter to the Russian people in particular, as Putin tries to maintain a level of

support for what he calls his special military operation in Ukraine, Julia.

CHATTERLEY: Exactly. Great context, Clare Sebastian, thank you. Protests have swept the United States after a Supreme Court decision ended the

constitutional protection for abortion.

Dozens of states and are rapidly bringing in laws to ban or severely restrict the procedure and this report Vanessa Yurkevich explores the

economic impact on American women.


VANESSA YURKEVICH, CNN BUSINESS AND POLITICS CORRESPONDENT (voice over): When Alana Edmondson unexpectedly got pregnant with her partner at 21; she

had a choice to make. She was working a low wage retail job in Seattle while dreaming of getting her PhD at Yale. She made the tough decision to

have an abortion.

ALANA EDMONSON, HAD ACCESS TO ABORTION SERVICE: But I knew that I would be stuck in a cycle of poverty that I was already trying to get out of.

YURKEVICH (voice over): This Supreme Court dismantled 50 years of precedent when it overturned Roe v Wade, returning abortion laws to states, there

will be significant economic repercussions. Women denied abortion access who gave birth were more likely to experience increased poverty lasting at

least four years compared to women who received an abortion according to the University of California, San Francisco,

EDMONSON: It would just be very, very difficult, especially with like the prices of daycare. I mean, even feeding somebody else.

YURKEVICH (voice over): 26 states will likely ban abortions. Those states already have lower wages, barriers to health care and less funding for

social services according to the Economic Policy Institute. The impacts would be felt most by women of color.


ASHA BANERJEE, ANALYST, ECONOMICS POLICY INSTITUTE: When women are not able to complete their education or get the job they want. This has severe

economic consequences yes for them. But this loss of economic potential of possibility will have ramifications for the state economy, the national

economy as well.

YURKEVICH (voice over): The anti-abortion group "Right to life" cites public assistance efforts in five of the 26 states likely to ban abortion

aimed at helping pregnant women and new moms. And now dozens of corporations are stepping in providing protections for employees in those


MIRIAM WARREN, CHIEF DIVERSITY OFFICE, YELP: I think for any employer that cares about issues of diversity, equity and inclusion, to stay silent on

such an issue is really just not OK.

YURKEVICH (voice over): Yelp, which calls the SCOTUS decision, a denial of human rights and a threat to workplace gender equality, said before the

ruling, it's covering travel and health care for employees, family members and partners seeking an abortion anywhere in the U.S.

YURKEVICH (on camera): Do you think it's both an asset for retention of employees and then also an asset for attracting new employees to the


WARREN: I think it's both it has really been a wonderful recruiting tool in terms of prospective employees saying I want to work at a company that is

out there and loud about what they believe in and what they care about?

YURKEVICH (voice over): Edmondson went on to realize her dream and move to Connecticut to get her PhD in literature at Yale. She says she feels lucky

to have been able to make her own choice.

EDMONDSON: Thinking outside of myself, it felt very scary for other people who can get pregnant who might not have the option to live their dream if

they wanted it.


CHATTERLEY: Vanessa Yurkevich reporting there and more on the impact of the overturning of Roe V Wade later in the program when I speak with Dan Green

Foster, her turn away studies details a devastating long term impact of being denied and abortion in America.

OK, let me bring you up to speed now with some of the other stories making headlines around the world. Zero COVID policy in Beijing for five years.

Wow! That's the claim reportedly made by senior Chinese Communist Party official. There was such a huge backlash to the remarks online censors have

now deleted the comments from the internet. CNN Selina Wang joins us live from Beijing.

It doesn't surprise me that there was a dramatic backlash to the prospect of living under the zero COVID policy rules. The testing as you've

described to us, many times Selina for the next five years?

SELINA WANG, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Julia, no surprise that was both alarming outrage across the country after that announcement came according

to a Communist Party newspaper, attributed to a top Communist Party official. This was from "The Beijing daily" this was citing Tai Chi, who is

the Beijing's Party Chief, a close ally of Xi Jinping and quoted was quoted saying this.

For the next five years, Beijing will resolutely implement COVID-19 pandemic control measures and uphold the zero COVID policy to prevent

imported cases from coming in and domestic cases from rebounding.

