Speaker 1: From the heart of where innovation, money and power collive
Speaker 1: in Silicon Valley and beyond. This is Bloomberg Technology with
Speaker 1: Emily Jay. I'm Emily Jack in San Francisco, and this
Speaker 1: is Bloomberg Technology. Coming up in the next hour. A
Speaker 1: David versus Goliath struggle continues between Amazon and its workers.
Speaker 1: The retail giant just defeated a push to unionize a
Speaker 1: second New York warehouse, just weeks after the union one
Speaker 1: at another warehouse across the street. We will have all
Speaker 1: the details, Plus Warren Buffett discloses a massive sake in
Speaker 1: act Division in a merger arbitrage play. Does the deal
Speaker 1: with Microsoft go through? We'll have a wide ranging conversation
Speaker 1: with former Nintendo CEO Reggie m about the rapidly evolving
Speaker 1: gaming landscape and media stocks Light, Netflix, Spotify and met
Speaker 1: It all down more than fift so far this year.
Speaker 1: What's a good business and media right now? We'll ast Light, Sheds,
Speaker 1: Rich Greenfield, all of that in a moment before let's
Speaker 1: turned out to another part of the Amazon narrative, with
Speaker 1: workers at a facility in New York having voted not
Speaker 1: to join an upstart union. This just weeks after the
Speaker 1: group one a historic victory at a warehouse right across
Speaker 1: the street. Bloomberg Spencer Soper, who covers Amazon Forest joins
Speaker 1: us now Spencer, given that the union just one across
Speaker 1: the street, what happened here? Yeah, that's a great question,
Speaker 1: And you know, it's tough to really make big sweeping
Speaker 1: conclusions out of this. You know, the question was is
Speaker 1: the is the union going to build on the momentum
Speaker 1: from the last vote or or supper setback? And we
Speaker 1: just see that they suffered a setback. Precisely what that
Speaker 1: means for their overall drive and overall momentum, we we
Speaker 1: just we just don't know. And um, these things take
Speaker 1: months to finally unraveled because they're generally contested, uh and
Speaker 1: the n l RB process is extremely slow. So we've
Speaker 1: still got a union vote that was denied twice in
Speaker 1: Bessemer that's still being litigated. And then we've got the
Speaker 1: union vote that was approved at this other facility recently
Speaker 1: that that Amazon is contesting. So we're just gonna have
Speaker 1: a lot of I think a lot more of these
Speaker 1: as as we look forward, And truly, not every warehouse
Speaker 1: is the same. Could it be that conditions are simply
Speaker 1: different in different warehouses. UM, it could be this was uh,
Speaker 1: I think more of a sort center, whereas the initial
Speaker 1: one was one of these bigger fulfillment centers. And also,
Speaker 1: let's just I think that maybe people have this false
Speaker 1: notion that UM, it's big community of people. You know,
Speaker 1: people go to these facilities are specific places they work,
Speaker 1: they clock in, they clock out, they go home. There's
Speaker 1: not necessarily some big community that that congregates UM. And
Speaker 1: that's that's really up for the union now to to uh,
Speaker 1: to make that happen, to to increase that kind of
Speaker 1: solidarity among among the workers and the and the big
Speaker 1: thing against them is UM, a lot of people just
Speaker 1: don't can be fairly apathetic, you know, maybe they don't
Speaker 1: want to have this job for very long and don't
Speaker 1: see them see it being worth um trying to to unionize,
Speaker 1: and then they just question if they gotta pay dues,
Speaker 1: what are they getting? What are they getting in exchange
Speaker 1: for paying dudes? Well, one person who's not ampathetic is
Speaker 1: Chris Smalls, who was really critical in that initial union
Speaker 1: victory at the warehouse across the street. Amazon is trying
Speaker 1: to overturn that one. Right now, what is the status
Speaker 1: of that. Yeah, so there's going to be hearing later
Speaker 1: in the month. Amazon lobbed concerns that, um, you know,
Speaker 1: people were allowed to get too close to the voting
Speaker 1: when it when it occurred, and even the media was
Speaker 1: allowed to get too close to the voting when it occurred. Um,
Speaker 1: there's all these various things. Is supposed to be a
Speaker 1: pristine process where the workers are allowed to voice their
Speaker 1: thoughts without any fear of reprisal or intimidation, that kind
Speaker 1: of thing. And so so Amazon is trying to throw
Speaker 1: some allegations that that this was not a pristine process.
Speaker 1: So we'll see where that. We'll see where that goes.
Speaker 1: All right, you will keep us updated. Spencer Soaper, thank
Speaker 1: you so much. Chairs of Activision. Blizzard jumped in US
Speaker 1: trading after warm Buffetts, Berkshire Hathaway raised its steake in
Speaker 1: the video GameMaker. Berkshire now once about nine and a
Speaker 1: half percent of Activision stock. That is up considerably from
Speaker 1: the less than two percent steak the company held at
Speaker 1: the end of last year. Buffett betting on the merger
Speaker 1: between Activision and Microsoft, that still has plenty of hurdles
Speaker 1: to clear. And my next guest knows a sing or
Speaker 1: two about the world of gaming. I'm joined now by
Speaker 1: Reggie vs M, a former president and CEO of Nintendo,
Speaker 1: who is also out with a new book, Disrupting the
Speaker 1: Game From the Bronx to the Top of Nintendo. Reggie,
Speaker 1: great to have you back here on the show. Um, So,
Speaker 1: your book chronicles the rise of Nintendo and how you
Speaker 1: navigated a lot of different disruptive forces. I'm so curious
Speaker 1: now looking back and it's been almost twenty years since
Speaker 1: you joined the company. What do you don't know now
Speaker 1: that could help some of the folks navigating the drama
Speaker 1: in the gaming industry today. Well, first, Emily, thanks for
Speaker 1: having me. You know that the gaming industry constantly undergoes
Speaker 1: so much change. There's always new technology, there's always new
Speaker 1: forms of gaming. I mean, if you if you think
Speaker 1: about a game like Fortnite, it didn't exist five years ago.
