Skip to main content

tv   Bloomberg Technology  Bloomberg  September 9, 2019 5:00pm-6:00pm EDT

5:00 pm
♪ taylor: i am taylor riggs in san francisco. welcome to "bloomberg technology." coming up in the next hour -- >> an investigation is not a lawsuit. it is an investigation to determine the facts. at whetherking google violated antitrust laws. plus, we get an exclusive
5:01 pm
interview with a ceo, three years after microsoft acquired the job listing site. disruption, robots, supply chains, and data technology changing health care. we explore big changes coming to medical technology and how to invest in it. but first, to our top story. up aneys general opened broad investigation into whether google's search and advertising practices violate antitrust and harm consumers. states attorneys general, led by texas, say they are investigating whether the search giant's business practices are consumers. harming anthis is not a lawsuit but investigation to look at facts. the facts will lead to where the facts lead.
5:02 pm
taylor: monday's announcement was closely followed by one that facebook's look into market dominance on friday. i am joined by a guest. she served as an assistant attorney general in the antitrust bureau of new york , ate, and in new york reporter who covers google for us, so let's just start with you. how big of a deal was this? reporter: it was pretty impressive to say 50 attorneys general. california and alabama are conspicuously missing. we will have to see what is missing with them. lawyers whooup of represent the entire country, ag speaking from arkansas and ag's speaking from arkansas and alaska.
5:03 pm
they need google and need their advertising to get in front of people, so the political tone here is they wanted it to seem like a big deal and wanted it to be a large, national, bipartisan investigation into the company. taylor: sally, what was your take away from the press conference today? sally: this is a huge deal. to have 50 state attorneys general, and i know there were some holdouts, but to have 50 state attorneys general, from both sides of the political spectrum, going to gather and give this long, in-depth press announcement, where they explain all of their concerns, i think it is a very huge deal, and it just signals a new era against big tex -- big tech. taylor: this was a bipartisan issue, not just democrats or republicans, both aisles.
5:04 pm
is this concerning from a tech perspective? shouldyes, they definitely be concerned. this is a powerful coalition. it is hard to get things done in america right now because this country is so divided, but they are joining together and sharing the same concerns about small businesses being able to have a shot at reaching customers, about google unfairly increasing the costs and using its search monopoly to favor its own websites. rit, a lot of state attorneys general came out, saying, "we support free markets, we support innovation." is google stifling these? gerrit: google would say they are not, doing amazing things to reach people on the internet, and, if course, that is how it started for some that use google and use the internet, but more and more, they are having to do
5:05 pm
things like pay more and more just to bid on their own brands, their own names, maybe even trademarks that they own. they even have to pay google to make sure that they show up instead of a competitor, so you are hearing more and more. it started out as a lot of grumbling, and you could dismiss some of that, but more and more, businesses are saying, "look, this is not working for us anymore. this that works good for us before is becoming a trap, and we cannot keep paying into it just to become a float -- just to stay afloat," and that is going on. taylor: the florida state attorney general said the service is not free. we are sacrificing data. do you agree? sally: definitely. there has been a big deception on the american people that these internet services are free, both google and facebook. we are under constant surveillance, and we are offering up content that is valuable, and we are paying a
5:06 pm
very high price. there are some economists that said in a market that is competitive, we would be getting paid with -- for the information we are giving up. about: sally, talk to me that data. so often in this program and in broader conversations, we talk about a monopoly and an antitrust issue and a privacy issue. did today do a good enough job, separatet this is two issues? sally: i do not believe they are two separate issues. i think we are seeing a real convergence of privacy and antitrust. the reality is when these tech giants do not have competition, they are able to extract massive amounts of data from users, so i think there is a real convergence, and the other issue is that data is a huge competitive advantage, so as these companies are doing acquisition after acquisition that gives them unique data sets, they are creating barriers
5:07 pm
to entry for competitors and really fortifying their monopoly power. taylor: sally, how would they compete with big tech in china, let's say? sally: you know, i am really not so worried about china. that is kind of a red herring. i am much more worried about american businesses paying a tax just to be discovered on the internet. a represent asked google -- a representative asked google, it is true that 50% of searches go to google websites, and google was not able to give "no" as an answer to that question, so what we have is google taking over the internet because it has such a huge monopoly share. it is able to prioritize its own websites at the expense of every other business in our economy, so i am really not worried about china. rrit, one of the legal barriers here is talking about how the consumer is harmed.
