Speaker 1: From the heart of where innovation, money and power CALLI
Speaker 1: in Silicon Valley and beyond. This is Bloomberg Technology with
Speaker 1: Emily Jay. I'm Caroline Hyde in New York in for
Speaker 1: Emily Chang, and this has Breenberg Technology coming up in
Speaker 1: the next hour. You've guessed at Elon Musk. We're covering
Speaker 1: it at once cost Twitter Private, so he's offering forty
Speaker 1: three billion dollars in cash to do so. The board
Speaker 1: has reservations, so will share holders ever have the option
Speaker 1: to vote? We discuss, Plus the sec might have a
Speaker 1: few thoughts on Musk's interest in Twitter. He vented his
Speaker 1: frustrations with the agency, including that now infamous settlement where
Speaker 1: he was forced to step down as Tesla's chair and
Speaker 1: online sneaker marketplace. The Goat Group is moving into team
Speaker 1: sponsorships and making its ferry into Europe with a multi
Speaker 1: year deal the French soccer club Paris Saint jemin Our.
Speaker 1: Exclusive interview with the Goat co founder CEO that's later
Speaker 1: this hour. All across the ins and outs the curiosity
Speaker 1: surrounding Elon Musk's interest in Twitter, we want to unpack
Speaker 1: when that story a little bit more, Starting with Musk's
Speaker 1: surprised Ted talk. It was streamed for the world civilization
Speaker 1: or risk is decreased if Twitter, the more we can
Speaker 1: increase the trust of Twitter as a public platform. And
Speaker 1: so I do think this will be somewhat painful and
Speaker 1: I'm not sure that I will actually be able to
Speaker 1: to acquire it. It was quite the cute loss moment
Speaker 1: for Ted, of course, amid its Canada based event that
Speaker 1: it held today, and suddenly in flying came Elon Musk,
Speaker 1: who had some big thoughts to be had. Sarah talked
Speaker 1: to us about well, just how serious we think in
Speaker 1: nature this bid is? Well Elon Musk, I mean, he says,
Speaker 1: of course he has the financial wherewithal to do this
Speaker 1: if he has ad mentioned, sells some shares or get
Speaker 1: some debt financing. But beyond that, I mean he really
Speaker 1: his heart is in changing the platforms content moderation policy,
Speaker 1: and he spoke a little bit about that at Ted.
Speaker 1: He said that he wants to make sure that Twitter
Speaker 1: doesn't doesn't take down any account unless they absolutely have to,
Speaker 1: and that you know, people are allowed to edit their tweets.
Speaker 1: He has a bunch of things as a power user,
Speaker 1: remember Elon Musk has more than eighty million followers. As
Speaker 1: a power user, he sees some things that he wants
Speaker 1: to fix and sort of make sure that that Twitter
Speaker 1: is is more in line with his free speech ethos.
Speaker 1: But a lot of the things he mentioned, I believe
Speaker 1: if you ask Twitter what they thought of those ideas,
Speaker 1: they would say they're doing them already, such as his
Speaker 1: thought that you know, adhere to the rules in the
Speaker 1: country where Twitter exists. Of course Twitter does that, so
Speaker 1: so I think that, you know, it is sort of
Speaker 1: fuzzy here what exactly he plans to change concretely if
Speaker 1: you were to take over Twitter, and then how it
Speaker 1: would be led. Yeah, and I think that's the key question.
