WEBVTT - Netflix Growing Again and Women Leaders Quitting

0:00:02.200 --> 0:00:05.560
<v Speaker 1>From the heart of where Innovation, money and power Collie

0:00:06.320 --> 0:00:10.840
<v Speaker 1>in Silicon Valley and beyond. This is Bloomberg Technology with

0:00:10.920 --> 0:00:26.319
<v Speaker 1>Emily Jay Him Emily Chang in New York. And this

0:00:26.360 --> 0:00:29.240
<v Speaker 1>is Bloomberg Technology coming up in the next hour. Hollywood

0:00:29.240 --> 0:00:34.199
<v Speaker 1>breathes a sigh of relief. Netflix is growing again. Expectations

0:00:34.200 --> 0:00:37.800
<v Speaker 1>were low after the streaming giant lost subscriber's last quarter

0:00:37.840 --> 0:00:42.960
<v Speaker 1>and suddenly pivoted to ads. What's working we'll discuss. Plus,

0:00:43.240 --> 0:00:45.920
<v Speaker 1>women are leaving the top ranks of companies at higher

0:00:46.000 --> 0:00:48.440
<v Speaker 1>rates than ever before, according to a new report from

0:00:48.520 --> 0:00:51.960
<v Speaker 1>McKenzie and lean in what they're calling the Great Breakup

0:00:52.360 --> 0:00:56.120
<v Speaker 1>later this hour, And what has Zuck been so quiet

0:00:56.200 --> 0:01:00.120
<v Speaker 1>about Facebook these days? The mediceo seems to be ignoring

0:01:00.160 --> 0:01:03.320
<v Speaker 1>his flagship social network to focus on luring people into

0:01:03.360 --> 0:01:06.319
<v Speaker 1>a vacant virtual world. We're gonna get to all of

0:01:06.360 --> 0:01:08.280
<v Speaker 1>that in a moment, but first or more on Netflix,

0:01:08.319 --> 0:01:11.160
<v Speaker 1>I want to bring in Bloomberg's Lucashaw Okay, Luke Lucas

0:01:11.319 --> 0:01:14.640
<v Speaker 1>are what are the good things you're seeing in this report?

0:01:14.959 --> 0:01:16.959
<v Speaker 1>Why are we seeing a turnaround before a lot of

0:01:16.959 --> 0:01:20.240
<v Speaker 1>these new changes have even been put into effect. Well,

0:01:20.280 --> 0:01:22.959
<v Speaker 1>it's it's growing again. So it added two point four

0:01:23.000 --> 0:01:26.000
<v Speaker 1>million subscribers in the most recent quarter. That's way above

0:01:26.040 --> 0:01:28.640
<v Speaker 1>what they forecast, way above what Wall Street forecast. They

0:01:28.680 --> 0:01:32.000
<v Speaker 1>also estimated four point five million editions in the fourth quarter.

0:01:32.400 --> 0:01:34.319
<v Speaker 1>So Netflix is still going to have its worst year

0:01:34.400 --> 0:01:37.560
<v Speaker 1>in a in a really long time. But people had

0:01:37.560 --> 0:01:39.880
<v Speaker 1>been jittery because it had shrunk for two quarters in

0:01:39.880 --> 0:01:41.680
<v Speaker 1>a row. The fact that it's growing again as seen

0:01:41.760 --> 0:01:43.880
<v Speaker 1>as as a positive sign. The fact that it has

0:01:43.959 --> 0:01:45.679
<v Speaker 1>all these hit shows that came out in the most

0:01:45.720 --> 0:01:48.480
<v Speaker 1>recent quarter also a positive sign. If you wanted to

0:01:48.480 --> 0:01:50.200
<v Speaker 1>be a bit of a pessimist, you could say, why

0:01:50.240 --> 0:01:52.320
<v Speaker 1>did they only add two point four million when it

0:01:52.400 --> 0:01:54.880
<v Speaker 1>had all those hits, And that's that's a legitimate question.

0:01:55.200 --> 0:01:57.160
<v Speaker 1>But I think there was you know, the the response

0:01:57.200 --> 0:01:59.920
<v Speaker 1>to its slowdown had been so dramatic that a lot

0:02:00.040 --> 0:02:01.960
<v Speaker 1>people are just breathing a side relief that it seems

0:02:02.000 --> 0:02:04.320
<v Speaker 1>to be back on a more stable trajectory. Now, what

0:02:04.400 --> 0:02:08.040
<v Speaker 1>do we know about the ad supported tier and how

0:02:08.160 --> 0:02:11.400
<v Speaker 1>is that impacting your outlook on how much better we

0:02:11.440 --> 0:02:15.320
<v Speaker 1>can get here? Well, it's gonna release the new tier

0:02:15.760 --> 0:02:17.840
<v Speaker 1>or start selling it in November. It will cost seven

0:02:17.880 --> 0:02:20.960
<v Speaker 1>bucks a month. You'll watch about four or five minutes

0:02:20.960 --> 0:02:24.360
<v Speaker 1>of commercials per hour. Most of the programs that people

0:02:24.400 --> 0:02:26.480
<v Speaker 1>watch or care about will be available, but not all.

0:02:26.600 --> 0:02:28.880
<v Speaker 1>You won't have ads in new movies, you don't have

0:02:28.919 --> 0:02:30.960
<v Speaker 1>ads and kids programming, although you may have sort of

0:02:31.200 --> 0:02:33.120
<v Speaker 1>a pre roll add just not ads in the middle

0:02:33.160 --> 0:02:36.000
<v Speaker 1>of it. Um And so that means that Netflix's add

0:02:36.000 --> 0:02:38.640
<v Speaker 1>tier is cheaper than HBO, Max's add to, or cheaper

0:02:38.639 --> 0:02:40.840
<v Speaker 1>than Disney Plus is forthcoming add tier, a little more

0:02:40.880 --> 0:02:43.720
<v Speaker 1>expensive than some of the smaller rivals. I think people

0:02:43.720 --> 0:02:47.280
<v Speaker 1>are pretty optimistic that this should boost the company's performance

0:02:47.280 --> 0:02:49.560
<v Speaker 1>in the years ahead, at the very least give people

0:02:49.560 --> 0:02:52.040
<v Speaker 1>a reason not to cancel. But Netflix is saying it

0:02:52.080 --> 0:02:54.800
<v Speaker 1>doesn't expect to see any material impact on a business

0:02:54.880 --> 0:02:58.320
<v Speaker 1>in the fourth quarter, more likely in in the coming year.

0:02:58.400 --> 0:03:00.480
<v Speaker 1>It could, of course, just be trying to manage that infectations.

0:03:00.639 --> 0:03:02.720
<v Speaker 1>What about when it comes to the content strategy. I

0:03:02.840 --> 0:03:05.360
<v Speaker 1>mentioned Britain is my favorite show, but but you know

0:03:05.800 --> 0:03:08.440
<v Speaker 1>it's been a while, and you know they talked about

0:03:08.440 --> 0:03:11.840
<v Speaker 1>Monster that the Jeffrey Dahmer's story. What are you seeing

0:03:11.919 --> 0:03:16.919
<v Speaker 1>as kind of the next generation of big Netflix hits well?

0:03:16.960 --> 0:03:19.240
<v Speaker 1>I think there's a perception and then there's the reality. Right,

0:03:19.240 --> 0:03:21.720
<v Speaker 1>there's a perception in the marketplace right now that programming

0:03:21.720 --> 0:03:23.760
<v Speaker 1>on Netflix has gotten a lot worse, that their funding

0:03:23.760 --> 0:03:26.640
<v Speaker 1>lots of bad shows, bad movies, and that people have

0:03:26.720 --> 0:03:29.120
<v Speaker 1>moved on to HBO Max, to Apple TV Plus, to

0:03:29.200 --> 0:03:31.640
<v Speaker 1>Disney Plus. And while I think there's some truth to

0:03:31.680 --> 0:03:33.919
<v Speaker 1>that that, and even Netflix has said that perhaps it's

0:03:33.960 --> 0:03:36.720
<v Speaker 1>making too much, for the most part, Netflix is still

0:03:36.760 --> 0:03:38.680
<v Speaker 1>making a lot of shows that people want to watch.

0:03:38.680 --> 0:03:40.760
<v Speaker 1>It had Movies and The Gray Man and Purple Hearts

0:03:40.760 --> 0:03:43.040
<v Speaker 1>that people watched. It had Dahmer, which was one of

0:03:43.040 --> 0:03:45.440
<v Speaker 1>its biggest hits, that had the new season of Stranger Things,

0:03:45.480 --> 0:03:48.440
<v Speaker 1>that had this Korean show Extraordinary Attorney Woo that was

0:03:48.560 --> 0:03:51.720
<v Speaker 1>hugely popular. Uh, And so I think you'll see a

0:03:51.720 --> 0:03:55.160
<v Speaker 1>lot more of that. Netflix just making a wide range

0:03:55.200 --> 0:03:57.000
<v Speaker 1>of shows that appeal to people on the coast, of

0:03:57.000 --> 0:03:58.680
<v Speaker 1>people in the middle of the country, people all over

0:03:58.720 --> 0:04:01.200
<v Speaker 1>the world. And we'll you over time if if they're

0:04:01.240 --> 0:04:03.400
<v Speaker 1>doing enough to get people to come in. I think

0:04:03.400 --> 0:04:05.840
<v Speaker 1>there's also a lot of concern about how much Netflix

0:04:05.880 --> 0:04:08.760
<v Speaker 1>is spending on marketing, and the company is just starting

0:04:08.800 --> 0:04:11.000
<v Speaker 1>to adjust its approach there, So what are folks saying

0:04:11.040 --> 0:04:13.600
<v Speaker 1>in Hollywood? Obviously Netflix isn't doing all of this in

0:04:13.640 --> 0:04:16.279
<v Speaker 1>the vacuum. You've got all of the competitors out there

0:04:16.320 --> 0:04:20.960
<v Speaker 1>making their changes as well well. I think people are,

0:04:21.400 --> 0:04:24.799
<v Speaker 1>on the one hand, relieve because Netflix's problems had impacted

0:04:24.800 --> 0:04:26.599
<v Speaker 1>the stock price and the strategy for a lot of

0:04:26.600 --> 0:04:29.960
<v Speaker 1>its competitors. So even though they are rivals to one another,

0:04:30.000 --> 0:04:32.960
<v Speaker 1>nobody wants to see Netflix collapse because every other company

0:04:33.320 --> 0:04:36.120
<v Speaker 1>basically bet their future on streaming. At the same time,

