tv Bloomberg West Bloomberg May 26, 2016 6:00pm-7:01pm EDT
mr. trump spoke today in bismarck, north dakota. mr. trump: we're looking for absolute competent at the tens. i expect we'll have many women involved, i have had it with many women involved and i think you're going to see that. you're going to see that very strongly. mark: mr. trump also said he is willing to debate democratic presidential candidate bernie sanders with the money raised going to charity. the house has officially begun talks for the fight against the zika virus. they left town for the memorial day recess with no progress toward a compromise. rick sneijder is looking to stop administrative investigations into how two state agencies handled flint's drinking water crisis. the move follows warnings the many women s could hurt state
that. it's a very interesting thing. during the trial we learned some interesting things of what went on behind the scenes. there were negotiations between larry elson and larry page, discussions about that, in the very early days, we are seeing in the picture, there was kind of hilarious comments, she approached one of the google people. we are a new kind of company, we don't adhere to the old rules. she said to them, how about the shalt not , thou
steal, that's an old rule. that got some laughs in the courtroom even from the judge that didn't seem to favor oracle in this trial. it's an interesting case. one of the things we found during the trial, when oracle bought sun, they assigned a big dollar value to the java licenses and potential java uses. so people look at that deal and wonder why did they pay so much money for sun? java was great value to them, the value they expected to get out of java they may never get if they can't enforce the licenses and using this without a license. emily: this case could have spurred a lot more litigation. what's the take here? >> it's either side could have won and i think it's, you know, the whole point of open sources to be able to use it, so at the end of the day, i think it's good for innovation and smaller companies, i think it's good for investment capitol to be able to use existing technology
and grow businesses out of it. you had oracle didn't build it, they bought it. then they sued the company that used, the former c.e.o. of it who actually helped build it, so there were a lot of elements in this where both sides could have come out the winner. at the end of the day, it's good for silicon valley that we can use technology to build new companies. emily: what are the next steps here? >> as alluded to in the conversation, oracle along the way has been leaving crumbs that it can come back to and file appeal. they took issue with the way that the jury was instructed on fair use. they filed various motions at different points in the trial itself where they asked the judge to rule in their favor as a matter of law saying there are no facts under which google could possibly win. so now that the trial is over, oracle will dig all of those back up, ask the court to overturn the jury which i don't think this judge is inclined to do. the judge was very
complimentary of the jury, seemed to think highly of their efforts. the next stage is likely going to be a fairly extensive appeal to the federal circuit and potentially to the supreme court. we'll see how it plays out. we're not looking at the end of this litigation by any stretch of the imagination. emily: quickly, cory, what does it mean for oracle's future mobile ambitions, is it a huge blow? >> you can see the dollar amounts they were going after here. they wanted to be able to use this case to enforce other infringements they see on the java patents. so i think this is a great disappointment to them. i also point out the movement of stock as you know that i don't tend to believe in the stock market in the short term tells us a whole lot. in this case, the stock was only down a little, the street thought very little about not just the outcome, the positive outcome of this case for oracle, but also the positive valuation of java as a part of oracle's business.
oracle may see a lot of value there, wall street did not. i think that's why you saw the stock not move much after hours. emily: cory, matt, dan, our guest host for the hour, you're sticking with me. now, another story we are watching, has apple got its eye on the media content business? discussions were held in a meeting last year with time warner's head of corporate strategy. talks never proceeded to formal litigation, but media stocks rose on this news. a deal with the owner of hbo could help apple catch up as the iphone maker faces a future of slowing smartphone sales. coming up, the real story behind venture capital israel the k hulk hogan against media.
