WEBVTT - Nvidia Buyer Megaspeed Faces Smuggling Probe

0:00:02.520 --> 0:00:14.000
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. Bloomberg Tech is live

0:00:14.040 --> 0:00:17.840
<v Speaker 1>from coast to coast with Caroline Hyde in New York

0:00:18.120 --> 0:00:20.120
<v Speaker 1>and ever though in San Francisco.

0:00:22.480 --> 0:00:24.080
<v Speaker 2>This is Bloomberg Tech Coming up.

0:00:24.120 --> 0:00:27.240
<v Speaker 3>Service now agrees to by cybersecurity startup Armists for seven

0:00:27.240 --> 0:00:31.640
<v Speaker 3>points seventy five billion dollars, its largest acquisition to date. Douz,

0:00:31.680 --> 0:00:36.479
<v Speaker 3>Invidia's biggest Southeast Asia buyer, faces a chip smuggling probe

0:00:36.520 --> 0:00:40.440
<v Speaker 3>despite the tech giants insistence that chip diversion doesn't exist.

0:00:41.080 --> 0:00:44.080
<v Speaker 3>And crypto's big year that wasn't a win for all

0:00:44.440 --> 0:00:48.120
<v Speaker 3>the billionaire's hit hardest by recent price drops. First rechecking

0:00:48.159 --> 0:00:50.519
<v Speaker 3>on those markets and bigcoin continues to be on the downside.

0:00:50.520 --> 0:00:53.279
<v Speaker 3>We're off five percentage twin eight, three and sixty one,

0:00:53.640 --> 0:00:56.560
<v Speaker 3>so once again another annual loss for the OG in

0:00:56.600 --> 0:00:57.480
<v Speaker 3>the crypto space.

0:00:57.680 --> 0:00:59.959
<v Speaker 2>But we're seeing risk on perpetuate a little bit.

0:01:00.000 --> 0:01:01.720
<v Speaker 3>And then as that one hundred, we're higher on the day,

0:01:01.720 --> 0:01:03.480
<v Speaker 3>we're higher on the month, and boy are we higher

0:01:03.520 --> 0:01:05.800
<v Speaker 3>on the year, up more than twenty percent. And of

0:01:05.840 --> 0:01:08.880
<v Speaker 3>course today's figures the US economy expanding at four point

0:01:08.880 --> 0:01:12.120
<v Speaker 3>three percent annualized pace. Maybe just easing back a little

0:01:12.120 --> 0:01:14.560
<v Speaker 3>bit of risk on feeling if indeed the FED doesn't

0:01:14.560 --> 0:01:17.240
<v Speaker 3>cut as much as I'm in anticipated because this economy.

0:01:17.120 --> 0:01:18.480
<v Speaker 2>Looks like it's doing fine.

0:01:18.840 --> 0:01:20.800
<v Speaker 3>Let's talk about some of the animal spirits in the

0:01:20.840 --> 0:01:22.840
<v Speaker 3>market right now, particularly when it comes to M and A.

0:01:22.880 --> 0:01:25.480
<v Speaker 3>And let's look at Service Now. We're currently trading lower

0:01:25.480 --> 0:01:26.440
<v Speaker 3>on that particular stock.

0:01:26.440 --> 0:01:27.039
<v Speaker 2>We're off by two and.

0:01:27.040 --> 0:01:29.320
<v Speaker 3>A half percent because well, they're going to use cash,

0:01:29.360 --> 0:01:32.440
<v Speaker 3>They're going to use debt for his biggest acquisition so far.

0:01:32.520 --> 0:01:34.720
<v Speaker 2>It's all about the world of cyber and it's actually.

0:01:34.480 --> 0:01:37.600
<v Speaker 3>A story that Bloomberg broke where ahead of the formal announcement.

0:01:37.680 --> 0:01:40.160
<v Speaker 3>Let's get to it at Bloomberg's Andrew Martin, and it

0:01:40.240 --> 0:01:42.800
<v Speaker 3>was last week that you made clear to the market

0:01:42.800 --> 0:01:45.039
<v Speaker 3>that Service Now was looking at this particular acquisition.

0:01:45.120 --> 0:01:46.200
<v Speaker 2>Why is it building up in.

0:01:46.160 --> 0:01:50.919
<v Speaker 4>Cyber Well, I think there's sort of following a path

0:01:51.040 --> 0:01:55.440
<v Speaker 4>that Microsoft and Google were already followed, which is, you know,

0:01:55.560 --> 0:02:00.840
<v Speaker 4>combining a enterprise software product and our cyber is sort

0:02:00.880 --> 0:02:03.280
<v Speaker 4>of a bonus. And so you know, Microsoft sort of

0:02:03.320 --> 0:02:04.360
<v Speaker 4>perfected this idea of.

0:02:07.000 --> 0:02:08.720
<v Speaker 5>Having a package of.

0:02:08.840 --> 0:02:11.960
<v Speaker 4>Their software offerings in the cloud and bringing in cyber.

0:02:12.440 --> 0:02:15.480
<v Speaker 4>Google bought Whiz to do something very similar and now

0:02:15.639 --> 0:02:20.440
<v Speaker 4>Service now, you know, is basically saying as we automate

0:02:20.480 --> 0:02:23.960
<v Speaker 4>you know, they basically automate it and personnel, and now

0:02:23.960 --> 0:02:26.360
<v Speaker 4>they're offering cyber is sort of a broader package to

0:02:26.480 --> 0:02:27.239
<v Speaker 4>entice customers.

0:02:27.240 --> 0:02:30.520
<v Speaker 3>So the safety of Agenda KI is crucial. Wise, armis

0:02:30.639 --> 0:02:33.440
<v Speaker 3>the right holding. Tell us about the founding team and

0:02:33.520 --> 0:02:33.880
<v Speaker 3>other reason.

0:02:34.320 --> 0:02:35.840
<v Speaker 5>Armist is an interesting company there.

0:02:36.520 --> 0:02:38.919
<v Speaker 4>Like a lot of cyber startups, it was started by

0:02:39.080 --> 0:02:42.720
<v Speaker 4>Israeli military veterans who had worked in one of their

0:02:42.760 --> 0:02:46.080
<v Speaker 4>elite cyber units. And what these guys do is they

0:02:47.040 --> 0:02:51.320
<v Speaker 4>they call it cyber exposure management. It's basically looking across

0:02:51.360 --> 0:02:54.880
<v Speaker 4>your whole digital footprint and finding in real time flaws

0:02:54.880 --> 0:02:57.920
<v Speaker 4>and vulnerabilities and fixing them quickly. And it's something that

0:02:58.080 --> 0:03:04.760
<v Speaker 4>really lends itself to AI see that being automated, and.

0:03:03.680 --> 0:03:07.040
<v Speaker 5>You know, the company has grown incredibly fast.

0:03:07.240 --> 0:03:10.440
<v Speaker 4>And uh you know, for for a company that uh

0:03:10.960 --> 0:03:15.200
<v Speaker 4>that that automates processes, automating cyber just makes sense as

0:03:15.240 --> 0:03:15.560
<v Speaker 4>part of that.

0:03:16.280 --> 0:03:18.080
<v Speaker 2>What's interesting is, as you said, this is part of

0:03:18.080 --> 0:03:18.560
<v Speaker 2>a theme.

0:03:18.880 --> 0:03:20.639
<v Speaker 3>The fact that the mega deal of the year was

0:03:20.720 --> 0:03:23.720
<v Speaker 3>Whiz with alphabet Are we expecting yet more and more

0:03:23.840 --> 0:03:26.880
<v Speaker 3>these platforms looking to bolt on cyber acquisitions.

0:03:26.880 --> 0:03:28.720
<v Speaker 4>It just makes sense, right, I mean, it just makes

0:03:28.760 --> 0:03:31.800
<v Speaker 4>sense to to offer cyber as part of a broader package.

0:03:31.840 --> 0:03:36.960
<v Speaker 4>And you know, among the big cyber players, Microsoft being

0:03:36.960 --> 0:03:41.800
<v Speaker 4>the biggest, Google, CrowdStrike, palom Alto, they're all trying to

0:03:41.840 --> 0:03:45.560
<v Speaker 4>build a bundle that can attract users with with sort

0:03:45.600 --> 0:03:47.520
<v Speaker 4>of one stop shopping and cyber.

0:03:47.920 --> 0:03:52.200
<v Speaker 3>That word platformization, which a horrible words, horrible word, but

0:03:52.240 --> 0:03:55.640
<v Speaker 3>they love it. Megs, Andrew Martin, we so appreciate you

0:03:55.680 --> 0:03:59.000
<v Speaker 3>coming on about the latest deal. Let's turn our attention

0:03:59.040 --> 0:04:02.040
<v Speaker 3>to another huge, huge piece of reporting by Bloomberg. In

0:04:02.160 --> 0:04:05.600
<v Speaker 3>Vidia's largest buyer in Southeast Asia, it's under investigation by

0:04:05.640 --> 0:04:09.240
<v Speaker 3>the US government over whether it smuggled advanced chips into China.

0:04:09.560 --> 0:04:13.720
<v Speaker 3>Now Singapore based Megaspeed imported at least four point six

0:04:13.760 --> 0:04:16.560
<v Speaker 3>billion dollars worth of in Vidio hardware through November since

0:04:16.560 --> 0:04:19.320
<v Speaker 3>it's founding back in twenty twenty three. The company wasn't

0:04:19.360 --> 0:04:23.039
<v Speaker 3>its obscure spinoff of a Chinese gaming enterprise could become

0:04:23.160 --> 0:04:27.040
<v Speaker 3>a prime example of Washington's fears of Beijing gaining access

0:04:27.080 --> 0:04:30.400
<v Speaker 3>to advanced chips For commercial and military uses. Megaspeed denies

0:04:30.480 --> 0:04:33.400
<v Speaker 3>any wrongdoing, says it abides by all regulations from the

0:04:33.480 --> 0:04:36.640
<v Speaker 3>US and elsewhere relevant to its operations. Let's get the

0:04:36.680 --> 0:04:39.320
<v Speaker 3>details on what was a very long running investigation for

0:04:39.400 --> 0:04:43.800
<v Speaker 3>Bloomberg's chips reporter Ian King and the deep dive the

0:04:43.920 --> 0:04:47.200
<v Speaker 3>reporters have done to understand whether we really understand how

0:04:47.240 --> 0:04:49.960
<v Speaker 3>many GPUs are going to megaspeed and where they're ending

0:04:50.000 --> 0:04:50.480
<v Speaker 3>up in.

0:04:50.440 --> 0:04:51.040
<v Speaker 2>Talk us through it.

0:04:52.200 --> 0:04:55.239
<v Speaker 6>Yeah, I mean there's a lot of evidence. It's important

0:04:55.279 --> 0:04:57.719
<v Speaker 6>to point out, as you already did that in Nvidia

0:04:57.800 --> 0:05:01.400
<v Speaker 6>says there's nothing going on here. Speed itself says there's

0:05:01.440 --> 0:05:05.320
<v Speaker 6>nothing going on here. But you know our colleagues reporting here, Caroline,

0:05:05.440 --> 0:05:09.719
<v Speaker 6>is that there is an investigation going on, and you

0:05:09.760 --> 0:05:13.640
<v Speaker 6>know Southeast Asian governments and also Washington are looking at

0:05:13.680 --> 0:05:16.920
<v Speaker 6>this and still trying to find out whether there has

0:05:17.000 --> 0:05:21.440
<v Speaker 6>been anything significant going on the go ahead.

0:05:21.440 --> 0:05:23.839
<v Speaker 3>Sorry, Well, from what we know, it's a Singapore based company,

0:05:23.960 --> 0:05:27.800
<v Speaker 3>Megaspeed operating fully in compliance, as they say, with applicable laws.