5:08 pm
as said, google is a free service for consumers. what about the consumer being harmed? said, with, as sally consumers giving up their data without being paid for it in a fair way, that is something that google and other large tech companies have done for a long time, and in the united states at least, they have been able to push off some of these investigations, because they were services that were free to the end consumer, but there is the consumer who buys the advertising. they need to bid on advertisement so people can find them online. that is a consumer of the google product, and that is kind of what the regulatory legal establishment in the united states has realized and come around to that, that there is consumer harm, even if gmail and search seems free for the end user. taylor: the investigation that is ever developing, thank you,
5:09 pm
sally hubbard, and our "bloomberg technology" reporter, gerrit. the latestit to season of "stranger things," netflix has seen a significant acceleration in downloads. the third season of "stranger things," a science fiction horror series, shares have fallen since july. and coming up, apple is under fire right before its big iphone event, the company confirming it violated labor law. what this could mean in terms of its relationship with beijing, next. and if you like bloomberg news, check us out online. you can listen on sirius xm. this is bloomberg. ♪
5:10 pm
5:11 pm
5:12 pm
wework has not hit investment grade status, but they may taking key from netflix by relying on junk bonds. bwork has a credit rating of from both fitch and s&p. and we are watching apple and soft con. it was confirmed they broke chinese labor law while building iphones, using too many temporary workers in the world's largest iphone factory. the claims came from china labor watch. the group says it found other labor rights violations in the past.
5:13 pm
i am joined by tom, who currently has a buy rating on apple, enjoining us in the studio, -- and joining us in the studio is our reporter. deal?s a big reporter: yes, it is a big deal, because apple is at the top of its game, in top of the industry of treating work goals -- workers fairly, and here, they and foxconn are saving a lot of money by employing temporary workers versus full-time workers year round. move theom, does this needle for you when it comes to apple stock? sure. i do think it is disappointing, and i agree with mark in that regard. it is sad that apple chose to use so many temporary workers in making their iphones, but when i
5:14 pm
think about the challenges facing technology companies, especially on the terror front, i do think that apple is on a front in an area where it is so big that it can lobby both the chinese government and the u.s. government, but i do think it is disappointing that they would use so many temporary workers for making their iphones. mark, apple affirmed the claims. what do they do to fix the problem? irk: what apple said, and believe this to be true, when they see challenges in their supply chain, see issues, breaking a law, which they are, they are going to rectify it, and they do not want this coming out again. from what i understand, they are going to be working with foxconn to fix this. this is some thing already being repaired. then temporary workers, apple, 55%, down to 50%, now about 30%, so instead of that going back up again, i would
5:15 pm
imagine that is going to come back down closer to 10%. of this is, how much about the general supply chain, given that apple is in the front battle of the u.s.-china trade fight? tom: i do think for any multinational consumer electronic company, sourcing out of china, these are challenging times. we just had our consumer technology conference in new york, and so many who were participating were saying basically the challenge in today's environment is you do not know what the rules are from a tariff standpoint. any day, you could find out that tariffs are 10%. the next day, you could find out they are 20%. i think what you will see over time is more companies moving their supply chain out of china. for apple, that might not be a great opportunity. in their case, they could see a lot of their suppliers move their production out of china. i think apple is going to try to
5:16 pm
continue to navigate the challenges, including the tariff, as it applies to its supply chain. china: tom, we know that needs apple and apple needs china, but will we start to see more red tape, more difficulty for u.s. tech companies over there in china, and that is china's way of pushing back? will beo expect there pushed back from the chinese government if more companies do, pushbt -- there will be ack from the chinese government if more companies do, in fact, move out. but they are operating from a position of strength, given they are in the exporter to the u.s., and i do think this is a challenge that is going to take time to unpack, but i think in the case, again, for apple, they are kind of in a class by themselves. they have importance to both the chinese government and the u.s. government. they have the ability to lobby
5:17 pm
both sides, and i think that puts them in a unique position. have beend, mark, we ,alking about trade and tariffs since early to mid 2018. how easy is it to move to other locations outside of china, like vietnam? equipment, it of is actually quite simple. one person at apple who works in the supply chain described it as and paste,, copy, moving a supply chain to another company. the problem is the skilled labor. it is the people, having the amount of people, building a production city. that part is more difficult. taylor: tom, we are all looking at the big apple product launch tomorrow. what are you looking at? are basically, i think they in a unique position.