0:04:36.160 --> 0:04:38.279
<v Speaker 1>you do hear a lot of sort the whispers and

0:04:38.320 --> 0:04:41.200
<v Speaker 1>snickers about the quality of programming on Netflix and how

0:04:41.200 --> 0:04:42.560
<v Speaker 1>it's not as good as it used to be and

0:04:42.600 --> 0:04:44.479
<v Speaker 1>not as fun as it used to be. Like I said,

0:04:44.520 --> 0:04:46.039
<v Speaker 1>I think there's some truth to that, but some of

0:04:46.040 --> 0:04:48.159
<v Speaker 1>that is also just a little bit of kind of

0:04:48.240 --> 0:04:51.279
<v Speaker 1>lack of understanding of what people are actually watching. But

0:04:51.360 --> 0:04:54.040
<v Speaker 1>we'll also see in the next few weeks what the

0:04:54.080 --> 0:04:57.080
<v Speaker 1>results are like from Warner Brothers, Discovery with HBO, Max,

0:04:57.279 --> 0:05:00.719
<v Speaker 1>from Disney with Disney Plus. Unfortunately don't really yet numbers

0:05:00.720 --> 0:05:04.640
<v Speaker 1>for Apple TV and an Amazon broken out, but the

0:05:04.960 --> 0:05:07.920
<v Speaker 1>positive results for Netflix should be a sign that if

0:05:07.960 --> 0:05:10.200
<v Speaker 1>you can program. Well, there's still plenty of growth to

0:05:10.200 --> 0:05:12.560
<v Speaker 1>be had in streaming. So look, obviously, you know we're

0:05:12.560 --> 0:05:15.120
<v Speaker 1>in the middle of a major macro economic downturn. You

0:05:15.160 --> 0:05:18.960
<v Speaker 1>have consumers reevaluating the priorities. How many subscriptions do we

0:05:19.040 --> 0:05:21.920
<v Speaker 1>really want to have? There's been a big reset in

0:05:21.960 --> 0:05:24.280
<v Speaker 1>the content business. Where do you think this stands Let's

0:05:24.279 --> 0:05:28.280
<v Speaker 1>say a year from now, how does this all shake out? Well,

0:05:28.400 --> 0:05:30.880
<v Speaker 1>the big question is at what point some of these

0:05:30.880 --> 0:05:33.480
<v Speaker 1>players decide that they'd be better off consolidating. Right. You

0:05:33.520 --> 0:05:35.800
<v Speaker 1>know you talked about people being more sensitive with how

0:05:35.880 --> 0:05:39.400
<v Speaker 1>much they're spending. I think even the most optimistic person

0:05:39.480 --> 0:05:41.280
<v Speaker 1>would say that people don't want to have to pay

0:05:41.320 --> 0:05:43.600
<v Speaker 1>for more than four or five streaming services. And there

0:05:43.640 --> 0:05:46.920
<v Speaker 1>are a number of services going for that mass scale.

0:05:46.960 --> 0:05:50.159
<v Speaker 1>So does that mean that a paramount plus Warner Brothers,

0:05:50.200 --> 0:05:54.080
<v Speaker 1>Discovery with HBO, Max, uh, you know, a a peacock

0:05:54.120 --> 0:05:56.840
<v Speaker 1>from NBC Universal. Do some of those companies consolidate in

0:05:56.880 --> 0:05:59.080
<v Speaker 1>some way. We've already seen Disney and Fox come together,

0:05:59.120 --> 0:06:02.960
<v Speaker 1>We've already seen Viacom and CBS come together. There's been

0:06:02.960 --> 0:06:05.920
<v Speaker 1>a lot of speculation that at some point there will

0:06:05.960 --> 0:06:09.240
<v Speaker 1>be bigger deals we just don't know when. All right,

0:06:09.440 --> 0:06:12.159
<v Speaker 1>Luca Shaw, thank you as always for your analysis and

0:06:12.200 --> 0:06:24.480
<v Speaker 1>insights here. Appreciate it. Intel self driving technology companies mobilized

0:06:24.480 --> 0:06:28.560
<v Speaker 1>targeting evaluation far below previous expectations for its I p

0:06:28.720 --> 0:06:32.680
<v Speaker 1>O Intel and recently lowered and expected valuation of Mobile

0:06:32.680 --> 0:06:35.800
<v Speaker 1>I from fifty billion to thirty billion due to turbulent

0:06:35.839 --> 0:06:40.120
<v Speaker 1>market conditions. Now that's closer to sixteen billion here to

0:06:40.160 --> 0:06:43.120
<v Speaker 1>discuss our Bloomberg Deal's reporter Crystal Z. So clearly the

0:06:43.160 --> 0:06:45.840
<v Speaker 1>market condition is not helping here. But what's behind this

0:06:46.120 --> 0:06:50.080
<v Speaker 1>another another valuation cut? Yeah, So basically I p O

0:06:50.160 --> 0:06:53.000
<v Speaker 1>takes a long time to prepare. They probably came up

0:06:53.040 --> 0:06:56.360
<v Speaker 1>with the idea of listening this unit Mobile IE when

0:06:56.360 --> 0:06:58.760
<v Speaker 1>market was no booming, and right now it's went from

0:06:58.760 --> 0:07:01.200
<v Speaker 1>fift to sixteen then sixteen. I would like to say

0:07:01.200 --> 0:07:04.640
<v Speaker 1>it's not probably the final evaluation launch with the range.

0:07:04.680 --> 0:07:06.880
<v Speaker 1>I think it could go lower, it could go higher,

0:07:06.960 --> 0:07:09.200
<v Speaker 1>it could go lower. If we're optimistic, we think it

0:07:09.240 --> 0:07:12.920
<v Speaker 1>could go higher. But it's not the final evaluation um

0:07:12.960 --> 0:07:14.840
<v Speaker 1>and we will know next week when they actually do

0:07:14.880 --> 0:07:17.320
<v Speaker 1>a price to deal. And are you expecting them to

0:07:17.320 --> 0:07:18.960
<v Speaker 1>to go ahead with this I mean, is there any

0:07:19.040 --> 0:07:20.800
<v Speaker 1>kind of cold feet on the other side, like, maybe

0:07:20.840 --> 0:07:22.760
<v Speaker 1>we shouldn't do this right now. So if the market

0:07:23.240 --> 0:07:25.680
<v Speaker 1>on the pricing day falls on a day like today

0:07:25.680 --> 0:07:28.320
<v Speaker 1>where things are doing okay, like they could well go ahead.

0:07:28.360 --> 0:07:31.920
<v Speaker 1>But everything is market dependent. It could just price on

0:07:31.920 --> 0:07:33.720
<v Speaker 1>a day where everything is in the red and it

0:07:33.760 --> 0:07:38.080
<v Speaker 1>would just be a total disaster. And we shall see.

0:07:38.120 --> 0:07:39.960
<v Speaker 1>But right now I think they have the intention to

0:07:39.960 --> 0:07:42.320
<v Speaker 1>go ahead with this listing. And what is the exact

0:07:42.320 --> 0:07:46.000
<v Speaker 1>timeline we should expect a listing next week, perhaps the

0:07:46.000 --> 0:07:49.240
<v Speaker 1>middle of the week. There's this question of, you know,

0:07:49.280 --> 0:07:52.440
<v Speaker 1>the unprofitable I p O and whether that era is

0:07:52.840 --> 0:07:55.360
<v Speaker 1>coming to an end. And obviously you've covered so many

0:07:55.360 --> 0:07:57.720
<v Speaker 1>I p o s in boom times and now you're

0:07:57.720 --> 0:08:02.440
<v Speaker 1>covering the lack thereof you know, how are companies thinking

0:08:02.480 --> 0:08:04.680
<v Speaker 1>about strategy in terms of what they want to get

0:08:04.720 --> 0:08:08.240
<v Speaker 1>out of a public offering. Yeah, so anyone who has

0:08:08.360 --> 0:08:10.960
<v Speaker 1>raised money in the past year when valuation was still good,

0:08:10.960 --> 0:08:13.960
<v Speaker 1>when money was still available, will unlikely be looking at

0:08:14.000 --> 0:08:16.360
<v Speaker 1>an I p O. I think the mentality very much

0:08:16.480 --> 0:08:18.320
<v Speaker 1>right now is that if you don't have to do it,

0:08:18.400 --> 0:08:20.640
<v Speaker 1>don't do it. And I'm sure that's what the bankers

0:08:20.680 --> 0:08:23.280
<v Speaker 1>are advising their clients as well. But if you're a

0:08:23.320 --> 0:08:26.320
<v Speaker 1>company like Mobile I, where you have a parent company

0:08:26.360 --> 0:08:28.880
<v Speaker 1>that is looking to return some money, then you would

0:08:28.920 --> 0:08:31.360
<v Speaker 1>go ahead with this listing. But for people who have

0:08:31.400 --> 0:08:34.760
<v Speaker 1>a choice, they will most likely not. So that also

0:08:35.040 --> 0:08:37.480
<v Speaker 1>give it an interesting power dynamic. If you're an investor

0:08:37.520 --> 0:08:39.560
<v Speaker 1>and you know that this company needs to go public,

0:08:39.880 --> 0:08:41.800
<v Speaker 1>you have more pricing power. So how long does the

0:08:41.880 --> 0:08:44.920
<v Speaker 1>drought last and your view, well, a lot of bankers

0:08:44.960 --> 0:08:46.439
<v Speaker 1>are saying that we should expect the rest of the

0:08:46.520 --> 0:08:49.800
<v Speaker 1>year to be quiet, or even the first quarter of three.

0:08:49.880 --> 0:08:52.920
<v Speaker 1>So we will likely see some deals coming back meaningfully

0:08:53.040 --> 0:08:55.720
<v Speaker 1>in the second quarter of twenty three, and it would

0:08:55.800 --> 0:09:00.640
<v Speaker 1>most likely start with companies that are potentially revenue you positive,

0:09:00.880 --> 0:09:03.920
<v Speaker 1>or even profitable. The things that we have covered in

0:09:03.920 --> 0:09:05.920
<v Speaker 1>the last year where they have no revenue of that

0:09:06.080 --> 0:09:09.120
<v Speaker 1>no profit. Those who have to wait. All right, Crystals,

0:09:09.360 --> 0:09:11.160
<v Speaker 1>We'll keep checking back in with you and see if

0:09:11.160 --> 0:09:14.600
<v Speaker 1>the timeline changes. Thank you. I want to move on

0:09:14.679 --> 0:09:17.840
<v Speaker 1>to another I p O that's been highly anticipated, that

0:09:17.920 --> 0:09:20.320
<v Speaker 1>is instat car Let's bring in Adam Burnbaum to discuss.