Speaker 1: Talk to us about how we can presume. And we
Speaker 1: understand from certain other reporting that the board isn't particularly
Speaker 1: happy about this, But we were talking, for example, that
Speaker 1: we know Jack Dulcy is still on the board. He
Speaker 1: and Elon Musk actually have a relatively favorable relationship respect
Speaker 1: one another. But this must be incredibly high pressure stakes
Speaker 1: for the new CEO. It is just an incredibly highly
Speaker 1: pressured moment for Prague. Admirable, but you know, he knew
Speaker 1: what he was getting into. Twitter is a company that
Speaker 1: has had a highly volatile time with outside investors with
Speaker 1: its board. This is a company that does not have
Speaker 1: the majority founder control, and so it is vulnerable to
Speaker 1: activist interests, to um CEO change decisions and that nature
Speaker 1: of activity. So I don't think that this is the
Speaker 1: end of the Elon Musk story. I think that we
Speaker 1: we have even heard retail investors get very excited about
Speaker 1: backing him on this plan, and others who are who
Speaker 1: are running away from the idea that Elon Musk should
Speaker 1: shake up Twitter. It's a time of volatility. It was
Speaker 1: supposed to be a week for Twitter employees to be
Speaker 1: heads down focusing on their work, but they are very distracted,
Speaker 1: of course, by everything that's happened here. I'm assuming there
Speaker 1: was talk that there, of course having a meeting to
Speaker 1: discuss just this very bid at about five pm today,
Speaker 1: So we wonder how, of course, that conversation is currently faring.
Speaker 1: Sarah Fry great to catch up with you get a
Speaker 1: little bit more of the double in the detail of
Speaker 1: all of this story as it continues to evolve. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: let's of course now stick with it and get you
Speaker 1: some outside perspective. Two key analysts that cover the company,
Speaker 1: Markmahenya Evicle, Jasmine in Bug of Insider Intelligence, Mark Jasmine,
Speaker 1: great to have some time with you. First and foremost,
Speaker 1: Jasmine just talked to us about you know, what you
Speaker 1: think Elon Musk wants out of this? Is it to
Speaker 1: exercise changes? He says, I mean, what sort of change
Speaker 1: do you think could be a foot as a product perspective? Well,
Speaker 1: first of all, it's it's not totally surprising that this
Speaker 1: is happening. We all expected there to be some turbulent
Speaker 1: times ahead. I mean, Musk is one of Twitter's most
Speaker 1: prolific users, and Twitter is a social platform that thrives
Speaker 1: on big news and uncertainty, and that's something that likely
Speaker 1: appeals to Musk in terms of what he'll change though,
Speaker 1: I think first and foremost Musk would make Twitter a
Speaker 1: free speech haven, probably reversing many of the guardrails that
Speaker 1: Twitter has put forth recently to protect the health of
Speaker 1: the platform it's users and to make advertisers be or
Speaker 1: feel comfortable UM advertising there. He'd probably also likely transform
Speaker 1: it into a subscription only service UM that isn't rely
Speaker 1: on advertising to bring in revenue. I don't think this
Speaker 1: is something that would happen overnight. I don't think Musk
Speaker 1: is happy with the existing subscription model and would want
Speaker 1: to improve it before he does implement these changes. But
Speaker 1: that's likely something that would come if this deal materializes.
Speaker 1: And to that point, Mark, if you see that the
Speaker 1: product could change, would it be a positive change? How
Speaker 1: do you view any of the discussion around the evolution
Speaker 1: of the product and whether and inherently it could add value?
Speaker 1: Because from what I took from the Ted talk, this
Speaker 1: ended up being thought of a sort of a not
Speaker 1: for profit endeavor that he's taking on Caroline, I think
Speaker 1: you just laid jump, but I think you just pointed
Speaker 1: out what's going on here. I don't necessarily hear a
Speaker 1: public market strategy from uh. From Musk, I i hear
Speaker 1: a public good good strategy. I've been on the sidelines
Speaker 1: on Twitter and really skeptical about the asset for a
Speaker 1: couple of years because of the slow pace of product
Speaker 1: innovation on both the user and the advertiser side. I
Speaker 1: don't hear Musk addressing those issues. I think his goals
Speaker 1: are different, and he is public goods goals. In other words,
Speaker 1: he wants to turn it into an absolutist free speech
Speaker 1: PLI form. Hey, he's on the side of the angels
Speaker 1: as far as I'm concerned on that, but that's not
Speaker 1: what shareholders are necessarily focused on. What are you doing
Speaker 1: to improve the tools for advertisers to run performance marketing campaigns?
Speaker 1: On the side, what are you doing to make the
Speaker 1: site more intuitive for more consumers? And I'm not sure
Speaker 1: a subscription business is going to really add a lot.