Speaker 1: So there's always something new, something coming around the corner.
Speaker 1: As as I continue to be engaged with the gaming industry,
Speaker 1: you're constantly thinking about what's next. Where are the new
Speaker 1: technologies going to take you and how do you continue
Speaker 1: growing the business moving forward? You know, you talk about
Speaker 1: the activision Microsoft potential merger. You know, I do believe
Speaker 1: there's going to continue to be consolidation in the overall
Speaker 1: gaming industry space. But I also believe it's going to
Speaker 1: give eies to new smaller studios that are going to
Speaker 1: be even more aggressive and bringing new types of content
Speaker 1: out to the marketplace. So the bigger going to continue
Speaker 1: getting bigger, but they're going to be really innovative smaller
Speaker 1: players coming into the market as well. So let's talk
Speaker 1: about Activision for a moment. What do you make of
Speaker 1: Warren Buffett's stake here, because a number of investors don't
Speaker 1: seem to think this deal is actually going to happen,
Speaker 1: do you. I do think the deal is going to happen.
Speaker 1: When you look at the overall combined entity, it makes
Speaker 1: the new combined business one of the top three gaming businesses,
Speaker 1: but not the number one industry that that position is
Speaker 1: still held I believe by Apple, with Sony not too
Speaker 1: far behind. So it's not a situation where the merger
Speaker 1: is going to create the new biggest player on the block.
Speaker 1: And as I said earlier, I think they're going to
Speaker 1: be other types of mergers, other entities that are going
Speaker 1: to continue growing within the overall space. So I do
Speaker 1: think it passes all of the anti trust hurdles. But
Speaker 1: as you said, this has a long way to play out. Now,
Speaker 1: you recently told me that you're a big believer in
Speaker 1: blockchain technology. You see that as a big opportunity in
Speaker 1: the gaming world. Can you walk this out a little further?
Speaker 1: How you see this benefiting players and the developer ecosystem.
Speaker 1: What I believe blockchain technology can do is that it
Speaker 1: can create a ed ability for new types of different
Speaker 1: games to be created, games where you're actually playing to
Speaker 1: own a piece of content. I also believe that the
Speaker 1: blockchain will enable developers to potentially create new types of
Speaker 1: different games. Just as augmented reality gave rise to games
Speaker 1: like Pokemon Go, I believe this fundamental technology can give
Speaker 1: rise to new and different types of games. Now what
Speaker 1: has to happen, though, is that fundamentally the games need
Speaker 1: to be fun, they need to be worth playing. Technology
Speaker 1: by itself doesn't necessary create new forms of content, but
Speaker 1: it enables new and different types of play to come
Speaker 1: to bear. So that's what I believe is going to happen.
Speaker 1: When you look at blockchain as a technology and what
Speaker 1: it could do for game could that, though, eliminate intermediaries
Speaker 1: one day, like big gaming studios. I don't think it
Speaker 1: eliminates the big gaming studio, but I do think it
Speaker 1: changes the payment mechanism, It changes maybe how retailers can
Speaker 1: participate in this industry. I think that's where there's a
Speaker 1: bigger risk for great game creators, great development studios. As
Speaker 1: long as they're developing novel content that speaks to the consumer,
Speaker 1: I think they're going to be fine. I'd be more
Speaker 1: concerned if I was a retailer in this space and
Speaker 1: what that looks like five years, ten years from now now. Nintendo,
Speaker 1: for example, has traditionally avoided giving players control of game
Speaker 1: data in game items. Do you see something like that changing? You? Know? So,
Speaker 1: I would say that Nintendo has evolved to do much
Speaker 1: more downloadable types of content, much more digital content. There
Speaker 1: really is no gaming company out there today that truly
Speaker 1: lets its players own all of the content. Once a
Speaker 1: game potentially comes off of a developers uh systems, all
Speaker 1: of the mechanisms where they're updating the games. Once that happens,
Speaker 1: then the players always at risk for potentially losing their content,
Speaker 1: losing what they've spent potentially years building which is why
Speaker 1: I think blockchain can change that dynamic so that when
Speaker 1: I create something, I truly can own it forever, which
Speaker 1: I think is very very appealing to it to a
Speaker 1: gamer today. Speaking of new technology on the horizon, I
Speaker 1: recently interviewed you at south By Southwest and you had
Speaker 1: some very controversial remarks about meta and Mark Zuckerberg's vision
Speaker 1: for the metaverse. I want to replay a portion of
Speaker 1: what you had to say. Then take a listen. I'm
Speaker 1: not a buyer of that idea. I don't think that
Speaker 1: their current definition is going to be successful. Why do
Speaker 1: I say that. I say that because, first, you know,
Speaker 1: and I don't know if anyone from Facebook is here,
Speaker 1: but you you have to admit that Facebook itself is
Speaker 1: not an innovative company. Facebook is not an innovative company.