And the domestic pandemic control measures that were mentioned included this regular PCR testing, which we currently have to do in Beijing and many

major cities across China strict entry rules into Beijing health monitoring in neighborhoods and public areas as well as strict monitoring and testing

for people coming in and out of Beijing.

Now, in response to that there was an outpouring of not just anger, but also hopelessness because we're in year three of the pandemic and people

are fed up that they still have to go through the strict protocols when the rest of the world has moved on.

But in response, after this huge amount of outrage, we saw Beijing Daily this Communist Party newspaper actually removed that line in the next five

years. And also Weibo, which is China's Twitter like social media platform banned the hash-tag for the next five years.

And the Communist Party newspaper attributed the removal of that line to eight publishing error. But Julia CNN reviewed that speech online and the

party officials did in fact talked about these zero COVID policies that would be in place for the next five years.

And let me read to you some of the angry Weibo comments that were posted. They included, "I have to rethink whether I should continue to stay in

Beijing in the long term", and other Weibo posts said, "For the next five years what is the point of being alive even"?

Right now in China, even though major cities are starting to open up still all close contacts, and positive cases are sent to quarantine facilities,

entire cities and communities are shut down over just a handful of COVID-19 cases?

And critics say that really this policy is more rooted in political ideology than science, because Xi Jinping has directly tied his leadership

to zero COVID well that means it's not going away anytime soon.


WANG: Healthcare experts say that the country should be pouring resources into increasing the vaccination rate especially for the elderly population

and making mRNA vaccines available.

But instead the government is pouring resources into these costly testing and quarantine sites so huge frustration here. And really the pandemic as

well has increased the Communist Party's social control.

They are now able to track all of our movements our daily routines are all controlled by the color of the health code on our apps. And people fear

that this deepening surveillance and tracking is also here to stay long after COVID has gone Julia.

CHATTERLEY: Selina Wang, thank you so much for that joining us there from Beijing. Now a devastating drought has triggered a humanitarian crisis

across the Horn of Africa. The region is experiencing the driest conditions in four decades. Millions are at risk of starvation with one UNICEF

official warning of "An explosion of child deaths soon if the world does not act immediately".

South African officials say poor people remain hospitalized after a deadly and unexplained incident at a Tavern. More than 20 Young people who had

partied at the venue mysteriously died on Sunday morning. Authorities have shut down the pub to investigate the cause of their deaths.

They will take samples from their bodies to toxicology labs for further analysis.

OK, and straight ahead deepening inequality the 10 year study found restricting abortion rights disproportionately hurts the already poor and

vulnerable and studies lead on overturning Roe V Wade. And a ray of hope the startup using solar power to pull water out of thin air I speak to the

CEO of Source Global.


CHATTERLEY: Welcome back to "First Move" and return to one of our top stories this hour. The overturning of Roe V Wade in the United States and

the impact on women because many states deny access to abortions. Long before such a ruling was imaginable a study by the University of California

San Francisco highlighted the kinds of impacts it could have.

In the turn away study, researchers spent a decade following the lives of thousand women for more than 20 states. Its main conclusion was that while

having an abortion does not harm women's health or well being denied one results in worse outcomes in terms of health, wealth and family.

Joining us now is the woman who led that study Dr. Diana Greene Foster a professor at the University of California San Francisco.


CHATTERLEY: She's also the Director of Research for its advancing new standards in reproductive health program. Diana, welcome to the show. Thank

you so much for your time.

I think the critical aspect of this one for me was that this wasn't done in preparation of an overturning of Roe V Wade, but it is now being used as

evidence of the detrimental and devastating impact it can have, for many reasons, including a burden that falls on those least able to afford it?

DIANA GREENE FOSTER, PROFESSOR AT THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO: That's right. When we started this study, we were interested in

the consequences of receiving an abortion primarily, and we needed a comparison group. And we picked people who wanted an abortion and couldn't

get one.

And unfortunately, with the decision on Friday, it's, you know, that group becomes the more important one, because many, probably hundreds of

thousands of people in many states will soon not be able to get a legal abortion in their state.

CHATTERLEY: I mean we can go through the financial impact there, the mental impact, all the different areas and the impact on their existing family,

which was something that was quite important and fascinating for me reading this report.

But if we look at the financials first, one of the things that you suggested and found was that those that have denied an abortion, or have to

carry an unwanted child to term, have four times greater odds of living below the federal poverty line afterwards. They have lower credit scores a

high likelihood of bankruptcy, or being in debt, it has a dramatic impact financially, for many of these women and their families?