5:18 pm
when expectation has been so low for a new iphone product launch, i would argue in its history, never. i am almost more interested to find out the pricing of apple tv plus then to find out the future of the next generation of iphones. why is that? because next year, we are looking for a 5g phone from apple. owing back to tariffs, you may have consumers who are rushing to buy this generation's device in anticipation of paying 10% plus more for next generation, solely because of tariffs, but, again, i think for new product news for apple tomorrow, i am more interested in the pricing for the apple tv plus than anything specific to the iphone. rk, do you agree? are low, buttions i think shatter proofing and water resistance are exciting. and then 3d cameras and a.r. mark, thank you
5:19 pm
for joining me on all things apple. coming up, a luxury firm ramping up competition with amazon, taking a day off its free delivery service. we bring you this, next. this is bloomberg. ♪
5:20 pm
5:21 pm
two-day shipping quickly enough? verishop does not think so, going further, allowing all customers to benefit from this without a membership fee, subscription, or minimum gochase, but is it enough to against amazon? let's discuss. , also from snapchat. great to have you. freews from the day,
5:22 pm
shipping. why the change? customer first, employee second, and shareholder third, we are focused on how we can make our customer life better, and we focus on different shifting. we saw the positivity from our customers, and we want to make tongs better, and we want it get to you in one business day. customers you say before shareholder's. how are shareholders responding to the increased cost that this will cost the company? imran: i think if your customers are happy, they will keep coming back to you and become very loyal customers to you, and there is a significant lifetime value of customers. we are a very young company, less than one year old, but the way we are orienting the company and what we are getting everybody focused on is long-term and how we should think about the long-term value
5:23 pm
of customers, and we believe by delivering happiness to customers on a daily basis by delivering the product faster, having the best selection, having the best quality, and having the best customer support, let, we have our customer support phone number on the top of the site. increaseso, we will the lifetime value of our customers, and we focus on that, and if we do that, that will create long-term shareholder value. taylor: amazon and walmart have also come out with 3, 1-day shipping. how do you compete? imran: first of all, i think we have to recognize that e-commerce is a very, very large market. it is about $1 trillion. only 10% of that is online, so retail by far is one of the biggest market opportunities out there, and online purchases are still pretty low, so we do not think it is a zero-sum game. weare really focused on how
5:24 pm
can sell to our customers better. we are focusing on categories like men and women's fashion, beauty. we recently launched kitchen, and we are focused on how we can service our customers better, and we believe the market is big enough for multiple players to do well. taylor: and are those types of consumer products, the categories, the ways in which you think you are able to differentiate yourself from someone like amazon? journey,e customer from coming to our site to getting the product, so when they come to our side, we make it incredibly easy for the discovery of the product. we have things like responsible shop, where you can easily find sustainable, eco-friendly products. we have a lot of filtering options to find rate products. we have one called taste makers, so you can find your favorite ndeduencers' recomme
5:25 pm
product. we scan for quality. we have people who talk to different vendors, and we source the product. by doing so, we have third-party sellers, so there is the quality of the product and the authenticity of the product, and then how we provide the after customer support. we are really focused on making sure customers find all of the premium product in one place, and they get it quickly, and they have a great experience if they have any questions. i keep wanting to go back to it is a very large market. only 10% of retail is e-commerce, and we think multiple players will serve the customers better. taylor: what is the pressure in the room to be profitable? imran: i think we are very lucky to have a group of investors who really see the opportunity, and we are focused on driving the value for the customers, and i think the other thing is we really, really want to build a company, so i think anything
5:26 pm