0:05:28.240 --> 0:05:31.240
<v Speaker 3>But what ultimately has had to spring up ever since

0:05:31.240 --> 0:05:34.240
<v Speaker 3>the Biden administration back in twenty twenty two was a

0:05:34.320 --> 0:05:36.919
<v Speaker 3>restriction on sophisticated chips kind of from Nvidia to China.

0:05:37.040 --> 0:05:42.120
<v Speaker 3>So suddenly you saw other Asian countries become real areas

0:05:42.120 --> 0:05:44.920
<v Speaker 3>of focus for importing chips, so that Chinese companies could

0:05:44.920 --> 0:05:47.560
<v Speaker 3>actually do the workload, could do the compute outside of

0:05:47.560 --> 0:05:48.320
<v Speaker 3>their own country.

0:05:48.360 --> 0:05:52.400
<v Speaker 6>Correct, Yeah, now that's absolutely right. There's nothing illegal with

0:05:52.560 --> 0:05:57.080
<v Speaker 6>setting up a data center and serving Chinese customers, providing

0:05:57.160 --> 0:06:01.920
<v Speaker 6>those customers don't have links with a band entity in

0:06:01.960 --> 0:06:05.719
<v Speaker 6>the US, whether that's the military or some company which

0:06:05.760 --> 0:06:10.240
<v Speaker 6>the US government has decided serves China's military. However, there

0:06:10.320 --> 0:06:14.400
<v Speaker 6>is a suspicion about these links, about who's in control

0:06:14.480 --> 0:06:18.039
<v Speaker 6>of what. There is a you know, and this is

0:06:18.080 --> 0:06:20.719
<v Speaker 6>the problem that in Vidia has to face and in

0:06:20.800 --> 0:06:23.240
<v Speaker 6>video you know say, look that there's nothing to see here,

0:06:23.279 --> 0:06:23.880
<v Speaker 6>there's nothing.

0:06:23.720 --> 0:06:24.240
<v Speaker 5>To worry about.

0:06:24.279 --> 0:06:27.040
<v Speaker 6>But as you'll see from our story, there's a lot

0:06:27.200 --> 0:06:32.440
<v Speaker 6>of links between individuals in China. There are you know,

0:06:32.920 --> 0:06:36.320
<v Speaker 6>there's a lot of lack of clarity in the relationships,

0:06:36.360 --> 0:06:39.440
<v Speaker 6>which I think everybody is trying to work through to

0:06:39.480 --> 0:06:41.960
<v Speaker 6>make sure that there is nothing untoward going on.

0:06:42.040 --> 0:06:45.080
<v Speaker 3>Because Bloomberg didn't find evidence of any megaspeed in video

0:06:45.160 --> 0:06:49.279
<v Speaker 3>chips actually being divert into China. But there's all these inconsistencies,

0:06:49.320 --> 0:06:52.840
<v Speaker 3>as you say, in Megaspeed's Southeast Asia demand and ship

0:06:52.880 --> 0:06:55.640
<v Speaker 3>inventory and wherever all they all end up in.

0:06:56.160 --> 0:06:58.120
<v Speaker 2>What's so interesting is this is a moment.

0:06:58.240 --> 0:07:02.200
<v Speaker 3>Where maybe actually in we'll get more access to China.

0:07:02.440 --> 0:07:04.560
<v Speaker 3>H two hundreds have in theory or at least according

0:07:04.600 --> 0:07:07.320
<v Speaker 3>to a truth social post been allow it back into China.

0:07:07.360 --> 0:07:09.240
<v Speaker 2>The question is where the China wants them.

0:07:09.400 --> 0:07:12.400
<v Speaker 3>But also where the megaspeed will actually have Chinese demand

0:07:12.440 --> 0:07:14.800
<v Speaker 3>going forward if indeed we start to see access once

0:07:14.800 --> 0:07:16.960
<v Speaker 3>again to mainland Yeah.

0:07:16.800 --> 0:07:19.440
<v Speaker 6>I mean there's again we're in a kind of a

0:07:19.480 --> 0:07:23.120
<v Speaker 6>transition period where we're trying to find out exactly how

0:07:23.160 --> 0:07:25.200
<v Speaker 6>this will all play out. In Vidia wants to do

0:07:25.240 --> 0:07:28.480
<v Speaker 6>business directly in China, that's absolutely true. At the moment,

0:07:28.520 --> 0:07:32.800
<v Speaker 6>it cannot do that because of these restrictions. What we're

0:07:32.800 --> 0:07:34.680
<v Speaker 6>trying to find out is whether the Chinese want to

0:07:34.680 --> 0:07:39.040
<v Speaker 6>do business directly within VideA, and if that's the case,

0:07:39.120 --> 0:07:42.120
<v Speaker 6>what level of demand that they will be there. In

0:07:42.240 --> 0:07:45.000
<v Speaker 6>Vidia has really kind of had a good year in Washington.

0:07:45.040 --> 0:07:49.240
<v Speaker 6>It's gone from really restrictive rules to freeing up of

0:07:49.320 --> 0:07:52.520
<v Speaker 6>some of them. But again that has to translate into

0:07:52.680 --> 0:07:56.360
<v Speaker 6>shipments into that Chinese market, and we haven't seen that

0:07:56.440 --> 0:07:59.440
<v Speaker 6>yet and we don't know that that will actually happen. Clearly,

0:07:59.560 --> 0:08:02.280
<v Speaker 6>stories like this that there are suspicions about smuddeling that

0:08:02.360 --> 0:08:06.040
<v Speaker 6>we know perhaps should be more secure and more kind

0:08:06.040 --> 0:08:09.000
<v Speaker 6>of careful in how we deal with China and Chinese

0:08:09.160 --> 0:08:12.040
<v Speaker 6>entities don't help that case. So again, there's a lot

0:08:12.040 --> 0:08:14.240
<v Speaker 6>at stake here, and we really need a lot more

0:08:14.320 --> 0:08:16.800
<v Speaker 6>clarity about the details of how this is all going

0:08:16.840 --> 0:08:17.400
<v Speaker 6>to work out.

0:08:17.680 --> 0:08:20.880
<v Speaker 3>It's a very fairo incredibly complex story, and you broke

0:08:20.920 --> 0:08:23.880
<v Speaker 3>it down perfectly for us Bloomgazine, King, thank you very much. Indeed,

0:08:23.880 --> 0:08:27.600
<v Speaker 3>go read more about the Invidio supplier on your terminal

0:08:27.680 --> 0:08:30.760
<v Speaker 3>or online. But let's talk more now about chip and

0:08:30.800 --> 0:08:34.280
<v Speaker 3>trade news because the US it's actually accused today China

0:08:34.360 --> 0:08:37.760
<v Speaker 3>of engaging in unfair trade practices in the semiconductor sector,

0:08:38.040 --> 0:08:40.880
<v Speaker 3>but Washington won't place additional tariffs on chip imports till

0:08:40.920 --> 0:08:44.079
<v Speaker 3>at least mid twenty twenty seven. Chinese embassy in Washington

0:08:44.080 --> 0:08:46.520
<v Speaker 3>did not immediately respond to the request for comment. That's

0:08:46.520 --> 0:08:49.040
<v Speaker 3>going the details of blombgs, Jordan Fabian and so we

0:08:49.160 --> 0:08:53.880
<v Speaker 3>understand that USTR, that's the Office of US Trade Representative saying, look,

0:08:54.240 --> 0:08:55.560
<v Speaker 3>what they're doing isn't fair.

0:08:58.480 --> 0:08:58.960
<v Speaker 5>Exactly.

0:08:59.160 --> 0:09:04.040
<v Speaker 7>It's an interesting development. This investigation actually started under the

0:09:04.080 --> 0:09:07.560
<v Speaker 7>administration of former President Joe Biden, with the expectation that

0:09:07.600 --> 0:09:10.520
<v Speaker 7>Donald Trump, who talked tough on China during the campaign,

0:09:10.559 --> 0:09:13.080
<v Speaker 7>would follow up on it when he became president. But

0:09:13.200 --> 0:09:15.520
<v Speaker 7>in the interim he started a trade war with China.

0:09:15.840 --> 0:09:19.280
<v Speaker 7>He then struck a deal with Jijenping to take off

0:09:19.520 --> 0:09:23.000
<v Speaker 7>those tariffs. And so the US right now, if you

0:09:23.040 --> 0:09:25.760
<v Speaker 7>listen to what Jamison Greer, the Trade Representative, has said

0:09:26.040 --> 0:09:30.560
<v Speaker 7>other senior administration officials, they want a stable relationship with

0:09:30.720 --> 0:09:33.400
<v Speaker 7>China on trade, and so they're not going to look

0:09:33.440 --> 0:09:35.960
<v Speaker 7>to hike tariffs at the current moment, which is why

0:09:36.000 --> 0:09:39.040
<v Speaker 7>you have this odd outcome of an investigation saying the

0:09:39.080 --> 0:09:43.000
<v Speaker 7>obvious really, which is that China is using non market

0:09:43.040 --> 0:09:48.080
<v Speaker 7>practices to dominate the chip industry. But at the same time,

0:09:48.200 --> 0:09:50.120
<v Speaker 7>the US isn't really going to do anything about it,

0:09:50.240 --> 0:09:52.560
<v Speaker 7>at least not for the foreseeable future.

0:09:52.800 --> 0:09:56.480
<v Speaker 3>So ESDO was legally required to publish the outcome and

0:09:56.520 --> 0:10:00.760
<v Speaker 3>the investigation the three to Zho one investigation, but is

0:10:00.800 --> 0:10:03.200
<v Speaker 3>being thought of that China is up to in terms

0:10:03.280 --> 0:10:06.760
<v Speaker 3>of unfairly supporting its industry. They say, China's targeting in

0:10:06.800 --> 0:10:10.720
<v Speaker 3>the semiconductor industry for dominance is unreasonable and burdens or

0:10:10.720 --> 0:10:13.640
<v Speaker 3>restricts US commerce and thus is actionable.

0:10:13.679 --> 0:10:15.880
<v Speaker 2>Jordan, what are they being told or accused of.

0:10:18.400 --> 0:10:22.199
<v Speaker 7>You know, they're being accused of using non market practices

0:10:22.240 --> 0:10:26.240
<v Speaker 7>to bolster their domestic industry. You'll sell those chips that

0:10:26.640 --> 0:10:31.600
<v Speaker 7>perhaps below market rates into various countries to get them

0:10:32.000 --> 0:10:36.840
<v Speaker 7>hooked on the Chinese technology stack and thereby increasing the

0:10:36.880 --> 0:10:40.160
<v Speaker 7>market share of their chip industry. The irony is that

0:10:40.200 --> 0:10:43.280
<v Speaker 7>the US is pretty much trying to do the same thing,

0:10:43.440 --> 0:10:46.360
<v Speaker 7>which is basically doing a take it or leave it

0:10:46.400 --> 0:10:49.160
<v Speaker 7>deal with countries around the world, saying that you need

0:10:49.200 --> 0:10:52.760
<v Speaker 7>to use the US tech stack. We want to make

0:10:52.760 --> 0:10:56.400
<v Speaker 7>sure that countries are not on the Chinese tech stack

0:10:56.440 --> 0:10:59.000
<v Speaker 7>and had been for a while, you know, trying to

0:10:59.080 --> 0:11:03.240
<v Speaker 7>limit X worts to China to other countries that are

0:11:03.240 --> 0:11:08.320
<v Speaker 7>deemed unfriendly, and also crack down on the Chinese market.

0:11:08.400 --> 0:11:11.720
<v Speaker 7>So they're saying, essentially, you know, you know, China can't

0:11:12.000 --> 0:11:13.880
<v Speaker 7>try to dominate the market. We're going to try and

0:11:13.880 --> 0:11:17.280
<v Speaker 7>dominate the market. But right now they're again going to

0:11:17.400 --> 0:11:21.760
<v Speaker 7>sort of stand off our whole back on increasing terrorists

0:11:21.800 --> 0:11:24.880
<v Speaker 7>further on Chinese chips to address that.