Speaker 1: You can see my face there. Uh in response to
Speaker 1: um that remark, I'm curious what reaction you've had to
Speaker 1: that assessment since well, so let me just finish the thought, right, So,
Speaker 1: what I said was that Facebook has been a fast forward, right.
Speaker 1: They've typically taken other initiatives and pushed them forward. They've
Speaker 1: been an acquire You look at some of the things
Speaker 1: that they're doing. For example, with Instagram, they acquired that business.
Speaker 1: The only piece of of completely new tech or completely
Speaker 1: no idea that they did was the very first social network.
Speaker 1: So that's where I was coming from when I said
Speaker 1: that today Meta I wouldn't qualify as an innovative company.
Speaker 1: What I found shocking was the amount of people who
Speaker 1: agreed with that statement and with the statement overall that
Speaker 1: the other reasons why I believe their vision of the metaverse,
Speaker 1: the fact that they don't partner very well, the fact
Speaker 1: that they don't have a lot of credibility or have
Speaker 1: suffered credibility issues with the consumer. These all affect the
Speaker 1: concept of the metaverse, where ideally you have one overall environment,
Speaker 1: it's digital in nature, there's a common currency. All of
Speaker 1: these things are fundamental to at least my vision of
Speaker 1: the metaverse. And this is where I see that Meta
Speaker 1: as a company has some issues. So I wonder if
Speaker 1: there are any metaverse companies that you like. You know,
Speaker 1: it's been interesting some folks are saying, you know, more
Speaker 1: traditional quote unquote gaming companies like Nintendo. The stock is
Speaker 1: lagging because investors are focusing on other company these that
Speaker 1: are promoting their visions of the metaverse, whether it is
Speaker 1: Roadblocks or in Vidio meta shares. To be fair, I've
Speaker 1: really suffered. What do you think of that assessment and
Speaker 1: the pace of innovation at some of these other companies,
Speaker 1: including Nintendo, which you know isn't trumpeting its vision for
Speaker 1: the metaverse. Yeah, so I think there's a number of
Speaker 1: different things. I do think companies like Epic, who are
Speaker 1: the parent company for Fortnite, are doing some very interesting
Speaker 1: things with that platform and introducing avatars and having events
Speaker 1: within its space, which is very meta like. I also
Speaker 1: believe that Roadblocks has the potential to really push on
Speaker 1: this area quite aggressively. I think the market is down
Speaker 1: on Nintendo in part because while the Nintendo Switch continues
Speaker 1: doing exceptionally well, they've already announced that their software sales
Speaker 1: are going to be down in the current fiscal. They're
Speaker 1: hinting that they're going to be some challenges in the
Speaker 1: next fiscal. I think that's why investors are reacting to
Speaker 1: that particular stock in terms of where they see it
Speaker 1: going over the next twelve or eighteen months. In terms
Speaker 1: of other companies that I think are doing some really
Speaker 1: interesting things. You know, as I said with you on stage.
Speaker 1: I think there are a number of smaller companies, privately
Speaker 1: held companies that are doing very interesting things in this
Speaker 1: space that will come to light over the lex number
Speaker 1: of months. Any advice for the Nintendo leadership today? You know,
Speaker 1: I am still on very good terms with all of
Speaker 1: my my peers and my friends over at Nintendo. Whatever
Speaker 1: they call me for advice, which isn't too often. I've
Speaker 1: been away from that business three years now. I give
Speaker 1: them lots of my opinion. But look, the Nintendo Switch
Speaker 1: is on the verge of becoming the best selling Nintendo
Speaker 1: system of all time, So that speaks a lot to
Speaker 1: all of the momentum they have today on that business
Speaker 1: and all of the wonderful content they're created. So last
Speaker 1: good question, I want to ask you about Netflix, because
Speaker 1: since we talked, we saw Netflix Blue subscribers for the
Speaker 1: first time in a decade. A lot of folks concerned
Speaker 1: about the future of the streaming business. Has streaming hit
Speaker 1: its peak? I actually don't believe that streaming has hit
Speaker 1: its peak. I think there's a number of different factors
Speaker 1: going on. Specifically two uh Netflix, There's a lot of
Speaker 1: new players in the streaming space. I do think they
Speaker 1: need to take another look at their overall strategy for
Speaker 1: how they air their content. I personally believe that binging
Speaker 1: maybe has become a little passe. You look at what
Speaker 1: HBO and other players are doing as they come back
Speaker 1: to having appointment TV and having a piece of content
Speaker 1: airing on a regular day on a regular schedule. I
Speaker 1: think those are some of the things that they may
Speaker 1: need to look at versus a complete overhaul of their programming. Interesting.
Speaker 1: Reggie Fees may uh interesting advice for the Netflix team.
Speaker 1: Appreciate you as always taking the time to join us.