Speaker 1: If you run through the numbers, and we've run surveys
Speaker 1: on this, it's only about ten percent of Twitter users
Speaker 1: really want to pay for a subscription service, even putting
Speaker 1: up the kind of numbers, you know, two or three
Speaker 1: bucks a month. I mean, maybe you get half a
Speaker 1: billion in revenue right now, this company is generating three
Speaker 1: to four billion. And advertising is a great model and
Speaker 1: it's a trillion dollar tam So that's that's fine for
Speaker 1: Twitter to stick with that. They just need to improve
Speaker 1: the tools. And I don't hear that coming from from
Speaker 1: must but I don't think that's his strategy. I think
Speaker 1: he wants to He's coming out of with a public
Speaker 1: goods strategy, and which is what you pointed out. And
Speaker 1: to that end, Jasmine, that of course isn't music to
Speaker 1: investors is what is music to investors is is growth
Speaker 1: is getting more people on board. I mean, in a
Speaker 1: weird way, this is sort of a wonderful advertising free
Speaker 1: prs some that's currently going on for the use of
Speaker 1: the social media platform. But inherently do you think it
Speaker 1: would spell its demise in terms of users, in terms
Speaker 1: of growth. Well, the interesting thing here is that, you know,
Speaker 1: Musk's comments really come at a time that Twitter has
Speaker 1: had a rebound in AD growth. UM last year, worldwide
Speaker 1: ad revenues were up to nearly four point five billion
Speaker 1: dollars in AD revenues only grew by seven point four percent.
Speaker 1: But I think you're absolutely right. At the very least,
Speaker 1: you know, this will drive a lot of user engagement
Speaker 1: on on Twitter. Controversy trend tends to turn or or
Speaker 1: to have people lean into the platform. At the same time, though,
Speaker 1: that makes a lot of advertisers really really wary. Um.
Speaker 1: Twitter has long been used as a brand advertising platform,
Speaker 1: and the company has done a lot to make it
Speaker 1: brand safe for advertisers. Now, Musk takes a very different
Speaker 1: view on speech on Twitter and is probably going to
Speaker 1: push for less, not more content moderation, and that will
Speaker 1: make risk adverse advertisers really think twice about advertising there. Mark,
Speaker 1: as you said, for the few years you've been on
Speaker 1: the sidelines sort of questioning the overall business model. When
Speaker 1: we saw the changing of the guard Jack Dawsey handing
Speaker 1: over to Prague Agua Wal, did you think that that
Speaker 1: was net positive? How are we feeling about this CEO,
Speaker 1: relatively new in tenure, having to navigate what is a
Speaker 1: complete storm, perfect or not? Caroline, I've viewed that as
Speaker 1: a really strong net neutral. Uh So, you know, look,
Speaker 1: I don't know if we've heard under the new CEO
Speaker 1: a clear, you know, a really clear strategy for the
Speaker 1: company going forward. I'll give him a few months. I
Speaker 1: think we all should. At the same time, he's been
Speaker 1: with the company for I forget at eight or ten years,
Speaker 1: were running product By the way, that's been the problem
Speaker 1: at the company. I want to be respectful here, but
Speaker 1: but you know, it's been a slow pace of innovation,
Speaker 1: and the company has come out and acknowledge that. They
Speaker 1: said that at their last investor days. So I'm not
Speaker 1: sure this was the radical change that Twitter really needed
Speaker 1: in order to you know, speed up the product development cycle.