0:11:24.840 --> 0:11:28.600
<v Speaker 2>Problem complex trade web. Jordan Fabian, thanks so much for

0:11:28.640 --> 0:11:30.640
<v Speaker 2>talking us through it. We really appreciate you.

0:11:30.760 --> 0:11:34.480
<v Speaker 3>Meanwhile, coming up, thing about Larry Allison, his big bet

0:11:34.520 --> 0:11:38.000
<v Speaker 3>on paramount that could alter his vast Oracle fortune.

0:11:38.040 --> 0:11:40.120
<v Speaker 2>One on that. Next, this is Blomberg Tech.

0:11:53.640 --> 0:11:56.920
<v Speaker 3>Larry Alison no stranger to bold bets, but his biggest

0:11:56.960 --> 0:12:00.520
<v Speaker 3>one yet maybe in media. A potential personal guarantee more

0:12:00.520 --> 0:12:03.160
<v Speaker 3>than forty billion dollars to backstop paramounts all cash bid

0:12:03.160 --> 0:12:04.439
<v Speaker 3>for Warner Brothers Discovery.

0:12:04.640 --> 0:12:06.160
<v Speaker 2>He could dramatically we shape the.

0:12:06.120 --> 0:12:09.320
<v Speaker 3>Oracle founder's fortune and Meg's Dylan Sloane joins us for

0:12:09.400 --> 0:12:12.280
<v Speaker 3>more as we're picking apart how Larry Ellison is basically

0:12:12.280 --> 0:12:15.559
<v Speaker 3>helping his son, David Ellison potentially by Warner Brothers Discovery.

0:12:15.720 --> 0:12:18.400
<v Speaker 3>What's so extraordinary about your reporting on the billionaire is

0:12:18.440 --> 0:12:21.800
<v Speaker 3>that he has sold very little of Oracle stock over

0:12:21.800 --> 0:12:22.240
<v Speaker 3>the years.

0:12:22.320 --> 0:12:24.560
<v Speaker 8>He has Yeah, and even amongst the billionaires that we're

0:12:24.600 --> 0:12:27.160
<v Speaker 8>looking at on the Bloomberg billionis Index, he really stands out.

0:12:27.920 --> 0:12:30.040
<v Speaker 8>He's sold about seven and a half billion dollars worth

0:12:30.040 --> 0:12:32.560
<v Speaker 8>of stock lifetime, no more than a billion dollars in

0:12:32.600 --> 0:12:35.920
<v Speaker 8>a single year since twenty ten, So that pair that

0:12:35.960 --> 0:12:38.800
<v Speaker 8>really pales in comparison in looking at some other founders.

0:12:38.840 --> 0:12:41.120
<v Speaker 8>You know, he still earns about forty percent of the company,

0:12:41.360 --> 0:12:43.880
<v Speaker 8>which is, you know, multiples higher than a lot of

0:12:43.920 --> 0:12:46.480
<v Speaker 8>comparable tech founder peers. So his strategy in terms of

0:12:46.480 --> 0:12:48.880
<v Speaker 8>his wealth management has been to stick really closely to

0:12:49.280 --> 0:12:52.920
<v Speaker 8>holding his Oracle stock, not cashing out at any point,

0:12:52.960 --> 0:12:54.800
<v Speaker 8>which has been very successful for him as a stock

0:12:54.840 --> 0:12:57.199
<v Speaker 8>has done well. But it does raise some questions about

0:12:57.240 --> 0:12:58.800
<v Speaker 8>the cash that he has on hand and whether or

0:12:58.800 --> 0:13:01.480
<v Speaker 8>not he would be able to imediately meet those equity

0:13:01.520 --> 0:13:03.320
<v Speaker 8>financing comitment should he be called on to do so.

0:13:03.440 --> 0:13:05.880
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, because like forty billion in the grand scheme of things,

0:13:06.200 --> 0:13:07.880
<v Speaker 3>is actually not that much compared to his two hundred

0:13:07.880 --> 0:13:10.840
<v Speaker 3>and fifty two billion dollar net worth. But how liquid

0:13:10.960 --> 0:13:13.320
<v Speaker 3>is any of that? Where has money gone? What could

0:13:13.400 --> 0:13:14.640
<v Speaker 3>he sell to help out?

0:13:14.720 --> 0:13:16.240
<v Speaker 8>Yeah, And you raise a good point, which is it's

0:13:16.240 --> 0:13:18.079
<v Speaker 8>important to say that he can afford this. Of course

0:13:18.120 --> 0:13:20.080
<v Speaker 8>many times over third richest man in the world he

0:13:20.080 --> 0:13:20.960
<v Speaker 8>has got more than.

0:13:20.920 --> 0:13:23.800
<v Speaker 5>Enough assets to be able to cover this, but historically.

0:13:23.360 --> 0:13:26.760
<v Speaker 8>Ellison's has relied on debt to finance money of his investments,

0:13:26.800 --> 0:13:30.360
<v Speaker 8>his lifestyle purchases. Currently about thirty percent of his Oracle

0:13:30.400 --> 0:13:33.800
<v Speaker 8>stake is pledged to secure loans, which he uses to

0:13:34.120 --> 0:13:36.920
<v Speaker 8>raise cash and fund his many lifestyle purchases. He has

0:13:36.960 --> 0:13:39.800
<v Speaker 8>a really extensive real estate portfolio. You may remember even

0:13:39.840 --> 0:13:41.640
<v Speaker 8>earlier this year. It feels like a lifetime ago, but

0:13:41.679 --> 0:13:43.480
<v Speaker 8>he put up a big chunk of the equity for

0:13:44.080 --> 0:13:48.319
<v Speaker 8>his son David's acquisition of National Amusements, the acquisition of Paramount.

0:13:48.920 --> 0:13:51.079
<v Speaker 8>So should he need to raise cash down the line,

0:13:51.080 --> 0:13:53.439
<v Speaker 8>of course, selling shares would be one option if he's

0:13:53.480 --> 0:13:55.800
<v Speaker 8>called on to backstop this steal, which again would constitute

0:13:55.880 --> 0:13:58.480
<v Speaker 8>a pretty significant change from his his strategy over the

0:13:58.520 --> 0:14:02.360
<v Speaker 8>past few decades, or potentially increasing the size of those loans,

0:14:02.440 --> 0:14:05.200
<v Speaker 8>which is something that the Oracle board would need to

0:14:05.320 --> 0:14:07.439
<v Speaker 8>go through a review process of to give the okay.

0:14:07.480 --> 0:14:11.920
<v Speaker 3>Just like Tesla learn when El muskport now X was

0:14:11.960 --> 0:14:14.560
<v Speaker 3>Twitter Dolan sloan. It's great reporting, go and check it

0:14:14.600 --> 0:14:18.040
<v Speaker 3>out on all things billionaires. But let's talk a little

0:14:18.040 --> 0:14:21.920
<v Speaker 3>bit more about the potential bid or deal of Paramount, binding,

0:14:22.240 --> 0:14:26.000
<v Speaker 3>Water Brothers, Discovery, and indeed Netflix to the legal stakes

0:14:26.000 --> 0:14:29.720
<v Speaker 3>of the Megamedia mergers. Fiona Scott Morton, Professor of Economics

0:14:29.720 --> 0:14:32.120
<v Speaker 3>over at the Yale University School of Management and adjunct

0:14:32.120 --> 0:14:35.040
<v Speaker 3>professor of Yale Law School, is with us. Now let's

0:14:35.120 --> 0:14:38.080
<v Speaker 3>just go back to whether or not any of these

0:14:38.120 --> 0:14:42.680
<v Speaker 3>will get through regulatory approval. Let's start with Paramount buying

0:14:42.720 --> 0:14:43.640
<v Speaker 3>Warner Brothers Discovery.

0:14:43.680 --> 0:14:44.920
<v Speaker 2>Does it cut legal mustard?

0:14:44.880 --> 0:14:48.560
<v Speaker 9>Do you think, well, all three of the bidders, remember

0:14:48.600 --> 0:14:51.680
<v Speaker 9>there was Comcast in there to begin with, have overlapped

0:14:51.840 --> 0:14:54.800
<v Speaker 9>with Warner Brothers. If you think about three buckets of

0:14:54.920 --> 0:14:59.680
<v Speaker 9>say content, production, streaming, and then channels or networks, they

0:14:59.760 --> 0:15:03.360
<v Speaker 9>a overlap and Paramount in particular has a lot of

0:15:04.280 --> 0:15:08.720
<v Speaker 9>production studio kinds of assets, particularly because of course Paramount

0:15:08.720 --> 0:15:11.720
<v Speaker 9>merges with sky Dance first, so that's a big issue

0:15:11.720 --> 0:15:14.120
<v Speaker 9>for them, and they have a significant share of streaming

0:15:14.200 --> 0:15:14.640
<v Speaker 9>as well.

0:15:15.120 --> 0:15:17.960
<v Speaker 3>You served as Deputy Sistant Attorney General for Economic Analysis,

0:15:18.000 --> 0:15:20.600
<v Speaker 3>chief Economist, you can basically helped with anti trust division

0:15:20.640 --> 0:15:24.440
<v Speaker 3>in your time. When ultimately it comes down to it,

0:15:24.440 --> 0:15:27.600
<v Speaker 3>as courts are going to say, who's the competitor here.

0:15:27.880 --> 0:15:28.960
<v Speaker 2>Do you think it's right that.

0:15:28.880 --> 0:15:32.440
<v Speaker 3>They bulk in YouTube and new ways of consuming content,

0:15:32.480 --> 0:15:36.200
<v Speaker 3>even TikTok versus us all be on linear, certainly on cable.

0:15:37.520 --> 0:15:40.160
<v Speaker 9>Yes, I think this is the tricky thing for the

0:15:40.200 --> 0:15:44.320
<v Speaker 9>paramount BID. I mean, we all understand what producing content is,

0:15:44.360 --> 0:15:46.160
<v Speaker 9>and I think we have a pretty good grip on

0:15:46.320 --> 0:15:49.160
<v Speaker 9>who does that and why it's different and what sort

0:15:49.200 --> 0:15:53.760
<v Speaker 9>of market there is there. Streaming, however, is much trickier

0:15:54.000 --> 0:15:58.080
<v Speaker 9>because we have user produced funny cat videos, we have

0:15:58.240 --> 0:16:01.880
<v Speaker 9>user produced videos that actually sustain those users in terms

0:16:01.880 --> 0:16:05.920
<v Speaker 9>of income. We have professionally produced short things, professionally produced

0:16:05.920 --> 0:16:08.120
<v Speaker 9>long things, and so we're getting a kind of a

0:16:08.200 --> 0:16:13.480
<v Speaker 9>continuum of content, and that includes YouTube, as you point out,

0:16:13.560 --> 0:16:16.560
<v Speaker 9>which has a big chunk of that continuum. And it's

0:16:16.840 --> 0:16:18.880
<v Speaker 9>going to be very difficult to draw the line on

0:16:18.920 --> 0:16:21.240
<v Speaker 9>what is what we call the relevant market, which in

0:16:21.320 --> 0:16:24.440
<v Speaker 9>antitrust is what matters because that's where you get head

0:16:24.440 --> 0:16:25.400
<v Speaker 9>to head competitors.

0:16:25.600 --> 0:16:28.360
<v Speaker 3>It feels as though Netflix, for its part, which thus

0:16:28.400 --> 0:16:31.120
<v Speaker 3>far is meant to be the front runner for buying

0:16:31.800 --> 0:16:34.760
<v Speaker 3>Warner Brothers, or at least the streaming and the studio

0:16:34.840 --> 0:16:36.960
<v Speaker 3>side of it, they've tried to front run this sort

0:16:36.960 --> 0:16:40.680
<v Speaker 3>of argument by making clear they think the market competitors

0:16:40.680 --> 0:16:42.760
<v Speaker 3>are YouTube and they are TikTok and they are just

0:16:42.800 --> 0:16:45.520
<v Speaker 3>where are eyeballs at? Who do they need to convince

0:16:45.560 --> 0:16:47.720
<v Speaker 3>in this because many would say, oh, the Allisons have

0:16:47.760 --> 0:16:50.240
<v Speaker 3>got the air of the administration, but really it's the

0:16:50.320 --> 0:16:52.400
<v Speaker 3>courts that's right.