Speaker 1: Author of a new book, Disrupting the Game from the
Speaker 1: Bronx to the Top of Nintendo available coming up. Could
Speaker 1: cyber threats be the greatest threat we face? We're gonna
Speaker 1: have more on what the war in Ukraine is teaching
Speaker 1: us about cybersecurity next. This is Bloomberg as the War
Speaker 1: in Ukraine reaches on a recent report from Microsoft says
Speaker 1: Russia has carried out hundreds of cyber operations, including destructive attacks,
Speaker 1: against Ukraine throughout its invasion. This an effort to degrade
Speaker 1: Ukraine's government and military and to undermine the public's trust
Speaker 1: in those institutions. Want to talk about what it all
Speaker 1: means for the future of cybersecurity abroad and here at
Speaker 1: home with Camille Stewart. She is the Global head of
Speaker 1: Product Security Strategy at Google. Camille, great to have you
Speaker 1: with us. I'm so curious what Google has seen in
Speaker 1: in in light of the war in Ukraine. Have you
Speaker 1: seen a big uptick in cyber attacks? Yes. We are
Speaker 1: are focused on elevating information to help the folks on
Speaker 1: the ground in Ukraine understand what threats are headed their way. UM.
Speaker 1: We have provided a lot of support in Poland as well,
Speaker 1: and are leveraging Android bones to provide some of those
Speaker 1: air rapid alerts that folks need to stay safe. So
Speaker 1: we've seen a lot of activity across a number of
Speaker 1: different vectors and are providing support in any way that
Speaker 1: we can. So how specifically have attacks ramped up? So
Speaker 1: most attacks are locally targeted, and we're seeing UM some
Speaker 1: activity around UM misinformation and disinformation around UM the the
Speaker 1: war in the campaign UM, access to information has been
Speaker 1: limited and those things are causing some churn. We've seen
Speaker 1: a little bit of activity targeting UM Ukraine infrastructure, but
Speaker 1: not as much as anyone had predicted before when they started.
Speaker 1: But we're definitely seeing some activity now. John Cocho from
Speaker 1: the Department of Homeland Security recently had this to say,
Speaker 1: And I know you also worked at the Department of
Speaker 1: Homeland Security under President Obama, So I want you to
Speaker 1: take a quick listen. You know, five years ago, the
Speaker 1: biggest threat to our country was isis inspired massive acts
Speaker 1: of violence here that's no longer the case. The biggest
Speaker 1: threat to our country I from homeland security standpoint, and
Speaker 1: really national security of cyber actors attacking us. And at
Speaker 1: Homeland Security, that's what we're doing seven Representative John Cocho
Speaker 1: there of New York, would you agree with that assessment.
Speaker 1: It is definitely one of the greatest. I mean, it
Speaker 1: has risen in public consciousness because we are seeing attacks
Speaker 1: like solar winds and on colonial pipeline, and so I
Speaker 1: think the pervasiveness and the public consciousness is a really
Speaker 1: helpful thing as we moved forward. But we're definitely seeing
Speaker 1: um an increased focus on that media love attack. Our
Speaker 1: business is prepared, they are working on. It depends on
Speaker 1: the size of the organization, it depends on their investment
Speaker 1: in security. But there has been a really strong effort
Speaker 1: through the US government to collaborate with private sector, and
Speaker 1: that public private cooperation has facilitated a lot of investment
Speaker 1: and DHS through sis UH, as mentioned by Congressman, UM
Speaker 1: does a lot of support for organizations throughout the UM
Speaker 1: the private sector, and there are you know, this number
Speaker 1: to me is still so striking. Six hundred thousand open
Speaker 1: cybersecurity jobs. Is that part of the reason we may
Speaker 1: be seeing an uptick and attacks. I wouldn't say that
Speaker 1: that is the reason, but we definitely need more people
Speaker 1: to combat the threat, a lot of smart people with
Speaker 1: a number of different backgrounds. I'm glad you brought up
Speaker 1: that statistic because I think people here about cybersecurity jobs
Speaker 1: and think they need to be an engineer or very technical,
Speaker 1: but there are a number of jobs that would require
Speaker 1: folks of a variety of backgrounds, from legal backgrounds to
Speaker 1: training and marketing. All right, Camille Stewart, Global head of
Speaker 1: Product Security Strategy at Google. Camille, thanks for giving us
Speaker 1: your view on the cyber landscape. Welcome back to Bloomberg Technology.
Speaker 1: I Emily Chang in San Francisco. The Milk and Institute
Speaker 1: Global conferences underway this week, and bloombergs Eric Schatzker caught
Speaker 1: up with Citadel CEO Ken Griffin to talk about everything
Speaker 1: from inflation to the war on Ukraine. Part of that
Speaker 1: conversation and what he had to say about crypto right now,
Speaker 1: take a listen. So it's it's pretty simple. All my
Speaker 1: colleagues who are younger than I am probably think I'm
Speaker 1: a dinosaur in this issue. They're big believers. They believe
Speaker 1: that cryptocurrency has an important role in the global economy
Speaker 1: as a means of facilitating payment in a web three
Speaker 1: world three world. I have to give that due consideration.
Speaker 1: These are really sharp people. I have to live with
Speaker 1: the reality that that an asset's worth of people perceive
Speaker 1: it to be worth. So I may be skeptical about cryptocurrency.