0:09:20.320 --> 0:09:24.120
<v Speaker 1>He's the executive director at GP Bullhound, a tech advisory

0:09:24.120 --> 0:09:27.320
<v Speaker 1>and investment firm with a billion dollars under management. So

0:09:27.400 --> 0:09:31.960
<v Speaker 1>instacart adam another one that's had you know, massive valuation

0:09:32.040 --> 0:09:34.520
<v Speaker 1>cuts and believe it was, you know, valued at thirty

0:09:34.600 --> 0:09:38.120
<v Speaker 1>nine billion dollars at the height of its popularity in

0:09:38.160 --> 0:09:40.800
<v Speaker 1>the middle of the pandemic. Now we're down to thirteen

0:09:41.480 --> 0:09:45.199
<v Speaker 1>billion dollars. What's your expectation with this one. I think,

0:09:45.400 --> 0:09:48.480
<v Speaker 1>you know, Insta carts in an interesting position because they

0:09:48.480 --> 0:09:50.480
<v Speaker 1>don't really need the money right now. They've done a

0:09:50.480 --> 0:09:53.199
<v Speaker 1>few things that are very vering suit when they raised

0:09:53.240 --> 0:09:57.000
<v Speaker 1>capital and a higher valuation. Secondarily, they got their business

0:09:57.040 --> 0:10:00.839
<v Speaker 1>models such that they became cash flow positive. And number

0:10:00.880 --> 0:10:03.760
<v Speaker 1>three is they've evolved their business models so that they

0:10:04.200 --> 0:10:06.880
<v Speaker 1>have alternative sources for it. So they have an advertising

0:10:06.880 --> 0:10:09.440
<v Speaker 1>model which is doing extremely well. All that adds up

0:10:09.480 --> 0:10:12.120
<v Speaker 1>to they don't need to do a offering right now.

0:10:12.320 --> 0:10:15.000
<v Speaker 1>The the reason for doing an offering and would just

0:10:15.000 --> 0:10:17.280
<v Speaker 1>be to get some liquidity to a ten year old

0:10:17.280 --> 0:10:19.720
<v Speaker 1>companies for some of their employees. But I don't think

0:10:19.760 --> 0:10:21.840
<v Speaker 1>they need to force to do it. I think there's

0:10:21.840 --> 0:10:24.439
<v Speaker 1>another there's another dynamic thim that's out there. Emily and

0:10:24.480 --> 0:10:28.520
<v Speaker 1>that is interesting. And this is this legislation that's floating

0:10:28.559 --> 0:10:32.360
<v Speaker 1>around Washington right now, which is the reclassification of gig words.

0:10:32.400 --> 0:10:35.480
<v Speaker 1>That's something that would have a material impact on the

0:10:35.600 --> 0:10:39.640
<v Speaker 1>cost structure for these shoppers, going from being independent contractors

0:10:39.840 --> 0:10:43.080
<v Speaker 1>to being treated as employees. That I think the company

0:10:43.120 --> 0:10:45.560
<v Speaker 1>is certainly up for it. It's a very well managed company.

0:10:45.559 --> 0:10:47.960
<v Speaker 1>FIGI does a great is doing a great job, and

0:10:47.960 --> 0:10:50.480
<v Speaker 1>so to Prova. And this is a company that went

0:10:50.559 --> 0:10:54.200
<v Speaker 1>from two hundred thousand shoppers to five hundred thousand shoppers

0:10:54.600 --> 0:10:57.200
<v Speaker 1>UH during the height of the pandemic. Just a well

0:10:57.240 --> 0:11:00.880
<v Speaker 1>managed business. But all that's being said is that there's

0:11:00.920 --> 0:11:03.440
<v Speaker 1>no need right now for them to have to do

0:11:03.720 --> 0:11:06.920
<v Speaker 1>an I p O in a very very auspicious market department.

0:11:07.160 --> 0:11:09.520
<v Speaker 1>So are you saying that you think if they have

0:11:09.559 --> 0:11:12.560
<v Speaker 1>to classify these workers as employees, it's not going to

0:11:13.240 --> 0:11:17.200
<v Speaker 1>dramatically negatively impact the company that they're prepared for it.

0:11:17.960 --> 0:11:20.320
<v Speaker 1>I'm what I'm saying is that I think that they

0:11:20.360 --> 0:11:23.840
<v Speaker 1>would be able to handle it because I there, because

0:11:23.840 --> 0:11:26.479
<v Speaker 1>it's gonna but it's going to certainly impact the valuation

0:11:26.559 --> 0:11:30.040
<v Speaker 1>models that institutions are looking at for sure, And I

0:11:30.080 --> 0:11:32.600
<v Speaker 1>think that in and of itself is a reason you

0:11:32.720 --> 0:11:34.680
<v Speaker 1>hold off on rushing into an I p O market

0:11:34.679 --> 0:11:37.000
<v Speaker 1>when you don't need to do it. It's this is

0:11:37.040 --> 0:11:40.720
<v Speaker 1>a consumer facing business. The the aura of an I

0:11:40.840 --> 0:11:43.120
<v Speaker 1>p O is important, and there's no reason to rush

0:11:43.160 --> 0:11:44.959
<v Speaker 1>into a market, you know, when you're in an invariument

0:11:45.080 --> 0:11:48.560
<v Speaker 1>like we're in right now, where there's there's so much

0:11:48.640 --> 0:11:51.599
<v Speaker 1>read on the screens of institutional investments from past I

0:11:51.720 --> 0:11:54.160
<v Speaker 1>p O s, you know, you really need to you know,

0:11:54.200 --> 0:11:57.719
<v Speaker 1>to pull off a transaction successfully. What you really need

0:11:57.760 --> 0:11:59.600
<v Speaker 1>to do is you have to have everything aligned so

0:11:59.640 --> 0:12:02.040
<v Speaker 1>you don't need this other variable right now out there

0:12:02.080 --> 0:12:04.520
<v Speaker 1>which is impacting their cost structure. So I guess what

0:12:04.600 --> 0:12:06.760
<v Speaker 1>I'm saying is they don't need to do it right now.

0:12:06.800 --> 0:12:08.600
<v Speaker 1>I think they're up for the task if that's where

0:12:08.600 --> 0:12:12.160
<v Speaker 1>the legislation happens. But that's that's far from the FADA

0:12:12.160 --> 0:12:15.000
<v Speaker 1>company right now. Well, just talk to Crystal about the

0:12:15.080 --> 0:12:18.480
<v Speaker 1>era of the unprofitable I p O, which was hugely popular,

0:12:18.559 --> 0:12:22.320
<v Speaker 1>especially among technology companies instat carts, saying it's turned the

0:12:22.360 --> 0:12:25.760
<v Speaker 1>corner on profitability, So I imagine that might be one

0:12:25.920 --> 0:12:29.360
<v Speaker 1>less thing for investors to worry about you know, is

0:12:29.400 --> 0:12:32.120
<v Speaker 1>the is the era for unprofitable I pos is that over?

0:12:33.240 --> 0:12:35.760
<v Speaker 1>I think I think I wouldn't say it's you never

0:12:35.800 --> 0:12:38.280
<v Speaker 1>say never, so I wouldn't say it's over forever, but

0:12:38.280 --> 0:12:40.760
<v Speaker 1>I definitely say it's over for the short term. I'd

0:12:40.760 --> 0:12:44.200
<v Speaker 1>say that, you know, the there's there's a focus and

0:12:44.200 --> 0:12:46.480
<v Speaker 1>we're seeing this in our business across the board. We

0:12:46.520 --> 0:12:48.880
<v Speaker 1>do a lot of M and H transactions, We're doing

0:12:48.880 --> 0:12:51.000
<v Speaker 1>a lot of capital raising. We just raised five hundred

0:12:51.040 --> 0:12:54.560
<v Speaker 1>million dollars for business. Uh, there's a there's a big

0:12:54.600 --> 0:12:59.040
<v Speaker 1>focus on more mature models that have provided a pathway

0:12:59.120 --> 0:13:03.440
<v Speaker 1>to profitability or demonstrating that their that their models are involved.

0:13:03.640 --> 0:13:07.360
<v Speaker 1>The days of companies going out with a you know,

0:13:07.440 --> 0:13:10.079
<v Speaker 1>somewhat somewhat of a pipe tree into the public markets,

0:13:10.320 --> 0:13:12.280
<v Speaker 1>which frankly they shouldn't have been in the public markets

0:13:12.280 --> 0:13:14.640
<v Speaker 1>to begin with. I think that at least with the

0:13:14.720 --> 0:13:16.360
<v Speaker 1>near term, we're not going to see them for a while.

0:13:16.440 --> 0:13:19.679
<v Speaker 1>So how are you changing your strategy and what are

0:13:19.720 --> 0:13:25.840
<v Speaker 1>you telling your clients admits to these evolving conditions. Well,

0:13:25.880 --> 0:13:28.760
<v Speaker 1>I think what we're what we're telling people is one

0:13:28.840 --> 0:13:31.960
<v Speaker 1>the M and A market continues to be open, particularly

0:13:32.080 --> 0:13:36.240
<v Speaker 1>from very very good areas, things like cybersecurity E s G.

0:13:36.840 --> 0:13:39.439
<v Speaker 1>We do a lot of work with digital analytic businesses

0:13:39.520 --> 0:13:42.880
<v Speaker 1>and digital transformation companies. These are companies that have core

0:13:44.040 --> 0:13:47.720
<v Speaker 1>organic growth within their within their addressable markets, which you're

0:13:47.720 --> 0:13:50.640
<v Speaker 1>going to continue. What we are telling people is that

0:13:50.679 --> 0:13:53.360
<v Speaker 1>for those who are considering the I p O market

0:13:53.520 --> 0:13:56.120
<v Speaker 1>right now in this environment, that is not something that

0:13:56.160 --> 0:13:59.679
<v Speaker 1>we would strongly recommend. Uh. For sure, it's definitely not

0:13:59.760 --> 0:14:02.080
<v Speaker 1>some thing it needs to be done. I think that

0:14:02.679 --> 0:14:06.960
<v Speaker 1>there are you know, in between all this negative discussion,

0:14:07.480 --> 0:14:09.839
<v Speaker 1>is that still this year we're gonna have a reckoned

0:14:09.880 --> 0:14:13.640
<v Speaker 1>amount of capital coming into venture venture funds. It's just

0:14:13.640 --> 0:14:16.160
<v Speaker 1>going to be more concentrated. Uh. And I just think

0:14:16.160 --> 0:14:18.360
<v Speaker 1>there's a flight that's just a general flight to quality.