FOSTER: Yes, and that's consistent with what people say when they're seeking abortion. The leading reason people give is they feel they can't

afford to have a child or they can't afford to have another child.

And what we see is that they're right that people who are denied an abortion experience, immediate drop in full time employment, and are more

likely to report that they don't have enough money for basic living needs for the full five years that we followed them.

CHATTERLEY: And in many cases, and this surprised me too, 60 percent of cases, the women being denied, already had other children, to your point

about there being consequences for the broader family. And actually, very few of them go on to decide to put the child up for adoption.

In fact, 90 percent of them keep the child and that has consequences for the child, perhaps for resentment, but also for the other children in the

family too?

FOSTER: Yes, when we look at the consequences for women's older children, what we see is that the existing children are more likely to live in

poverty, less likely to hit developmental milestones, if their mother was denied an abortion than if she received one.

And the child warned because she was denied an abortion, if we look at that child's outcomes compared to the next child born to women who receive

abortion. So this comparisons really about if women have the ability to determine the circumstances of their births, when we see is that children

born from later pregnancies experience better maternal bonding, and are less likely to live with an economic hardship.

CHATTERLEY: I mean, one of the other things as well that stood out to me was the choices that a woman wakes as a result of having to carry the child

in terms of perhaps a partner.

More likely to stay with an abusive partner more likely to raise the child alone, perhaps, if the circumstances are different again, it says

consequences for the mother for the family for the child.

FOSTER: Maybe the most important part of the study is when we ask people what their reasons were for wanting an abortion. All the reasons they gave

us were exactly that what we found when we studied this over time, where the experiences of people who are denied abortions.

So what I take from this is that when people are making the decision about what to do with an unwanted pregnancy, they know their own circumstances,

they know their responsibilities.

They know what their aspirations are, and they're trying to make a decision that's best for themselves and their families and when they're unable to

get that wanting abortion, their outcomes are measurably worse off.

CHATTERLEY: And what we often hear is the emotional, the psychological impact of having an abortion and how detrimental that can be for a woman.

But again, and this was the point of the study, not what we've spent all this time talking about.

But what the impact is actually of, of having got that abortion and what happens and even five years out 95 percent of the women in this study, were

saying I made the right choice. I did the right thing in my mind. I did the right thing?

FOSTER: We don't find evidence. That's exactly right. We don't find evidence of mental health harm from an abortion.


FOSTER: We don't find evidence of mental health harm from an abortion. In the short term people were denied abortions actually have worse mental

health, that's in higher anxiety, lower self esteem.

And over time, the biggest differences between those who receive and those who are denied abortions isn't in mental health. It's really in physical

health and economic well-being.

CHATTERLEY: And obviously, we can't track perhaps if regret comes later on in life if people have an unstable relationship that wasn't part of this

study, so I should just make that point.

But actually, what worries me most about this study is that it was done with the comparison of women that were too late to get an abortion, not

under the new circumstances as a result of the Supreme Court decision, which women are simply not being able to get access to an abortion.

And they weren't in a situation where they were afraid of - please knocking on the door saying, is this what you were trying to do if they were perhaps

having a miscarriage, for example, being afraid to go and get medical access or help in case they're accused of perhaps tried to bring on an


I know it's subjective. It's, it's difficult to quantify to get a sense of. But, Dan, I'm sure you've also thought about the consequences for women

today under this completely separate situation, which is arguably far worse if they're trying to get access to an abortion and now simply count.

FOSTER: Yes, I think you're right, that what the Trinity study doesn't capture is all the additional legal risk that this decision has, will

result from this decision where people may be hesitant to get treatment for complications, because they're worried about the law.

And that's a part that isn't captured. In terms of people seeking abortion later, in the journalist study, they actually don't see a big difference

between the people who sought abortions later versus earlier; it was mostly a difference of not realizing that they were pregnant.

So I think that the health outcomes and the economic outcomes we can expect under this dubs decision, and what we weren't able to measure that will be

in the future are all the negative legal consequences.

CHATTERLEY: Diana, what do you hope is the response to this Supreme Court decision and the consequences that you perhaps understand, and can quantify

better than most? What do you hope the response is?