emily: billionaire investor and facebook board member reveals he has indeed been secretly funding lawsuits to take down gawker media including bank rolling a do if amation case involving hulk hogan over a sex tape. it could threaten gawker's very existence. "wall street journal" is reporting gawker is considering a sale. he issued a statement to financially support hogan's
suit. gawker built its business on humiliating people on sport. they said victims would be too intimidated or disgusted to attempt address for clear wrongs. freedom to press does not mean freedom to publish sex tapes without consent. here to discuss this, owen who wrote the original story for gawker in 2007, that quote outed peter as gay. he is business editor for the "san francisco chronicle." so owen, knowing that you know now, do you have any regrets about writing that story? >> i have no regrets about writing that story. emily: why not? >> i didn't out peter. he outed himself to a wide circle of people in silicon valley who took it upon themselves to say, this is ok for us to know. the unwashed masses should not know such a detail about one of our own. emily: just because he told people who know him, should it be public? >> if it's an open secret, why
shouldn't you discuss it. it was in our mission. also fundamentally as a gay man, i feel like -- emily: yourself? >> as a gay man myself, we need to live in a world where it's ok to say that person is gay, i'm gay, where it's not viewed as some kind of schoolyard taut but as simply a human fact about someone that is interesting. interesting because not everyone is gay, we are a minority within the population, but it should be ok to discuss. emily: what are your thoughts on that? >> it's also ok not to be. >> it's ok not to be gay, i support your right. >> i support yours. i think it shouldn't matter and we're moving towards a world where it doesn't matter, that's a good thing. >> if it doesn't matter, why not say it? >> shouldn't a person be entitled to whom and when they say it if it's their personal business, on this subject or
any subject to be honest to you. it's not so much being gay or not gay. the question is shouldn't a human being be able to determine how they want to express themselves, whether you agree or i agree. that is my issue with it. >> absolutely, i think that to put it in this category of personal business, to kind of treat it as something other, to treat it as something that anyone anywhere should be ashamed of ever is to denigrate the status of gay people. >> i don't know that he ever thought that he was ashamed of it. >> i don't think he was. >> he is a very personal person like many people are. they should be able to determine when they say about themselves whatever they want to say, whether so i respect that i like to live in a world where you live in where it shouldn't matter and shouldn't be a topic of conversation. >> or should be a topic of conversation because it's something you can freely discuss. >> where we don't need to anymore. emily: when you published the story, did you and nick publish it in gawker, did you discuss
it and debate it, was it an automatic yes, we're doing this? >> denton, the conversations were typically one way. he would give me a tip. i would run with my investigation, my reporting, my journalism to see if there was a story there. that's typical between any editor and their boss of the editorial team. you get a possible story. you look into it, you determine what the story is that you want to write. this is a story i wanted to write. emily: nick just released a letter to peter saying this vindictive decade-long campaign is quite out of proportion to the hurt you claim. your plaintiff's lawyer has sued not just the company, but individual journalists. thiel toward the "new york times," i refuse to mean that journalism means massive pricy violations. it's because that i respect
journalists, i do not believe they are endangered in fighting back against gawker. >> the largest issue is should billionaires be able to dictate what is said about them. do we want to live in a world coverage ubjects of get approval over every single thing a journalist writes. if they don't like anything you ight, are they going to fund some secret lawsuit? are they going to use every tool at their disposal to stop you. it's not about whether thiel is gay or not. it's about, for example, the successes and fractures of his hedge fund, it's about his some secret lawsuit? facebook board member very early on in his life when it was a private company. all of these things were things
were covered and things that thiel may not have wanted us to run. does he get a veto on every single thing that a journalist does? emily: what's your thought on that? gawker went hard on bill cosby before anyone else did. hillary clinton and the emails, tom cruise and scientology, not just this one story. >> does bill cosby get to determine what we write about him? that's personal business, right? >> i think we live if a world, these are all fair questions and so my point is this. you can see the perspective of the journalist, this is why they become journalists, this is what they believe facebook b member very early in. i believe your intent is just as admirable as you describe it. i don't believe that's the intent of everybody. i do believe there is mean-spirited and the american public, as evidenced by the election, by the way, would like consequences for journalists also, the fact that you write whatever you want whenever you want whether it's true or not -- >> whoa, whoa. >> people put their own spin on it. consequences.