Speaker 1: What's the value bitcoin or ethereum? I also collect American
Speaker 1: abstract art. Why is a painting worth ten million dollars?
Speaker 1: It's oil on a canvas. So value is in the
Speaker 1: eyes of the holder. It's nigh's the market. One of
Speaker 1: the things that we do with Seal securities is we
Speaker 1: help people create the portfolios that they think create the
Speaker 1: greatest value for them. And as such, given the institutional
Speaker 1: increase and interest in cryptocurrency, I think it's reasonable to
Speaker 1: expect to see us be more involved in the crypto space,
Speaker 1: providing liquidity institutional and potentially retail investors. How soon is
Speaker 1: it difficult to build a market making business in crypto
Speaker 1: from scratch. It's difficult to build to the level of
Speaker 1: rigor that we would want to build too. Things like
Speaker 1: ensuring that we're not a party to a transaction with
Speaker 1: North Korea are really important to us. They might not
Speaker 1: be to our competitors, but I'm not going to help
Speaker 1: fund the North Koreans with their various ventures by by
Speaker 1: mistakenly buying their cryptocurrency. So we're going to run our
Speaker 1: business too. I believe a very high standard of of
Speaker 1: k y C and a m L in the interest
Speaker 1: of making sure that we are in the markets as
Speaker 1: a constructive participant in this space and really bring the
Speaker 1: best practices that we see here in North America into
Speaker 1: the market. Would you describe that business the one you
Speaker 1: envision as a market making business akin to what you
Speaker 1: do in equities or more of an exchange I would
Speaker 1: say it's it's it's probably a combination to choose what
Speaker 1: will end up in So obviously, we as a market
Speaker 1: maker commit our capital's principle, and then we believe exchange
Speaker 1: technology is very important helping to bring buyers and sellers together.
Speaker 1: Do you feel any sense of regret for not diving
Speaker 1: in sooner, because, as you well know, there are examples
Speaker 1: of firms. I'll mention Binance because it's the biggest that
Speaker 1: have become among among in revenue terms and valuation terms,
Speaker 1: among the biggest in the world. Well, I'm gonna I'm
Speaker 1: gonna answer this in a way that's very personal to me. Look,
Speaker 1: I wish I owned a whole lot of Amazon fifteen
Speaker 1: or twenty years ago, and I wish I owned a
Speaker 1: whole lot of or Apple twenty years ago and just
Speaker 1: kept it for like twenty years. I'd say one difference
Speaker 1: between those investments and having built a cryptocurrency firm over
Speaker 1: that period of time is I'd actually feel really proud
Speaker 1: of what Amazon has done for the US consumer. I
Speaker 1: feel really proud of what Apple has done for the
Speaker 1: U S consumer. You know, we both walked in here.
Speaker 1: I was checking my iPhone. It's just completely changed our lives.
Speaker 1: Amazon has completely changed the ability for somebody to purchase goods,
Speaker 1: for small retailer to offer their products on a giant,
Speaker 1: vast virtual marketplace. These are businesses that have really clearly
Speaker 1: changed the world for the better. I'm still looking for
Speaker 1: that story as to how crypto has made the world
Speaker 1: so much better. I give you the story as to
Speaker 1: how bitcoin consumes as much power as a small country.
Speaker 1: You know, a world that's fixated on carbon footprints. It's
Speaker 1: remarkable to me that we applaud the emergence of a
Speaker 1: cryptocurrency which has a CEO two footprint of like a
Speaker 1: significant smaller, small, mid sized country. A couple of quick
Speaker 1: questions for you on politics before we finish, Um, you
Speaker 1: are among the most significant UH funders of political campaigns
Speaker 1: in this election cycle. Um. One important thing has just
Speaker 1: changed or is about to change. Elon is going to
Speaker 1: own Twitter. How is that going to change this election
Speaker 1: cycle and those that follow? I think the most important
Speaker 1: part of Elon Musk owning Twitter is about free speech,
Speaker 1: hands down the most important part. The social media networks
Speaker 1: are so focused on curating what all of us see
Speaker 1: and read every day, they've really eroded free speech. As
Speaker 1: you and I knew growing up, and I know Ellen
Speaker 1: is just deeply committed to the idea of freedom of expression. Now,
Speaker 1: free speech doesn't necessarily mean good ideas, to be clear,
Speaker 1: but to have a robust debate around ideas is how
Speaker 1: we actually come to reason conclusions and showing both sides
Speaker 1: of a story is important. You know, the Hunter Biden
Speaker 1: laptop just disappearing in the abyss of the cover up
Speaker 1: of large social media companies and many of the news
Speaker 1: franchises is a really terrifying story. Would have changed the election?
Speaker 1: Probably not, but your American voter has been entitled to
Speaker 1: know about this information. Absolutely, Like, if we want our
Speaker 1: democracy to work, we need people who have the time
Speaker 1: and the ability to access the relevant information on candidates.
Speaker 1: It made a change our view on a candidate, but
Speaker 1: we should have the ability to make an informed, in
Speaker 1: reason decision. Citadel CEO Ken Griffin there at the Milk
Speaker 1: and Institute Bloomber will we bring you more coverage from
Speaker 1: the global conference throughout this week's Stay tuned to Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Television right here. And speaking of media companies, they are
Speaker 1: now struggling as concerns over what role online media will
Speaker 1: play in the future. Tech companies lost nearly two trillion
Speaker 1: dollars in market value during the month of April alone.