0:16:52.440 --> 0:16:55.080
<v Speaker 9>The president can say he wants the Ellisons to have it,

0:16:55.160 --> 0:16:58.200
<v Speaker 9>and he can say that about his friends or the

0:16:58.200 --> 0:17:01.360
<v Speaker 9>people who give him money, or silence the voices that

0:17:01.440 --> 0:17:04.560
<v Speaker 9>he doesn't want to hear. But ultimately, we have a

0:17:04.640 --> 0:17:07.000
<v Speaker 9>law in the United States that can be enforced not

0:17:07.040 --> 0:17:09.960
<v Speaker 9>only by the public, the federal public authorities, but the

0:17:10.000 --> 0:17:13.560
<v Speaker 9>states and actually buy private plaintiffs as well. And so

0:17:13.720 --> 0:17:16.199
<v Speaker 9>if there's some harm to competition and that can be

0:17:16.240 --> 0:17:19.600
<v Speaker 9>shown by a state or a private plaintiff, then they

0:17:19.600 --> 0:17:21.760
<v Speaker 9>can go to court and try to block the transaction

0:17:22.040 --> 0:17:24.560
<v Speaker 9>just like the federal government can. And indeed we have

0:17:24.680 --> 0:17:28.879
<v Speaker 9>seen states coalitions of states being very active and antitrust

0:17:28.960 --> 0:17:31.960
<v Speaker 9>lately when they have felt that the federal government is

0:17:32.000 --> 0:17:33.000
<v Speaker 9>not doing a good job.

0:17:33.560 --> 0:17:35.440
<v Speaker 3>Fear and a Scott Morton, I'm a feeling this story

0:17:35.520 --> 0:17:37.240
<v Speaker 3>is going to run. So we get to have you back,

0:17:37.320 --> 0:17:46.840
<v Speaker 3>Yale University School and Management. We appreciate your expertise. It's

0:17:46.880 --> 0:17:50.040
<v Speaker 3>been a wild year in crypto. Despite big regulatory wins,

0:17:50.280 --> 0:17:53.200
<v Speaker 3>hasn't been kind to everyone, even as prices and interest

0:17:53.280 --> 0:17:56.600
<v Speaker 3>surged early on. Billionaires tied to the space they're chatting

0:17:56.760 --> 0:17:59.440
<v Speaker 3>very different paths. Setting into twenty twenty six, let's state

0:17:59.480 --> 0:18:02.720
<v Speaker 3>the vinkle of twins. They saw their fortunes pressured as

0:18:02.760 --> 0:18:06.240
<v Speaker 3>Gemini Space Station continues to face losses after the exchange's

0:18:06.280 --> 0:18:09.879
<v Speaker 3>shares for one sixty percent following September IPO. On the

0:18:09.920 --> 0:18:13.119
<v Speaker 3>other side, Jeremy Elaire's Circle benefited from growing adoption of

0:18:13.119 --> 0:18:16.200
<v Speaker 3>its USDC stable coin, helped by clearer regulation, and the

0:18:16.240 --> 0:18:19.399
<v Speaker 3>shares have almost tripled since listening in June, although you

0:18:19.400 --> 0:18:22.720
<v Speaker 3>can see they're well off their previous highs. Meanwhile, let's

0:18:22.720 --> 0:18:26.639
<v Speaker 3>talk my novograts. Galaxy Digital has actually seen some sort

0:18:26.680 --> 0:18:30.200
<v Speaker 3>of a rebound alongside bitcoins gains earlier in the year,

0:18:30.240 --> 0:18:32.840
<v Speaker 3>but it has had a tough stretch. Then there's Michael

0:18:32.840 --> 0:18:36.320
<v Speaker 3>Saylor's wild ride as too, as the Strategy founder doubled

0:18:36.400 --> 0:18:39.800
<v Speaker 3>down on his high conviction bitcoin bet, further tying his

0:18:39.880 --> 0:18:42.160
<v Speaker 3>wealth to the token's price wings his net worth has

0:18:42.240 --> 0:18:47.080
<v Speaker 3>collapsed almost forty percent this year. So what next for

0:18:47.119 --> 0:18:48.560
<v Speaker 3>crypto in twenty twenty six?

0:18:48.720 --> 0:18:49.639
<v Speaker 2>Not just the billionaires.

0:18:49.840 --> 0:18:51.840
<v Speaker 3>Nisa Colleens, Stillmark Managing.

0:18:51.480 --> 0:18:53.920
<v Speaker 2>Partners, says she's going to see momentum.

0:18:54.240 --> 0:18:57.720
<v Speaker 3>She writes, we expect to continued progress through increased MNA activity,

0:18:57.720 --> 0:19:01.439
<v Speaker 3>expanded entrepreneurial innovation, and a deeper, more robust base of

0:19:01.480 --> 0:19:05.280
<v Speaker 3>both retail and institutional uses. She joins us Now, for you,

0:19:05.440 --> 0:19:08.320
<v Speaker 3>at least reflecting on twenty twenty five, what was the

0:19:08.359 --> 0:19:09.560
<v Speaker 3>biggest landmark move?

0:19:09.720 --> 0:19:11.000
<v Speaker 2>Was it institutional adoption?

0:19:12.960 --> 0:19:15.600
<v Speaker 10>Well, twenty twenty five was one of the most consequential

0:19:15.720 --> 0:19:20.000
<v Speaker 10>years in bitcoin's history, not because of price appreciation, but

0:19:20.119 --> 0:19:24.119
<v Speaker 10>because of structural progress, and that includes policy, product, and

0:19:24.320 --> 0:19:29.320
<v Speaker 10>institutional adoption. Across all of these fronts, Bitcoin moved meaningfully

0:19:29.359 --> 0:19:33.040
<v Speaker 10>into the mainstream as an embedded part of the financial system,

0:19:33.440 --> 0:19:35.919
<v Speaker 10>and twenty twenty six will be able to take advantage

0:19:35.920 --> 0:19:36.720
<v Speaker 10>of that foundation.

0:19:37.080 --> 0:19:41.480
<v Speaker 11>What does advantage look like, Well, what it looks like

0:19:41.800 --> 0:19:47.040
<v Speaker 11>is recent regulatory clarity and an effort by regulators and

0:19:47.080 --> 0:19:51.200
<v Speaker 11>policy makers to acknowledge bitcoin as part of the financial

0:19:51.240 --> 0:19:55.320
<v Speaker 11>system and to lay the foundational groundwork in terms of

0:19:55.400 --> 0:19:59.080
<v Speaker 11>policy so that the US can continue to lead both

0:19:59.080 --> 0:20:03.840
<v Speaker 11>in terms of innovation distribution as well as institutional adoption

0:20:03.920 --> 0:20:08.760
<v Speaker 11>that can provide efficiencies and gains for US based institutions

0:20:09.000 --> 0:20:11.880
<v Speaker 11>from bitcoin, the acid and bitcoin technologies at.

0:20:11.880 --> 0:20:14.440
<v Speaker 3>Least reminds us of that quickly, just remind us where

0:20:14.480 --> 0:20:18.080
<v Speaker 3>we are on policy. Because Genius Act tick, that helps

0:20:18.119 --> 0:20:22.440
<v Speaker 3>sable coins and pass through Congress. But the Clarity Act

0:20:22.560 --> 0:20:24.600
<v Speaker 3>what will that give us if India does get through

0:20:24.640 --> 0:20:25.000
<v Speaker 3>the Senate.

0:20:26.640 --> 0:20:29.359
<v Speaker 10>So in addition to the Genius Act passing this year,

0:20:29.359 --> 0:20:33.120
<v Speaker 10>we've seen advancement of the What the Clarity Act attempts

0:20:33.200 --> 0:20:35.560
<v Speaker 10>to do, or aims to do, I should say, is

0:20:35.600 --> 0:20:39.480
<v Speaker 10>to create a framework for bitcoin and other digital assets

0:20:40.240 --> 0:20:44.480
<v Speaker 10>can create clarity as well as consumer protection and can

0:20:44.520 --> 0:20:48.240
<v Speaker 10>offer definitions of what these digital assets are. So, for example,

0:20:48.280 --> 0:20:51.639
<v Speaker 10>we expect that bitcoin will be defined as a commodity

0:20:51.680 --> 0:20:56.000
<v Speaker 10>along with other decentralized assets under the purview of the CFTC,

0:20:56.720 --> 0:21:00.720
<v Speaker 10>and that will help drive institutional adoption both in terms

0:21:00.800 --> 0:21:04.199
<v Speaker 10>of institutionals institution's.

0:21:03.480 --> 0:21:05.480
<v Speaker 12>Own interaction with bitcoin, but.

0:21:05.520 --> 0:21:10.040
<v Speaker 10>Also institutions comfort with distribution bitcoin to their own clients.

0:21:10.640 --> 0:21:11.879
<v Speaker 2>We've got but a minute left.

0:21:11.960 --> 0:21:13.960
<v Speaker 3>But your put photo is so interesting because it's all

0:21:13.960 --> 0:21:17.720
<v Speaker 3>around the bitcoin ecosystem and one of us energy focused.

0:21:17.760 --> 0:21:20.240
<v Speaker 2>How is that playing and also this need for energy

0:21:20.320 --> 0:21:24.080
<v Speaker 2>and power in the AI era as well.

0:21:24.080 --> 0:21:24.560
<v Speaker 12>That's right.

0:21:24.760 --> 0:21:27.760
<v Speaker 10>So we began the year talking about bitcoin and the

0:21:27.800 --> 0:21:31.880
<v Speaker 10>intersection of bitcoin with other critical trends, and that included

0:21:31.920 --> 0:21:36.480
<v Speaker 10>AI and energy infrastructure. What we've seen as the year

0:21:36.560 --> 0:21:39.520
<v Speaker 10>comes to an end is an acknowledgment or recognition of

0:21:39.520 --> 0:21:43.240
<v Speaker 10>the opportunity at the intersection of bitcoin and energy. We've

0:21:43.280 --> 0:21:48.080
<v Speaker 10>seen this with large transactions such as those advanced by

0:21:48.720 --> 0:21:55.320
<v Speaker 10>major AI stakeholders seeking energy development and looking for a

0:21:55.359 --> 0:21:59.120
<v Speaker 10>way to drive efficiencies and especially in terms of pace

0:21:59.200 --> 0:22:04.760
<v Speaker 10>of development, including through partnership with bitcoin miners and bitcoin

0:22:04.840 --> 0:22:06.920
<v Speaker 10>mining development institutions.

0:22:07.560 --> 0:22:10.000
<v Speaker 3>At Least, it's been great as always getting your take

0:22:10.040 --> 0:22:11.960
<v Speaker 3>throughout the year of twenty twenty five and very much

0:22:11.960 --> 0:22:13.800
<v Speaker 3>looking forward to checking in with you in twenty twenty

0:22:13.840 --> 0:22:16.240
<v Speaker 3>six as well. And apologies for a technical glitch we

0:22:16.280 --> 0:22:18.280
<v Speaker 3>had throughout that interview at least Clean, We thank you

0:22:18.320 --> 0:22:26.000
<v Speaker 3>so much of still Mark, Welcome back to Bloomberg Tech.

0:22:26.080 --> 0:22:27.879
<v Speaker 3>Let's check in on these markets for you as we

0:22:28.000 --> 0:22:29.800
<v Speaker 3>head towards one is a very shortened week.

