Skip to main content

tv   Best of Bloomberg Technology  Bloomberg  April 7, 2019 1:00am-2:00am EDT

1:00 am
natasha: the data does not look great. those median numbers don't look great for most companies. it was a 29% median pay gap as compared to their $.99 equal pay gap. right? for minorities in the u.s., it was $.93 on the dollar. ♪ it does not look great, they squeaked out an a. they got an 86 out of 100, but they are the on the company to receive an a on the scorecard. emily: apple and intel, you gave them a b. you gave several tech companies emily: i'm emily chang, and this is the "best of bloomberg technology," failing grades, oracle and hp. why? where we bring you all of our top interviews from this week in tech. coming up, lyft in reverse. natasha: some of those companies shares under pressure post were a or a minuses last year. i.p.o. as wall street analysts raise emily: so they got worse? natasha: no, they didn't get concerns about how fast the worse, but we did add one a new ridesharing company can start making money. plus, lifting the curtain at youtube. criteria this year. the video platform faces more we are ranking across 10 controversies. different quantitative factors, staffers say managers are not it is very transparent. listening, and that proposals to change recommendations and curb conspiracies are being sacrificed for engagement. and we added the median racial pay gap in the u.s. that was a statistic that
1:01 am
citigroup got out this year and and twitter co-founder and other companies hadn't, it set a c.e.o. jack dorsey said rules new standard. like europe's gdpr have a so we added that to the mix. some of those companies that were getting a minuses are now getting b's. they have made some positive impact on the tech industry. he speaks in an exclusive improvements. interview with bloomberg in toronto. they have the equal pay for equal work numbers. their global coverage of how first to our top story. after much fanfare and a first many employees are reporting on. day top in the stock, lyft is and the companies that failed, losing some steam after going it was half of the list. public, falling below its i.p.o. emily: oracle, hp, marriott, price. among investors' concerns, mcdonald's, walmart, outside the justifying its valuation and, a tech world. timeline for turning a profit, why did they fail? natasha: because they are not disclosing. and analysts are striking a it is only because of the cautious tone about the stock, regulatory mandate in the u.k. with the majority giving it a some of those companies, like neutral rating. mcdonald's, have to report in we discussed the road ahead with jake fuller, managing director the u.k. at guggenheim securities and and those numbers look ok, but bloomberg intelligence's mandeep singh. those are only two out of 10 data points that we are looking >> i am not sure you want to for. read too much into the short-term trading activity. emily: we are seeing some steam and momentum behind equal pay it is a high multi-story stock. regulation in the united states. you'd expect to see a little bit of volatility around that. do you think we need laws here? natasha: i think it has been very slow. it has been more of a ground that being said, we did launch game. with a neutral rating. bottom line for me, you have to states including massachusetts, look too far out. new york, and california have
1:02 am
and make big assumptions on things like growth rate, whether or when they can get to a started to improve their state laws. self-driving car future. emily: even when i interviewed you recently saw a judge in the u.s. overturned a block, a the c.e.o., logan green, he said he couldn't give us a date when freeze that had been put out by the trump administration that was going to require companies with over 100 employees to report their gender and racial self-driving cars would be available. pay data to the government. yet many investors were betting that is promising. on them not having to pay drivers and relying on self-driving technology. that is similar to what is happening in europe. mandeep, you seem to think that expectations for lyft are too a recent study shows that even high and lyft will not be able to meet some of those when companies are reporting expectations. just to the government, not >> a lot of people were fully transparently, which is expecting them to trade at the what we are looking for, they narrow the gender pay gap, they same multiples as software and hire more women and move more service companies. women into positions of we don't think that is going to leadership, and that is where you see the benefits. happen. this is still a very rudimentary emily: new surveymonkeypoll shows that 50% of men believe market. that the pay gap, the gender pay gap is made up. although, it is going to be a how do we deal with that, when men, to be frank, are still running these companies? natasha: i think that is sad. i think there is a lot of disruptive service, but no one misinformation.