Speaker 1: Why now and how long will it last. I'm joined
Speaker 1: now by lfshead Partners Rich Greenfield to get his perspective. So,
Speaker 1: when you look at media companies in particular Netflix, Spotify, Meta,
Speaker 1: Rich all down more so far this year? How long
Speaker 1: does this keep up? Look? This is pretty ugly, and
Speaker 1: I think part of the challenges we're in sort of
Speaker 1: unchartered territory Emily, Like, we don't short, we know what
Speaker 1: a recession looks like. We know what global or geopolitical
Speaker 1: unrest looks like over in Eastern Europe and Russia, et cetera.
Speaker 1: What we don't know is sort of the the unlock
Speaker 1: effect of the pandemic. And what I mean by that is,
Speaker 1: you know, has consumer behavior really fundamentally changed? You know,
Speaker 1: you're looking at sort of a surgeon vacation travel, right
Speaker 1: People want to be out of their houses. You know, Look,
Speaker 1: try to book a trip to Disney World right now.
Speaker 1: It is complete and utter insanity trying to get into
Speaker 1: Disney World, even without European travel. So what's really happened
Speaker 1: to streaming? Has there been a fundamental change in sort
Speaker 1: of the future of streaming television or the shift from
Speaker 1: linear television to streaming television, or do we just shoot
Speaker 1: two years too far up the curve too fast, and
Speaker 1: it's gonna take time for consumers to actually catch up
Speaker 1: now and for it's just the business and evaluations to
Speaker 1: sort of catch up. And that's what we're struggling with,
Speaker 1: what everyone investor wise is struggling with. Like we used
Speaker 1: to talk about there being seven hundred, eight hundred, maybe
Speaker 1: even a billion of homes that would do streaming television,
Speaker 1: whether you're talking about Netflix or Disney, like, that was
Speaker 1: the total addressable market we call TAM that everyone was
Speaker 1: excited about. Has it changed? Like is it much lower now?
Speaker 1: Is the time to get there longer? Or pricing gonna
Speaker 1: have to be you know lower to get there. Those
Speaker 1: are the things everyone is grappling with. Like, I don't
Speaker 1: think we've fundamentally changed, but I do think the combination
Speaker 1: of pandemic unlock, geopolitical inflation, maybe a recession in Europe,
Speaker 1: maybe fears of recession in the US, like all of
Speaker 1: that is you know, look at the price of eggs,
Speaker 1: like right, like, there are a lot of things going
Speaker 1: on right now, and nobody right like, there is nobody
Speaker 1: right now that understands what the other side of a
Speaker 1: pan two year pandemic looks like because we've never lived
Speaker 1: through this in the markets we have today with that effect,
Speaker 1: and so this is just new and virgin territory from
Speaker 1: an analytical standpoint, and it's making it very hard not
Speaker 1: just for us. These companies can't predict their business. So
Speaker 1: you recently said advertising is falling apart, the cable bundle
Speaker 1: is falling apart, streaming has slowed. Is there a good
Speaker 1: media business to be in right now? It is, well,
Speaker 1: the obvious one, right I mean, there's two businesses that
Speaker 1: are obviously big beneficiaries right now. One is, you know,
Speaker 1: my partner Brandon Ross covers the entire live entertainment space.
Speaker 1: I mean Live Nation is on fire. They're like, it
Speaker 1: is just an insane how good that businesses? Tickets go
Speaker 1: on sale and they're sold out two seconds later. So
Speaker 1: live entertainment is clearly a benefit a sary right now.
Speaker 1: You see it across that category. The other one, you know,
Speaker 1: and you're you're showing Netflix on the screen in terms
Speaker 1: of sort of what content is available. The business that's
Speaker 1: also benefiting from this explosion of streaming services is content creation.
Speaker 1: And if you're in the business of making content, that
Speaker 1: business has gotten far, far better because there's incredible demand
Speaker 1: from all of these services. So production studios have been
Speaker 1: big beneficiaries. The problem is there's not a lot of
Speaker 1: pure play production studios to actually invest in. Like Sony
Speaker 1: is not a streamer, right, Sony doesn't have a streamer.
Speaker 1: They have a lot of other businesses. But Sony's production
Speaker 1: business has been incredible in terms of what they've created
Speaker 1: over the course of the past year. The problem is
Speaker 1: there's just not a lot of ways to play that. Obviously,
Speaker 1: in live entertainment, you can own Live Nation. That's been
Speaker 1: a great stop. What are you expecting to see when
Speaker 1: we see Disney's results? I mean you mentioned that theme
Speaker 1: parks are booming, and so if you're a business like
Speaker 1: Disney and you have a streaming arm but also a
Speaker 1: theme park arm, are you well insulated or not? You
Speaker 1: would have thought they'd be well insulated. The stock obviously,
Speaker 1: I mean the stock peaked what a hundred and ninety
Speaker 1: and is sitting at a hundred and twelve ish. I
Speaker 1: don't know where it closed today, but like it has
Speaker 1: been beat up. I mean, Disney has been trading down
Speaker 1: every single day, and I think part of it it's
Speaker 1: really twofold one. I think global economic fear, right, so
Speaker 1: fear of not so much. How good the theme parks
Speaker 1: are right now, But what happens if we go into
Speaker 1: more of a global recession is certainly of fear. And
Speaker 1: then the other piece of it, right is you know,
Speaker 1: the hope or the reason to own Disney. For for
Speaker 1: multiple years, the reason to own did Disney was, hey,
Speaker 1: this is a company with a Netflix inside, right, Like
Speaker 1: they're the only company coming out of the Fox acquisition.