0:14:18.559 --> 0:14:21.200
<v Speaker 1>So that's what where you know, we're advising people that

0:14:21.680 --> 0:14:25.240
<v Speaker 1>don't rush ahead to do something unnecessarily, but there's certainly

0:14:25.320 --> 0:14:28.560
<v Speaker 1>market and there's certainly transactions to be done. The transactions

0:14:28.600 --> 0:14:31.600
<v Speaker 1>to be done a very very fair valuations for companies

0:14:31.640 --> 0:14:34.840
<v Speaker 1>that have more sure business models and and have the

0:14:34.880 --> 0:14:38.920
<v Speaker 1>economics to support. How long do you think the downturn

0:14:39.000 --> 0:14:41.040
<v Speaker 1>will last? We're hearing, you know, six months for the

0:14:41.080 --> 0:14:43.760
<v Speaker 1>I p O window to reopen. I'm hearing from from

0:14:43.840 --> 0:14:47.640
<v Speaker 1>some other more skeptical folks two to three years before

0:14:47.640 --> 0:14:50.560
<v Speaker 1>we're out of this. Yeah, it's a it's a great

0:14:50.640 --> 0:14:53.120
<v Speaker 1>question when you look, when you look at what has

0:14:53.200 --> 0:14:56.920
<v Speaker 1>happened over a period of time right now, all these

0:14:57.000 --> 0:15:01.520
<v Speaker 1>valuation models that that institutional buy look at are predicated

0:15:01.520 --> 0:15:04.160
<v Speaker 1>on the on an interest rate. When you don't know

0:15:04.280 --> 0:15:07.000
<v Speaker 1>what that interest rate is gonna be, it's very very

0:15:07.040 --> 0:15:09.880
<v Speaker 1>hard to build the models accordingly, so you know, you

0:15:10.120 --> 0:15:13.040
<v Speaker 1>it's it becomes very very challenging when you have a

0:15:13.120 --> 0:15:17.280
<v Speaker 1>FED that is focused on breaking the back of inflation,

0:15:17.680 --> 0:15:19.960
<v Speaker 1>and and that's certainly the right thing for them to

0:15:20.000 --> 0:15:22.760
<v Speaker 1>be doing, but it's hard. It's hard to do that.

0:15:22.880 --> 0:15:24.960
<v Speaker 1>I would I think that once you get to a

0:15:25.080 --> 0:15:28.800
<v Speaker 1>sole period of time in interest rate raisings and you

0:15:28.840 --> 0:15:32.160
<v Speaker 1>start to see that we're entering into and you start

0:15:32.200 --> 0:15:35.160
<v Speaker 1>seeing the labor statistics supporting that, I think you're going

0:15:35.280 --> 0:15:39.440
<v Speaker 1>to see a you're gonna see a a market that's

0:15:39.440 --> 0:15:41.800
<v Speaker 1>going to be more receptive. And when markets and when

0:15:41.800 --> 0:15:45.240
<v Speaker 1>markets start opening to the I p O market, the

0:15:45.360 --> 0:15:47.800
<v Speaker 1>companies that go out and those environments have to be

0:15:48.920 --> 0:15:51.640
<v Speaker 1>primo they have to be the best companies in their

0:15:51.720 --> 0:15:55.160
<v Speaker 1>environment and those and that's really what's traditionally happens in

0:15:55.200 --> 0:15:57.920
<v Speaker 1>any in any sort of bed I p O market,

0:15:58.200 --> 0:16:00.440
<v Speaker 1>the market comes back because the best, the best go

0:16:00.520 --> 0:16:03.640
<v Speaker 1>out there, they work, the institutions start feeling a little

0:16:03.640 --> 0:16:06.280
<v Speaker 1>bit more comfortable, and then they and then you start

0:16:06.280 --> 0:16:08.800
<v Speaker 1>seeing additional companies come out. I would say, you know,

0:16:08.840 --> 0:16:13.800
<v Speaker 1>to answer your question, uh, I'm thinking mid midtime next year,

0:16:13.920 --> 0:16:17.120
<v Speaker 1>I would say, you know, Q four no Q one

0:16:17.200 --> 0:16:20.520
<v Speaker 1>still feels a little early. I would say maybe Q two,

0:16:20.600 --> 0:16:22.720
<v Speaker 1>Q three start seeing it. And again, you know, the

0:16:22.720 --> 0:16:25.680
<v Speaker 1>equity capital markets are an environment that's you know, a

0:16:25.760 --> 0:16:28.000
<v Speaker 1>front owner. So we're gonna be out in front of

0:16:28.000 --> 0:16:32.040
<v Speaker 1>the economy. You are on the more optimistic side than

0:16:32.720 --> 0:16:35.520
<v Speaker 1>Adam Burg. Bam g people Hound, thank you. Good to

0:16:35.560 --> 0:16:40.480
<v Speaker 1>hear your perspective. Right coming up, Apple drops after a

0:16:40.520 --> 0:16:43.960
<v Speaker 1>report about iPhone production, plus the company unveils new iPads

0:16:44.360 --> 0:16:46.400
<v Speaker 1>for the first time in five years. We're gonna talk

0:16:46.400 --> 0:16:50.120
<v Speaker 1>about how the pandemic has changed the company's approach to tablets.

0:16:50.280 --> 0:17:03.360
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloomberg. Apple just launched its first fully redesigned

0:17:03.440 --> 0:17:06.080
<v Speaker 1>entry level iPad in five years, but shares dropped on

0:17:06.119 --> 0:17:09.520
<v Speaker 1>a report the company will cut production of the iPhone

0:17:09.520 --> 0:17:13.080
<v Speaker 1>fourteen plus. Let's bring in Bloomberg's Mark German to discuss

0:17:13.160 --> 0:17:17.400
<v Speaker 1>marcus report coming from the information. What's your assessment about

0:17:17.440 --> 0:17:21.679
<v Speaker 1>these production cuts. I'm not sure what else Apple or

0:17:21.680 --> 0:17:24.680
<v Speaker 1>investors or analysts should really expect when the phone comes

0:17:24.680 --> 0:17:28.359
<v Speaker 1>out three weeks later than the other variations. It's basically

0:17:28.480 --> 0:17:31.240
<v Speaker 1>last year's phone, but a little bit bigger. Really no changes,

0:17:31.640 --> 0:17:34.280
<v Speaker 1>and it's only eight dollars per month, less than the

0:17:34.320 --> 0:17:37.960
<v Speaker 1>iPhone four Team Pro Max. There's really not a good

0:17:38.000 --> 0:17:42.359
<v Speaker 1>reason to buy that nine iPhone fourteen plus when again

0:17:42.440 --> 0:17:45.080
<v Speaker 1>on installments, a much better phone, the one you're showing

0:17:45.080 --> 0:17:47.680
<v Speaker 1>on screen right now. It's only eight dollars per month.

0:17:47.720 --> 0:17:50.520
<v Speaker 1>So if you're already spending nine on the phone, chances

0:17:50.520 --> 0:17:52.720
<v Speaker 1>are you can spend eleven hundred dollars, especially if you

0:17:52.760 --> 0:17:56.000
<v Speaker 1>break over break up that difference over twenty four or

0:17:56.119 --> 0:17:58.879
<v Speaker 1>thirty months. Interesting. You've also got some new reporting on

0:17:59.080 --> 0:18:02.480
<v Speaker 1>the iPads. New iPod pads tell us how big a

0:18:02.600 --> 0:18:06.080
<v Speaker 1>change you're seeing here, and and you know why the

0:18:06.160 --> 0:18:10.120
<v Speaker 1>change in strategy from Apple. So two new iPads. One

0:18:10.359 --> 0:18:13.040
<v Speaker 1>is the new iPad Pro with the M two chip.

0:18:13.160 --> 0:18:15.720
<v Speaker 1>The second is a new entry level iPad. I'll start

0:18:15.760 --> 0:18:17.520
<v Speaker 1>with the iPad Pro. That will be a lot quicker,

0:18:17.960 --> 0:18:20.800
<v Speaker 1>smallest update in the history of the iPad Pro. The

0:18:20.840 --> 0:18:25.000
<v Speaker 1>first one came out seven years ago. They've essentially added

0:18:25.080 --> 0:18:29.080
<v Speaker 1>just that faster processor. It's about fift faster. I don't

0:18:29.080 --> 0:18:30.920
<v Speaker 1>think you're going to see major day to day gains

0:18:30.960 --> 0:18:33.920
<v Speaker 1>from last year's model. There's a new Apple pencil hover

0:18:33.960 --> 0:18:36.480
<v Speaker 1>feature you're showing, which now if you take the stylus

0:18:36.520 --> 0:18:39.879
<v Speaker 1>over the screen, it can sense twelve millimeters away that

0:18:39.920 --> 0:18:41.760
<v Speaker 1>you're there, so you don't actually have to touch the screen.

0:18:41.960 --> 0:18:43.920
<v Speaker 1>It's kind of a cool but more of a software

0:18:43.920 --> 0:18:47.840
<v Speaker 1>based tweak. Now the entry level iPad, I have no

0:18:47.880 --> 0:18:50.520
<v Speaker 1>idea why anyone would buy the iPad air. The iPad

0:18:50.520 --> 0:18:54.080
<v Speaker 1>air with the M one chip six This iPad entry

0:18:54.119 --> 0:18:57.000
<v Speaker 1>level has the A fourteen chip, so a little bit slower,

0:18:57.280 --> 0:19:00.359
<v Speaker 1>but for over a hundred dollars less expensive. So I

0:19:00.359 --> 0:19:02.639
<v Speaker 1>think it's going to be an incredibly hot seller. I

0:19:02.720 --> 0:19:04.919
<v Speaker 1>think it's going to do well. The question is what

0:19:05.080 --> 0:19:08.160
<v Speaker 1>is Apple thinking right now with its iPad strategy. It's

0:19:08.160 --> 0:19:10.639
<v Speaker 1>really all over the place. You have five or six

0:19:10.880 --> 0:19:14.760
<v Speaker 1>distinct models. You have a lot of overlap in both

0:19:14.840 --> 0:19:19.199
<v Speaker 1>pricing and functionality, and capacities and design and colors. The

0:19:19.280 --> 0:19:22.560
<v Speaker 1>software story is not in good shape. People have been

0:19:22.600 --> 0:19:26.240
<v Speaker 1>asking for major multitasking improvements for years now. I don't

0:19:26.240 --> 0:19:29.320
<v Speaker 1>think Stage Manager, which they're launching with iPad O sixteen

0:19:29.320 --> 0:19:32.560
<v Speaker 1>and these new iPads next week, is the answer. I

0:19:32.600 --> 0:19:35.399
<v Speaker 1>think they will do well the holiday season, particularly with

0:19:35.440 --> 0:19:38.040
<v Speaker 1>the new colorful entry level iPad, but I think they

0:19:38.040 --> 0:19:40.920
<v Speaker 1>need to give the iPad pro some serious juice, both

0:19:40.920 --> 0:19:43.480
<v Speaker 1>in terms of hardware and software, and really define what

0:19:43.560 --> 0:19:45.600
<v Speaker 1>the vision in the future of the iPad is. I

0:19:45.640 --> 0:19:48.520
<v Speaker 1>think it's going to be bigger screens and Mac like multitasking,

0:19:48.680 --> 0:19:50.199
<v Speaker 1>but we'll see what they have up their sleeves in

0:19:50.280 --> 0:19:53.639
<v Speaker 1>twenty three and twenty four. Mark, you never sugre account anything.