1:03 am
you can look at it on an equal knows the long-term profitability potential. pay for equal work basis. it just goes to show that we are still in the early stages of this market. emily: jake, what do you make of even in my industry, finance, carl icahn backing out here? the lyft founders own 5% of shares, but have almost 50% in i'm a financial advisor, the gap voting power. it is not unusual in technology. for financial advisors for equal you see the same thing at pay for equal work is $.62 on facebook and google, or for a the dollar. company that maybe doesn't have that is pretty remarkable. a lot of leverage, what do you but even at men and women from make of a big name brand investor backing out? jake: i am not sure we can make the same jobs are being paid the a lot out of it. he has been in four years. same, there is still a median made a lot of money on it. gap because there is an equal opportunity for women and minorities at these companies, and there should become and that not so surprising. i guess the bigger question is is where it makes a difference what about the other large to performance. holders, folks like google, fidelity, gm. my guess is that they are more long-term holders. emily: managing partner at arjuna capital, natasha lamb. coming up, bring on the regulations, says mark zuckerberg. it would be more scary for me if we break down the facebook we saw those types leave. emily: lyft investors are c.e.o.'s plan for the government backing them up. to set new internet laws. i sat down with ben horowitz. that's next. he is on the board. of course he is biased, but he had this to say about what lyft has managed to pull off. bloomberg tech is live streaming on twitter. check us out at technology and follow our global news network, take a listen. tictoc, on twitter. this is bloomberg. >> all of these founders in
1:04 am
silicon valley go, oh, nobody ♪ believes in it. when logan said, they are telling the truth. literally, everybody had written them off. for them to come back and go from, when i stepped onto the board, we were at about 16% share in the u.s., we are at about 39% today. that's an amazing, really thrilling thing. emily: going from 16% to 39% market share in the united states in a matter of years, do you not think that is impressive enough? >> i think it is impressive but it is built on a lot of subsidies. like i said, this market is still rudimentary. when you look at ride hailing and the ancillary services they are offering on the bikes and scooters side, if you offer subsidies and you know you are burning a lot of cash, you can gain a lot of market share. but at the end of the day, you have to retain subscribers and show steady upsell.
1:05 am
that is much harder. i would wait for at least a few quarters to see that steady growth and active riders and active rider pricing and stuff like that. >> from my vantage point, the key question here is not what you have done, it is what you're going to do. from the big questions about the stock profit potential, the only have four ways you are going to get there. you can cut driver pay, you can cut incentives that you have been running, you can bring insurance costs down. or you can get self-driving cars. none of those things are immediately obvious. emily: do you have the same concerns about uber even though it is a much bigger business? >> we don't know as much about uber yet. we don't have the public filings. but it is a bit of a different animal. number one it is a market leader. number two, they have a big international business. number three, they have a large food delivery business so a bit of a different story there. emily: number three, they have a large food delivery business that they are pouring a lot of money into and they have other bets.
1:06 am
lyft pitched itself is focused. uber has a number of bets spread around. does that make lyft a better case than uber? >> i think one of the things you >> welcome back to the "best of have to figure out is, what does the financial profile of some of those other businesses look like? we just don't have the details for uber yet. markberg technology." hard to say. congress theld the food delivery business for uber particularly stands out. companies like grub hub where the profit margins are quite high. emily: uber has released some writing was on the wall when it financial data for the last comes to policing social media. >> i think it's inevitable that there will need to be some several quarters which show that regulation. my position is not that there should be no regulation, that i uber's revenue is much bigger think you have to be careful about what regulation you put in place. emily: over the weekend we got than lyft but also losses much some insight into what zuckerberg thinks those rules should be. bigger than lyft. he made the call from global regulation from a facebook post. have you done any preliminary work on how they actually compare? writing, i believe we need a mandeep: obviously, there are more active role for governments about five times bigger in and regulators. by updating the rose on the internet, we can those are what revenue and booking and you know, it just goes to show that is good about it. protecting society from water they are obviously diversified, harms.