FOSTER: And I would, I am not feeling very hopeful right now. But I would like to see a shift in our country from just talking about abortion as a

political issue as an ideological issue, to having some understanding and compassion for the experience of somebody who's pregnant when they don't

want to be and is trying to make the best decision for themselves and their families.

That's so rarely the conversation that we've been having. And it allows the Supreme Court justices to just ignore the consequences for families. So

maybe in the future, we'll start to shift to having more respect for childbirth and pregnancy and what a massive sacrifices that is, and making

sure that people are supported in pregnancy and also in early parenthood.

CHATTERLEY: No easy decisions. Diana, great to have you with us, thank you so much for your time.

FOSTER: Thank you.

CHATTERLEY: Diana Greene Foster there, Professor at the University of California at San Francisco and the leader of that turn away study. Thank

you once again. OK, still to come here on "First Move", inflation bites, but that's not stopping animal lovers spending on their furry friends. We

speak with the CEO of Retailer PETCO, right after this.



CHATTERLEY: And welcome back to First Move. U.S. stocks are up and running this Monday investors beginning the session on team green, look at that

stocks extending last week solid gains the first weekly rise on Wall Street so far this month.

Tech stocks were triumphant up more than 7 percent, the S&P 500 popping out of bear market territory too. So bear market went down 20 percent from the

highs we're back up out of that now.

News on Friday to that Americans inflation expectations are not as high as theirs feared helping the bullish case for stocks to falling commodity

prices suggesting that global growth may also be softening.

Encouraging news for central banks trying to weaken demand and hold price pressures down oil has also fallen for two weeks straight. Economic

Bellwether copper also tumbling more than 6 percent.

Investors hoping global rates may not have to rise as aggressively as first feared if the demand outlook cools, and inflation moderates. OK lions and

tigers and bears well more like dogs, cats, cows and horses. Oh my pet retail giant PETCO, which operates more than 1500 stores across the United

States, Mexico and Puerto Rico, has reaped the benefits of accelerated pet ownership during the pandemic.

The pet industry has stayed resilient even as inflation takes a bite out of pet owner's pockets. A recent survey showed 71 percent of dog owners say

pet related costs like food, toys, and vet visits are higher because of inflation.

But a rise in prices hasn't stopped animal lovers from spending on man's and women best friend. Joining us now is Ron Coughlin. He's the CEO of

PETCO, Ron, fantastic to have you on the show.

I want to start there because I think a lot of us thought that the dramatic rise in pet ownership and I'm one of those that got a pet during the

pandemic was pulling purchases forward from the future. But actually what is the last year's data has told us is it's not slowing down anytime soon.

RON COUGHLIN, CEO, PETCO: Yep, that's exactly right. There was a lot of theories that there was this great pet poll forward. We saw 11 million new

pets in 2000, but heightened in 21. And actually, in 22, the projection is 2 percent growth in number of pets. That's higher than pre pandemic 1


So there's a lot of pet parents like you that brought in furry friends and they continue to do so.

CHATTERLEY: I'm not slowing down yet. Do you think it's sustainable? I just wonder what saturation looks like. I read that there's an estimated 78

million dogs and 85.8 million cats owned in the United States.

That's 44 percent of households have a dog. And that compares to 35 percent of households that have a car. That's my - yes.

COUGHLIN: It is and if you look at actually go talk to Gen Z and millennial, 65 percent plan on getting a new pet in the next five years. So

there continue to be new pets coming into homes.

And one of the dynamics is we're seeing second pets, third pets coming into homes. And in actually 21 what we saw is cat really took off double digit

growth in the number of cats coming into homes and we're really increasing our focus on cats.

But more and more now with our new concept that we just launched. Now we're getting into equine and other areas as well.

CHATTERLEY: Oh, we'll come back to that in a second because I know that some that's exciting too. Do you think about people acquiring second and

third pet simply as people transition to perhaps being back into the office. They need playmates.


COUGHLIN: Yes, that's a component of it. I also think that's why you saw cat growth in 21 with the anticipation. But most folks are hybrid now. So I

think that's driving increased pet adoptions as well.

CHATTERLEY: Are you seeing any adjustment in parent behavior? And I've touched on it in the introduction for rising prices.


CHATTERLEY: Because it is influencing toys, that I've certainly seen it too. Our people trading down in the same way those they perhaps would with

food or to pets come first.