0:19:53.680 --> 0:19:56.520
<v Speaker 1>That's why we're laughing. Thank you for giving us giving

0:19:56.520 --> 0:19:59.200
<v Speaker 1>it to a straight Bloomberg s Mark German, as always,

0:20:07.000 --> 0:20:09.440
<v Speaker 1>Welcome back to Bloomer Technology. I'm Emily Chang in New York.

0:20:09.480 --> 0:20:12.040
<v Speaker 1>I want to get to what has been dubbed the

0:20:12.160 --> 0:20:16.639
<v Speaker 1>Great Breakup, which is the phenomenon of women leaders leaving

0:20:16.640 --> 0:20:19.639
<v Speaker 1>their companies at higher rates than ever before and the

0:20:19.680 --> 0:20:23.800
<v Speaker 1>gap between women and men leaders quitting that's the largest

0:20:23.960 --> 0:20:27.119
<v Speaker 1>it has ever been. This is according to Women in

0:20:27.160 --> 0:20:29.520
<v Speaker 1>the Workplace study by McKinsey and Lenan dot Org. I

0:20:29.560 --> 0:20:32.040
<v Speaker 1>want to talk about why we're seeing all of this

0:20:32.160 --> 0:20:34.760
<v Speaker 1>with McKenzie Senior partner, Lorena and Lena dot Org co

0:20:34.880 --> 0:20:38.920
<v Speaker 1>founder and CEO, Rachel Thomas. Lorena and Rachel. I'm always

0:20:39.160 --> 0:20:42.760
<v Speaker 1>looking forward to this report every year, mostly for our

0:20:42.800 --> 0:20:46.840
<v Speaker 1>progress update, but this one is not so good. Rachel,

0:20:46.920 --> 0:20:51.280
<v Speaker 1>explain what you mean by the great breakup. Well, it's

0:20:51.280 --> 0:20:54.960
<v Speaker 1>exactly what you said. For the first time that we've

0:20:54.960 --> 0:20:59.360
<v Speaker 1>been tracking. Women leaders are highly ambitious. There's ambitious as men,

0:20:59.440 --> 0:21:01.640
<v Speaker 1>but they're lee in the company at the highest rate

0:21:01.680 --> 0:21:05.199
<v Speaker 1>we've ever seen and at higher rates than men. And

0:21:05.440 --> 0:21:08.639
<v Speaker 1>we already know women are under represented in leadership, so

0:21:08.720 --> 0:21:12.480
<v Speaker 1>companies cannot afford to lose their precious few women leaders.

0:21:12.520 --> 0:21:14.639
<v Speaker 1>And to put the scale of this in the perspective

0:21:14.640 --> 0:21:19.520
<v Speaker 1>for you, Emily, for every woman director who gets promoted,

0:21:20.200 --> 0:21:23.600
<v Speaker 1>two women directors are choosing to leave their company. That's

0:21:23.680 --> 0:21:27.000
<v Speaker 1>one up and two out. And that's a problem. Lorena,

0:21:27.080 --> 0:21:30.400
<v Speaker 1>you've been working in corporate America for so long. Why

0:21:30.480 --> 0:21:35.160
<v Speaker 1>is this happening. Well, we see some very persistent headwinds,

0:21:35.280 --> 0:21:37.600
<v Speaker 1>none of which are going to surprise you, and we

0:21:37.680 --> 0:21:40.280
<v Speaker 1>see a change in the mindset of women. So some

0:21:40.359 --> 0:21:43.879
<v Speaker 1>of those headwinds. Emily, we've seen lots of different stabs

0:21:43.880 --> 0:21:47.120
<v Speaker 1>and cuts every day, but we saw that clearly about

0:21:47.760 --> 0:21:51.120
<v Speaker 1>women leaders said that someone took credit for their idea

0:21:51.560 --> 0:21:53.879
<v Speaker 1>in their meetings. This year, we saw that there were

0:21:53.920 --> 0:21:57.119
<v Speaker 1>two times more likely than men to be mistaken for

0:21:57.200 --> 0:22:00.480
<v Speaker 1>someone junior actually kind of undercutting their leaders up and

0:22:00.560 --> 0:22:02.280
<v Speaker 1>the list goes on, and these are the day to

0:22:02.359 --> 0:22:05.399
<v Speaker 1>day headwinds. They're also not getting credit for being great

0:22:05.440 --> 0:22:07.800
<v Speaker 1>people leaders. And so what we see is that when

0:22:07.840 --> 0:22:10.760
<v Speaker 1>women give more, when they make sure that work works

0:22:10.800 --> 0:22:14.480
<v Speaker 1>remotely and flexibly, when they actually take care of wellness,

0:22:14.520 --> 0:22:17.000
<v Speaker 1>when they pay attention to D and I, they rarely

0:22:17.040 --> 0:22:19.680
<v Speaker 1>receive credit. So those are some of the headwinds which

0:22:19.680 --> 0:22:23.560
<v Speaker 1>are signals to women you're not going to advance. And

0:22:23.600 --> 0:22:26.760
<v Speaker 1>the other thing that I mentioned is women's mindsets are shifting.

0:22:27.119 --> 0:22:31.040
<v Speaker 1>They're saying, look, I am positively ambitious, I would like

0:22:31.280 --> 0:22:34.280
<v Speaker 1>to get promoted, I would like another opportunity, and if

0:22:34.320 --> 0:22:36.800
<v Speaker 1>that means I need to break up with you and

0:22:36.880 --> 0:22:39.600
<v Speaker 1>go to another company, go to a competitor, go to

0:22:39.640 --> 0:22:42.240
<v Speaker 1>a smaller company to get that promotion, to get that raise.

0:22:42.640 --> 0:22:45.359
<v Speaker 1>I'm willing to bet on myself to do it. And

0:22:45.440 --> 0:22:49.160
<v Speaker 1>yet far fear or women are being promoted to manager

0:22:49.320 --> 0:22:54.000
<v Speaker 1>for the eighth year in a row. Uh, you're seeing this, Rachel?

0:22:54.040 --> 0:22:56.240
<v Speaker 1>Can you explain this to me? Because I feel like

0:22:56.240 --> 0:22:59.320
<v Speaker 1>we're getting a lot of conflicting information. You know, I've

0:22:59.359 --> 0:23:02.520
<v Speaker 1>also heard more women are being promoted in a house

0:23:02.640 --> 0:23:05.000
<v Speaker 1>or that you are are actually seeing that as a

0:23:05.000 --> 0:23:09.120
<v Speaker 1>potential path to success. Uh, perhaps a more accessible path

0:23:09.200 --> 0:23:12.439
<v Speaker 1>to success them bringing in new women to leadership roles

0:23:12.480 --> 0:23:16.760
<v Speaker 1>from the outside. Rachel, Emily, you're right, eighth year in

0:23:16.800 --> 0:23:21.000
<v Speaker 1>a row, that broken wrong at that first critical step

0:23:21.040 --> 0:23:24.200
<v Speaker 1>up to manager is still broken. For every hundred women

0:23:24.240 --> 0:23:27.280
<v Speaker 1>who were promoted to manager last year, I mean for

0:23:27.320 --> 0:23:30.240
<v Speaker 1>every hundred men, only eight seven women were in eighty

0:23:30.320 --> 0:23:33.800
<v Speaker 1>two women of color. And here's why that matters. At

0:23:33.800 --> 0:23:36.680
<v Speaker 1>the typical company, when you look at the manager level,

0:23:36.760 --> 0:23:40.600
<v Speaker 1>six managers or men and managers or women, which means

0:23:40.640 --> 0:23:44.320
<v Speaker 1>literally there are fewer women to promote. So that's company's

0:23:44.359 --> 0:23:47.760
<v Speaker 1>first pipe pipeline problem. And now we're talking about their

0:23:47.800 --> 0:23:50.720
<v Speaker 1>second pipeline problem, which is on top of that, women

0:23:50.840 --> 0:23:54.720
<v Speaker 1>leaders are leaving. So our message to organizations this year

0:23:54.880 --> 0:23:58.120
<v Speaker 1>is we've got a really double triple down on holding

0:23:58.160 --> 0:24:01.479
<v Speaker 1>on to our women leaders and up and coming women leaders.

0:24:02.800 --> 0:24:07.359
<v Speaker 1>The report uh sites one in four uh C suite

0:24:07.440 --> 0:24:10.159
<v Speaker 1>leaders as a woman, and only one in twenty is

0:24:10.160 --> 0:24:15.200
<v Speaker 1>a woman of color. Um Lorena, our startups doing at

0:24:15.240 --> 0:24:18.879
<v Speaker 1>all any better of a job than corporate America at

0:24:18.920 --> 0:24:22.679
<v Speaker 1>getting these numbers up. I wish we could say, yes, Emily,

0:24:22.800 --> 0:24:27.159
<v Speaker 1>we see pretty consistent lackluster results across any sized company

0:24:27.200 --> 0:24:29.479
<v Speaker 1>in the United States. And so to give you a

0:24:29.480 --> 0:24:31.600
<v Speaker 1>flavor of this, if you're a Black woman, if you're

0:24:31.600 --> 0:24:34.400
<v Speaker 1>a Latino woman, if you're an Asian woman, as you

0:24:34.480 --> 0:24:38.280
<v Speaker 1>try and climb up, you just face so many challenges.