1:07 am
-- broader harms. but at the end of the day, their on monday, we talked with topline is driven more by kind of international growth as well bloomberg's selina wang and a as u.s. growth. guest from the open markets institute who had also served on so it is a very balanced topline the antitrust bureau of new york. whereas lyftt is more u.s.-focused. >> zuckerberg is trying to get and i would say, lyft has higher take rates, take rates of about in front of any rules or 28% and that have grown in the regulations that come, and it is really in his interest to have a last two years. strong voice in this discourse. whatever comes, it will have a big impact on facebook. if i compare them to the online he is calling for new global travel guides looking at expedia, they are much better. internet regime. for lyft and uber, the story is it touches on four key areas, about containing costs now. harmful content, terrorist anything that applies to both of content, abusive content, he talks about election integrity, them. that covers political advertising, he talks about emily: guggenheim's jake fuller gdpr, and data portability, with bloomberg's mandeep singh. allowing users to freely take information from one network to another. just last month, apple held a glitzy star-studded event to announce a slew of new emily: sally, is this something subscription services, but the event prompted more questions than answers.
1:08 am
while the iphone maker brought that you ort the open markets in a parade of celebrities to institute support? introduce its new tv plus streaming service, the company sally: i think it is very silly was light on some key details, for zuckerberg to be out there, including pricing and promoting regulations to fix problems that his business model subscription models, and it has is causing. he has the power to fix these left investors and analysts problems by changing his business model. questioning just how it plans to compete. the targeted advertising dan ives and dallas lawrence business model is the reason why joined us monday to weigh in. fake news and harmful content is being amplified by facebook's >> i think the biggest thing we algorithms. it is the reason why facebook is saw out of the survey was that a collecting so much a on us but majority of u.s. adults are now streamers and they have a heavy -- on us that foreign agents are appetite for more than one content provider. able to target us on social on average they use three media platforms. different content providers for he can fix these problems. streaming. he doesn't need the regulators we used what is known as the to fix them for him. 15-100 rule. it is interesting how it is similar across cable and television. u.s. adults are able to watch, or want to watch about 15 channels and they are willing to emily: selina, there has actually been a lot of criticism spend about $100 on cable and of mark zuckerberg's plan. there was someone who said, mark also want to watch about 15 zuckerberg shouldn't be allowed streaming channels and spend $100 with a maximum of $24 per subscription. if you think about the revenue to make rules anymore. growth there, that is about they are under civil twice what netflix charges. investigation. he cannot regulate himself. so the average consumer is he's not saying facebook should saying, we are willing to spend regulate itself. about $100 a month for streaming. we want to own more than one
1:09 am
he is saying that it can't. device, and we really want to on isn't he? how that device comes with us wherever we go. selina: that doesn't amount to anything than just a glorified emily: apple hasn't said how public relations document that much it is going to cost. is trying to punt off any of the i would assume a higher price blame to the government. point wouldn't be good for your models. right? for instance, when he talks >> i think that is a great point about regulations around harmful that dallas makes. content, it is actually beneficial to facebook because initially, we see $1 or $2 less inevitably mistakes a happen. than netflix. now, they can say we were just following the line. right now for them it is a market share arms race that they now he is talking about a global regime, something like gdpr, need to get to. which actually helps some of these larger players more than the smaller players. right now, if you look at the because it is very cumbersome event, the big issue is obviously a lack of details. for a small company to have to it comes down to them building a comply with these rules. distribution platform than original content. they can increase facebook's in addition to that wherewithal. spending $1 billion a year relative to the $20 billion that netflix, disney, and amazon are spending. this integration they are doing we do believe that a large content acquisition is something that will finally happen at
1:10 am