this is an interesting question about whether or not how do journalists get consequences, how do prosecutors get consequences when they do wrong things, how do government officials get consequences now. this is a consequences where they're shooting back someone who has the capitol saying if you want to do this -- conseque this is an interesting emily: should there be think fa should handle this? >> i think facebook is in a very tough position. now peter thiel has been the earliest backer of the company. he is the one who said mark zucker berg, i believe in you, you have something here, the first real money into that company. with that said, i find it very strange just from looking at silicon valley for decades as i have for a vent you're capitalist to remain on the board this long in the company's life. he doesn't need to be on the board at this point. i think that has to be something -- emily: boards are supposed to be people with diversity of opinion. >> he has that. >> he has it, not only from other people. >> consequences for peter? it o you with the neutrality,
helps to have a trump delegate on the board, perhaps. >> i think many of these are very fair questions. i think like most people, we care about what is in our best interest. so mark zuckerberg and the rest of the board gets to determine at good corporate governance is. >> facebook is structured that wall street does not really get a vote. >> they knew that. they published that, the same with google, they published all that so you knew before you invested it what they were entitled to do. >> let's not say that wall street gets a vote. emily: one last question, owen, did you ever hear from peter around that time? >> i never got anything on the record publicly, any kind of pushback or dissatisfaction. emily: interesting. owen thomas, thank you for coming on, former reporter for gawker, "san francisco chronicle" business editor now. appreciate you joining us and hearing your side of the story. dan, it helps to have as always -- >> it's a really interesting question. emily: with me for the hour. now we're going to dig into
ers continue to drop their name into yahoo!'s core asset. at&t is also making a bid for the struggling web portal against verizon, long considered the frontrunner. what value do people see in the business? dan is the former c.o.o. of yahoo!, current c.e.o. of cheg making some big acquisitions, first on yahoo!, there are reports that you are part of a group, your facilitating dan gilbert's bid for yahoo!, can you tell us anything about that? >> i'm not facilitating anything. i think the story was accurate which was i carry great deal about the company, as do many former yahoo!s.
when there are high quality people interested in understanding the business, we're all happy to help them understand the business. emily: you are helping them understand the business? >> this is a complicated business at a complicated time with lots of competitors and understanding the history of it is something a lot of people have asked me and other formeria has. i'm happy to help people understand about growing companies. emily: how do you think it has proceeded so far? >> it has proceeded like you would expect. a lot of stories because nothing came out, a lot of leaks and a lot of stories around the leaks. they're doing exactly what they're supposed to do. they have been transparent with the process. they have communicated. i think that the process will play out and i think we'll have a much better understanding sometime in july whether yahoo! will be sold or not sold. emily: what do you make of at&t getting in the game? >> it doesn't surprise me.
the number one competitor verizon has been in the game, loudly in the game. they have the same series of assets. verizon has a leg up in the mobile advertising business having bought a.o.l. i think at&t's relationship with peter is probably the part that helps drive this which is peter's understanding of media, the people that work with peter used to work at yahoo!, so it's a very smart group of people taking a look at the asset and see if they can utilize it the same as yahoo! is? emily: what about marisa meyer? >> a lot of what has been said has been remarkably unfair. some of fair, that's the role you take on when you're the c.e.o. of a public company. emily: what is fair and unfair? >> what is unfair when they start publishing things about security and what the company spends on it. that doesn't matter for public investors to understand. she should not be under this kind of attack by anybody. that's the story that should be written. nobody chooses to write it.
why is the c.e.o. under this kind of attack. emily: what do you think of the "variety" cover? >> i don't want to be in her shoes for these reasons. it's that whole segment on what people can and can't write about you. unfortunately, some of these things are fair game whether she likes it or not. at the end day, she is doing her job as a professional c.e. . she is trying to build value, she has a strategy, she is executing on it. it hasn't lived up to the potential she hoped. she said that. they're looking at what else to do next. that's her role and responsibility. emily: so buying imagine easy solutions, writing tools for students. what does it mean for your original core textbook strategy? >> textbook was a tactic to build the largest audience of students to bring overwhelming value and to build a company that supported the needs of students that colleges are not supporting. so we help them get into college, we hope them lower their cost. we help them learn the subject. we help them get tutoring and
help them get jobs. no one else has done that. the acquisition of the largest writing tool, we reach to students from middle school to high school to colleges, 40 million students. we have the largest direct student reach in the world and the services that we're bringing direct to students are growing like crazy. i think we said that our subscription services are growing 37% year over year. this new, this has been the strategy from the beginning which was to use textbooks to build a brand and then build services that are indispensable for students to help save time and get smarter. emily: thanks so much. c.e.o. alking to grab next. ♪ okay, ready?
