tv Best of Bloomberg Technology Bloomberg November 19, 2016 6:00am-7:01am EST
going public. they filed for an i.p.o. under the jobs act. this is something a company can do if it makes less than $1 billion in revenue. its i.p.o. would be the biggest of a social media company since twitter sold shares back in november 2013. our editor at large cory johnson caught up with bloomberg's social media reporter and a partner right after the news broke. this i.p.o. could happen as soon it is a first quarter of this year, maybe as early as march. it could be up to $4 billion in what they raise. this is really incredible considering they filed to go public before the election. everything still seems pretty much on track.
>> fairly amazing here that if we're talking about a $25 billion i.p.o., facebook went out and collapsed afterwards. this is very aggressive pricing. >> this is absolutely aggressive. what they are going to try to emphasize is their growth potential. snapchat is very early on their path for revenue and they already have 1/3 of facebook's users in the u.s. they are definitely not making as much money off every user as twitter or facebook do. twitter has fewer active viewers. snapchat will probably have about 350 million, definitely a fraction. their point is definitely going to be to emphasize growth. >> justin, let me ask you, you had the tiger by the tail in a usiness that grew so fast.
it had so many users and such revenue, not unlike snapchat. what is your take on a company that has decided to go public with the backing they have had? justin: snapchat has a tremendous network effect. they have people using it many times today and i don't think that's likely to change and i think it is likely to grow as more people spend more time on mobile around the world. the long-term prospects are extremely strong. cory: what do you think about the i.p.o. as the way for a company to get out and decide to grow the next step? justin: it makes sense. it's the next step to get liquidity for early investors, to get liquidity for early employees, i think it's all part of the process. the price is pretty high, but i think we'll see in the long-term these tech companies have a strong network effect will be extremely valuable. people think facebook is super valuable right now but they only ave 1.7 billion people and
billions more that will eventually join facebook. cory: i have a chart that shows the i.p.o. business but the i.p.o. business -- we'll get to that in a minute, but the i.p.o. business itself has been very quiet. if you look at this chart, the umbers we are talking about, how many i.p.o.s happen in recent years. really low numbers for 2016. if you go here, you see the benefits from facebook, but fundamentally, 2016 is an enormously quiet year. why is that? sarah: there have been many factors why we haven't seen as many ideas as we expected. 2017 is the year we might see snapchat, uber, dropbox and airbnb get more serious about going public but capital has been extremely easy to get in recent years and it looks like that may have peaked and now companies may have to look for
other sources of capital as vcs and later stage investors want a return on investment and are getting skeptical about return on growth prospects. cory: i can't wait to see what the numbers really look like. see the spin that will be a part of that. sarah: anyone who wants to link it to us. cory: bloomberg is here to elp. staying on social media, google and facebook have announced some actions to stop users from stop posting fake stories and driving revenue after chris pointed fingers at these stories may have influenced the u.s. presidential election. sarah, let me starlet with you. this is a story that has exploded in recent days after the election of donald trump for president. to me, the strongest thing about this was the story on buzzfeed bout the macedonian bloggers putting up fake stories to
generate clicks to get paid. sarah: this is an extremely lucrative business if you can figure out a way to play it. the outrage sells. clicks are easy to get on these platforms and facebook for its part needs to take a close look and is taking a close look at its responsibility for distributing information. fake news is one thing and that might be easy to quash but what might be more difficult to address is these more biased stories that give you some of the facts and maybe create a misleading perception. they are not necessarily fake are definitely more propaganda ike in their nature. cory: you saw the fake story of the hillary clinton indictment and trumped up -- pun intended -- by fox news. they actually ran with that story which wasn't real. facebook's founder, mark
zuckerberg says only 1% of the stuff up there was fake. justin: i think that is completely wrong. cory: you think that is fake? justin clonk i think that is not accurate. it started on a viral site that was newly registered. that story was shared 216,000 times on facebook where is the new york times story that was true that said hillary clinton, the f.b.i. was clearing her of all charges was only shared 80,000 times. the impact of some of these fake tories can be huge and i think it is facebook's obligation and thical responsibility to not help spread fake news. cory: did facebook make money on the spreading of fake news? and at what level do you think that happened? justin: i don't think they are profiting off of it specifically but it is optimized for engagement. that means people click on what they want to see and people
click on what confirms their biases. facebook has optimize their algorithm to show people what they want to see and oftentimes that does not correlate 100% with what is true. cory: it sounds like they did make lots of money on these clicks, but it was set up in such a way that they were a great beneficiary of all these clicks on all of these fake, inflammatory stories. it had people confirming their own biases. justin: when people are engaged, when they like something, whether it is true or not, they spend more of their time and attention on facebook, so they are benefiting from it. emily: meantime 13 filings rolled out this week giving us a glimpse of what tech stocks are hot or not according to biggest institutional investors.