0:24:38.560 --> 0:24:41.680
<v Speaker 1>And one thing that's really important to note is women

0:24:42.000 --> 0:24:45.760
<v Speaker 1>of color are extremely ambitious. In fact, Black and Asian

0:24:45.800 --> 0:24:48.400
<v Speaker 1>women want to succeed and rise up to leadership rules

0:24:48.480 --> 0:24:51.960
<v Speaker 1>the most out of all people in your organization, and

0:24:52.040 --> 0:24:55.000
<v Speaker 1>yet they face these challenges. So, just as an example,

0:24:55.480 --> 0:24:57.600
<v Speaker 1>if you are a black woman, you are more likely

0:24:57.760 --> 0:25:01.600
<v Speaker 1>three times more likely in fact, to be questioned on

0:25:01.840 --> 0:25:05.520
<v Speaker 1>your credibility, and you know you received the least amount

0:25:05.560 --> 0:25:08.119
<v Speaker 1>of support from your manager, and all of these things

0:25:08.119 --> 0:25:10.440
<v Speaker 1>add up. And in a world where we have one

0:25:10.480 --> 0:25:14.280
<v Speaker 1>in twenty women of color at the very top, and

0:25:14.359 --> 0:25:17.959
<v Speaker 1>given all the emphasis that companies have talked about and

0:25:18.000 --> 0:25:21.040
<v Speaker 1>are aware in terms of racial reckoning, you would think

0:25:21.080 --> 0:25:23.400
<v Speaker 1>that we would be making more progress. And the fact

0:25:23.440 --> 0:25:26.480
<v Speaker 1>of the matter is that we're not. Oh, let's talk

0:25:26.480 --> 0:25:30.439
<v Speaker 1>about the silver linings. You talk about remote work. You

0:25:30.480 --> 0:25:34.800
<v Speaker 1>mentioned remote work earlier, but given these numbers, Rachel, how

0:25:34.880 --> 0:25:38.040
<v Speaker 1>is remote work really showing up for women in the workplace.

0:25:39.119 --> 0:25:42.520
<v Speaker 1>We know, before the pandemic, all employees in particularly women,

0:25:42.760 --> 0:25:46.560
<v Speaker 1>really valued flexibility. We also know that companies, many of them,

0:25:46.560 --> 0:25:50.960
<v Speaker 1>are continuing some commitment to at least a level of flexibility.

0:25:51.000 --> 0:25:53.080
<v Speaker 1>But when you look at remote in hybrid work, what's

0:25:53.119 --> 0:25:56.600
<v Speaker 1>really interesting is it's not just about flexibility for women.

0:25:57.400 --> 0:26:00.560
<v Speaker 1>They're actually having a better workplace experience and when they're

0:26:00.600 --> 0:26:03.800
<v Speaker 1>working from home, they're less likely to experience those micro

0:26:03.960 --> 0:26:07.600
<v Speaker 1>aggressions we often talk about getting mistaken for someone more junior,

0:26:07.640 --> 0:26:10.560
<v Speaker 1>having someone take credit for your ideas, and those obviously

0:26:10.600 --> 0:26:13.520
<v Speaker 1>have a huge impact on women. So it's just one

0:26:13.640 --> 0:26:19.160
<v Speaker 1>stat women with disabilities are half as likely to experience

0:26:19.200 --> 0:26:22.359
<v Speaker 1>microaggressions when they're working at home at their kitchen table

0:26:22.400 --> 0:26:25.600
<v Speaker 1>then when they're when they're working in the office. So certainly,

0:26:25.640 --> 0:26:28.240
<v Speaker 1>flexibility is not the end all v all answer, but

0:26:28.280 --> 0:26:30.360
<v Speaker 1>it's important to women because it allows them to fit

0:26:30.400 --> 0:26:33.359
<v Speaker 1>work into their lives and it's also delivering a better

0:26:33.400 --> 0:26:37.720
<v Speaker 1>work experience. So let's talk about a plan of action, Lorena.

0:26:37.880 --> 0:26:41.600
<v Speaker 1>How can companies and managers and leaders use this information

0:26:42.040 --> 0:26:46.679
<v Speaker 1>to use this as an opportunity to get better exactly?

0:26:46.840 --> 0:26:49.200
<v Speaker 1>And so what this does is it points a spotlight

0:26:49.240 --> 0:26:51.359
<v Speaker 1>on what's not working. And granted, there are a lot

0:26:51.440 --> 0:26:53.560
<v Speaker 1>of things that are not working, but there are solutions

0:26:53.560 --> 0:26:56.399
<v Speaker 1>out there. We take a look at better companies, companies

0:26:56.400 --> 0:26:58.959
<v Speaker 1>that are making more progress year over year. There are

0:26:58.960 --> 0:27:02.000
<v Speaker 1>a couple of things they do. One, they actually hold

0:27:02.080 --> 0:27:05.639
<v Speaker 1>themselves and managers accountable. They don't just have dashboards that

0:27:05.880 --> 0:27:08.600
<v Speaker 1>say that they need to improve, but they actually hold

0:27:08.680 --> 0:27:11.600
<v Speaker 1>leaders accountable for that in their business reviews, in their

0:27:11.600 --> 0:27:14.760
<v Speaker 1>performance evaluations. Another thing that we see is that they

0:27:14.800 --> 0:27:17.560
<v Speaker 1>empower managers. They give them the tools to do better

0:27:17.680 --> 0:27:20.720
<v Speaker 1>because certainly the positive intent is there and the last

0:27:20.760 --> 0:27:23.399
<v Speaker 1>thing is that we see that they do better in practices,

0:27:23.880 --> 0:27:26.840
<v Speaker 1>so they really go beyond the basics. It's one thing

0:27:26.880 --> 0:27:29.360
<v Speaker 1>to have an anti bias training once a year. It's

0:27:29.400 --> 0:27:32.280
<v Speaker 1>another thing to say, I'm going to have an anti

0:27:32.359 --> 0:27:35.120
<v Speaker 1>bias observer and I'm going to really bust that bias

0:27:35.480 --> 0:27:38.600
<v Speaker 1>in the moments that matter, which are performance reviews and evaluations.

0:27:39.040 --> 0:27:41.760
<v Speaker 1>It's a whole another thing to invest in career development

0:27:42.080 --> 0:27:44.679
<v Speaker 1>versus just networking on women. Those are just a couple

0:27:44.720 --> 0:27:47.640
<v Speaker 1>of examples, Emily, but there are some really concrete things

0:27:47.640 --> 0:27:50.800
<v Speaker 1>that company can do, and I'm extremely optimistic that they

0:27:50.800 --> 0:27:53.560
<v Speaker 1>can step forward and do these things. So I have

0:27:53.640 --> 0:27:56.200
<v Speaker 1>to ask you about, of course, the founder of lenan

0:27:56.320 --> 0:27:59.680
<v Speaker 1>who started this movement, and that is Cheryl Sandberg. Oh.

0:27:59.720 --> 0:28:03.679
<v Speaker 1>You know, now just a few weeks ago, uh left

0:28:03.760 --> 0:28:06.679
<v Speaker 1>after a very long tenure at Facebook, Rachel, what can

0:28:06.720 --> 0:28:09.600
<v Speaker 1>you tell us about Cheryl's next act? And you know

0:28:09.640 --> 0:28:11.600
<v Speaker 1>how much more time She's now going to be spending

0:28:11.600 --> 0:28:14.040
<v Speaker 1>with lenin and focused on these issues that you know,

0:28:14.080 --> 0:28:18.040
<v Speaker 1>as part of a movement that really she catalyzed. Yeah, So,

0:28:18.119 --> 0:28:21.080
<v Speaker 1>first of all, I love the cheryld got to a

0:28:21.160 --> 0:28:22.960
<v Speaker 1>point in her career where she was ready to leave

0:28:23.000 --> 0:28:24.959
<v Speaker 1>because we all as women have a right to make

0:28:25.040 --> 0:28:27.359
<v Speaker 1>choices about her career. As you know so well, Emily,

0:28:27.960 --> 0:28:31.000
<v Speaker 1>and as she said publicly, she's always been incredibly involved

0:28:31.000 --> 0:28:33.840
<v Speaker 1>with the Foundation and the work we do and fighting

0:28:33.840 --> 0:28:35.879
<v Speaker 1>to knock down the BIA season barriers they get in

0:28:35.920 --> 0:28:38.120
<v Speaker 1>women's way in the workplace, and she's going to continue

0:28:38.160 --> 0:28:40.600
<v Speaker 1>to do that. And we are thrilled to have Morna

0:28:40.720 --> 0:28:43.920
<v Speaker 1>Cheryl Sandberg with us every day and really speaking up

0:28:43.920 --> 0:28:47.400
<v Speaker 1>on these issues that are so critically important. So, Lorena,

0:28:47.520 --> 0:28:50.280
<v Speaker 1>last question, there's a lot to be worried about. What

0:28:50.400 --> 0:28:54.680
<v Speaker 1>can we be optimistic about We should be optimistic about

0:28:54.720 --> 0:28:57.400
<v Speaker 1>young women. Um So, I'm so glad you asked so.

0:28:57.560 --> 0:29:00.560
<v Speaker 1>In the survey this year, we founded lot of people

0:29:00.560 --> 0:29:04.600
<v Speaker 1>wonder women under thirty, gen X, gen Z, what what's

0:29:04.640 --> 0:29:07.000
<v Speaker 1>they're feeling? And I have some good news on that.

0:29:07.360 --> 0:29:11.000
<v Speaker 1>They are so ambitious. They want to be senior leaders

0:29:11.040 --> 0:29:13.480
<v Speaker 1>and that has increased over the last couple of years.

0:29:13.720 --> 0:29:15.760
<v Speaker 1>And they have a very clear view in a workplace

0:29:15.760 --> 0:29:18.000
<v Speaker 1>that works for them and they're going to step up

0:29:18.000 --> 0:29:20.280
<v Speaker 1>and live into that. And so when we think about

0:29:20.280 --> 0:29:22.480
<v Speaker 1>the future of women at work, I look at young

0:29:22.480 --> 0:29:25.880
<v Speaker 1>women and I say, look, that is our future. We

0:29:26.000 --> 0:29:29.320
<v Speaker 1>have to invest in them, develop them and bring them

0:29:29.360 --> 0:29:33.760
<v Speaker 1>up into the senior ranks. All right, mckensley's Lorena ye

0:29:34.120 --> 0:29:36.720
<v Speaker 1>lenand dot org its co founder and CEO, Rachel Thomas,

0:29:36.720 --> 0:29:38.240
<v Speaker 1>thank you both, and thank you for the work that

0:29:38.280 --> 0:29:43.800
<v Speaker 1>you do on this report every year. We appreciate it. Alright.