whoa! [ explosion ] nothing should get in the way of the things you love. ♪ get america's fastest internet. only from xfinity. mark: let's begin with a check on your bloomberg first word news. president obama and other g-7 leaders held their first day of talks thursday. afterward, the president said he and his colleagues discussed
ways to brother economy and put people back to work. president obama: there will be a chance to talk about trade, not only tbp and our involvement in ourselvesrecommitted to making sure we reach those negotiations. mark: president obama will become the first sitting american president to visit hiroshima. marco rubio says he is unlikely to seek reelection. the reason, his friend lieutenant governor carlos lopez is running for the seat. rubio is urged to seek a second term to make sure republicans keep the seat. two jet fighters collided off the north carolina coast today. four survivors were hospitalized. it occurred 25 miles east of north carolina's outer banks.
french police have detained a man believed to have links to extremists. he was believed to have a knife and a tear gas bomb. it took place a block from the bastille where a march was set to begin. it is just after 8:30 p.m. fridainfriday in sydney. paul allen has a look at the market. paul: one market open in the asia-pacific and that is new zealand. it is looking good at a fifth of 1%. futures indicate things are likely to be flat in australia on the asx and nikkei. the regional benchmark index may struggle. one of the bright spots is likely to be southeast asia's largest budget airline air asia, a malaysian-based airline which profits rose sixfold largely thanks to china.
18 destinations in china. air asia is planning to add more. important data out of japan with cpi for april. it is likely to show that deflation is worsening, down 2.4% -- -.4%. more evidence of the negative rates are not working. wants tos as japan insert the words that the global economy is at the risk of falling into crisis in the g-7 communique. i'm paul allen in sydney, australia. ♪ this is bloomberg west. this week saw new alliances force between automakers and their challengers.
the car industry braces for change exactly when it comes to the future of car ownership. the world's biggest car plants are hoping to secure a place in that future. let's take a look at who is leading the pack. ♪ >> carmakers are choosing sides in the ride-hailing wars. volkswagen invested $300 million in jet and toyota committed an undisclosed amount to uber. in january, general motors took a $500 million stake in lyft. let's not forget apples $1 billion bet on china's leader. with traditional car companies clamoring for a piece of the pie, which of the ride-hailers are leading the pack? uber may get all of the headlines, but lyft is taking on as much a big arrival in many u.s. cities and through international partnerships. claims to have more
than 99% of the ride hailing market. it boasts close to 300 million users in over 400 cities. competing 1.4 billion rides in 2015. grab dominates in southeast asia with a presence in 30 cities across six countries and a fast-growing motorbike service. which grew att, 300% last your dominates in europe. as these startups scramble for supremacy, it is too early to tell how the ride hailing wars will play out. emily: let's take a closer look now at grab. uber's biggest competitor in southeast asia. we caught up with the company's ceo and cofounder anthony tan first on bloomberg. i asked him what makes grab different than competitors. anthony: grab has the mobile tech platform in southeast asia.
we have very localized services. imagine taxis, cars and water motorbikes. motorbikes is you jump on right behind and navigates you through the traffic that you would imagine any big city in southeast asia would have. we give back to .5 hours of hours of commute time to citizens. emily: your great-grandfather drove a taxi. your grandfather brought the auto industry to southeast asia. you occasionally drive a grab yourself. tell me a little bit about that. anthony: sure. so, cars have been in my family blood for a long time. and, because of that, we felt very comfortable dealing with governance. i followed my father, working on governance before we build a factory. getting the licenses, the land. for us, learning from that,
learning from how my family ran business and how important working with government on a collaborative approach to basically build grab. that is how grab was founded. our first launch four years ago, we launched for someone very senior in the government. bigy: grab, lyft, a ridesharing partnership in december which recover half the world's population. how is that progressing and when will we see more integration? anthony: you will see global roaming product. whereby, you here in san francisco can book a car in beijing, singapore. you have access to the world largest transport fleet of cars and bikes. emily: if i go to singapore, i could open my lyft app and get a car? anthony: exactly. really not starting again,
reinstalling. it is exactly the same experience that you have here in san francisco. emily: when are we going to see it in full swing? anthony: soon. emily: ok. how worried about you about uber's global expansion plan? anthony: competition makes us all better. grab, we focus on serving our customers. going back to the global roaming program -- very focused on the customer experience. as we continue with localized services like grab motorbike taxis, very unique to jakarta, ho chi minh, all across southeast asia. we will add a new payment piece. in southeast asia, 95% of southeast asians use cash. they don't use credit cards. we said, hey, how do we reinforce that message? how do we be the most relevant
to customers in southeast asia? we are reinvesting in this payments piece to make sure our bikemers, grab tax,xi, enjoy that. emily: does that mean uber does not worry you? anthony: for us, it is about growing the market share and serving our customers, winning their hearts and continuing to be number one. emily: uber at $62.5 billion. didi at $26 billion. what about grab? anthony: there is a range of valuations out there. how we think about it is are we good value? yes, we believe we are very good value. do we believe investors believe in southeast asia? southeast asia is 633 million people. when of the fastest-growing internet populations in the world. google just released a report on that. people at softbank and cic believe grab is positioned.