COUGHLIN: The answer to you is last bit. Pets absolutely come first; we're not seeing a trade down. In fact, in our category, we're seeing continued

premiumization to better and better foods, better and better care of pets.

And a big part of that is Millennial and GenZ has adopted the majority of the new pets, and they are driving this trend towards humanization. If I'm

having salmon and sweet potatoes, guess what?

Yummy is having salmon and sweet potatoes, yummy is my dog. And we're seeing more and more of that. And the embodiment of it is fresh frozen

category, which is heading towards a four to $5 billion category. And it is basically human grade food served to your pet.

CHATTERLEY: Is it good nutrition for a pet though, because you know, I had this debate with my veterinarian about this. And whether human food is

necessarily good for dogs, or cats, whichever it is versus perhaps those that are artificial, but they're created to be balanced. How do you handle

that in --? Yes.

COUGHLIN: So the human, I talked about human grade, its human grade ingredients that are specially formulated under veterinary guidance for the

pets. So it is not just cooking your chicken or your rice and giving that it is special formulas for your pets.

But we also have scientific formulas from great folks like hills that are specifically for different conditions, whether it's weight loss, whether

it's urinary tract, et cetera. So we have different offers for different pet needs.

CHATTERLEY: I'm very familiar with all of those things, one people cooking for their pets, but also specialized diets as well. OK, let's talk about

rural communities, because this is another huge growth opportunity that you've identified.

And it's not just household pets now, its farm animals, as I again mentioned in the introduction. And it's a huge opportunity, not only for

food, nutrition, but also veterinary care as well. Talk us through that as a growth plan for the business.

COUGHLIN: Yes, so it starts with rural population growth. If you look at rural population, we've seen 42 percent growth in pet spend in rural areas

due to the rural population growth.

We just launched our first of our farm and feed stores in Floresville, Texas Floresville's population are up 30 percent since the last census,

it's a $7 billion addressable market.

But more importantly, I was there a week ago, and person after person said, thank you for opening the store because now I don't have to go to San

Antonio, to get my food.

Now, I don't have to go to San Antonio to get the veterinary care that I'm looking for. And so it's an underserved market. And they're looking for a

partner that's focused on the pet and pet business alone.

But inherent in these markets is a wider assortment. So we have chicks. We have products for pigs, for sheep for land. And I got to tell you that it

was an absolute fun experience. We had the mayor Gonzalez - Depoe out there, we had the City Council out there, we had the police force out

there, and we had the local rescue.

And to me, the - sadly, a cat got hit by a car out front, guess where the cat came for care, the cat came to us and we took it to emergency care and

helped it out. And that's a great example of us helping in our communities, right off the bat in that instance.

CHATTERLEY: Yes, these are essential services, and you're saving so much time for some of these farmers and for those who are trying to take care of

these animals and having to travel a long distance, whether it's for nutrition food, but also vet care as well.

Data, you are collecting enormous amounts of data not only on pets, for example, but also now across the spectrum.

If you're looking at farms, surely that's got to all feed into your insurance products as well. How is this going to impact the growth of that

and your ability to price appropriately?

COUGHLIN: Yes, well, if you look at our model, our customers trust us because we're their partners in taking care of their pets. So over 80

percent of our customers are in our pals program and increasingly in our vital Care Program, which for 90, 99 a month, you get a total care

inclusive of free checkups, discounts on grooming discounts on your food. So we really use the data to create a better experience for pet parents.


COUGHLIN: And as you said, whether that is insurance offers, whether that's RX, there's all kinds of new addressable market for us, and all kinds of

ways that we can take better care of pet because of that data.

In terms of pricing again, we have that higher value customer that's really looking to take best care of their pets. So we don't, we don't have the

same pressures that others might.

And importantly, less than 30 percent of our portfolio is sold that those mass players or those grocer players, so we don't have the same pricing

pressures that others made.

CHATTERLEY: We have to talk about yummy.

COUGHLIN: The love of my life. Yummy is 13 and a half a double cancer survivor. And I will tell you, I switched him to fresh frozen food through

what was it when I first started PETCO four and a half years ago and it changes life.

And I'm quite confident he wouldn't be here now if I didn't have him on some of the best food you can give.

CHATTERLEY: Yes, I never have the love of your life. Being a pet friend feels like and they're the best things in the world.

COUGHLIN: Yes, I know you do the same from Romeo.