apple in 2019. emily: but apple rarely makes of whats app increases its power over user data and answers questions like data privacy and makes it harder for regulations in facebook to moderate what is big acquisitions. going on in these platforms if they are encrypted and don't what content acquisition, what have access to what is actually being said. emily: is it possible that these kind of acquisition are you things can be helpful, that looking at? dallas: the clock struck 12 in our opinion for them. facebook could do more to it obviously beats the last one regulate itself, and also that in terms of m&a, $3 billion. governments around the world could do more cooperate to and we look at sony pictures lion's regulate facebook? gate, m.g.m. we talked about cbs viacom as a potential acquisition candidate sally: i think governments around the world should be doing and obviously, the longshot is more to regulate facebook i netflix. don't think they should be taking their cues from mark right now, when you look at that zuckerberg. there are other things that services business, the $50 billion per year, in our could open up competition much opinion, the $450 billion in more effectively than what he services, they cannot trip over proposes. their shoelaces on services. i also think that these half measures, that he knows will not specifically on the content be effective, like the gdpr, so piece. they need to put more fuel in far has not been very effective the engine from content. we have seen them do that in m&a. emily: you believe content is at the call pushing its goals. not necessarily king. he is proposing things that he knows will not fix the problem, will not really require facebook
1:11 am
to change the way it does its business, and will not affect its profitability. the fact that they don't have all the original content in the it just won't work. world is not necessarily a game regulators need to get involved, changer? they don't need to take advice from mark zuckerberg. dan: that's right, i completely agree with dallas. distribution is king. emily: what will fix the problem the biggest news apple made is in your view? they are moving away from the device and hardware strategy and >> i think interoperability letting viewers access apple plus on their smart televisions this year. that's game changer for apple to would be a way to allow entry really become the portal through into competition, things like, for example, your verizon which they are accessing their wireless phone can't communicate streaming content or building with an at&t wireless phone. their individual skin bundles. emily: apple has to have shows that people want to watch. allowing publication between networks can actually allow >> they have a billion subscribers and a billion device. competition to open up. the majority of o.t.t. data portability will not do subscribers are watching more that because if i take my data, streaming content on their smart where rely ticket to? phone than they are on the device. as far as content, netflix does not have a single top 10 show. when we pulled u.s. consumers, not a single netflix, amazon or google show is in the top 10. i need to be where will i take the number one show is "friend"" it to, i need to be where my friends are. also, opening up competitors in based on consumers, for which they paid $100 million this a secure way is another proposal that's been made. year. i think there is a way to get the content but the key is that distribution model. i agree with dan. i believe that integration of whatsapp, instagram, and
1:12 am
emily: "friends" reruns are messenger should be prohibited never going to die. dan, what do think about that? that maybe content doesn't by the f.t.c., and those deals matter so much, maybe that apple is so far behind? should be unwound. emily: they mentioned civil and dan: i couldn't agree more with criminal investigations. dallas in terms of distribution. it comes down to 1.4 billion active devices, which is why we believe the key here how we get to 100 million potential they could have some oversight subscribers over the next three of this marriage. how are we expecting these investigations to play out? to five years is distribution. because, it will likely be that continues to be their years, right? selina: it can be difficult to position of strength. keep up with a number of global although content definitely investigations going on. playing from behind the 8 ball , but right now it is going to be distribution first and then they are looking into unwinding content. that is going to be the focus for cook and company. both their backs are against the wall. parts of facebook. this is in our opinion going to that will be complex and drawn out. many experts say that be the most defining period for integrating the back and actually makes it harder for cook and apple in the history of the company. and right now their future will be defined by their success on regulators to be able to services and monetizing that separate the data. there is also concern that section 230 may be under install base over the next pressure. decade. this is the law that exams these emily: interesting. social platforms for being liable for the content on their dallas, quickly, you also found platforms. that users have a bit of content if it was rolled up, it could have a really big impact on fatigue. facebook.