0:29:43.800 --> 0:29:46.640
<v Speaker 1>Coming up, why one crypto aventure capitalist is asking the

0:29:46.640 --> 0:29:49.840
<v Speaker 1>public to public to look at crypto as a technology

0:29:50.200 --> 0:30:08.400
<v Speaker 1>not a token. That's next. This is Bloomberg. Blockchain is

0:30:08.440 --> 0:30:11.600
<v Speaker 1>a technology which is real deployed in many places. We

0:30:11.720 --> 0:30:14.360
<v Speaker 1>deploy it with ink with Onyx, which some of you

0:30:14.400 --> 0:30:15.959
<v Speaker 1>were part of and link with. Some of you were

0:30:16.000 --> 0:30:18.600
<v Speaker 1>part of the JP Morgan coin, which is a stable

0:30:18.680 --> 0:30:21.560
<v Speaker 1>coin backed by a U. S. Dollar deposit at JP Morgan.

0:30:21.960 --> 0:30:23.400
<v Speaker 1>And there are a lot of these technologies gonna work.

0:30:23.400 --> 0:30:26.080
<v Speaker 1>They're gonna replace ledgers, they're gonna make things cheaper. I

0:30:26.080 --> 0:30:28.280
<v Speaker 1>think banks will be big users of that. And yes

0:30:28.280 --> 0:30:29.960
<v Speaker 1>it may distant to me a certain part of banking.

0:30:30.040 --> 0:30:32.280
<v Speaker 1>So be it that we have that problem, like with

0:30:32.360 --> 0:30:35.840
<v Speaker 1>technology for the last fifty years and so my issue

0:30:35.880 --> 0:30:38.760
<v Speaker 1>has always been with what you guys call a cryptocurrency,

0:30:39.280 --> 0:30:42.400
<v Speaker 1>which I call a crypto token that doesn't do anything,

0:30:44.560 --> 0:30:47.720
<v Speaker 1>JP Morgan CEO Jamie Diamond last week, doubling down on

0:30:47.800 --> 0:30:52.520
<v Speaker 1>his disdain for crypto tokens but backing blockchain technology. Earlier,

0:30:52.600 --> 0:30:55.280
<v Speaker 1>Michael Anderson, co founder of the crypto venture capital firm

0:30:55.440 --> 0:30:58.960
<v Speaker 1>Framework Ventures, reacted to what Diamond has had to say

0:30:59.040 --> 0:31:02.480
<v Speaker 1>on Bloomberg Crypto take a listen. I think you know

0:31:02.600 --> 0:31:05.640
<v Speaker 1>the part about blockchain being real. He's completely right. Um,

0:31:05.960 --> 0:31:07.960
<v Speaker 1>there are a number of different application categories that are

0:31:07.960 --> 0:31:11.360
<v Speaker 1>built on blockchain today. Cryptocurrency and bitcoin just happens to

0:31:11.360 --> 0:31:12.800
<v Speaker 1>be one of them. N f t s happened to

0:31:12.800 --> 0:31:15.480
<v Speaker 1>be another. Um, We're starting to see the rapid innovation

0:31:15.640 --> 0:31:18.120
<v Speaker 1>of what these concepts can bring about, not just from

0:31:18.120 --> 0:31:21.440
<v Speaker 1>a cost savings perspective for existing businesses, but new types

0:31:21.480 --> 0:31:25.040
<v Speaker 1>of economic transactions that can exist in a new ecosystem

0:31:25.080 --> 0:31:27.720
<v Speaker 1>that can connect into the financial ecosystem. You know, and

0:31:27.960 --> 0:31:29.960
<v Speaker 1>you touched on it in the previous segment. But gaming

0:31:30.000 --> 0:31:32.520
<v Speaker 1>happens to be one of those segments of the market

0:31:32.560 --> 0:31:35.080
<v Speaker 1>that's just completely new in a new business model for

0:31:35.120 --> 0:31:38.120
<v Speaker 1>gaming will bring about a huge amount of economic activity.

0:31:38.160 --> 0:31:40.840
<v Speaker 1>He makes an interesting point about the coins. Michael and

0:31:40.920 --> 0:31:43.480
<v Speaker 1>I've always wondered myself. I mean, even if you see

0:31:43.520 --> 0:31:48.600
<v Speaker 1>the beauty and the blockchain, aside from you know, um

0:31:49.640 --> 0:31:54.160
<v Speaker 1>faith from the group, what's the reason that these token

0:31:54.280 --> 0:31:57.640
<v Speaker 1>should be worth a lot of money considering the fact

0:31:57.720 --> 0:31:59.800
<v Speaker 1>that you don't really need even a full token to

0:31:59.800 --> 0:32:04.360
<v Speaker 1>get on the blockchain and they're infinitely divisible. Yeah. Well,

0:32:04.400 --> 0:32:06.280
<v Speaker 1>you know, I think one of the hardest things that

0:32:06.320 --> 0:32:08.520
<v Speaker 1>we did for ourselves as an industry is called this

0:32:08.600 --> 0:32:11.880
<v Speaker 1>industry the cryptocurrency industry. Uh, you know what it should

0:32:11.880 --> 0:32:14.280
<v Speaker 1>have been. You know, maybe crypto commodities would have been

0:32:14.280 --> 0:32:16.680
<v Speaker 1>a better monitor for some of these assets, but really

0:32:16.720 --> 0:32:19.440
<v Speaker 1>it's just a new technology platform. Uh. You know, there

0:32:19.480 --> 0:32:22.720
<v Speaker 1>are reasons why tokens need to exist in these ecosystems

0:32:22.720 --> 0:32:24.560
<v Speaker 1>to secure networks. You know, one of the ways that

0:32:24.600 --> 0:32:27.360
<v Speaker 1>the proof of state ecosystem for Ethereum works is you're

0:32:27.400 --> 0:32:30.880
<v Speaker 1>taking Ethereum tokens and putting them up as economic security

0:32:30.920 --> 0:32:34.160
<v Speaker 1>to validate transactions and provide security in that network. You know,

0:32:34.200 --> 0:32:36.479
<v Speaker 1>there is a there's a core reason for that, and

0:32:36.640 --> 0:32:39.840
<v Speaker 1>Ethereum in particular has a number of transaction the amount

0:32:39.880 --> 0:32:42.400
<v Speaker 1>of transaction revenue that's going through it every single day

0:32:42.800 --> 0:32:46.040
<v Speaker 1>is tantamount to something that's a massively scalable and profitable

0:32:46.120 --> 0:32:48.400
<v Speaker 1>company if it were to be traded on the NASTAC

0:32:48.600 --> 0:32:51.640
<v Speaker 1>like a salesforce or a work day. UM. So if

0:32:51.680 --> 0:32:54.040
<v Speaker 1>you if we look at them from that perspective, you

0:32:54.080 --> 0:32:57.000
<v Speaker 1>know there are assets in this ecosystem that are fundamentally valuable.

0:32:57.240 --> 0:32:59.960
<v Speaker 1>How how or tell us about some of the businesses

0:33:00.040 --> 0:33:02.400
<v Speaker 1>you're invested in that are doing actual work with the

0:33:02.400 --> 0:33:06.479
<v Speaker 1>blockchain that has nothing to do with the value of

0:33:06.520 --> 0:33:11.880
<v Speaker 1>the token, for example, smart contracts or recording UM events.

0:33:11.920 --> 0:33:14.640
<v Speaker 1>I mean, what what what can the blockchain do that

0:33:14.640 --> 0:33:20.160
<v Speaker 1>that you're actually seeing it? Uh, seeing work in your companies? Yeah. Well,

0:33:20.200 --> 0:33:22.480
<v Speaker 1>one of the companies that we just announced a large

0:33:22.480 --> 0:33:25.520
<v Speaker 1>series A fundraise for with Stardust UM Hannah Miller. Hats

0:33:25.520 --> 0:33:28.479
<v Speaker 1>off to her broke that story earlier today. UM. They

0:33:28.560 --> 0:33:30.800
<v Speaker 1>just raised a new round of funding UM, which we

0:33:30.840 --> 0:33:33.560
<v Speaker 1>continued on with our existing investment. What they do is

0:33:33.560 --> 0:33:38.040
<v Speaker 1>they provide an ecosystem for traditional game developers to develop

0:33:38.120 --> 0:33:41.040
<v Speaker 1>their games and integrate blockchain. Just with the ease of

0:33:41.120 --> 0:33:44.400
<v Speaker 1>integration of an API and and some tooling and some infrastructure. UM.

0:33:44.400 --> 0:33:46.360
<v Speaker 1>We liken it to be to being sort of the

0:33:46.400 --> 0:33:49.080
<v Speaker 1>coin base for Web three gaming, where it'll just be

0:33:49.120 --> 0:33:52.040
<v Speaker 1>the arm ramps for hundreds of developers who are building

0:33:52.120 --> 0:33:54.480
<v Speaker 1>in this ecosystem who wanted to integrate n f t S.

0:33:54.840 --> 0:33:57.120
<v Speaker 1>And frankly, the integration of n f t S just

0:33:57.200 --> 0:33:59.680
<v Speaker 1>represents a new business model for game developers. It's not

0:34:00.040 --> 0:34:02.320
<v Speaker 1>you know, a speculative fervor as we've seen with MC

0:34:02.480 --> 0:34:05.800
<v Speaker 1>gaming so far. The tens of the helpers that are

0:34:05.800 --> 0:34:08.360
<v Speaker 1>building on top of it are are actually you know,

0:34:08.400 --> 0:34:12.120
<v Speaker 1>building in succeeding today. Um, and we're just gonna continue

0:34:12.120 --> 0:34:16.000
<v Speaker 1>to see that, try and continue Frame Work Ventures co

0:34:16.080 --> 0:34:26.879
<v Speaker 1>founder Michael Anderson. Let's take a look at Facebook now,

0:34:26.920 --> 0:34:31.160
<v Speaker 1>which some might have think has been abandoned, so to speak,

0:34:31.280 --> 0:34:33.479
<v Speaker 1>by Mark Socckerberg in favor of this new child Meta.