0:22:30.280 --> 0:22:32.680
<v Speaker 2>We're up two tens percent on the Nasdaq one hundred.

0:22:32.720 --> 0:22:35.760
<v Speaker 3>At the moment, stock's actually driving near all time highs,

0:22:35.960 --> 0:22:37.880
<v Speaker 3>very close on the S and P five hundred as well,

0:22:37.920 --> 0:22:41.000
<v Speaker 3>four straight session agains. We've got some renewed appetite for

0:22:41.000 --> 0:22:43.520
<v Speaker 3>tech in particular. This is even as the US economy

0:22:43.600 --> 0:22:46.400
<v Speaker 3>span the fastest that we've seen in two years four point.

0:22:46.240 --> 0:22:47.440
<v Speaker 2>Three percent analyzed pace.

0:22:47.520 --> 0:22:49.640
<v Speaker 3>But does that mean the FED won't cut as much?

0:22:49.680 --> 0:22:52.200
<v Speaker 3>Maybe that's why Bitcoin's under pressure. We're off by five

0:22:52.280 --> 0:22:54.760
<v Speaker 3>ten percent on cryptot eighty eight hundred and twenty eight.

0:22:54.800 --> 0:22:57.880
<v Speaker 3>It's expected to have a down year. Telly what's also

0:22:57.920 --> 0:22:59.920
<v Speaker 3>had a down month, and also we're down on the day.

0:23:00.320 --> 0:23:02.280
<v Speaker 3>The last quarter has been pretty painful for some of

0:23:02.280 --> 0:23:04.639
<v Speaker 3>these neo clouds. Core we've off by three percent, but

0:23:04.680 --> 0:23:06.920
<v Speaker 3>off way almost forty percent in the last trading quarter.

0:23:07.040 --> 0:23:10.320
<v Speaker 3>Neibeus is another neocloud, basically these new types of companies

0:23:10.320 --> 0:23:13.480
<v Speaker 3>that come out to offer compute for the ever necessary

0:23:13.520 --> 0:23:15.800
<v Speaker 3>need for AI or off by two percent on NEBBEUS

0:23:16.000 --> 0:23:18.280
<v Speaker 3>alphabet though at one point two percent, as it's actually

0:23:18.359 --> 0:23:21.440
<v Speaker 3>really thinking about the energy side of this AI equation

0:23:21.520 --> 0:23:24.680
<v Speaker 3>and it bought, of course, a power company. We saw

0:23:24.920 --> 0:23:28.520
<v Speaker 3>yesterday intersect power to be able to offer more climate

0:23:28.560 --> 0:23:31.080
<v Speaker 3>friendly energy for its AI needs, and that's been a

0:23:31.080 --> 0:23:34.600
<v Speaker 3>big theme for the year, and data centers energy demands

0:23:34.680 --> 0:23:37.080
<v Speaker 3>is one that we keep on intersecting with Bloomberg. Josh Saul,

0:23:37.080 --> 0:23:40.520
<v Speaker 3>who covers energy, been highlighting the strain that it's all

0:23:40.520 --> 0:23:42.680
<v Speaker 3>wimputing on the power grid. So I'm interested as to

0:23:42.800 --> 0:23:45.760
<v Speaker 3>if you flect on twenty twenty five how energy markets

0:23:45.840 --> 0:23:49.680
<v Speaker 3>were disrupted by the AI glut gold market rush that

0:23:49.720 --> 0:23:50.040
<v Speaker 3>we saw.

0:23:50.359 --> 0:23:51.960
<v Speaker 5>It absolutely changed so much.

0:23:52.000 --> 0:23:56.119
<v Speaker 13>We've never seen so much money rushing into the power sector.

0:23:56.640 --> 0:23:58.919
<v Speaker 5>The numbers are are just wild.

0:23:58.960 --> 0:24:02.200
<v Speaker 13>I mean, the four biggest tech companies spending three hundred

0:24:02.200 --> 0:24:07.000
<v Speaker 13>and forty four billion dollars this year. The power sector

0:24:07.119 --> 0:24:10.960
<v Speaker 13>expects to invest one point one trillion over the next

0:24:11.000 --> 0:24:15.119
<v Speaker 13>five years on the power grid in order to both

0:24:15.240 --> 0:24:19.119
<v Speaker 13>work on decaying infrastructure but also to connect all these

0:24:19.200 --> 0:24:20.240
<v Speaker 13>new data centers.

0:24:20.720 --> 0:24:25.040
<v Speaker 3>And they will get the financing from the end need

0:24:25.520 --> 0:24:27.840
<v Speaker 3>or are they having to turn to the consumer.

0:24:27.400 --> 0:24:29.720
<v Speaker 2>As well to help finance all this infrastructure? Is the

0:24:29.760 --> 0:24:31.000
<v Speaker 2>government who pays.

0:24:30.720 --> 0:24:33.320
<v Speaker 3>For the one point whatever trillion dollars?

0:24:33.320 --> 0:24:34.080
<v Speaker 2>It is of improvement.

0:24:34.160 --> 0:24:36.680
<v Speaker 13>Tech companies kick in a lot of money, and utilities

0:24:36.800 --> 0:24:39.920
<v Speaker 13>especially have been good about setting up contracts where they

0:24:40.640 --> 0:24:43.639
<v Speaker 13>get paid whether or not the tech companies use that

0:24:43.720 --> 0:24:46.200
<v Speaker 13>much power over time, so there's some built in protection

0:24:46.320 --> 0:24:47.399
<v Speaker 13>for customers there.

0:24:48.200 --> 0:24:50.120
<v Speaker 5>But when tech drives up.

0:24:50.240 --> 0:24:54.119
<v Speaker 13>The wholesale cost of electricity, that cost is then passed

0:24:54.119 --> 0:24:56.840
<v Speaker 13>on to consumers, so they do see some upward pressure

0:24:56.880 --> 0:24:57.719
<v Speaker 13>on bills from that.

0:24:58.040 --> 0:25:00.240
<v Speaker 3>Many anticipating in the twenty twenty six midter this is

0:25:00.240 --> 0:25:02.000
<v Speaker 3>going to come a lot about that. You saw issues

0:25:02.040 --> 0:25:04.760
<v Speaker 3>in New Jersey, We've got it in Virginia those areas

0:25:04.760 --> 0:25:06.040
<v Speaker 3>of data center build up.

0:25:06.880 --> 0:25:10.560
<v Speaker 2>Are you seeing the utilities.

0:25:10.000 --> 0:25:14.440
<v Speaker 3>And power companies also trying to get an easy regulatory environment.

0:25:14.520 --> 0:25:16.440
<v Speaker 3>I mean, we've talked a lot about fast tracking of

0:25:16.480 --> 0:25:18.440
<v Speaker 3>these big projects. If they've got a lot to put

0:25:18.560 --> 0:25:19.119
<v Speaker 3>money into.

0:25:19.880 --> 0:25:22.879
<v Speaker 13>It's hard because utilities, for sure want to hook up

0:25:22.880 --> 0:25:23.600
<v Speaker 13>the data centers.

0:25:23.600 --> 0:25:25.120
<v Speaker 5>That's a huge new customer for them.

0:25:25.119 --> 0:25:27.600
<v Speaker 13>That's like seven hundred thousand people just moving to their

0:25:27.680 --> 0:25:30.840
<v Speaker 13>territory who wouldn't want that business. But it can be

0:25:30.960 --> 0:25:33.200
<v Speaker 13>tough for them because if it makes prices go up,

0:25:33.520 --> 0:25:38.120
<v Speaker 13>that gets consumers mad, that gets regulators and politicians focused

0:25:38.160 --> 0:25:40.440
<v Speaker 13>on the issue, and you can have what we saw

0:25:40.440 --> 0:25:44.320
<v Speaker 13>in Georgia where regulators are voted out and new regulators,

0:25:44.960 --> 0:25:47.600
<v Speaker 13>democratic regulators who are expected to be less friendly to

0:25:47.800 --> 0:25:49.280
<v Speaker 13>the power company are voted in.

0:25:50.040 --> 0:25:52.200
<v Speaker 3>Josh, So can I have a busy twenty twenty six

0:25:52.200 --> 0:25:53.920
<v Speaker 3>thanks of breaking down what has been a wild ride

0:25:53.920 --> 0:25:54.840
<v Speaker 3>for twenty twenty five.

0:25:55.119 --> 0:25:55.879
<v Speaker 2>Let's talk more.

0:25:55.760 --> 0:25:58.800
<v Speaker 3>About that impact of energy demand on the tech industry.

0:25:58.920 --> 0:26:02.080
<v Speaker 3>Jason Oxman's with US President CEO of the Information Technology

0:26:02.119 --> 0:26:05.199
<v Speaker 3>Industry Council. You represent some of the biggest players in

0:26:05.240 --> 0:26:07.800
<v Speaker 3>the AI domain. I'm thinking of video open AI, a

0:26:07.840 --> 0:26:10.280
<v Speaker 3>lot of the demand for compute or indeed the supplies

0:26:10.359 --> 0:26:12.679
<v Speaker 3>to compute. Jason, what are you seeing in terms of

0:26:12.720 --> 0:26:15.920
<v Speaker 3>the regulatory equation changing to help speed up some of

0:26:15.920 --> 0:26:17.000
<v Speaker 3>this infrastructure investment.

0:26:18.000 --> 0:26:19.679
<v Speaker 14>Well, great to be back with you, Carolina, and your

0:26:19.720 --> 0:26:22.600
<v Speaker 14>absolutely right. Policymakers are paying a lot of attention to

0:26:22.640 --> 0:26:26.280
<v Speaker 14>this issue and the demand created by the construction of

0:26:26.280 --> 0:26:30.800
<v Speaker 14>new data centers demands new access to energy sources. Look,

0:26:30.840 --> 0:26:33.960
<v Speaker 14>we've seen over the last few decades under investment in

0:26:34.000 --> 0:26:36.959
<v Speaker 14>the energy grid, under investment in alternative forms of energy,

0:26:37.160 --> 0:26:38.840
<v Speaker 14>and there are a lot of moves afoot here in

0:26:38.960 --> 0:26:41.400
<v Speaker 14>Washington to address those issues. The biggest one that I've

0:26:41.400 --> 0:26:43.520
<v Speaker 14>seen in recent weeks and that we're supporting, is something

0:26:43.560 --> 0:26:46.800
<v Speaker 14>called the Speed Act, which Congress moved through the House

0:26:46.840 --> 0:26:49.640
<v Speaker 14>on its last day here last week. The Speed Act

0:26:49.920 --> 0:26:53.320
<v Speaker 14>would invoke regulatory reforms to speed up the permitting process

0:26:53.320 --> 0:26:56.040
<v Speaker 14>for construction of new energy projects. It would reduce some

0:26:56.080 --> 0:26:59.520
<v Speaker 14>regulatory burden on those construction projects. It takes years and

0:26:59.640 --> 0:27:02.560
<v Speaker 14>years to put new energy on the grid. Those grid

0:27:02.600 --> 0:27:05.159
<v Speaker 14>modernization efforts take a lot of time and effort and

0:27:05.240 --> 0:27:07.919
<v Speaker 14>financial resource. The one piece that Washington is trying to

0:27:07.920 --> 0:27:10.800
<v Speaker 14>address is reducing the regulatory burden to make sure we

0:27:10.840 --> 0:27:12.920
<v Speaker 14>can make those investments that we need to make. Data

0:27:12.960 --> 0:27:15.560
<v Speaker 14>centers are not new. You mentioned Northern Virginia. They've been

0:27:15.600 --> 0:27:18.280
<v Speaker 14>a data center hub for decades. Two thirds of the

0:27:18.280 --> 0:27:21.119
<v Speaker 14>world's Internet traffic passes through Northern Virginia because it's been

0:27:21.160 --> 0:27:23.320
<v Speaker 14>a traditional hub. But we're seeing the new construction of

0:27:23.359 --> 0:27:26.160
<v Speaker 14>data centerplace new energy demands, and as you noted, policymakers

0:27:26.160 --> 0:27:28.240
<v Speaker 14>are trying to take action and make it move more quickly.