that are blind or have poor eyesight will hear the car coming. the new rule could prevent about 2400 pedestrian injuries a year. speaking of electric cars, tesla shareholders approved the solar city merger this week by an 85% vote. we caught up with david welch for all the details. >> what elon wants to do is you can get a solar roof and a battery system so the sun's rays charge your battery. it is a one-stop shop. he synergy is there. it is not clear why these companies need to be together other than it is elon musk's vision. it is not that kind of synergy.
for solarcity, the synergy carries so much weight. they have almost 400,000 people that put money down to get a model 3. when you put stuff under the tesla name, that could really generate revenue and that is what elon is really pushing with this. emily: ben, what do you think pact will be of trump pact will be of a presidency on elon musk's ision? this is a president-elect who may not believe that climate change even exists. >> just one point on the acquisition, it is important to note one of the things that were just about solarcity was the buffalo manufacturing plant, it was good to see -- i think having tesla has under
tesla's umbrella helps to panasonic. as far as the political climate, the political climate across many sectors is facing a lot of uncertainty. trump and his staff has been clear that they are not going to be supportive of climate change. the investment tax credits that drive one of the drivers of solar in the yates was shepherded in by paul ryan. it is a jobs creator. i do not think they are going to go after tax credits. it is still a risk and it is something that people are talking about. the vision is to get down to a cost that is competitive without tax credits. there are companies on the version that. we have a difficult solar environment right now.
-- on the verge of that. because of oversupply particularly because of ramping up too much capacity in the short-term the medium-term solarcity benefits from that because we are seeing prices drop dramatically -- that will help their costs and help with adoption. emily: what are the new products that tesla and solarcity will offer? reporter: you are going to see a olar roof. these are not just panels you install on top of a house. these are actually architectural roofs and look pretty good. it is a total one-piece unit that is the entire roof of a house. for tesla, the big thing is obviously the model 3 which is going to come out in about 18 months. the vehicle has to go off without a hitch to generate cash to keep the enterprise going. after that, elon has talked about a delivery truck, pickup truck being electric.
my guess is that we will see the pickup truck first. you will see the fleet of vehicles coming out over the next several years. emily: the business of running a stock exchange has changed quite a bit. fees run, listings down and disclosure requirements are easier than they have been in years. after that, a changing of the guard at the top of one of the iggest operators in the u.s. betty liu talked with deana on he exchange. adena: i've been working with bob now for 10 years and when i
came back as president and coo, he and i have been partnered together to make sure we are optimizing the business. i feel like i have my handprints on the vast majority of what we have been driving toward and focused on. my job is to continue the journey to make sure we continue to be a critical market for an infrastructure provider. betty: bob has been very focused on technology and expanding those capabilities at the nasdaq. will that be a major focus going forward for you? adena: technology is deeply embedded in our dna. it's how we got started to be the first electronic xchange. that will continue to be our focus and how we can bring emerging technologies to interact with the capital markets as efficiently and effectively as possible. client service, all the other things that come with being a world-class exchange. betty: is there anything different you might do, anything you might expect to see out of the nasdaq? adena: we have been transforming nasdaq into a global market technology provider and i expect i will continue to take that journey with the clients and employees as we continue to be an exchange operator.