0:34:33.600 --> 0:34:37.800
<v Speaker 1>That's just one interpretation, including from our own Max Chafkin,

0:34:37.880 --> 0:34:41.520
<v Speaker 1>who wrote this piece for Bloomberg Business Week, focused on

0:34:42.120 --> 0:34:44.880
<v Speaker 1>what Mark Sockerberg is talking about now and it's not Facebook,

0:34:45.680 --> 0:34:50.000
<v Speaker 1>it's the metaverse. But is he really ignoring Facebook? I mean,

0:34:50.000 --> 0:34:52.520
<v Speaker 1>this is a huge platform and it's not just Facebook,

0:34:52.560 --> 0:34:56.359
<v Speaker 1>it's Instagram. It's what's appen Okay, so Facebook and and

0:34:56.400 --> 0:34:59.600
<v Speaker 1>what's happened Instagram. This is still the core of Meta's

0:34:59.600 --> 0:35:02.280
<v Speaker 1>business UM. And and and to you know, in some extent,

0:35:02.280 --> 0:35:05.440
<v Speaker 1>they're they're continuing to um, you know, make the trains

0:35:05.480 --> 0:35:08.000
<v Speaker 1>run on time and try to generate revenue and profit.

0:35:08.120 --> 0:35:10.600
<v Speaker 1>And and to be clear, this part of the business

0:35:10.600 --> 0:35:13.400
<v Speaker 1>generates huge amounts of profit. And if you just looked

0:35:13.400 --> 0:35:15.560
<v Speaker 1>at that part of the business by itself, you'd say, wow,

0:35:15.600 --> 0:35:18.279
<v Speaker 1>you know, Mark Zuckerberg is doing a really good job. UM.

0:35:18.320 --> 0:35:20.000
<v Speaker 1>But then when you sort of look at it in

0:35:20.040 --> 0:35:23.120
<v Speaker 1>the context of this pivot which is towards the metaverse UM,

0:35:23.320 --> 0:35:25.359
<v Speaker 1>which happened, you know, a little less than a year ago.

0:35:25.600 --> 0:35:28.279
<v Speaker 1>Company changed his name of course, away from Facebook UM

0:35:28.320 --> 0:35:29.960
<v Speaker 1>to this new thing. And then when you look at

0:35:30.000 --> 0:35:33.360
<v Speaker 1>just like the the comparison of user numbers, right, um,

0:35:33.400 --> 0:35:36.000
<v Speaker 1>you know, basically three billion people every single day are

0:35:36.040 --> 0:35:39.800
<v Speaker 1>coming into Facebook's properties. Uh, that including Instagram. What's happened

0:35:39.840 --> 0:35:43.240
<v Speaker 1>so on? Uh, it looks like about two hundred thousand

0:35:43.239 --> 0:35:47.120
<v Speaker 1>people are in Horizon Worlds, which is the flagship virtual

0:35:47.160 --> 0:35:50.360
<v Speaker 1>world that that Zuckerberg was touting last week at Connect.

0:35:50.600 --> 0:35:52.360
<v Speaker 1>And that's the kind of product that's a product that

0:35:52.440 --> 0:35:55.720
<v Speaker 1>like if face, if this happened with some other product

0:35:55.760 --> 0:35:58.560
<v Speaker 1>that Facebook was offering, they would kill it, you know, instantaneously.

0:35:58.760 --> 0:36:00.439
<v Speaker 1>This is the kind of thing Mark zucker I don't

0:36:00.440 --> 0:36:02.200
<v Speaker 1>think gets up in the morning for you know, two

0:36:02.560 --> 0:36:06.040
<v Speaker 1>thousand uniques. Um. But of course the company has decided

0:36:06.080 --> 0:36:08.120
<v Speaker 1>that this is the future and they're pushing towards it.

0:36:08.400 --> 0:36:10.960
<v Speaker 1>And I would argue pushing towards it, you know, had

0:36:11.040 --> 0:36:13.960
<v Speaker 1>great risk to the brand and maybe to society in general.

0:36:14.800 --> 0:36:18.640
<v Speaker 1>Facebook still has a lot of issues, Instagram has issues.

0:36:18.680 --> 0:36:22.160
<v Speaker 1>We've got an election coming up. If he's not paying

0:36:22.160 --> 0:36:24.719
<v Speaker 1>so much attention to these platforms, what hope does that

0:36:24.760 --> 0:36:27.200
<v Speaker 1>give us that that these problems are going to be fixed? Right? Well,

0:36:27.200 --> 0:36:29.960
<v Speaker 1>it's important to say, you know, the company would argue that, yes,

0:36:30.000 --> 0:36:31.880
<v Speaker 1>of course we're paying attention to these things. It's the

0:36:31.920 --> 0:36:33.960
<v Speaker 1>core of our business. You know. Nick Clay has been

0:36:34.000 --> 0:36:36.680
<v Speaker 1>elevated to this you know, more important role, you know,

0:36:36.760 --> 0:36:39.839
<v Speaker 1>overseeing uh, you know, stuff that includes elections. That said,

0:36:39.880 --> 0:36:41.839
<v Speaker 1>I think when you go back, say two years ago

0:36:41.880 --> 0:36:44.520
<v Speaker 1>and look at you know, what the company was talking about,

0:36:44.600 --> 0:36:47.200
<v Speaker 1>what Mark Zuckerberg was talking about, they were very focused

0:36:47.280 --> 0:36:50.440
<v Speaker 1>not just on elections, but on the responsibility that Facebook

0:36:50.440 --> 0:36:53.680
<v Speaker 1>owes to its to its users to society. Zuckerberg was

0:36:53.719 --> 0:36:56.560
<v Speaker 1>talking all the time about you know, COVID vaccines, and

0:36:56.680 --> 0:36:59.480
<v Speaker 1>right now we're talking about, um, you know, getting as

0:36:59.480 --> 0:37:03.040
<v Speaker 1>many off workers into the metaverse, which, um, which I

0:37:03.080 --> 0:37:05.360
<v Speaker 1>don't think has anything to do with those um you know,

0:37:05.440 --> 0:37:08.439
<v Speaker 1>issues of societal responsibility might in fact work against them.

0:37:08.719 --> 0:37:11.960
<v Speaker 1>And also, um, I'm not sure anyone even really wants that.

0:37:12.040 --> 0:37:15.040
<v Speaker 1>I mean, he's they're talking about, um, you know, uh

0:37:15.320 --> 0:37:17.399
<v Speaker 1>sending workers to the metaverse at a time when most

0:37:17.440 --> 0:37:20.480
<v Speaker 1>CEOs are trying to get their CEOs back to the office,

0:37:20.520 --> 0:37:22.760
<v Speaker 1>back in person. So it feels like they're they're working

0:37:22.800 --> 0:37:25.360
<v Speaker 1>against a bunch of trends and maybe even working against

0:37:25.360 --> 0:37:28.120
<v Speaker 1>their business. So the question is is this gonna work

0:37:28.280 --> 0:37:30.759
<v Speaker 1>in the hindsight? Are we gonna you know, is he

0:37:30.760 --> 0:37:32.480
<v Speaker 1>gonna be able to look I was right? I mean,

0:37:32.840 --> 0:37:35.640
<v Speaker 1>is it similar to mobile when Facebook transition to mobile

0:37:35.640 --> 0:37:38.359
<v Speaker 1>and everybody not everybody, but it seemed like a big

0:37:38.440 --> 0:37:40.640
<v Speaker 1>leap at the time. Is this the same? Words this different?

0:37:40.760 --> 0:37:43.759
<v Speaker 1>It's it's certainly possible. And if that happens, I think

0:37:43.840 --> 0:37:45.720
<v Speaker 1>you know, we will all you know, bow down before

0:37:45.840 --> 0:37:49.120
<v Speaker 1>you know, Mark Zuckerberg's prognostication because they'll have done this, um,

0:37:49.160 --> 0:37:52.359
<v Speaker 1>you know, amazing pivot two times now. A couple of things,

0:37:52.400 --> 0:37:54.520
<v Speaker 1>you know, one is that that pivot to mobile mobile

0:37:54.600 --> 0:37:57.959
<v Speaker 1>Cheryl Sandberg was you know, very involved. He had help

0:37:58.000 --> 0:38:01.480
<v Speaker 1>that maybe he doesn't have today. And and just because

0:38:01.520 --> 0:38:04.600
<v Speaker 1>he executes one pivot correctly, I'm not sure you can

0:38:04.719 --> 0:38:06.600
<v Speaker 1>sort of say, well, he's going to execute the next

0:38:06.640 --> 0:38:10.320
<v Speaker 1>pivot correctly. And the sort of leaks and the news

0:38:10.320 --> 0:38:13.000
<v Speaker 1>that we've seen coming out of Facebook is not super encouraging.

0:38:13.239 --> 0:38:15.600
<v Speaker 1>I mean, this is as as we learned last week

0:38:15.600 --> 0:38:17.960
<v Speaker 1>and reports from the Verge in the New York Times, Um,

0:38:18.080 --> 0:38:21.080
<v Speaker 1>Facebook is having trouble keeping its own employees, um, you

0:38:21.120 --> 0:38:23.560
<v Speaker 1>know interested in its metaverse app, which kind of makes

0:38:23.600 --> 0:38:25.799
<v Speaker 1>you wonder, how are they going to get other, you know,

0:38:25.960 --> 0:38:28.880
<v Speaker 1>people who don't actually work for Mark Zuckerberg excited about this.

0:38:29.000 --> 0:38:32.280
<v Speaker 1>All right, we'll check out Max's latest piece in Bloomberg

0:38:32.360 --> 0:38:34.719
<v Speaker 1>Business Week. Masks Chafkin. Always good to have you, good

0:38:34.760 --> 0:38:38.120
<v Speaker 1>to see you here in person. Thank you, And that

0:38:38.160 --> 0:38:41.120
<v Speaker 1>does it for this edition of Bloomberg Technology. Coming up Wednesday,

0:38:41.160 --> 0:38:43.520
<v Speaker 1>we're gonna be talking with the co CEO of Warby

0:38:43.640 --> 0:38:47.000
<v Speaker 1>Parker and Neil Bloomenthal. Talking about the future of his

0:38:47.200 --> 0:38:50.520
<v Speaker 1>business after stock has tumbled a bid. Since they're I

0:38:50.640 --> 0:38:53.080
<v Speaker 1>p O and don't forget to check out our podcast

0:38:53.120 --> 0:38:55.920
<v Speaker 1>wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Emily Chang in New

0:38:56.000 --> 0:38:58.480
<v Speaker 1>York today. This is Bloomberg