Speaker 1: This is the only company that can really rival Netflix
Speaker 1: and create a Netflix. Well, the problem is, as you
Speaker 1: just showed on the screen, Netflix is valuation has been
Speaker 1: eviscerated with it. So what is the implied value of
Speaker 1: this Netflix inside of Disney? It's obviously far less and
Speaker 1: and look emily the other piece of this is both
Speaker 1: Netflix and Disney in the past three months sort of
Speaker 1: out of nowhere, have come out and told you, in
Speaker 1: order to grow our businesses, we now think we have
Speaker 1: to incorporate advertising. That was something I mean, Disney was
Speaker 1: on record saying just a year ago, we don't want
Speaker 1: to put advertising in Disney. Plus now they're gonna start
Speaker 1: doing it later this year. Netflix had been pretty much
Speaker 1: religion was never going to do advertising, and now all
Speaker 1: of a sudden, Retastings is talking about how in the
Speaker 1: next couple of years they're open to incorporating advertising and
Speaker 1: think it could be additive. And so, you know, do
Speaker 1: you believe that advertising in this content is helpful? It's
Speaker 1: it's sort of a red flag for investors of why
Speaker 1: are these companies all of a sudden who didn't feel
Speaker 1: like they needed advertising, whose prices are so much cheaper
Speaker 1: than the cable bundle, while all of a sudden are
Speaker 1: they're resorting to advertising. You know, I don't think I
Speaker 1: don't hear a whole lot of consumers go, I know
Speaker 1: every consumer wants lower prices. I don't hear a whole
Speaker 1: lot of consumers saying, God, I really would like advertising
Speaker 1: inside of my media content. Well, here's something that consumers
Speaker 1: most of them do want, and that is sports. Do
Speaker 1: you think I mean in Disney of course has ESPN,
Speaker 1: but could sports? We're seeing Apple and Amazon betting on sports.
Speaker 1: Could sports be the answer? Quickly, I've only got about
Speaker 1: thirty seconds left. I think sports can be an answer
Speaker 1: as a as an add on sports, as a dedicated
Speaker 1: streaming service. It's very hard to make the math work.
Speaker 1: I mean, Amazon's made the most robust move with Thursday
Speaker 1: night Football. Let's see I think that we're gonna basically,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna say stay tuned. Amazon needs to show that
Speaker 1: they can generate a massive audience for Thursday night Football,
Speaker 1: where the billion dollars they spend is going to look
Speaker 1: like a very bad investment for streaming. This is the
Speaker 1: biggest investment ever made in streaming sports. Let's revisit this
Speaker 1: when we see what the numbers look like in terms
Speaker 1: of viewership. Come the fall, Rich Greenfield Chud Partners. Always
Speaker 1: good to have you, Rich, Thanks for making chat for
Speaker 1: Rest today. Coming up, he says he's stepping down as
Speaker 1: interim CEO of Twitter. That's a joke, of course, but
Speaker 1: Twitter didn't find it too funny. We'll have more on
Speaker 1: that next. This is Bloomberg time for our Crypto report.
Speaker 1: Now we want to take another look at Twitter, this
Speaker 1: time from a slightly different angle. Last week, crypto executive
Speaker 1: Stanni Kolichov tweeted to the masses that he had been
Speaker 1: named Twitter's interim CEO. That was a false claim, of course,
Speaker 1: or maybe just a joke. Shortly after his account was
Speaker 1: suspended by the social media giant. In less than twenty
Speaker 1: four hours later, Twitter reversed that suspension. Well, he's back
Speaker 1: now talking more about his faux appointment and more. Stanni Kolichov,
Speaker 1: founder and CEO of the Open Source Market Protocol. They
Speaker 1: with me, Now, okay, so Stannie, what exactly happened there? UM,
Speaker 1: you tweet that you're the interim CEO, you're quickly banned
Speaker 1: then reinstated twenty four hours later. Yeah, I mean it
Speaker 1: was definitely everything happened but quickly. So essentially I made
Speaker 1: a kind of like a tweet that's supposed to be
Speaker 1: a joke about essentially becoming a interim CEO of Twitter, UM,
Speaker 1: followed by the lot of kind of news about the
Speaker 1: Elon Musk acquiring UM Twitter and making it private, and
Speaker 1: I'm known in the vectory space for for BA, ticket
Speaker 1: building a piece and flights social media, the Lens protocol,
Speaker 1: and essentially UM. I continued the joke with actually laying
Speaker 1: down a road map for Twitter for ninety days, essentially
Speaker 1: shipping the edit button that Twitter has been working for
Speaker 1: for quite a while, and and also making Twitter more open,
Speaker 1: opening up the algorithms and making them open source. And
Speaker 1: and even creating kind of like a more decentil Twitter
Speaker 1: as well. And then what happened is that UM I
Speaker 1: got suspended UM and at some point UM there was
Speaker 1: this kind of like a hashtag free stunic movement then
Speaker 1: started to pick up UM in the vectory community and
Speaker 1: I was able to get back in, but for a
Speaker 1: period of time I I lost my followers in and
Speaker 1: also the nexus my BM So that was an interesting experience.