emily: can you share how much you raised in the last round? anthony: in total, close to $700 million. emily: do you plan to continue to raise money to fund your expansion? anthony: we are always open to great investors and great partners all throughout the world. peoplewe have seen like softbank being very bullish about southeast asia and grab. emily: did, for example, is said to be targeting an ipo next year. what about you guys? anthony: grab right now really targets at building more value, building the greatest, biggest mobile tech company. we have bold ambitions. we try to find how to build great partners. ipo's is one of the many options for us. in 2014 thatid grab might consider in ipo when the number of rides books reaches 2 million a day.
where are you now and would you reiterate that today? anthony: today, we are doing quite a large number of transactions. emily: 2 million? anthony: not 2 million yet, but we do see, again, ipo is one of the many options on the table. emily: ok. we have been seeing a lot of new players entering the ridesharing investment market. toyota investing uber. volkswagen investing in gett. gm investing in lyft. apple investing in didi. what do you make of all of these? /anthony: i think automakers are getting very excited and believe right healing -- i think everybody in the world is seeing ride hailing is the new form of transportation today. we are always open to great partners. these partners could add value. for example, we saw car
automakers investing in that space. we are talking to a lot of them. emily: i was actually going to ask that next. are you meeting with automakers right now? anthony: we are meeting with lots of different partners. you can imagine automakers being very, mentoring to ride hailing -- complementary to ride hailing. they provide the cars and we provide the service. emily: anyone else in particular you are meeting while in the u.s.? anthony: next week, we will be going to a conference. gene and myself will be on stage. emily: the president. anthony: the president of didi. emily: when you look to the future in southeast asia versus china, how do you see this market playing out? obviously very different but this trend towards ridesharing is the same. anthony: what you see in a very
local game, local transportation, big off-line components -- it is not just about an papp or machine learning, but ensuring the cars come clean and the drivers are nice -- we see all these local champions rising in southeast asia. didi in china. lyft here. i think what you are going to see is more and more of these getting stronger because the in aberaffects players of local giants. emily: i want to talk on regulatory issues in thailand. thailand recently ordered you and uber moto off the street. how will you handle that? anthony: grab bike is pushing the boundaries of innovation. and as a company like grab that constantly pushes innovation,
for sure, policies take time to catch up. going back to how i have learned from my family business and being in southeast asia for 67 0, 70 years, we believe working i with the government and innovating policy together -- when we ask ourselves are we doing something better for the country? are we helping make transportation cheaper and better for people? if the answer is yes, we will continue to work with governments to intimate. innovate. emily: because you have these partnerships, does that mean you will never expand in the united states or china or india? anthony: southeast asia, 630 million people. we are a fraction of where we need to be. for us, it is about more localized rather than services. how to engage to win riders and
drivers' hearts. one of the pillars is what we're calling grab pay to double down and triple down in southeast asia. emily: so that means southeast asia for now? anthony: it is the focus right now. emily: grab ceo and cofounder anthony tan. dan rosensweig is my guest. what is your take on the ride hailing wars and why these carmakers are getting into it and why the global wars play out between uber and anybody else? dan: i don't know how it plays out. i think china is not going to be uber's to win. maybe other places in southeast asia could win it. i think only airbnb is the only u.s. company to have a chance to win in china because they bring a new economy into china. they can bring tourists from outside china into china.
i think they are cultivating it very well. ridesharing -- it is interesting to see how the car companies i'm playing into it -- are playing into it. the logic is it people are going to be using uber, fewer cars are going to be sold. if fewer calls will be sold, they will be buying used cars to go into the business of driving uber. the car companies are preparing for a world where they want to make money on every iteration of that car as opposed to only selling the new car. remember, they do used cars. whatthat market drivees will they do? they used to open rental companies. it is a question of how they can stay involved with the car longer and make money off of every use. ride sharing is a way for them to do it. emily: in the u.s., do you think it is winner takes most?