betty: there's a lot of uncertainty around policies in general. we were just hearing president obama talking about what may or may not be expected. what he is responsible for or not anymore. there's a lot of talk as we heard from president-elect trump about rolling back regulations that have been imposed on the financial world. how's that going to affect the nasdaq? adena: to the extent we do have a republican administration and they show a pro-business orientation, that does tend to come with what i will call balance in regulation. one area that has impacted our industry has been dodd-frank and while there are a lot of good safeguards that have been put in place coming from dodd-frank, there has been unintended consequences. notably banks are no longer in a
position to offer much-needed liquidity in some of the markets where we operate. we would like to see the opportunity for dodd-frank to be modified for banks to take responsible risk taking to provide that really important liquidity. betty: modified or retracted? what would you prefer? adena: we have to recognize an enormous amount of work went into the creation of dodd-frank and there's a lot of reason for it. we recognize the history we come from but we know whenever you put in new regulation, there are unintended consequences that come with it. how can we make sure we are modifying the regulation to make sure it is having the impact you wanted to have? betty: would you say president-elect trump is good for the exchange? is good for the financial market? adena: from a we have seen so far, which is only one weekend, a republican administration with
a pro-business orientation is good for the financial industry. betty: he has pledged to cut back on corporate taxes. how big an effect is that going to have? adena: if you have some of the ax policies they are considering, they repeat ration tax, holidays and other things that make it so companies can optimize the cash they are generating and reinvesting in the business appropriately and reinvesting in growth, that is good for the economy. with that was betty lieu adeana freeman who takes the helm at the nasdaq in january. coming up, tighter regulations that could make business a lot tougher. e'll head to hong kong next. check us out at bloomberg tech tv week days 3:00 p.m. in new
emily: sticking with the car business, it has only been a few months since a ride giant bought out uber's operations in china. they are going to enhorse tighter ride sharing rules. if that policy goes into feblingtuber's deal might give -- a last laugh. with david spoke kirk patrick. take a listen. >> there is a discordance between the central government and the local administrations. if you look at the local government. the local level because the city governments are in charge of issuing a lot of permits for the axis operations. this is a push back from the cab rives.
it is a blow to their business. >> they were taking a step closer to an i.p.o. i wonder if you get the sense with not just uber but some of these unicorn companies are starting to think about publicly trading companies. >> i think in general that may be happening. i don't sense it as much at uber as some of the other companies. i think uber is feeling comfortable being able to raise capital at these astronomical evaluations. if you look at facebook's situation, if they had never gone public, they would be able to do a lot of things to respond to situations that are putting them in a difficult position now that they cannot do when they have to keep turning the advertising crank to please wall street. i can see them being sympathetic
to not going public. emily: 10 cent reported earnings this week. that's thanks to three parts of the business. payment and cloud services. peter ell stomach covers the company for bloomberg news and oins us from our tokyo bureau. tencent has tried to transform the biggest revenue streams in its business here. how well is that going? the company is the dominant player in messaging services through chat and qq. it is investing into cloud services and games and online paying systems too. it has a bunch of new initiatives it is trying to invest in and expand its revenue from here.
they have been essential to tencent's growth. what are some of the trends we're seeing there? any signs of slowing growth? >> just for context, they have about 840 million users. about twice many as twit er. it is the most popular messaging service within china. they also have the qq messaging services. growth is slowing a bit because they have now been adopted by half of the adult population. they are selling more advertising through those mediums as they offer new services and are also marketing games and other kinds of good through them. they are very, very popular services and tencent is trying to take advantage of this. emily: still ahead, twitter
emily: welcome back to "best of bloomberg technology". i'm emily chang. fallout from the election of donald trump continues to ripple through the tech world, especially when it comes to social media companies. this week twitter announced it suspended the account of prominent white supremacist. among them richard spencer. twitter also added tools this week to help users better filter out abuse. in a statement the company said because twitter happens in public and in realtime, we have had some challenges keeping up with and curbing abuse i
conduct. -- ok a step back and >> twitter is in the run-up to the election understood that there has been a dramatic increase in hateful conduct on their site. their anti-defamation league has run studies. there has been an increase in white supremacists, anti-semetic. held up by the excitement over the election. not necessarily endorsed by trump but definitely they have found a way to rally around the lection.