Speaker 1: Craziest performance marketing tools, and um you create them make
Speaker 1: the service just increasingly more intuitive for users. There's a
Speaker 1: point that Jason's made that's also really important. Some of
Speaker 1: this content moderation has been absolutely necessary. You know a
Speaker 1: few years ago there was just too much vitriol and
Speaker 1: too many of these f bombs on Twitter, so they
Speaker 1: needed to take that out. I think Musk is really
Speaker 1: focusing on the political content moderation. He maybe right about that, uh,
Speaker 1: but but I don't think that. I don't think advertisers
Speaker 1: and I don't think users are really I think most
Speaker 1: users probably aren't all that in the weeds and don't
Speaker 1: really care that much about the political moderation, the lack
Speaker 1: of it, or what's going on there because there's so
Speaker 1: many broad sets of interest. And I'm sorry, I think
Speaker 1: publics is just a small part of Twitter's appeal. So
Speaker 1: again I kept, let look at this and what's going
Speaker 1: to change the growth profile. Yes, we had a good
Speaker 1: last year, but you know, I think this is versus
Speaker 1: the other assets in the space. Snaps had much better
Speaker 1: product innovation and growth, and this company doesn't even touch
Speaker 1: the scale of Google, or or or or Facebook. Okay,
Speaker 1: so one answer question for you both as we had
Speaker 1: towards the end of this conversation. When I'm looking at
Speaker 1: fifty four twenty dollars twenty in terms of taking it private,
Speaker 1: do you think it will go? Will potentially see a
Speaker 1: deal for at least is it worth twenty? Jasmine, you
Speaker 1: know it's so hard to say, and Um, I do
Speaker 1: believe that because of mass character, there is a very
Speaker 1: large chance that you know, this deal does not materialize, um,
Speaker 1: and that he changes his mind. Mark, is it worth up?
Speaker 1: I think he's going to get his offer rejected. I
Speaker 1: think he's gonna sell his stock. I think the stock
Speaker 1: is gonna give up its twenty gains. Is it worth
Speaker 1: under a series of product improvements? Absolutely it is, but
Speaker 1: but we have to see the improvements first. No, I
Speaker 1: don't think right now today it's not worth And I
Speaker 1: don't appreciate his pot analogies. He doesn't have to put
Speaker 1: that as part of his his bid. I just think
Speaker 1: that undermines the credibility a little bit on the offer.
Speaker 1: Not much optimism that Marmahoney have a court, Jasmine Enberg
Speaker 1: Intel insider. It elligence. Really great to have both of
Speaker 1: you one. We thank you welcome back. Well. Twitter wasn't
Speaker 1: the only thing on the mind of Elon Musk today
Speaker 1: and the tag talk. He felt the need to get
Speaker 1: some things off his chest when it came to whether
Speaker 1: he had the money to actually take Tesla private. Now
Speaker 1: we will remember this tweet that kicked it all off
Speaker 1: about four years ago when he said funding was secured,
Speaker 1: which led to, of course the investigation by the SEC.
Speaker 1: To take a listen to Musk's version of events, because
Speaker 1: the SEC knew that funding was secured, but they pursued
Speaker 1: an act of public investigation. Nonetheless, at the time, Tells
Speaker 1: THO was in a precarious financial situation and I was
Speaker 1: told by the banks that if I did not agree
Speaker 1: to settle with the SEC, that they would the banks
Speaker 1: would cease providing working capital, and Tells would go bankrupt immediately.
Speaker 1: So that's like having a gun to your child's head.
Speaker 1: So I was forced to concede the SEC unlawfully, those
Speaker 1: bastards um and and and now they say it makes
Speaker 1: it look like I lied when I did not infect
Speaker 1: line I was. I was forced to admit that allied
Speaker 1: to saved Tess's life. And that's the only reason. Sorry
Speaker 1: for perhaps some of the strong language and that Musk
Speaker 1: was then asked in a very next question if he's
Speaker 1: glad that he didn't actually take Tess a private and
Speaker 1: he admitted, actually, then he was joining me. Now Tom Gorman,
Speaker 1: we want to know, I think not Tom Common, Harvey
Speaker 1: pit prolergies, Chairman Pitt, I don't know what's going on
Speaker 1: with We thought we had someone prior to you, but
Speaker 1: I'm very pleased to say that it is indeed you
Speaker 1: and your express c s when it comes to the
Speaker 1: SEC and Chairman. I'm interested, of course as a man
Speaker 1: who you know, has helped lead the SEC, understand the
Speaker 1: way in which this organization works, and has had to
Speaker 1: suffer some of the abuse it would see perhaps being
Speaker 1: leveled at you from the likes of Elon Musk. How
Speaker 1: do you think about that settlement that was made four
Speaker 1: years ago and the controversy that it stirred in the
Speaker 1: ongoing anger it still seems to be within of course
Speaker 1: Elon Musk himself. I think it's basically Musk's fiction. If
Speaker 1: he didn't want to litigate with the SEC or couldn't
Speaker 1: afford it, all he had to do was say I'm
Speaker 1: not going to litigate, I'll default and let the SEC
Speaker 1: get a judgment. And let's see what a court will order.