that would not make our customer life better, we do not try to spend money on that. we are focused on customers. as a company, you have to make choices, and we are making choices for the customers. that is how we are orienting the company. we want to be profitable. i think the business can be profitable, significantly. a lot of retail companies are incredibly profitable. in the united states, our goal is to drive the lifetime value of customers. taylor: quickly here, any plans to go public? imran: we are way too early. ceo imran, verishop's khan, thank you for joining me. and our conversation with facebook's privacy officer is next. this is bloomberg. ♪
5:27 pm
5:28 pm
5:29 pm
5:30 pm
this is bloomberg technology. i'm taylor riggs. back to our top story, the increasing probes into alleged antitrust behaviors by big tech companies. this time, google was in the spotlight. 50 attorneys general opened a broad probe into the company's certain advertising practices. this followed friday's turn of events, new york's attorney general announced she is investigating whether the social network was stifling competition. i sat down with facebook's former chief privacy officer chris to get his thoughts. chris: it was almost inevitable that big technology would be in
5:31 pm
the crosshairs of too tough a concept to imagine here. there are a lot of questions that have gone on in the number of different areas and a lot of them are getting swept up into antitrust type of conversation. there is challenges to that we need to talk about, but more than anything else, when companies touch people's lives in so many ways, there is inevitably a question about whether they are always laying fair. taylor: this is the state attorney general's case, facebook fined $5 billion from the fec. did that find not go far enough? chris: there are some people that argue that. there are different questions of privacy and antitrust. the ftc and doj at the federal level have an antitrust investigation going targeting facebook and google apparently. given the effect
5:32 pm
these companies have on the economy, it is a pretty natural thing for this to happen. it does not necessarily mean anything is going to occur from this investigation the end of the day. they are going to look at some particular cases now. it is good they are getting more particular because a lot of the rhetoric has been they are too big and too powerful. that is not an antitrust argument. there is still the rule of law in america and you have to prove a case. you have to prove antitrust injury, all these different things about how competition is harmed. the rhetoric has been vague on that so far. it is getting more particular which i think is helping. taylor: talk to me about if this feels a little bit too late. facebook feels like they were on the defensive. during your time there and the conversations you have, did they do enough to prevent this from happening, particularly data privacy? chris: one of the things we did in the early days of facebook was engaged with a number of different privacy regulators
5:33 pm
around the world. have proactive conversations about how the internet should protect privacy. there are going to be disagreements. we were going to look at it in somewhat of a different way than european regulators. we always try to have respectful conversations and try to build technology that allows people to make their own choices. all of that technology still sits on the facebook stack and there are a lot of disputes on whether it is headed. idden. the company is focused on these issues at this point. mark has been giving public speeches about how the future is private. that there was going to be a lot more control about how information is shared through facebook and the facebook family of apps. i think you will see that in a number of different technology companies. it is good to have competition on that. that is a different issue than antitrust. that's one of the things that is being missed and a lot of the rhetoric around this
5:34 pm
investigation being announced today and the ftc and doj investigation. taylor: you talk about the family -- zuckerberg with whatspp and instagram. is this the wrong time to be doing that? chris: there are certainly competitors that don't want them to do that. the classic statement about antitrust laws is it protects competition, not competitors. for a person using the facebook family of aps, it is a very convenient thing and a free thing for them to be able to communicate across the family of apps. that is one of the things the company wants to innovate on the consumer side for. a lot of these arguments about how innovation is stifled. there are always issues with big companies, but if you look at facebook and google and apple and amazon, the level of innovation of these companies is incredibly high. they're constantly coming with products to market, new ways for people to organize their time and lives more effectively.