0:27:28.440 --> 0:27:30.800
<v Speaker 3>Well, what about the checks and balances than are needed?

0:27:30.840 --> 0:27:32.960
<v Speaker 3>Because I think very much we've been reporting a lot

0:27:32.960 --> 0:27:36.080
<v Speaker 3>about new players coming on the scene, companies that have

0:27:36.240 --> 0:27:37.800
<v Speaker 3>never built data centers before.

0:27:37.840 --> 0:27:39.720
<v Speaker 2>I mean, boy Oracle itself.

0:27:39.480 --> 0:27:42.680
<v Speaker 3>I mean, one of the biggest data center infrastructure investors

0:27:42.720 --> 0:27:45.240
<v Speaker 3>out there at the moment, has never actually formally built

0:27:45.720 --> 0:27:46.879
<v Speaker 3>a data center of its own.

0:27:47.359 --> 0:27:49.760
<v Speaker 2>So how do get a lot of other ownerships?

0:27:50.000 --> 0:27:52.399
<v Speaker 14>You know, a lot of partnerships are happening. You'll recall

0:27:52.440 --> 0:27:55.840
<v Speaker 14>in January on day two of the Trump administration, project Stargate,

0:27:55.880 --> 0:27:59.840
<v Speaker 14>which Oracle was involved in, also involved SoftBank, open A

0:28:00.480 --> 0:28:03.959
<v Speaker 14>other companies that are more traditional investors in these kind

0:28:04.040 --> 0:28:06.920
<v Speaker 14>of projects. Data centers have been around for a long time,

0:28:06.960 --> 0:28:08.679
<v Speaker 14>but a lot of new companies are getting into it.

0:28:08.720 --> 0:28:11.800
<v Speaker 14>As your graphic and your conversation with Josh showed, only

0:28:11.800 --> 0:28:14.200
<v Speaker 14>about eighteen percent of the current demand for data centers

0:28:14.280 --> 0:28:17.200
<v Speaker 14>is from the tech industry. Financial services other related industries

0:28:17.440 --> 0:28:20.280
<v Speaker 14>are also building data centers, and I think, as you noted,

0:28:20.280 --> 0:28:22.960
<v Speaker 14>there's a lot of attention being paid by consumers to

0:28:23.000 --> 0:28:24.720
<v Speaker 14>this issue. They don't want to see their power bills

0:28:24.760 --> 0:28:27.560
<v Speaker 14>go up as a results of these investments in data centers,

0:28:27.560 --> 0:28:30.760
<v Speaker 14>and that's why we're pursuing these alternative projects. You've seen

0:28:31.080 --> 0:28:34.280
<v Speaker 14>tech companies like Microsoft invest in nuclear power. We're trying

0:28:34.320 --> 0:28:37.560
<v Speaker 14>to move forward with small module reactors that can power

0:28:37.600 --> 0:28:40.040
<v Speaker 14>these data centers. And I do think it's important for

0:28:40.280 --> 0:28:41.800
<v Speaker 14>consumers to understand.

0:28:41.400 --> 0:28:44.000
<v Speaker 12>The value to the US economy, the value to job growth.

0:28:44.000 --> 0:28:46.240
<v Speaker 14>It was this great report that Vanguard put out last

0:28:46.280 --> 0:28:50.000
<v Speaker 14>week that said that job growth in AI affected industries

0:28:50.080 --> 0:28:52.640
<v Speaker 14>is one point seven percent, job growth in non AI

0:28:52.640 --> 0:28:55.840
<v Speaker 14>affected industries zero point eight percents, so twice the job

0:28:55.880 --> 0:28:57.280
<v Speaker 14>growth in AI effected industries.

0:28:57.440 --> 0:28:59.680
<v Speaker 12>This has an enormous economic benefit.

0:29:00.000 --> 0:29:01.800
<v Speaker 14>Need to make sure these data centers are constructed, that

0:29:01.800 --> 0:29:05.240
<v Speaker 14>AI can continue to power the US economy, power wage

0:29:05.240 --> 0:29:08.040
<v Speaker 14>growth and the like. But there are some things that policymakers,

0:29:08.120 --> 0:29:10.320
<v Speaker 14>like the Speed Act can do to help move these

0:29:10.320 --> 0:29:11.000
<v Speaker 14>projects forward.

0:29:11.160 --> 0:29:13.320
<v Speaker 3>Well, many would say that actually that job's growth is

0:29:13.440 --> 0:29:15.440
<v Speaker 3>short term in nature. You need a lot of engineers

0:29:15.440 --> 0:29:17.360
<v Speaker 3>a lot of builders to build them, but actually don't

0:29:17.360 --> 0:29:19.880
<v Speaker 3>mean that many people to manage a data center, which

0:29:20.040 --> 0:29:22.200
<v Speaker 3>once it's up and running, And there's that short term,

0:29:22.240 --> 0:29:24.160
<v Speaker 3>long term perspective as well, when you think about the

0:29:24.160 --> 0:29:27.760
<v Speaker 3>inclimate impact, how much are the big tech companies really

0:29:27.800 --> 0:29:30.560
<v Speaker 3>realizing the responsibility when they're having to bring up all

0:29:30.600 --> 0:29:31.760
<v Speaker 3>this compute and power.

0:29:31.840 --> 0:29:33.840
<v Speaker 2>They're also seeing their emissions go up into the right.

0:29:34.760 --> 0:29:36.720
<v Speaker 14>Well, I think you're right about the long term versus

0:29:36.800 --> 0:29:39.160
<v Speaker 14>the short term. It does create a lot of construction jobs,

0:29:39.200 --> 0:29:41.840
<v Speaker 14>a lot of jobs to build these data centers, and

0:29:41.960 --> 0:29:45.640
<v Speaker 14>there are also jobs created in the data centers themselves.

0:29:45.840 --> 0:29:47.840
<v Speaker 12>But I think the long term effect.

0:29:47.560 --> 0:29:51.040
<v Speaker 14>Is really what does AI mean for improving productivity and

0:29:51.120 --> 0:29:53.680
<v Speaker 14>creating not only the job growth but also the wage growth.

0:29:53.720 --> 0:29:56.480
<v Speaker 14>That Vanguard report that came out last week that I

0:29:56.560 --> 0:30:00.000
<v Speaker 14>mentioned also noted that wage growth in AI related industries

0:30:00.000 --> 0:30:03.400
<v Speaker 14>this was three point eight percent versus point seven percent

0:30:03.480 --> 0:30:07.680
<v Speaker 14>in non AI related industries. That wage growth is enormously important.

0:30:07.720 --> 0:30:10.239
<v Speaker 14>It's what's made possible by the data center. So you're right,

0:30:10.280 --> 0:30:12.920
<v Speaker 14>the data centers themselves create a lot of construction jobs.

0:30:12.960 --> 0:30:15.160
<v Speaker 14>We're going to see that continue to move forward. But

0:30:15.200 --> 0:30:18.920
<v Speaker 14>it's what the data centers do. They're buildings that contain

0:30:19.160 --> 0:30:22.600
<v Speaker 14>the future of technology for the country, and the AI

0:30:22.720 --> 0:30:24.560
<v Speaker 14>servers that are in there and the services that are

0:30:24.600 --> 0:30:28.360
<v Speaker 14>powered for consumers and for productivity for businesses is really

0:30:28.360 --> 0:30:30.000
<v Speaker 14>what we need to be focused on going forward, and

0:30:30.000 --> 0:30:30.720
<v Speaker 14>that's the real.

0:30:30.520 --> 0:30:31.520
<v Speaker 12>Benefit of all of this.

0:30:32.240 --> 0:30:36.080
<v Speaker 3>It's a global theme, and we're seeing servers and the

0:30:36.120 --> 0:30:39.680
<v Speaker 3>GPUs that go inside them being put up everywhere. Now

0:30:39.720 --> 0:30:42.480
<v Speaker 3>there's a story, a really deeply reported story out today

0:30:42.520 --> 0:30:46.320
<v Speaker 3>from Bloomberg around Nvidia and the potential that we are

0:30:46.320 --> 0:30:51.000
<v Speaker 3>seeing chips GPUs from Nvidia get into China's hands, maybe

0:30:51.040 --> 0:30:54.640
<v Speaker 3>through middle parties, And there's some concerns that Megaspeed in particular,

0:30:54.720 --> 0:30:58.040
<v Speaker 3>it's a single, poor based company might have been making

0:30:58.080 --> 0:31:02.400
<v Speaker 3>that able. Jason, how much your companies thinking about diversion

0:31:02.400 --> 0:31:04.160
<v Speaker 3>of chips and how much are they comping down on it?

0:31:05.080 --> 0:31:07.520
<v Speaker 14>Well, I think it's important to remember that in the

0:31:07.640 --> 0:31:10.320
<v Speaker 14>reporting that you're talking about, that in Vidia didn't do

0:31:10.400 --> 0:31:12.800
<v Speaker 14>anything wrong, that there was no actual evidence that any

0:31:12.880 --> 0:31:15.560
<v Speaker 14>chips were diverted. But it's an investigation of one of

0:31:15.640 --> 0:31:19.719
<v Speaker 14>Nvidia's customers, which I think will play out by government.

0:31:19.760 --> 0:31:21.800
<v Speaker 14>But the broader question that you asked is an important one.

0:31:21.800 --> 0:31:25.400
<v Speaker 14>This is the question of national security and economics security

0:31:25.440 --> 0:31:28.320
<v Speaker 14>and where they overlap. The Biden administration took a very

0:31:28.320 --> 0:31:30.480
<v Speaker 14>clear approach to this, which I think was the wrong approach,

0:31:30.560 --> 0:31:32.760
<v Speaker 14>quite frankly, and that was to cut off access to

0:31:32.800 --> 0:31:35.800
<v Speaker 14>the world to US technology. What Trump administration has done

0:31:36.040 --> 0:31:38.840
<v Speaker 14>has recognized that there are enforcement matters that will occasionally

0:31:38.880 --> 0:31:41.520
<v Speaker 14>arise that they need to look into, and they will

0:31:41.560 --> 0:31:44.360
<v Speaker 14>do that. But as a general matter, the US economy

0:31:44.360 --> 0:31:47.400
<v Speaker 14>benefits in the US consumers benefit if the world can

0:31:47.440 --> 0:31:50.840
<v Speaker 14>buy American technology. This is a race against China, and

0:31:50.920 --> 0:31:55.480
<v Speaker 14>cutting off China and denying China access to technology really

0:31:55.520 --> 0:31:58.160
<v Speaker 14>just provides an incentive for China to bypass the US

0:31:58.280 --> 0:32:01.400
<v Speaker 14>market and build its own technology for the world. Denying

0:32:01.760 --> 0:32:04.360
<v Speaker 14>US companies the access to the global market is the

0:32:04.400 --> 0:32:07.480
<v Speaker 14>wrong approach. There are certainly national security questions that need

0:32:07.520 --> 0:32:09.320
<v Speaker 14>to be answered. They are enforcement matters that need to

0:32:09.320 --> 0:32:13.040
<v Speaker 14>be addressed on occasion. But as a broader matter, the

0:32:13.160 --> 0:32:15.720
<v Speaker 14>idea as the Biden administration did, and I think did wrong,

0:32:16.080 --> 0:32:19.800
<v Speaker 14>of cutting off the world's access to American technology, not

0:32:19.880 --> 0:32:21.240
<v Speaker 14>just China, but the rest of the world. That was

0:32:21.280 --> 0:32:24.040
<v Speaker 14>what the Biden administration did. That's the wrong approach. We

0:32:24.080 --> 0:32:26.800
<v Speaker 14>need to make sure that we recognize that the success

0:32:26.880 --> 0:32:31.160
<v Speaker 14>of American economic activity, the success of American technology, is

0:32:31.200 --> 0:32:33.680
<v Speaker 14>dependent on America having access to the rest.