Speaker 1: But he spent probably hundreds of thousands of dollars on
Speaker 1: legal fees to execute a settlement that went back and forth.
Speaker 1: Having done that, he should live up by to his agreement.
Speaker 1: He agreed to do it. If he didn't want to
Speaker 1: do it, nobody held a gun to his head. The
Speaker 1: proverbial one who was sort of saying it was in
Speaker 1: a difficult situation financially precarious for Tessa at the time.
Speaker 1: But now as we look forward, you of course were
Speaker 1: the twenty six chairman of the US Security and Exchange
Speaker 1: Committee back in two thousand, wants to tell the two
Speaker 1: thousand and three it's a it's a different beast now,
Speaker 1: but it is a basis currently having to analyze what
Speaker 1: perhaps a taking private of Twitter looks like by one
Speaker 1: Elon Musk, the way in which he has conducted it,
Speaker 1: the the amount that he's stating, again with the more
Speaker 1: important four twenty number in it, is it something yes,
Speaker 1: he see is going to be taking seriously. I think
Speaker 1: it's very hard to take anything Mr Musk does seriously.
Speaker 1: He always has ulterior motives and there are serious questions
Speaker 1: about what he's really about. Um he has said that
Speaker 1: if his offer isn't accepted, he will have to reconsider
Speaker 1: his physician. So he already created an overhang on the market.
Speaker 1: And I think it's a safe bet that Twitter, although
Speaker 1: it has said it will review the offer, will ultimately
Speaker 1: reject it. That's not to say it should reject it,
Speaker 1: but it is to say that they will. They will
Speaker 1: have all sorts of reasons that they concoct to refuse
Speaker 1: to accept Musk's offer, and then the market price of
Speaker 1: the stock will plumb it. So he's playing a game
Speaker 1: with Twitter and with the investors in Twitter, and with
Speaker 1: the market for Twitter securities, and it's it's a game
Speaker 1: or indeed a maneuver or indeed away in which he
Speaker 1: conducts himself through the medium of social media, which is
Speaker 1: fascinating in this current day and age. And we shouldn't
Speaker 1: be shot by given that we had well the head
Speaker 1: of the United States, a president himself who used to
Speaker 1: give an awful lot of news via the social media platform.
Speaker 1: But how do you think an sec can look at
Speaker 1: what is, you know, an announcement of taking a certain
Speaker 1: amount of shares in a company, an announcement of them
Speaker 1: and wanting to do a bid. How how do you
Speaker 1: think SEC regulation can adapt to this new age of
Speaker 1: this news environment. I think it's very difficult because the
Speaker 1: SEC's rules did not really contemplate social media. And while
Speaker 1: there have been very good attempts by the SEC to
Speaker 1: try to modernize their positions, it's still very difficult for them.
Speaker 1: The fact that somebody can simply tweet out to eight
Speaker 1: million people market influencing information is not something the SEC
Speaker 1: has yet come up with a solution for, and I
Speaker 1: think that is going to have to be something it
Speaker 1: takes a very close look at. If you would chairming
Speaker 1: one word of advice right here, right now for the SEC.
Speaker 1: If I were chair, what would I do well? I
Speaker 1: first of all would say former SEC chairs should be
Speaker 1: seen but not heard. That that's one aspect. But I
Speaker 1: would say this, I would be investigating the origins of
Speaker 1: this offer. I would want to investigate why must file
Speaker 1: the wrong form when asked the five percent threshold? And
Speaker 1: I would be looking into a variety of must potential infractions.