1:13 am
i know this is first world but we are already seeing other governments move ahead with problems, but there are regulation even as the u.s. overwhelmed. stalls. >> they are overwhelmed with too many choices. disorganized choices. emily: i feel like i spend 30 we just reported singapore is minutes a night just trying to coming out with new laws that figure out what to watch, when i would hold companies like have time to watch it. facebook liable for false information and force them to take them down and show the >> i think that is what apple corrections are making. does really well. emily: are there governments they organize content in a way getting it right? that is user friendly. that's what they said at their announcement last week. that have a good model that other countries could follow that was the real key of this when it comes to creating some effort, to make sure whatever content you want, whatever skin bundle you want, if you want hbo now in that one segment, you sort of framework to better have it wrapped up. govern big tech given that big emily: dan ives and dallas lawrence. tech clearly isn't doing a very good job of regulating itself, coming up, bloomberg technology even though you and many people investigates how youtube let think they should? objectionable videos flourish on sally: i think the gdpr had the site. promise. it's not being enforced properly. we'll bring you to key takeaways, next. and, if you like bloomberg news, check us out on the radio. you can listen on bloomberg app, bloomberg.com, or in the u.s. on i think there are things you can sirius xm. this is bloomberg. learn from it. i also think the california privacy measure also has promise, and i think that big ♪ tech is out there promoting laws in other states like washington state, with the goal of getting a weaker privacy law at the
1:14 am
federal level to preempt the stronger california law. the antitrust perspective, the german authority had a very innovative case where they said that facebook abused its dominance by violating gdpr and collecting too much data from consumers. so i think they have a good clue of where things are going. the european commission has enforced against tech platforms, although it hasn't done a great job of following up on that remedies. emily: bloomberg's selina wang and sally hubbard of the open markets institute. coming up, the twitter ceo weighing in on one of the biggest issues for tech in 2019. saying he thinks regulation is a good thing. more from our exclusive interview. and later, who hacked jeff bezos? the security point man has a new theory. and it is a bombshell. we will discuss. this is bloomberg. ♪
1:15 am
♪ emily: a new bloomberg investigation reveals managers at google's youtube are not doing everything they can to
1:16 am
curb toxic and misleading videos on the platform. staffers tell us instead, it is him and him and all about increasing engagement, the primary measures of views, time spent and interactions with online videos. multiple current and former employees say executives and ceo susan wojcicki were given suggestions how to deal with malicious content. however, been said they were told not to "rock the boat." bloomberg tech's mark bergen wrote the piece and joined us on tuesday. >> there is a series of events dating back to maybe 2012 or so. that was when youtube put in an internal goal to get to a billion hours of watch time. they rejiggered their technical infrastructure based on optimizing how long people watch videos. over the years, particularly since the 2016 election, a lot of people were internally bringing up the downsides of that, where they were sort of optimized for outrage. you see people on the political fringes going viral on the site. what you saw with kids' content,
1:17 am
channels like toy freaks, these emily: twitter cofounder jack really aggressive, violent dorsey is echoing mark pranks that flourished in part zuckerberg's comments, calling for a heavy regulatory hand when because the algorithms favored it comes to the tech giants. many companies are looking for healthier conversations after the engagements over and over again. drawing criticism for issues emily: so youtube gave us a like harmful speech. statement saying our primary focus has been tackling some of the platform's toughest content challenges. we have taken a number of significant steps to prevent the spread of harmful misinformation, improving the in an exclusivity bloomberg interview, dorsey said he would welcome more regulation. experience on youtube bringing , take a listen. jack: we have seen abuse, we -- on youtube, bringing the number of people focused on have seen harassment, we have seen people leave our platform because of it. content issues across google to 10,000 to be able to more we have seen voices being quickly and find and remove the silenced because of what is happening on the service. violative content. that is number one. youtube has made some changes. we can't build a platform of are employees saying it is not speech, a platform of conversation in a service that enough? will remain relevant to people, mark: yeah. if people don't feel safe to speak up. it is pretty clear, in the past three years, they have made a series of changes, fairly radical ones. recently, they eliminated for all of those who believe in free expression and free speech, comments on a lot of videos it's critical that we are not aimed at kids. people at youtube say this is a huge shift. utilizing technology like
1:18 am
twitter to shut down voices and there has been this debate about comments for a long time. they kept comments intact in large part because they wanted to silence others. a lot of our policy is in you to to be a social media enforcement and now more and platform. more so, in technology, is aimed the key issue here is that the at addressing this problem. company is shifting for what they call responsible growth. that is a metric where they are using things like user surveys to see how people feel after they watch videos. it is never going to be fully that is a really tricky thing to solved because it is one of deal with. those things where you just have they have not exactly told to constantly iterate, investors, the public, and a lot perfection is not a goal, but we need to give people much better controls over their experience. and we need to do more of the work for them. of their employees what that many to take over the burden of reporting harassment or abuse. looks like. emily: youtube on twitter has really some follow-up statement saying, but susan wojcicki specifically has made this a priority. but in your story, employees are we need to utilize technology saying that she personally is better to automatically identify not making this a priority. what exactly are employees where it is happening or where telling you? there is a high probability of mark: consistently, the thing i it happening, so people don't necessarily need to see it when have heard for people who worked they didn't ask to get into the under susan is not that she fray. >> how much of it is twitter focusing on that?