and so the company was already working on tools to current harassment in light of that, and i think that the news they released earlier this week about some of the more stringent rules are going to be in place, better reporting tools people will have, and now they are showing they can actually take ction. this is something they have come under fire for in the past and in light of the election, they really need to take a serious look at it. for facebook there is fake news. there is a fake news on twitter too, but on twitter people are much more concerned about the amount of harassment and abuse. emily: facebook and twitter have been criticized for amplifying the voices that people wanted to hear. let's take a listen to what mark zuckerberg had to say about fake news and whether or not it influenced the election. take a listen. >> personally, i think the idea that fake news on facebook -- t's a very small amount of the
content -- influenced the election in any way is a pretty crazy idea. emily: jennifer, what do you think? how much responsibility does facebook, twitter bear here? >> the election has highlighted and amplified how impactful social media is. i think all of these private organizations -- they aren't subject to first amendment coverage, common carrier rules. but how they think about their impact requires them to reflect on what that looks like. even if it's a small percentage of that today, how this will change over time and what tools they can use on a nonarbitrary basis, manage fake news or harassment or aggression through their sites is something they need to be taking a look at and suspect they are.
emily: facebook is enormous. david kirkpatrick wrote the book on facebook and suggested earlier this week that jack dorsey is taking a more political stance. where we are seeing mark zuckerberg be much more apolitical. >> zuckerberg, it's important to him personally to appear unbiased. we saw how facebook reacted to the dispute earlier this year around trending topics, when gizmoto reported that there may be liberal biases in the stories they selected to be trending. facebook almost over reacted to that. they fired the human editors, they invited conservatives to headquarters to speak with zuckerberg and learn more about how newsfeed works. this is a very tricky place for zuckerberg to be in. he does not want to be the arbiter of truth. he doesn't even want to block biased opinionmongering news, opinion masquerading as news. those will be the most difficult articles for facebook to try to
restrict. fake news could be easy. those kind of things that are trying to persuade people are going to be a lot harder. emily: do you think facebook needs to take greater responsibility to add more human editors, human curators of news, like yahoo! news did back in the day? >> i think facebook has never characterized themselves as a news site. it never characterized itself as a promulgate or as news. putting that responsibility on them from a human editing perspective raises their liability. emily: but the reality is so many other users are seeing their news through facebook. >> i think that is fair and the type of information that is shared. there may be some automated tool solutions, and don't forget the power of users themselves, to be able to self manage and self regulate. there is quite a lot of that already today. zuckerberg could put more tools in place to enable the individuals to manage that as well. >> if people are only clicking on stories they agree with, maybe they won't understand what's fake or maybe they have been lacking their own tools to
discover what news is or isn't, to be believed. >> that's a challenge. that's a challenge even before facebook came along. people often choose to hear information they want to hear. they choose fox news over cnn in the same fashion. so how much of that responsibility falls back to zuckerberg and facebook versus the individual and consumer, and the education system we try to foster acceptance of different voices. emily: sheryl sandberg did publicly endorse hillary clinton in this particular election. let's talk about snapchat. we have reported that they have filed to go public, they filed to go public before the election. is snapchat facing any of these allegations are they in a different place because the content is so ephemeral? sarah: snapchat is not fee-based. it's not even one of those situations where you are sorting through who to follow. they show you what to look at, they have their discover channel that has media partners creating
content. they have live stories that have covered rallies from clinton and trump. both candidates advertised on the platform. snapchat's really not been affected by this as much. it is more ephemeral content that people are sending to each other. internally, i don't think snapchat executives, even though they filed to go public before the election, i don't think they are worried about a trump presidency. everything seems to be on track over there. emily: jennifer, you were just awarded vc of the year by eloitte. i'm curious how you are looking at investing in social media right now. you started a new fund a few years ago. given now power of facebook and twitter and snapchat, do you see social media as -- is there
really room for growth there? >> continues to be amazing innovation. the elevation is driving towards a conversational interface. most of the innovation we're seeing in investing is moving towards where the consumers are spending their time, which is on facebook -- facebook messenger, i messenger. where we see the opportunity for more applications will be driven off the ceiling on top of that platform. emily: billionaire and twitter investor spoke to bloomberg from riyadh this week. he remains optimistic for the future to have site under the c.e.o.