Speaker 1: I want to consider whether any of those infractions should
Speaker 1: or could impede the progress of his law. For and
Speaker 1: weather investors have been harmed. I believe he has done
Speaker 1: a lot of serious damage to the way the markets
Speaker 1: are supposed to function. Chairman Harvey Pitt, we thank you
Speaker 1: so much for your expertise, your insights. There will wonder
Speaker 1: if the SEC was listening from New York this Boomberg.
Speaker 1: So aside from the world of Elon Masque, here's some
Speaker 1: other stories that we are following well. Cuts are coming
Speaker 1: a palet in the fitness company is slashing prices for
Speaker 1: its major hardware products. The high end bike class is
Speaker 1: being cut to five dollars, while the treadmill is being
Speaker 1: reduced by a hundred and fifty dollars. The bike is
Speaker 1: being reduced by in fact, meanwhile, Palatine is rising, of course,
Speaker 1: the price of its monthly subscriptions. It's all part of
Speaker 1: a comeback plan aimed at generating more occurring revenue. Yeah,
Speaker 1: welcome back to Blue Bow Technology. I am Caroline Hide
Speaker 1: in New York. Let's get back to, of course the
Speaker 1: top story you know, masks forty three billion dollar bid.
Speaker 1: Let's discuss a little bit like what on the platform
Speaker 1: of Twitter could be changed and what are some of
Speaker 1: the concerns about Elon must perhaps taking over that company.
Speaker 1: During his tag talk today he mentioned the idea of
Speaker 1: free speech and lot essentially that him buying Twitter would
Speaker 1: be the ultimate goal. Take listen, I think it's very
Speaker 1: important for there will be an inclusive arena for free
Speaker 1: speech where oh yeah, so yeah. Um. Twitter has become
Speaker 1: kind of the de facto town square. So it's just
Speaker 1: really important that people have the both the reality and
Speaker 1: the perception that they're able to speak freely within the
Speaker 1: bounds of the law. It's de facto town square. Well,
Speaker 1: we're going to dig into that thought now. I'm joined
Speaker 1: by Jennifer Greigel, Associate Professor of Communications at Syracuse and
Speaker 1: an expert social media including platform governance, content moderation. Means,
Speaker 1: all of means certainly a strong point of Elon Musk. Jennifer,
Speaker 1: your perspective on what Elon really wants to achieve by
Speaker 1: doing this. I mean, I know it put a big
Speaker 1: performance on a ted today, but I decided to make
Speaker 1: a sandwich instead because it was like time better spent.
Speaker 1: I was hungry. Um. But you know, I think, honestly,
Speaker 1: even as seeing in that clip, the last person we
Speaker 1: want owning a town square is Elon Musk, and certainly
Speaker 1: we don't want more big platforms being owned. You know,
Speaker 1: we already see that with Zuckerberg, we see that with others,
Speaker 1: So like this isn't this isn't something that we want
Speaker 1: to see happen at this point. There was, of course,
Speaker 1: while you were making a sandwich and maybe potentially still
Speaker 1: listening in, there was discuss all um, well more than
Speaker 1: two thousand people, up to two thousand people potentially owning
Speaker 1: Twitter with him and perhaps in being some sort of
Speaker 1: non for profit. Would that be a direction of trouble?
Speaker 1: Does it need to be a public health business? It
Speaker 1: really should be owned by more of those who have
Speaker 1: need a real stake in the public square and speech.
Speaker 1: But like retail investors, you know, he is not going
Speaker 1: to take this over with retail investors. He needs institutional investors.
Speaker 1: He needs the big corporates who have these big blocks.
Speaker 1: He uh, he needed people like the Saudi Prince who
Speaker 1: is an early investor, Like he just doesn't have the
Speaker 1: friends to help him take it over at this point.