0:32:33.560 --> 0:32:33.960
<v Speaker 1>Of the world.

0:32:34.400 --> 0:32:36.880
<v Speaker 3>Very briefly, what about the approach being taken from federal

0:32:36.960 --> 0:32:40.320
<v Speaker 3>versus state regulation of AI. The actual large language models

0:32:40.760 --> 0:32:43.600
<v Speaker 3>new Act here in New York and in California.

0:32:43.720 --> 0:32:45.760
<v Speaker 2>But are we ever going to getting clarity from a

0:32:45.760 --> 0:32:46.360
<v Speaker 2>federal level.

0:32:47.400 --> 0:32:50.360
<v Speaker 14>Yeah, there were more than one hundred AI laws adopted

0:32:50.400 --> 0:32:52.479
<v Speaker 14>at the state level this year, and there are more

0:32:52.520 --> 0:32:55.840
<v Speaker 14>than one thousand bills pending heading into twenty twenty six. Look,

0:32:55.880 --> 0:33:00.600
<v Speaker 14>technology is best deployed not with fifty different regulatory regimes applicable,

0:33:00.840 --> 0:33:03.320
<v Speaker 14>but one common regime. And this is another thing that's

0:33:03.320 --> 0:33:06.880
<v Speaker 14>on our twenty twenty six roadmap. President Trump just signed

0:33:06.880 --> 0:33:11.240
<v Speaker 14>an executive order tasking the administration with proposing legislation to

0:33:11.320 --> 0:33:16.240
<v Speaker 14>Congress that will replace those fifty potential separate regimes with

0:33:16.400 --> 0:33:18.440
<v Speaker 14>one federal regime. We think that's the right way to

0:33:18.440 --> 0:33:22.480
<v Speaker 14>go because technology doesn't necessarily need to stop at state borders.

0:33:22.840 --> 0:33:25.120
<v Speaker 12>We want to have one uniform.

0:33:24.880 --> 0:33:28.360
<v Speaker 14>National regime rather than a patchwork of fifty regimes. That'll

0:33:28.360 --> 0:33:30.320
<v Speaker 14>be better for the technology, it'll be better for consumers

0:33:30.360 --> 0:33:32.880
<v Speaker 14>and businesses that want to make use of that technology.

0:33:33.000 --> 0:33:35.320
<v Speaker 12>That something we're really helping happens in twenty twenty six.

0:33:35.720 --> 0:33:38.080
<v Speaker 3>Jason Nxman, come join us again in twenty twenty six.

0:33:38.160 --> 0:33:39.800
<v Speaker 2>Until then, have a very happy holiday.

0:33:40.040 --> 0:33:48.760
<v Speaker 3>CEO of Information Technology Industry Council, we thank you. One

0:33:48.760 --> 0:33:51.520
<v Speaker 3>of the biggest questions facing investors in twenty twenty six

0:33:51.560 --> 0:33:54.640
<v Speaker 3>and beyond is whether the billions being spent on AI.

0:33:54.440 --> 0:33:55.840
<v Speaker 2>Infrastructure will pay off.

0:33:56.040 --> 0:33:58.600
<v Speaker 3>Bank of America CEO Brian Monorhans But yesterday with my

0:33:58.600 --> 0:33:59.400
<v Speaker 3>colleague David.

0:33:59.280 --> 0:34:02.120
<v Speaker 2>Weston said it was starting to see the impacts kickin.

0:34:03.600 --> 0:34:05.640
<v Speaker 15>The A investment has been building during the year. It

0:34:05.680 --> 0:34:08.280
<v Speaker 15>is probably a bigger contributor next year in the years beyond,

0:34:08.360 --> 0:34:10.880
<v Speaker 15>and so if you look at the data center build out,

0:34:10.920 --> 0:34:13.000
<v Speaker 15>which is one of the ways that evidence itself, that's

0:34:13.000 --> 0:34:16.040
<v Speaker 15>a big deal. If you look at customer client spending,

0:34:16.160 --> 0:34:19.080
<v Speaker 15>like US spending on AI, that's higher it was last year.

0:34:19.120 --> 0:34:22.879
<v Speaker 15>But frankly, overall spending levels are shifting towards that not

0:34:22.920 --> 0:34:27.720
<v Speaker 15>necessarily growing at a mid single digit rate type of numbers.

0:34:27.760 --> 0:34:30.359
<v Speaker 15>So I think that's part why the reason we feel

0:34:30.360 --> 0:34:33.040
<v Speaker 15>constructive for next year. We think AI spending continues. We

0:34:33.120 --> 0:34:38.759
<v Speaker 15>think there's benefits the American taxpayer from tax rebates, lower

0:34:38.840 --> 0:34:41.600
<v Speaker 15>taxes due to the tax built going through and being

0:34:41.600 --> 0:34:45.120
<v Speaker 15>effective for next year. And we think the expense expensing

0:34:45.120 --> 0:34:48.000
<v Speaker 15>and other bonuses for businesses are good. So all that

0:34:48.080 --> 0:34:50.400
<v Speaker 15>leads to our confidence that we go from basically at

0:34:50.400 --> 0:34:53.960
<v Speaker 15>two percent type of growth letter level this year plus

0:34:54.000 --> 0:34:56.640
<v Speaker 15>or minus up to two point four percent, which is

0:34:56.680 --> 0:34:58.600
<v Speaker 15>all due to that. And AI is kicking and more

0:34:58.600 --> 0:35:00.880
<v Speaker 15>and more, and so it's not only tributable to AI,

0:35:01.000 --> 0:35:03.320
<v Speaker 15>but that's having a marginal impact. That's pretty strong.

0:35:03.440 --> 0:35:05.800
<v Speaker 16>So much of the American economy is supported by the consumer,

0:35:05.840 --> 0:35:08.239
<v Speaker 16>and you at Back of America have a really powerful

0:35:08.400 --> 0:35:11.719
<v Speaker 16>viewpoint into the American consumer. How's the American consumer doing?

0:35:11.760 --> 0:35:13.880
<v Speaker 16>Because it has been very strong. There have been some

0:35:13.960 --> 0:35:15.719
<v Speaker 16>people saying it's starting to slow down.

0:35:15.880 --> 0:35:16.640
<v Speaker 5>You have to step back.

0:35:16.680 --> 0:35:19.919
<v Speaker 15>We look at American consumers, seventy million consumers putting four

0:35:19.920 --> 0:35:22.640
<v Speaker 15>and a half trillion dollars plus into the American economy

0:35:22.640 --> 0:35:25.080
<v Speaker 15>every year, and we've tracked the way that goes in

0:35:25.120 --> 0:35:27.480
<v Speaker 15>the American county for many years. And so in the

0:35:27.560 --> 0:35:30.160
<v Speaker 15>third quarter it was up about five percent of last year.

0:35:30.480 --> 0:35:32.439
<v Speaker 15>As we look at the fourth quarter here so far

0:35:32.480 --> 0:35:34.200
<v Speaker 15>in October November, i'd say it in a four to

0:35:34.200 --> 0:35:36.239
<v Speaker 15>four and a half percent, which is very consistent with

0:35:36.280 --> 0:35:39.480
<v Speaker 15>a very solid growing economy. You know, at the end

0:35:39.520 --> 0:35:42.640
<v Speaker 15>of the day, it's going to work against wage growth

0:35:42.640 --> 0:35:45.640
<v Speaker 15>and we see in the underlying consumers we have wage growth.

0:35:45.680 --> 0:35:48.280
<v Speaker 15>I either paychecks are going up, and so the labor

0:35:48.320 --> 0:35:50.319
<v Speaker 15>markets flattened out a little bit in terms of job

0:35:50.360 --> 0:35:54.120
<v Speaker 15>growth and things like that. It's normalizing in terms of unemployment,

0:35:54.160 --> 0:35:56.520
<v Speaker 15>but you still see underlying wage growth. So the American

0:35:56.560 --> 0:36:00.920
<v Speaker 15>consumer spending a fours percent more November this year versus

0:36:00.920 --> 0:36:04.080
<v Speaker 15>November last year is a very solid backdrop. The credit

0:36:04.120 --> 0:36:07.000
<v Speaker 15>quality American consumer is strong. And then you hear a

0:36:07.040 --> 0:36:10.520
<v Speaker 15>lot about this discussion about different rates of growth among

0:36:10.560 --> 0:36:12.200
<v Speaker 15>different income tursiles or third.

0:36:12.320 --> 0:36:13.280
<v Speaker 5>So we look at the.

0:36:13.360 --> 0:36:16.920
<v Speaker 15>Bottom third, middle third, and top third American income people

0:36:16.960 --> 0:36:18.919
<v Speaker 15>in the Bank of American customer base, we do see

0:36:18.920 --> 0:36:22.240
<v Speaker 15>differences either higher income and middle income or growing faster.

0:36:23.280 --> 0:36:26.960
<v Speaker 15>But even the lower income third is still growing. And

0:36:27.000 --> 0:36:29.439
<v Speaker 15>that's all good. And that means why is that true?

0:36:29.520 --> 0:36:32.640
<v Speaker 15>Companies are employing people, they're paying people. Now, the labor

0:36:32.680 --> 0:36:34.640
<v Speaker 15>market's got a little soft and as we look forward

0:36:34.680 --> 0:36:38.239
<v Speaker 15>to four point five four point six unemployment that is

0:36:39.200 --> 0:36:41.000
<v Speaker 15>gotten worse so to speak. You know, it was the

0:36:41.000 --> 0:36:42.440
<v Speaker 15>beginning year. But frankly, this.

0:36:42.440 --> 0:36:44.000
<v Speaker 5>Goes back to the normalization question.

0:36:44.040 --> 0:36:46.560
<v Speaker 15>If you look at the tenure average unemployment a twenty

0:36:46.640 --> 0:36:48.719
<v Speaker 15>year to thirty year or forty year it's five and

0:36:48.800 --> 0:36:51.040
<v Speaker 15>six percent, you know, as you go back through time,

0:36:51.120 --> 0:36:53.160
<v Speaker 15>and so a four and a half to four point

0:36:53.239 --> 0:36:57.319
<v Speaker 15>six unemployment rate is a very strong relative unemployment rate.

0:36:57.400 --> 0:36:59.520
<v Speaker 15>It's just a lot of years it's been below four

0:36:59.520 --> 0:37:01.319
<v Speaker 15>and a half percent, has actually been in the last

0:37:01.320 --> 0:37:03.560
<v Speaker 15>ten years. So people are very used to numbers now

0:37:03.880 --> 0:37:06.239
<v Speaker 15>which were part of the tightness and labored in the

0:37:06.320 --> 0:37:10.400
<v Speaker 15>twenty seventeen eighteen nineteen era, and you had the pandemic

0:37:10.440 --> 0:37:13.560
<v Speaker 15>and it retightened, and so it's normalizing. But we feel

0:37:13.560 --> 0:37:16.320
<v Speaker 15>good about all that in the consumers in pretty good shape.

0:37:16.600 --> 0:37:17.320
<v Speaker 2>Thankry Macaci.

0:37:17.440 --> 0:37:20.520
<v Speaker 3>Obrian Weynhan speaking to bluemeg's David Weston and coming up

0:37:20.800 --> 0:37:24.239
<v Speaker 3>new details and the decisions behind Tesla's door design. Those

0:37:24.280 --> 0:37:26.839
<v Speaker 3>electric doors are now in a spotlight following at least

0:37:26.920 --> 0:37:29.160
<v Speaker 3>fifteen fatalities or.

0:37:29.120 --> 0:37:47.040
<v Speaker 17>On that next a blue meg Tech, a decision made by.