away. what will peter t hinchel bring to president elect donald trump's transition team? >> he is one of the smartest people i know. joe: peter is one of the smartest people i know. what is unique about him is he is able to look at things from a contrary in perspective. the way he maps out the world is not the way people in the media talk about what matters. having peter there will give him a perspective. >> what do you think his priorities will be? joe: i'm not sure what his priorities will be. i think he has a lot of common sense around things that matter for the tech sector. lot of the regulatory reform. i think peter really believes in making america a place where you are continuing to advance and build new things and think about the future. he talks about how the 1960's were looking to the future and we are have that anymore and i think he's going to try to figure how to put that back into place. >> do you think his role ensures
a positive or at least an accommodative environment for technology and maybe even silicon valley more specifically? joe: i don't think you can say anything for sure. it gives me a lot of comfort that it's going to be good for up-and-coming businesses. for established businesses, i don't know if he can protect them or not. we're going to see what happens with that. erik: given the kind of work palantir has done for the u.s. government, what kind of restriction does it face in audi arabia? or the gulf more broadly? joe: i think the restrictions on palantir and i can only speak is a cofounder, not someone running it -- the u.s. government has encouraged palantir to work with other countries and go after terrorism is one of the things that they do. appropriate use of data and civil liberties.
there's a lot of governments that want to help work with the u.s. and do that job but obviously, they are not going to want to report regimes doing things against our own civil libertarian values. self-imposed. >> there are other positions like you can't work with certain parts of china or iran, but i think a lot of the world has become more self-imposed in terms of what silicon valley wants to help with. erik: one of the curious things about palantir is that it remains private. if not mistaken, your cofounder remains ceo of the company and said running a company like this would be difficult if it were public. do you think that is still the case? joe: i think a lot of these founders are very bright people that i learn a lot from an overestimate how hard it is to be public. a lot of people are very scared of becoming public and a lot of people who have made the transition, it's not as bad as people think.
erik: do you think the time will come when palantir can go public? joe: i definitely believe so. erik: how long do you think it will take? joe: as an early shareholder, i would like to see it earlier and i understand why other people might want to delay it. erik: of all the trends in technology today, whether it is a big data, machine learning, ai or a taunus cars or anything else or that matter because the list goes on, what excites you the most? joe: what excites me is how the big industries are going to change over the next 10 or 20 years. when you talk about ai, those are tools that we use. just like to cloud is a tool we use. the fundamental truth is data is not being used to run these ministries in the way that it could be. there are platforms being put in place to harness data that for the first time is input into health parts of health care are being run it will make those industries work in a better way. i'm excited about fixing big industries and using technology to run them.
erik: one of the questions you must get all the time is what happens to the jobs? how do you answer that? joe: that is another great question. i think jobs are not as much of a zero sum thing as you think. if we're going to get rid of the manufacturing jobs, that means we have a world where everything you could by is strarle cheap. the cost of everything we buy goes down by 98%. there are services jobs, entertainment and other things people could do to create wealth, so i think it is a golden age if we can all afford things cheaply. it is not nearly as scary as people say. erik: how do you capitalize on that as an investor? joe: i think the shift that is going on is the platforms that are put in place that are going to run the big industries. don't figure out what those platforms are and invest in this platform companies. emily: a powerful protection over a consumer internet access
emily: a story we are watching. microsoft has offered concessions to european regulators trying smooth the way for the acquisition of linkedin. they started casting an eye over the megamerger in october. microsoft announced the $26.2 billion deal in june. tech stocks were hit hard by president elect trump's surprise win. though they have crept back light slightly in recent days, many are questioning what a trump presidency will mean for technology, specifically acebook, amazon, google.
they asked what president elect trump means for big cap u.s. teches. take a look. >> i think there is some basic narrative about technology and silicon valley being outor favor just as middle america goes in favor. again, who knows? it is too early to tell. >> prior to this election, i mean, the recent moves aside, did what we see in these big tech stocks look bubblely like investors were sort of casting aside rationalism about evaluations? > we're stuck, guys. there are certain things we think are overvalued and the business model is questionable and others are borderline cheap. >> which ones are cheap? >> i'm not going to disclose specifically. but the point being is that i think everything is moving together right now theme atically.