1:19 am
doesn't care about these issues. especially around the kids content, which was an eye-opening moment for her and her leadership team. how much of it is inviting more the consistency was more conversation from outside parties? i ask about because for the last few days, to have been a lot of paralysis for a number of headlines about mark reasons. for a number of reasons, whether it is concern about being seen as anti-conservative or the changes they would make to youtube's advertising platform. zuckerberg's piece in the or concern of what that would "washington post," about more mean for creators. regulation of internet. that concern has led to stalling would you say that those inertia. we look at the anti-vaccination, comments are in line with your we have new data. the number of videos promoting general of, because you have talked about this before. anti-vaccination, youtube has jack: generally, i think regulation is a good thing. been aware of it for a long it's a positive. time. our role as a company should be this is a series of events that that of an educator, helping have become a publicity regulators and legislators understand what is happening nightmare and they are forced to with technology. take action. the secular trends we are aware they recently started of, how our system works. the regulator's job is to ensure categorizing these protection of individual. anti-vaccination videos as what they call "water lime content," and will no longer be recommended. they have not shared externally if those changes on the recommendation engine, and a lot of the changes that wojcicki has so as long as we are working brought have made an impact on together on that, that has good their business, their engagement, and these are metrics they are using for their
1:20 am
employees and for the company. outcomes. i haven't looked at all of the emily: coming up, it was national equal pay day in the specific feedback to mark's united states. closed, but i generally think the scorecard has just been that there are things like gdpr that have been positive for our released. platform, but also for the industry in general. specifically, there's a lot more we'll tell you how the biggest clarity around privacy and about how data is being used. tech companies made out next. this is bloomberg. ♪ typically, a service like ours, our terms of service are a little bit hard to read and a little bit hard to follow and not necessarily the most customer-focused thing. gdpr put a stake in the ground to at least bring out some elements that have more control over, but there is room for that. but also, there is not going to be anyone party that is responsible for fixing this. i think putting too much of that weight on any one entity whether it be a corporation, individual or government, is not going to work. we have to think about it a little differently.
1:21 am
we have to think about it as a desire. our purpose is to serve the public conversation and to incentivize and increase healthy conversation. we can look at that deeper. we can look at what we are incentivizing, we can look at the foundational nature of the business and make sure we are not incentivizing behaviors that would take away from health. there are areas where i think we are. those are questions we are asking. it will lead to some fundamental shift in how the service works and how people experience it. emily: that was twitter ceo jack dorsey. now for reaction, we spoke to bloomberg selina wang, who covers the company. take a listen. >> i think it's very far from the grand manifesto zuckerberg had. when we wrote about that on facebook, twitter declined to comment. he does say that regulation as a
1:22 am
whole is a positive thing and that gdpr has been beneficial. he also admits that twitter's terms of service is notoriously difficult to read and that it has brought some clarity about how twitter gathers data and how it is used. i think it is also worth mentioning that twitter has less of an incentive to play a strong role in the discourse around regulation. ♪ it's in their benefit to let emily: in the u.s., april 2 is also known as equal pay day. facebook take the heat and any it is a day to recognize the regulation that eventually comes push, or lack thereof for pay parity among men and women in is going to impact a giant like corporate america. facebook and google much more than a much smaller platform like twitter. they had the second gender and emily: i wonder if some of these will pay scorecard is a ranking of the world's largest companies tech ceos are simply tired of on pay based on race and gender. being blamed for all of these problems and would like to shift this year, the scorecard gave an the responsibility to somebody a rating to only one company, else. citigroup. selina: there is an interesting they also passed out failing situation here where you have grades to over half the companies surveyed. the ceos going out and trying to where did the tech land? we talked to arjuna capital's natasha lamb in boston. improve the messaging around the >> if you recall in january, company, at the other end of the citigroup was literally the day we have see the results of