5:35 pm
they are competing against each other for a lot of that too. the question is from an antitrust perspective is are they engaging in any unfair competitive acts where they have market power? taylor: that was my conversation with facebook's former chief privacy officer chris kelly. speaking of regulating tech companies, joule is facing scrutiny from the u.s. food and drug administration. fda officials warned it may have broken the law by marketing its products as safe. the agency sent a letter requesting documents on their advertising efforts, especially as they relate to children. the acting fda commissioner tweeted that "juul has ignored has ignored the law" adding that, "we put the industry on notice if the disturbing rise use of e-cigarettes continues especially through the use of flavors that appeal to kids, will take even more aggressive action." coming up, the crossroads of
5:36 pm
medicine and technology. in our new series, we will take a look at how technology will change health care over the next 20 years and how investors can position their portfolios. this is bloomberg. ♪
5:37 pm
5:38 pm
week, bloomberg technology is a flooring medical technology in a series we are calling wired for health. whether it be diagnosis, treatment, research or investment, we will be looking into how innovation plays a crucial role in sustaining health. we begin with the future of health. to give you some context, 21 years ago, we saw the first robot assisted heart bypass surgery. today, virtually every operation in the u.s. uses robotics. where will the next 20 years
5:39 pm
take us in terms of innovation and disruption? leader ish segment here with new research. what i love about this research is we first talked about where we have come the first 20 years and where we will be by 2040. where will we be in the next 20 years? guest: by 2040, we expect that health care system to be different than today. it will be one where the consumer manages their own health care and control their own data. it is going to be a system that focuses much more on prevention and wellness than acute intervention. businesses will take on different roles than they have had in the past. taylor: from your research, my take away is the consumer is taking power back. i have power for my data. what is the technology for that? glenn: it is the same technology that is driving a lot of consumer driven control nowadays. we all shop online.
5:40 pm
we control our shopping experience, our banking experience. people want to be able to control their health care experiences too. with that, it is a combination , pervasive sensors that will be in us, around us, measuring our health and all of the environmental data. interoperabley data which means we can combine that data and draw some insights from it and present that back in a consumer friendly manner. taylor: you talk about no more silos between biotech, big pharma, venture capital. how do you see all of those starting to work together? glenn: there's a lot of collaboration. a recent study we did, research study said 80% of med tch's companies excited to be doing collaboration in the next few years. that will be par for the course. collaborations within the
5:41 pm
industry as well as collaboration with high-tech players who are bringing great capabilities around a.i. and data analysis that are crucial for this next wave of health care. taylor: talk to me about a.i. a lot of people are waiting on 5g to help power some of the a.i. is that really the future? glenn: let's go this way -- today, there are over 250,000 clinical studies that occur in the year. individualan or any cannot absorb all that information. the beauty of a.i. is it can a.i. is it can digest all of that data and make some sense out of it. our health is a function of subtle correlations and a bunch of different biomarkers and environment factors and a.i. can pick up on that. taylor: on this program every day, it comes up about data privacy. in your world, what is the balance between big data and more data is good versus the chance we are all going to get hacked? glenn: the key is people need to be able to control and give
5:42 pm
permission as to what they want to give third parties to analyze. there is great benefit to individualsto us as to have companies that can analyze all this data, but we need to know what is being done and how to control it. taylor: thank you so much. that was glenn snyder. if the future of health care is often being disrupted by medical technology, investment will evolve as well. ark investment has identified five tech enabled disruptive platforms that you generate more than $50 trillion in business value and wealth correction over the next 10 to 15 years. they are industrial innovation, genomics, next-generation internet, then tech innovation, and mobility as a service. to talk about all of these, we want to talk to kathy wood, ceo of ark investment. of the five i listed off, walk me through what will be the biggest disruptor. kathy: we think the most