CHATTERLEY: Yes and the thing. They're the best things better than humans. I don't deserve it. Yes, great to chat to you. We'll talk again soon. Big

hug to Yummy as well, thank you.

COUGHLIN: Thank you.

CHATTERLEY: The CEO of PETCO there. Thank you. OK, up next, from pets to tech. I speak to the CEO of a startup using solar energy to distill

drinking water, but how. Well here, stay with us.


CHATTERLEY: Welcome back to "First Move". The world is running out of water and it's an escalating crisis drinking water. I mean today, more than 25

percent of the world's population; 2 billion people lack access to clean water.

By 2025 that figure could rise to 50 percent say UNICEF? Many more people live in areas of water scarcity, where women and children predominantly

spend an estimated 200 million hours every day collecting water a colossal waste of time.

A startup called Source Global is working on a solution. It's invented the technology to fix extract water from air using solar power. And joining us

now is Cody Friesen and he's the CEO of SOURCE Global, Cody fantastic to have you on the show.


CHATTERLEY: Condensing water from the air is not a new idea. But the question of how that water is condensed and the energy used to do it is

important. And that's what makes what you're doing so exciting. Just explain the concept and the technology behind it, please and welcome.

CODY FRIESEN, CEO, SOURCE GLOBAL: Yes, great to be honest with Julia. And as you noted, you know, the challenges with water around the world are

dramatic, right, 2.4 billion people lack safe access to water at their home.

And, you know, that manifests itself, as you know; today 200 million hours will be spent by women or girls fetching water. And you know, over a

trillion bottle plastic bottles of water will be sold this year, right.

And so that challenge is just massive. And we aim to make safe water an unlimited resource around the globe. By taking basically the principles of

renewables, you know, we think about how solar electricity is now the lowest cost electricity on the planet.

We effectively do that for water. Source, hydro panels basically take in sunlight and air and can produce perfect water almost anywhere on the


CHATTERLEY: So you're going to have to explain that more deeply. So no further filtration or cleaning is required. Everything happens within the


FRIESEN: Exactly. So you know, we sort of live on a wet planet, I think all of us appreciate that. But the total amount of water vapor that's in the

lower part of the atmosphere is just a mess.

But it's like 100 million years of all of humanity's water replaced every single week by the hydrologic logic cycle. And so the question really only

becomes of how do you take that water vapor and make it liquid in a renewable way.

And so what we do is we take hygroscopic materials that have been engineered to concentrate the water vapor from the air by about 10,000

times by volume. And the way that you have experienced that in your own life is, you know, when you leave the lid off of a sugar bowl, the sugar,

it's a little bit clumpy.

Or if you live in a place with a really cold winter, you know your antique wooden furniture cracks and then swells in the wind in the summer, that

process is just those materials coming to equilibrium with their environment.

And so in a very similar way, these engineered materials do exactly that. And then we expose them to sunlight. So the water vapor is fires back out.

And we do that many hundreds of times per day. And so by doing that we basically produced distilled water.

CHATTERLEY: I mean it's phenomenal; one panel produces how much water in a day. Can you do the comparison with the number of plastic bottles that one

panel could save to your earlier point about how many plastic bottles will produce in one day? Because this is another piece of the jigsaw puzzle here

that that you're tackling?

FRIESEN: Yes, exactly. So each panel replaced about 10 plastic bottles per day, and has a 15 year life. So you think about that 60,000 or so bottles

that are reef displaced through its lifetime.

And then of course, just like when you think about solar, rarely do you see one solar module, we put these together to serve individual homes, schools,

high end hotels, whole communities.

And so we're able to basically match the amount of drinking water that's needed at that place in a way that really solves that problem in a

sustainable way, in a way that is independent of whether the rain has fallen or if the infrastructure is good.

CHATTERLEY: I was just doing the math there. So over a 15 year period, we're talking one hydro panel, eliminating the need for 54,000 bottles, how

big is the hydro panel? And what's the cost of one panel?

FRIESEN: Yes, so the size of a hydropower is about the size of an industrial solar module. And when we sell them online, they're about $2,000

per panel. And of course, we do large arrays, they're lower cost.

When we think about the places where we've gone, so we've now completed over 450 projects in over 50 countries, starting in our own backyard here

we have the largest Native American population in the United States is the Navajo Nation.