Speaker 1: So Twitter hasn't responded to this situation directly, but it
Speaker 1: certainly seems like they took your tweet seriously and then
Speaker 1: decided maybe they shouldn't have taken it so seriously. But
Speaker 1: it does raise a debate about what's real and fake
Speaker 1: UH and free uh in the in the world of speech.
Speaker 1: What do you think the learning is here? Yeah, definitely
Speaker 1: the timing is quite interesting, the regarding uh the freedom
Speaker 1: of speech, especially because Twitter itself and many of this
Speaker 1: bigger social media platforms day they kind of artists, uh
Speaker 1: the digital phone halls where where everyone can comment and
Speaker 1: talk about and and you have your audiences and essentially
Speaker 1: UM in my case, for example, when I got the
Speaker 1: band UM that Twitter was my only public facing platform,
Speaker 1: So where I have my followers and my audience and
Speaker 1: and my communication channel with with my audience. And I
Speaker 1: think the challenging part here is that when you have
Speaker 1: a platform and the motivation that isn't open, uh, it's
Speaker 1: it's very kind of like a hard to create competition
Speaker 1: in terms of the algorithm that are used, um, showing
Speaker 1: the content or motivating the content, or even understanding the
Speaker 1: reasons behind the different kinds of suspensions and bands. And
Speaker 1: I think, like from the victory crypto perspective, what's fascinating
Speaker 1: is that there's a movement about the essentralizing many of
Speaker 1: imports and parts of the infrastructure, and that might be
Speaker 1: financial infrastructure that it has been happening with this in
Speaker 1: choice finance, but now also with the social media, because
Speaker 1: social media as an infrastructure is very valuable and maybe
Speaker 1: there's kind of like a thinking behind of it that
Speaker 1: it's so valuable that it shouldn't be completely owned by
Speaker 1: the few or or let's say, uh even like private heights,
Speaker 1: but actually everything should be open and anyone can and
Speaker 1: customize and build algorithms and let the users choose which
Speaker 1: of these algorithms are most vorable and and affair to
Speaker 1: them but you know, one of our Bloomberg opinion column
Speaker 1: this makes this point today that open sourcing the algorithm
Speaker 1: would open up average users to a lot more unwanted content.
Speaker 1: I mean, is open sourcing the algorithm as Elon Musk
Speaker 1: seems to want to do, really the right move. I
Speaker 1: think it's all about giving choices to the user. So
Speaker 1: for example, what we're doing at lants protocol, we're simply
Speaker 1: create blockchain these social graph where you can create a
Speaker 1: profile and and then you have your follower relationships on chain.
Speaker 1: So for example, if something like this happens where you
Speaker 1: get banned in the one application, you can go to
Speaker 1: another application and log in with your accounts and you
Speaker 1: have your followings for example. Recently, actually Bloomberg reported that
Speaker 1: Facebook discontinued the podcasting services in their platform, meaning that
Speaker 1: all of this uh podcaster that has been building their
Speaker 1: audience on Facebook, they pretty much lost the audience and
Speaker 1: the hard work what what what was putting into that relationships.
Speaker 1: So essentially, by opening up the social graph, any application
Speaker 1: developer new entrepreneur who figures out interacting new way with
Speaker 1: the content can create a new application. Since the barriers
Speaker 1: slow and and basically creates more usability that way, and
Speaker 1: the users can then choose what they want to use.
Speaker 1: Quick pick pitch Stanni of thirty seconds. What do you
Speaker 1: think the is better about the lens protocol and this
Speaker 1: Web three alternative than Twitter today? I think essentially less
Speaker 1: protocol is about giving opportunities for anyone to build new
Speaker 1: ways to interact with the content, but also for the
Speaker 1: users to simply create the profile. Ones have their following
Speaker 1: relationships on the box chain and essentially no any single
Speaker 1: platform can take that away from you. So what it
Speaker 1: means that first time ever all the platforms like Twitter, Facebook,
Speaker 1: they actually need to compete on the algorithms they are
Speaker 1: providing you and you as a user, you're not locked
Speaker 1: into the platform itself. And this is definitely like a
Speaker 1: new dynamic al right, Stanni Kolschov of a founder and CEO,
Speaker 1: not the interim CEO of Twitter. To be clear, that
Speaker 1: was a joke, Stanni, thank you for joining us. The
Speaker 1: European Union has hit Apple with a formal antitrust suit
Speaker 1: over iPhone payments. The complaint alleges that Apple abuses its
Speaker 1: dominance over mobile wallets on its devices via its Apple
Speaker 1: Pay service. The company could face hefty fines. Apple says
Speaker 1: it's contactless pay system helps consumers. A story will continue
Speaker 1: to follow, and that does it for the sedition of
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Technology. We are back Tuesday with more earnings including
Speaker 1: air b D and Lift. Don't forget to check out
Speaker 1: our new podcast, find it wherever you get your podcast.
Speaker 1: I'm Emily Changing in San Francisco. This is Bloomberg