5:43 pm
underestimated today is dna sequencing. it is the topic you are exploring today. dna sequencing is exploding and responsibleumina, for 95% of the dna sequences around the world, including china. if it three engages in terms of cutting the cost and price well below $1000, current human genome, we will see explosive unit growth. we think that if illumina were to be cutting costs at the rate we believe that technology will enable, 40% per year -- think about that, 40% per year. humanmber of whole genomes that will be sequenced will move from 2.4 million globally last year and that is half of all the folger human genomes ever sequenced in the
5:44 pm
history of time, to 100 million in five years when we believe the price will be as low as $100 per genome. yes? taylor: that is a fascinating statistic and i am so glad you brought that up. how important is that statistic for you as an investor and me as a consumer getting that under $100? cathie: we think it is very important if we are going to start analyzing each human genome in terms of mutation. our body is comprised, our genome is comprised of 3 billion lines of code effectively. and, mutation is like a programming error. it's the earliest manifestation of disease. it can start when we are born. it may not be full-blown until we are adults. wouldn't it be nice for our genetic counselors -- that is a new job that is developing some
5:45 pm
momentum here -- to identify our mutations from one event to the next, and to identify cancer in stage one. that is the promise of dna to $100s dropping and even lower with time. the information exposure we will be able to take advantage of. taylor: we bring this into your world of investing and you have a genomic etf, arkg. we had a great graphic showing the list of your top five holdings. what do you see within these companies to allow you to take companies to allow you to take advantage of that next revolution you are talking about? cathie: illumina is the category killer in terms of dna sequencing and it is foundational to everything else we believe needs to happen. invitae is one of the most important molecular diagnostic testing companies.
5:46 pm
it is driving down cost. worthst of goods sold $1300 per test. it has got down to $250 and offers it commercially, the test commercially for $450 to $500. what we are seeing them do now is interesting. they are offering tests free to discover pancreatic cancer or huntington disease or epilepsy. more about those diseases. what is happening is pharma companies. glenn talked about collaboration. pharma companies are paying inviate to deliver those three tests so they can get the information anonymized and learn more about these diseases so that they can find cures for these very difficult diseases. lots of collaboration between pharma, biotech, molecular diagnostic testing companies,
5:47 pm
dna sequencing and so forth. taylor: with an etf, i think a lot of retail investor interest. have you seen it within retail or did you get a lot of institutional interest as well? cathie: it is across-the-board. we manage funds across-the-board. we have many retail investors. they really helped us start out that fund. now, we have institutional investors moving into our etf. it is very interesting to watch sovereign wealth funds who are trying to learn more about the health, health care systems and health care breakthrough so they can improve lives for their own countries. they are even moving into our etf because they can treat our etf like a stock and it does not have to go through a lot of due chiefnce and go to the
5:48 pm
investment officer. whoe are younger advisors are actually very excited about what we are doing. taylor: wonderful. that was cathie wood of ark investment. if cathie met -- mentioned gene editing, our wired for health series will be featured this friday. we will have many guests and innovators providing the latest insights from the intersection of medicine and technology. still ahead, celebrating the work anniversary. microsoft and linked nearing three years as we find out how the coupling is doing. our conversation with the ceo is next. this is bloomberg. ♪
5:49 pm
5:50 pm
taylor: we do continue to follow all of the news happening out of the u.k. tied to brexit. mp's debating and voting on a motion to call an early general election. boris johnson is talking now. let's listen in.