is it a duopoloy? y? should uber be worried about its dominance? dan: i think everybody is always worried. i think it is a commodity were people will go for the cheapest. that are people that get into have it. i think uber has a very big lead and it will be difficult for people to take it away unless lyft will pay a great deal of money to drivers to switch and charge customers less. that is a very difficult business model to sustain, but winning market share is very hard. in a market where uber as such a largely. it is possible, but it is substantial cash. emily: all right, dan rosensweig, you are sticking with me. under the hoodok of an $18 billion social media phenomenon. we will focus on the potential of snapchat, next. ♪
emily: snapchat is now an $18 billion company after his latest round of funding. it just padded its war chest with $1.3 billion as it tries to evolve beyond a teenage phenomenon. itording to its tech, brought and a total of $59 million in revenue in 2015. the app had one million active users in december, a big jump from the year before. with me now is mark and our guest post dan rosensweig. what do we know about the round? mark: around was in progress forever. they started it last year. for most tech companies, an unusually long round.
they started at exceeding billion dollars. they raised almost $2 billion in cash that it has put the value of the company at $18 billion. emily: dan, what do you make of this valuation and the terms as far as we know them? dan: i would love to have that multiple since we are larger than them. i think snapchat is proving itself to be the kind of company that has a chance to be really big and really independent and really sustainable. despite everybody's expectation that people would lose interest, it is gaining interest. i think he's smart for raising capital when he can. he did not give up a large percentage of the company. i think the genius of it is that people are learning to take a lower, more reasonable valuation at $59 million in revenue in exchange for a clean sheet. he is in control of what he wants to do next. emily: you have more media
companies investing more time in snapchat. how would you engage their product into turning this into a real business? mark: they are starting to get really excited about snapchat. the numbers do not show that. $59 million is not a lot of money. sarah spoke to what person familiar who told her they plan on quadrupling revenue this year. you can see it from the way the media companies and politicians and everybody looking at this as an important media platform to promote themselves. emily: hillary clinton did a custom fi filter on snapchat highlighting donald trump's comments on the housing crash, framing out one of his quotes. crashingf hope a happens so people can buy like me." you guys did how they are feeling about this election.
dan: we have a hot off the press poll reaching out to 40 million students. 17,000 person panel that we can look into. what they support. there is popularity in snapchat. in a three-man race, bernie, ismp and hillary, bernie three to four times larger in about support and hillary and trump are about even. in a two-man race, hillary and trump, hillary wins but does not get all of bernie's voters. 10% will go to trump. 25% will not vote at all. emily: they will abstain. dan: a question about the hatpchat valuation -- snapc going four times will have as much revenue as buzz feed this year. one got valued at $18 billion and one valued at $1.5 billion.
what do you think about that? emily: quickly. mark: buzzfeed has editorial staff which snapchat does not. they prefer a company that not reliant on hiring large staff. dan: i think it benefits the phone so much. emily: all right, mark, thank you so much. dan rosensweig, so great to have you on the show. go dubs. we will be right back. ♪
emily: the in-flight wi-fi saul shares spike after receiving a proposal to offer internet on its mastic flights. shares rose as much as 16%, the biggest move since february. it will give gogo some financial breathing room. as passengers increasingly fastd wif-fi that is as in the air as it is on the ground.
it is time to find out who is having the best day ever, or the worst. today it is a global airspace. the airspace company called space hotel hit a snag. astronauts were meant to release air into an inflatable room, but nassau called off the effort after two hours of attempt were unsuccessful. if all goes well, it will swell four times in valium and demonstrate a new way of living for the astronauts. nasa paid the company nearly $18 billion to test the concept. that does it for this edition of bloomberg west. tomorrow, we will sit down with netapps ceo. that is tomorrow on "bloomberg west." ♪
>> from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. charlie: we begin with politics. the state department inspector general criticized hillary clinton's e-mail practices. they said she violated government policies using a government account for official business. the news comes as clinton faces renewed personal attacks from donald trump and a primary fight with bernie sanders. joining me is a political corresp