0:37:46.920 --> 0:37:50.319
<v Speaker 3>Tesla executives a decade ago. It's being linked to fatalities

0:37:50.360 --> 0:37:53.759
<v Speaker 3>in car crashes now. The incidents have prompted increased scrutiny

0:37:53.800 --> 0:37:56.680
<v Speaker 3>of Tesla's electric doors, triggering lawsuits over whether.

0:37:56.560 --> 0:37:59.800
<v Speaker 2>The design can leave passengers trapped. Take a look.

0:38:01.320 --> 0:38:08.360
<v Speaker 18>Tesla for years has built its reputation on being a cool, safe,

0:38:09.400 --> 0:38:11.520
<v Speaker 18>good looking car maker.

0:38:11.920 --> 0:38:14.120
<v Speaker 19>Tesla's engineered to be the safest card in the world,

0:38:14.200 --> 0:38:16.520
<v Speaker 19>and to be fair to them, they have done very

0:38:16.560 --> 0:38:20.480
<v Speaker 19>well on US crash tests. They often get five star ratings.

0:38:21.160 --> 0:38:23.440
<v Speaker 19>Flush door handles were very much part of the aesthetic

0:38:23.880 --> 0:38:26.400
<v Speaker 19>and the engineering. You know, it looks very cool.

0:38:28.280 --> 0:38:29.120
<v Speaker 2>For so many years.

0:38:29.160 --> 0:38:33.239
<v Speaker 18>People who drive Tesla's love their Tesla's. They think their

0:38:33.239 --> 0:38:38.680
<v Speaker 18>cars are safe, but these accidents reveal that there's actually

0:38:38.760 --> 0:38:39.759
<v Speaker 18>something bigger going on.

0:38:41.560 --> 0:38:44.239
<v Speaker 20>When you push this button, says it sagal to the

0:38:44.680 --> 0:38:47.960
<v Speaker 20>twelvel barriers say okay, pop the door opened. Now, if

0:38:47.960 --> 0:38:50.239
<v Speaker 20>you have no TWELEVEO power, the first thing you're going

0:38:50.280 --> 0:38:52.560
<v Speaker 20>to do is push this button over and over again.

0:38:52.760 --> 0:38:54.640
<v Speaker 20>You're going to stop freaking out and realize this thing

0:38:54.719 --> 0:38:58.279
<v Speaker 20>isn't working. In my opinion, this isn't terribly obvious that

0:38:58.320 --> 0:39:00.960
<v Speaker 20>this opens the door. This is not a physical lever.

0:39:01.320 --> 0:39:04.440
<v Speaker 20>This does not pull a cable. The actual way that

0:39:04.480 --> 0:39:09.280
<v Speaker 20>you open a Tesla is you use this unmarked square

0:39:09.400 --> 0:39:11.640
<v Speaker 20>right here. That's how you open it.

0:39:11.680 --> 0:39:13.960
<v Speaker 12>Is that the same on every model of Deeslo.

0:39:14.480 --> 0:39:15.320
<v Speaker 20>It is not the same.

0:39:15.680 --> 0:39:16.760
<v Speaker 12>What if you're in the backseat.

0:39:17.239 --> 0:39:18.920
<v Speaker 20>Now, the backseat is a scary part.

0:39:19.880 --> 0:39:23.520
<v Speaker 18>So in the front seat there by the handle. In

0:39:23.560 --> 0:39:27.360
<v Speaker 18>the back seats, they might be under the rug, or

0:39:27.560 --> 0:39:30.880
<v Speaker 18>behind a speaker grill, or behind the trim on the

0:39:30.920 --> 0:39:34.399
<v Speaker 18>door or I actually found one in a model. Why

0:39:34.480 --> 0:39:37.400
<v Speaker 18>it was in the door pocket under a plastic flap.

0:39:38.400 --> 0:39:40.719
<v Speaker 2>A lot of Tesla owners themselves.

0:39:40.360 --> 0:39:43.120
<v Speaker 18>Don't know that these manual releases exist.

0:39:43.680 --> 0:39:46.040
<v Speaker 19>You can design the best vehicle in the world, but

0:39:46.080 --> 0:39:49.239
<v Speaker 19>you have to also think about what happens to a

0:39:49.320 --> 0:39:54.319
<v Speaker 19>human being after a crash. You are panicking and you're

0:39:54.360 --> 0:39:56.640
<v Speaker 19>going to go to that muscle memory. And for most

0:39:56.640 --> 0:39:59.439
<v Speaker 19>of us, muscle memory is like an old car where

0:39:59.480 --> 0:40:03.760
<v Speaker 19>you just open the door.

0:40:08.760 --> 0:40:11.480
<v Speaker 3>And we now have more reporting on that decision making

0:40:11.520 --> 0:40:15.560
<v Speaker 3>process behind the dual design. According to multiple accounts from sources,

0:40:15.680 --> 0:40:18.560
<v Speaker 3>the electric door handle was demanded by Tesla CEO in

0:40:18.560 --> 0:40:20.480
<v Speaker 3>a musk despite safety warnings.

0:40:20.719 --> 0:40:22.000
<v Speaker 2>Let's get more on this. We've been about.

0:40:22.000 --> 0:40:26.640
<v Speaker 3>BusinessWeek columnist Max Chafkin goes back a decade and it

0:40:26.719 --> 0:40:29.920
<v Speaker 3>really goes back to almost this era of very sleep

0:40:30.000 --> 0:40:31.520
<v Speaker 3>design where less is more.

0:40:31.920 --> 0:40:35.480
<v Speaker 21>Yeah, and this is a design aesthetic that comes from

0:40:35.520 --> 0:40:40.200
<v Speaker 21>Elon Musk. So in certain ways, it's very interesting that

0:40:40.280 --> 0:40:43.840
<v Speaker 21>he was involved in these conversations because this looks like

0:40:44.080 --> 0:40:45.640
<v Speaker 21>a mistake in retrospect, we're.

0:40:45.480 --> 0:40:46.360
<v Speaker 5>Seeing these deaths.

0:40:47.360 --> 0:40:51.760
<v Speaker 21>You know, Tesla's has said it's working on redesigns, there

0:40:51.800 --> 0:40:54.759
<v Speaker 21>are inquiries and so on. It's not surprising that Musk

0:40:54.880 --> 0:40:57.279
<v Speaker 21>was involved in this, because he's involved in sort of

0:40:57.320 --> 0:40:59.880
<v Speaker 21>all aspects of the cars design. On the other hand,

0:41:00.600 --> 0:41:03.759
<v Speaker 21>it's interesting because you do because again this is this

0:41:03.840 --> 0:41:06.320
<v Speaker 21>kind of undercuts some of the claims that the company

0:41:06.320 --> 0:41:08.080
<v Speaker 21>has made about the safety of its vehicles.

0:41:08.560 --> 0:41:11.000
<v Speaker 3>There's this line in the story that basically is what

0:41:11.440 --> 0:41:14.600
<v Speaker 3>Mars said is the best part is no part, right,

0:41:14.600 --> 0:41:18.960
<v Speaker 3>And so this desire for something that was good looking

0:41:19.160 --> 0:41:20.879
<v Speaker 3>and sophisticated and sci fi.

0:41:21.440 --> 0:41:22.919
<v Speaker 2>But it's not just test as I have them.

0:41:23.000 --> 0:41:25.480
<v Speaker 3>Everyone else talked to this designs ecesthetic as well.

0:41:25.560 --> 0:41:28.120
<v Speaker 21>Yeah, this has spread to the entire auto industry. You've

0:41:28.120 --> 0:41:30.080
<v Speaker 21>seen in a lot of higher end cars, many evs,

0:41:30.120 --> 0:41:33.799
<v Speaker 21>as well as some gas cars. It's not only you know,

0:41:33.880 --> 0:41:36.240
<v Speaker 21>sort of attractive from a design point of view, although

0:41:36.280 --> 0:41:37.040
<v Speaker 21>I think people have.

0:41:36.960 --> 0:41:37.759
<v Speaker 2>Different points of view.

0:41:37.800 --> 0:41:41.480
<v Speaker 21>It's also less expensive because fewer parts you know, means

0:41:41.520 --> 0:41:43.239
<v Speaker 21>you know, less cost and that's one of the things

0:41:43.239 --> 0:41:46.279
<v Speaker 21>that Tesla has been very successful at making cars with

0:41:46.480 --> 0:41:49.680
<v Speaker 21>much fewer parts. They have this famously vertically integrated you know,

0:41:49.760 --> 0:41:52.760
<v Speaker 21>manufacturing system. It's help, it's allowed them to cut costs. Obviously,

0:41:52.800 --> 0:41:56.240
<v Speaker 21>you see their their their potential problems when you diverge

0:41:56.239 --> 0:41:58.680
<v Speaker 21>from the way the auto industry has done things for

0:41:58.680 --> 0:41:59.399
<v Speaker 21>a really long time.

0:41:59.719 --> 0:41:59.919
<v Speaker 2>Now.

0:42:00.160 --> 0:42:02.600
<v Speaker 3>Chief designer has been on Bloomberg and said that they're

0:42:02.640 --> 0:42:04.239
<v Speaker 3>looking to change things up.

0:42:04.600 --> 0:42:07.920
<v Speaker 2>How quickly will that get into new models? And what

0:42:08.000 --> 0:42:09.319
<v Speaker 2>about the old models.

0:42:08.960 --> 0:42:11.800
<v Speaker 3>That usually we see an update through software upgrade?

0:42:12.120 --> 0:42:14.680
<v Speaker 21>Right, Well, so Tesla has said, you know, unlike other men,

0:42:15.040 --> 0:42:19.160
<v Speaker 21>unlike other automakers, they're continuously updating their cars. So in theory,

0:42:19.280 --> 0:42:22.080
<v Speaker 21>I suppose they could get this done pretty quickly. Though again,

0:42:22.120 --> 0:42:25.480
<v Speaker 21>this is not as simple as a software update. This

0:42:25.560 --> 0:42:28.120
<v Speaker 21>is going to require tooling, It's going to require factories,

0:42:28.160 --> 0:42:34.000
<v Speaker 21>retrofits potentially in cars. The Stumber story Bloomberg Bran earlier today,

0:42:34.360 --> 0:42:38.080
<v Speaker 21>you know, mentions a similar example around the shifter in

0:42:38.280 --> 0:42:40.440
<v Speaker 21>I believe it was the Model X or the Model Y,

0:42:40.840 --> 0:42:44.000
<v Speaker 21>where they took away the column that you used and

0:42:44.080 --> 0:42:47.160
<v Speaker 21>replaced it with a button that didn't work out. They

0:42:47.200 --> 0:42:50.080
<v Speaker 21>had to retrofit that so you could see something similar here.

0:42:50.160 --> 0:42:51.839
<v Speaker 21>Although this is not something that's going to be taken

0:42:51.840 --> 0:42:52.760
<v Speaker 21>care of overnight.

0:42:53.520 --> 0:42:56.279
<v Speaker 3>Mean Well shares no record highs as it seemed more

0:42:56.320 --> 0:43:00.360
<v Speaker 3>of a robotaxi humanoid robot kind of a company right now. Max,

0:43:00.440 --> 0:43:02.560
<v Speaker 3>great to get your take on what has been a

0:43:02.719 --> 0:43:05.960
<v Speaker 3>theme throughout twenty twenty five. This deep investigation into teslatle

0:43:06.000 --> 0:43:08.879
<v Speaker 3>handles by Bloomberg. Now, that does it for this edition

0:43:08.960 --> 0:43:11.320
<v Speaker 3>a Bloomberg Tech. Don't forget to check out our podcast

0:43:11.640 --> 0:43:14.360
<v Speaker 3>hand on the terminal, as well as online on Apples, Spotify,

0:43:14.600 --> 0:43:17.680
<v Speaker 3>and iHeart from New York, This is Bloomberg