1:23 am
first company in the world to the company. jack dorsey likes to have idealistic visions about what the future will be like on reveal its median gender pay gap twitter, but we haven't exactly seeing how that is going to and its u.s. median racial pay change on the product. they have started iterating a gap. beta app. what that means is it did not they are looking at ways to use an adjusted number, which is what are the disclosures we have maybe deemphasize the followers gone from companies -- gotten from companies so far. which is equal pay for equal work number. most of those numbers we have the numbers of likes and responsive people have. they want to encourage healthy seen from companies have been conversation. adjusted, they are around 99 cents to parity. that is still in the testing phases. if you and i were in the same it has been years since he position, we would make the same as if i was a man and you were a woman. what citigroup did further was talked about the initiative, and to publish their median number. we still haven't seen the results. if you take all the men and emily: i want to ask you about softbank. women, you say, take the middle $100 billion is not enough. talk to us about what is driving person and say what are they this. >> 100 billion dollars is not making, man versus woman, and enough, until you start looking at the pace of deal making. there is a much bigger gaps. that is how equal pay is just about two years, they have measured in the united states invested $70 billion in startups when we talk about equal payday. women are paid $.80 on the dollar. that is the median earning. like dog walking companies and citigroup, in response to an cancer detection. they don't want to slow down the arjuna capital proposal, came dealmaking. out with this data and steppedeg if that is the case, they need to recapitalize. they are seeking $100 billion. the standard.g?
1:24 am
they are looking at a variety of options including asking some of their existing backers to weigh debt repayments, increased capital, and we don't know the timeline. it is possible that a deal could not be struck. emily: where are they going to put this money? >> they want to continue on this grand vision of a.i., and they want to back the leading company in every industry that is critically impacting and disrupting that sector, whether that is dog-walking or cancer detection. he said he wants to raise another $100 billion fund. emily: they are a small investor in lyft and a big investor in uber. do we know if they are going to make money on the uber ipo? do we expect them to? >> we don't know yet. when you talk to softbank, they are always talking about the long-term vision.
1:25 am
they say their repayments are very attractive and the investors are interested in doubling down and recapitalizing. there is not a lot of transparency at this point on the numbers, but there are certainly hoping that they are positive ones. emily: that was selina wang. still ahead, all the riches in the world could not keep jeff bezos from getting hacked. was it the "national enquirer?" or a foreign power? we break down what his security team thinks, next. this is bloomberg. ♪
1:26 am
1:27 am
emily: finally. it was just under two months ago that "washington post" owner and amazon ceo jeff bezos took to medium to accuse the "national enquirer" of trying to blackmail him. the "washington post" coverage of the murder of a journalist in a saudi arabian consulate seemed to hit "a particular nerve." things have taken up to another
1:28 am
level thanks to bezos' security consultant who made the accusation. saying quote we concluded the saudis had access to his phone and gained private information. it is unclear to what degree if any they were aware of the details. we discussed this with my next guest. >> he is steering the consensus about this episode. it's the occam's razor, michael sanchez -- emily: the woman he had an affair with. >> right, the consensus prevailing is that her brother provided all the text messages starting in the fall of last year to the "national enquirer." i thinks they are frustrated with that explanation.