And that nation is the size of West Virginia 175,000 people, 54,000 people with no water. So last year, we installed it over 500 homes and prevented

them from having to drive long distances to go get their water.

We've also done projects with Aboriginal Housing office for Australian Indigenous and whole communities such as the Warm Springs tribe and Oregon.

And so sort of when we think about solving water stress, you know, today we have these challenges associated with over a million miles of lead pipes in

the United States, aging infrastructure around the world.

Of course, groundwater overdraw everywhere, and climate change, of course, on a planetary basis. And so those challenges are substantial and getting

worse. And yet we're still sort of in the Roman era where we still talk about how much rainfall there was last year.

So we know whether or not we're going to have enough water behind the dam. And so how do we, the question becomes how we move ourselves from this

historical sort of Roman era approach waiting for the waterfall in the sky to a 2022 approach that enables us to program where there is perfect

drinking water at any given time in a sustainable way that it really takes us for.


CHATTERLEY: I have many, ton - millions more questions to ask you. I guess the digital component of this is vitally important to because you can track

the performance to ensure nothing's malfunctioning and going wrong, which I know someone will comment on if I don't ask you about this.

But the other thing I want to ask you is the needs are so vast one company is not going to address this will you license this technology to other

companies? I know you've raised money from some huge names like Blackrock, Duke Energy, and Bill Gates' Breakthrough Energy ventures?

Do you need more money? And are you talking to governments? Look, I've thrown all the questions at you.

FRIESEN: Yes, Julia, I think you hit the nail on the head with that last part, which is the reason why Blackrock or Bill Gates or these are Harvard

come into this company, is because they see just a massive scale of the problem, right?

The tam or total addressable market is effectively infinite for a single company. You nailed it, right. And you know, from my perspective, anybody

working on perfecting drinking water is a hero in my book.

Because it is just such a massive issue that, you know, when I talk about the number of hours spent by women and girls fetching water, that's like a

statistic that sort of knocks you back 20 million hours just today.

But of course, we all know that that's just the tip of the iceberg of the issue, right? The knock on effects on that lack of education, of course,

they're fetching water with cholera, or whatever.

You know, they're, they tend to have higher mortality rates and all these other issues that knock on from having to fetch water, right. And yet,

we're living in a world with smartphones, 6 billion smartphones, where every single human on the planet effectively has access to all of

humanity's information.

And so, you know, we've gone from information poverty, if you want to information wealth, and you know, food poverty is getting ever less

challenged, and yet water poverty is expanding.

So it's a huge problem that needs to be solved in a new way. And so that I think that's number one. And I think you're exactly right. So from a

licensing perspective, from a subsidiary perspective, from other people coming in with similar ideas, or maybe, you know, other resources, all of

that we need all of those different approaches to solve this problem.

From a digital perspective, so every single hydro panel, I just mentioned, the materials part of this, right, there's the thermodynamic element,

there's the machine learning element, there's the digitized element, there's a bunch of layers that make source hydro panels really special.

And one of those is that every hydro panel connected to the cloud around the globe. And so for the first time, we've really built a global digital

drinking water utility, right?

And so we were able to our network operations center to see that we're doing what we say we've done, right, and, and if we're falling short, we

can get out there and solve it and that again, it's programmable, it's distributed, it's digital.

So it's a different it's just leapfrogs and still away that--

CHATTERLEY: And you know what, I've run out of time and I'm being shouted out, so I'm going to have to get you to come back and talk about this.

FRIESEN: You asked me a lot of questions--

CHATTERLEY: I probably - on you. So I knew I had to interrupt you, Cody, amazing work that you guys are doing. Thank you so much. Come back and

we'll reconvene on this conversation. Cody Friesen, CEO of SOURCE Global, great to chat to you. Thank you. We're back after this, I think.



CHATTERLEY: And to a really fast and finally out risk may have left the building but he's still a king size draw at the box office. Preliminary

numbers show the new Elvis biopic in a dead heat for number one with Top Gun Maverick.

Estimates show each film at just over $30 million at the U.S. box office. A final tally is expected later today. Elvis is the Warner Brothers movie,

the studio owned by CNN's Parent Company Warner Bros. Discovery, now I'm about to leave the building as well for better or worse.

That's it for the show. "Connect the World" with Becky Anderson is up next and I'll see you tomorrow.