5:51 pm
prime minister johnson: in their own leaflets -- they say we need a general election now. now.ed a general election that's what it says. yet, throughout the weekend, the honorable gentlemen have been trying to disguise their preposterous cowardice by coming up with evermore outrageous excuses for delaying election until the end of october or perhaps november. andhe delay procrastination, that has become the hallmark of the opposition. why are they conniving to delay brexit in defiance of the referendum? 25costing the country 250 millin pounds a week for the privilege,
5:52 pm
for delay . must operate more than five hospitals and trained more than 4000 new nurses. the only possible explanation is that they fear we will win, mr. speaker. i will win. a renewed mandate to take this country out of the eu. a policy they now oppose. that is the story of your opposition. for three years, they have schemed to overturn the voting of the british people. the referendum, which in a crowning, almost all of them voted to hold. mr. speaker, they didn't just vote to hold it. some of them even argued. >> thank you for the prime minister. he's chosen to give me an
5:53 pm
intervention. the amount of money that is being spent going into europe could pay for nurses -- but may nine -- but may i say years of austerity left us in a test. years of austerity have left 4 million children living in poverty. the prime minister has moved forward when it is time. minister johnson: tell him to vote his absurd policy and spend an extra one billion pounds a month to keep us in the eu. spending one billion pounds on more police officers on the streets of this country.
5:54 pm
but, some of them -- the liberal democrats also called for a referendum on our membership in the eu. by the way, they lost that referendum. they did nothing but try to overturn the result. arrogating themselves the authority to decide which democratic elections with a respect in which they respect. there they are. now they want a second referendum but they are already planning to campaign against the result. when asked whether she would implement brexit if the people voted for a second time, the party's new leader replied no. every time the liberal democrats lose the referendum, they just call for a new one. the honorable member were the new leader of
5:55 pm
the referendum party, jimmy goldschmidt, they are models of coherence by comparison with the leader of the opposition. his strategy, mysterious as it is, is that by some process, he becomes prime minister -- taylor: that was u.k. prime minister boris johnson speaking in parliament. joining me now -- all the brexit development develop its. tim ross joining us on the phone. can you walk me through, give our global audience a perspective. what are we listening to now? tim: this is boris johnson trying for a second time to persuade the u.k. parliament to allow him to go for the general election. the next one is not due until 2022 but he cannot get his brexit deal through, his no deal brexit through parliament.
5:56 pm
the only way out is for an election but he cannot get that either. taylor: tim, what is the future for boris johnson here? tim: he's going to have to wait and be patient. parliament will come after tonight when he is widely expected to lose this vote for an election, he is going to have to wait for five weeks until parliament comes back again. he will try to regroup and come up with another plan. taylor: how does jeremy corbyn respond? tim: jeremy corbyn is the man now with more power seemingly than the prime minister in terms of timing that election. if johnson wants one, he has to persuade the opposition to go to one. he's fine. he's willing to wait as he pleases, i think. taylor: wonderful. that was tim ross. thank you for joining me. that does it for this edition of bloomberg technology. bloomberg technology is livestreaming on twitter. check us out. follow our global breaking news network, tictoc, on twitter.
5:57 pm
this is bloomberg. ♪ here, it all starts with a simple...
5:58 pm
5:59 pm
hello! -hi! how can i help? a data plan for everyone. everyone? everyone. let's send to everyone! [ camera clicking ] wifi up there? -ahhh. sure, why not? how'd he get out?! a camera might figure it out. that was easy! glad i could help. at xfinity, we're here to make life simple. easy. awesome. so come ask, shop, discover at your xfinity store today.
6:00 pm
paul: welcome to daybreak australia. i'm paul allen. kathleen: i'm kathleen hays in new york. sophie: i'm sophie kamaruddin in hong kong. we are counting down to asia's major market open. ♪ paul: here are the top stories we are covering in the next hour. the brexit battle continues as mp's demand to see the government no deal preparations. commons may be suspended in the coming hours. ford hits a bump in the road as moody's cuts its rating to junk.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on