1:29 am
they believe and this is been clear since the media post that country and of the its leader were involved. they see some discrepancies with occam's razor solution. and michael sanchez claims that when he was contacted first by the "national enquirer" and as the chief content officer, that they already had some text messages. he is pointing to these other forces that may or may not be at work. he said that he turned over information about this to u.s. law enforcement. emily: the security consultant makes these proclamations but doesn't provide any evidence. does that undermine the point he is trying to make? >> absolutely. at this point we don't know if he is buying the narrative of his choosing through an intermediary or if they actually have some evidence to back up these claims. all of the evidence he put into his 2000 word, basically a conspiracy theory at this point, it is all circumstantial.
1:30 am
it's all interesting and intriguing. show us the goods. emily: it certainly is intriguing. why? >> one thing that has changed is that i believe one or weeks ago, two the "new york times" had a fascinating story about these companies, many former law enforcement secret security people from israel and united arab emirates who now have companies, that are sleuthing on behalf of governments and basically stealing information. this is possible this is happening. we know this contributed to the khashoggi.amal why are they doing this?
1:31 am
they are frustrated with this simplistic narrative. emily: despite the unsubstantiated claims, american media reviews the unsubstantiated claims the material were required from anyone other than the single source. spencer, which is lauren sanchez's brother. when that story broke, to be fair, most of the texts that were published in that story seemed to be from her side. how do we explain that? >> i am sorry, how do we explain that all the texts we have seen so far are from bezos to his -- emily: right. >> that is an interesting thing, if the saudi government had access to jeff bezos's phone, if this is all they could come up with, it is an interesting question because if that is the best they could have come up with so far, by the nature want
1:32 am
-- it looks like the person with access to the messages is someone close to lauren sanchez. >> it's a great point. michael sanchez does not deny he provided some of the texts. the question is where did they originate? he says the "national enquirer" already knew about it. this is what gavin debecker, it almost juvenile, who started comes off as it, where did it start, and what is the point? who knows. amazon spends $1.6 million a year on jeff bezos's personal security. so either way, it is kind of amazing that a lot of people paid very well to do their jobs and protect this executive clearly did not do their jobs properly in this case. emily: another story we are, following, amazon saying that they will lower their price of goods at whole foods across the board. what do we know about this?
1:33 am
>> we know hundreds of products, we know that it is a small fraction of their inventory. whole foods is a lot more expensive than most other places to buy groceries. emily: jeff bezos still has a job. what do you make of this in the context of the larger amazon narrative? >> the whole foods price lowering? groceries remain a 10-year plus work in progress. they've been trying their own services, they acquired whole foods. they don't have much to show for it. whole foods sales have been flat, actually, down last year. they have been trying new things, innovate new store formats. now they are lowering prices to juice that business. emily: and that does it for this edition of "the best of bloomberg technology." we will bring you the latest in technology throughout the week. you can tune in every day. we are live streaming on twitter.
1:34 am
be sure to follow our global breaking news network, tictoc, on twitter. this is bloomberg. ♪ so with xfinity mobile
1:35 am
i can customize each line for each family member? yup. and since it comes with your internet, you can switch wireless carriers, and save hundreds of dollars a year. are you pullin' my leg? nope. you sure you're not pullin' my leg? i think it's your dog. oh it's him. good call. get the data options you need, and still save hundreds of dollars. do you guys sell other dogs? now that's simple, easy, awesome. customize each line by paying for data by the gig or get unlimited. and now get $250 back when you buy a new samsung galaxy. click, call, or visit a store today.
1:36 am
alix: saudi aramco's big reveal. the oil giant unveils profitability, performance, and production with a key warning the government still pulls the strings. holy moly guacamole. avocado prices surge the most in a decade as president trump threatens to close down the southern border. move over, almond milk. i sit down with gordon's ceo to find out why his company is shunning plant-based milk and doubling down on the cow while food struggles to survive. ♪ alix: i'm alix steel. welcome to bloomberg's "commoded
1:37 am
1:38 am
1:39 am
1:40 am
1:41 am
1:42 am
1:43 am
1:44 am
1:45 am
1:46 am
1:47 am
1:48 am
1:49 am
1:50 am
1:51 am
1:52 am
1:53 am
1:54 am
1:55 am
1:56 am
1:57 am
1:58 am
1:59 am
2:00 am

25 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on