i think over time that is going to dissipate and the companies are going to be judged on their own merits. take a look at something as neutrality which the obama administration embraced and ham strung the telecom companies. he has in the past talked about that not being fair to the telecom companies. companies that have benefited from net neutrality have gotten hit pretty hard. but will he enact anything? we don't know. >> what do you think about what a president donald trump would mean for big deals that are still pending such as at&t and its effort to buy time warner? >> i think there will be fewer business combinations. they tend not to happen in those time periods. he sort of indicated some skepticism on a couple of big
deals. emily: that was jim chanos. net neutrality is considered by many to be the obama administration's signature policy on tech. remember this is the idea, internet service providers like at&t and verizon cannot create fast and slow lanes for web traffic putting companies like netflix at their mercy. the f.c.c. passed rules prohibiting this but the election of trump has many concerned net neutrality could end up on the chopping block come 2017. he didn't have a clear policy on the issue, trump once tweeted obama's attack on the internet s another top down power grab. we were joined by larry downs and for a round table discussion. >> i don't think that's what is going the happen. that tweet you mentioned was in
response to president obama's announcement he wanted to the f.c.c. to urn turn it into public utilities. i think the net neutrality rules themselves are not all that controversial. neither congress or the f.c.c. may move them back to the federal trade commission. i don't think they are going anywhere. >> you think it will remain basically business as usual. >> business as usual for net neutrality but not for reclassification of i.s.p.'s. >> what will it mean for netflix? >> it won't change anything or or consume -- consumers. >> our bloomberg intelligence analysts have analyzed -- outlined three possible ways that the policy could change. one through the courts, you know, we're expecting trump to appoint another supreme court
justice. through congress, limiting the ability or the new trump appointed chair of the f.c.c. they would change the rules themselves. what do you think is the most likely path forward? >> i think you can count on the new f.c.c. chairman to start undoing the legal claims of authority that underlay the two open internet orders we have seen. once that happens, i think that will kick the issue back by default to the federal trade commission. they could have addressed this issue starting 10 years ago and that really forces the democrats to decide do they want to take the deal that the republicans offered them last year? if they do, they may succeed in getting some version of the issue back to the federal communications commission or they may get the federal trade commission to have rule-making power. but i think larry is basically
right. you're not going to see this issue change fundamentally. the 2010 rules were never really controversial at their core and the industry if they had to uld sign up today to a self-regulatory pledge. >> there has been debate by the authority to have f.c.c. over net neutrality or some other issues. do you think that will be questioned? >> i think so. the question has been in 1996 did congress give the f.c.c. authority over broadband? that is what we have been fighting about for the last 10 years. it is not really clear. congress may step in and make it more clear. the f.c.c. may reinterpret it themselves and say we're going back to the version we had all along up until chairman wheeler. that will definitely be a keystone of what they will do to re-examine their own authority and decide what did congress
really mean and what really is our limit? >> what about mma? trump indicated he was not a fan what he believes no one really knows. it has been confusing. there is other analysis that he could be good for m&a. that a sprint and t mobile could merge in this area if they wanted to. how do you think the f.c.c., a trump f.c.c. will weigh in on m&a issues? >> there is really no way to tell. we have to wait to see who becomes chairman and who takes over anti-trust at the department of justice. but the people who actually follow these things are in general skeptical of the need for government intervention and are generally more willing to let deals go through and if there are issues, real demonstrated harms to consumers, to come up with conditions that will respond to those instead of
blocking deals or using conditions just to regulate without going through the normal process as the obama administration has done. so i think probably we'll see deals more likely to go through but it depends and if you saw a wild card chairman come in that might follow through on what trump has tweeted about maybe things would be different but there is no way to tell at this point. >> silicon valley is in an interesting position having been so outspoken against donald trump. how do you see the relationship between trump and the tech industry playing out. do you think trump risks alienating them further? to their detriment perhaps. >> i think what we can hope for is that republicans are free trade. silicon valley likes things to be left unregulated and hopefully those things will align and those character difference also work themselves out. emily: that's it for this
carroll: welcome to "bloomberg businessweek." in this week's issue, a look at president-elect donald trump and who he surrounds himself with and what that means for wall street and main street. fear that hasthe taken hold in tech town. carol: and like california says they may be better off with out trumps america. oliver: all of that head on "business week." carol: we are with alan pollack. in the finance section, you look