Speaker 1: And I just don't see the retail investors, even though
Speaker 1: I'm concerned about like public speech and that is kind
Speaker 1: of like represented with those who do retail investing, right,
Speaker 1: but like it's it's it's not going to happen with
Speaker 1: elon that way, So maybe as another plan, But there's
Speaker 1: a lot of people who have a stake in this
Speaker 1: and they want the power associated with it. As you
Speaker 1: mentioned Elliott Management Company. These these people aren't necessarily just
Speaker 1: interested in making money. They care about the social aspect
Speaker 1: is big platforms like Twitter too, as one hopes the
Speaker 1: people who work at Twitter are as well. And it
Speaker 1: must be an incredibly towards time if you're currently the
Speaker 1: CEO or Twitter paragagual we understand is ending the meeting
Speaker 1: with staff over evaluating the offer and Jennifer words of
Speaker 1: advice to change what currently is occurring. And the frustration
Speaker 1: that some people feel in terms of denial of free
Speaker 1: speech or too much free speech. You know, again, we
Speaker 1: have to remember that this this CEO is new. It
Speaker 1: was put in after Elliott and others had exerted some
Speaker 1: influence at the company. Um, he's essentially kind of a
Speaker 1: company guy at this point. He's he's staring in the
Speaker 1: boat for the current investors there. But free speech is
Speaker 1: not ever been the case with a company like Twitter.
Speaker 1: It's a it's a public company, and this is about
Speaker 1: the speech of those who own and run it and
Speaker 1: That's what Elon Musk is interested in. He's interested in, um,
Speaker 1: you know, expanding his agenda, expanding his speech and his
Speaker 1: power and what he wants to use it for. Jennifer.
Speaker 1: Is it a regulatory in tape that we now need?
Speaker 1: Is there involvement that is necessary? You know? I saw
Speaker 1: on the list there the things that were being discussed
Speaker 1: the employees, and nowhere did I see how to regulate
Speaker 1: government right like including our own uh here in the
Speaker 1: United States on these platforms. We still don't talk enough
Speaker 1: about how much the federal government pushes out federal propaganda
Speaker 1: right on these platforms, and that is probably something that
Speaker 1: he doesn't want to draw attention to. So I think
Speaker 1: it's less about like the edit button. Like I said
Speaker 1: last week, this isn't about the typos um. This is
Speaker 1: about being able to maybe exert some control over our
Speaker 1: own government to push back maybe when he uh doesn't
Speaker 1: like what the SEC is doing. You know what if
Speaker 1: he ends up putting a bunch of the federal accounts
Speaker 1: and a quarantine and not boosting them in the algorithm anymore. UM,
Speaker 1: I don't think the government would like that. So there's
Speaker 1: a lot of power here. It's not just about Trump
Speaker 1: coming on the platform or not, Like just because he's
Speaker 1: on doesn't mean he has any reach, like he used
Speaker 1: to write, so they could limit you know, how much
Speaker 1: you know visibility he gets in the algorithm too. And
Speaker 1: this idea of transparency to like, if it's totally transparent,
Speaker 1: it'll be it'll be gained by bad actors, by our
Speaker 1: own government, it'll be gained by the power players. So
Speaker 1: you know, maybe independent audits are needed to help make
Speaker 1: sure this isn't abuse. But you know, these ideas that
Speaker 1: he's floating are just kind of pull him out his
Speaker 1: back pocket. They don't really make a ton of sense.
Speaker 1: Always full provoking, Jennifer, thank you, Associate Professor of Communications
Speaker 1: at Serakis. We continue to discuss Elon Musk's well bid
Speaker 1: for Twitter, and he currently is saying that the Twitter
Speaker 1: board has a liability if acting against shareholder interest The
Speaker 1: Twitter boards duty is breached if they act against shareholder interests.
Speaker 1: He's commenting on a possibility basically the defensive method that
Speaker 1: the Twitter board could use, known as a poison pill,
Speaker 1: to be able to sort of expunge any sort of
Speaker 1: overall control by someone such as Neilon Musks. So currently
Speaker 1: he's using the platform that he so loves and wants
Speaker 1: to take private, saying that if current Twitter board takes
Speaker 1: actions contrary to shareholder interests, they would be breaching their
Speaker 1: fiduciary duty. The liability they would thereby assume would be
Speaker 1: titanic in scale. So of course the board of course
Speaker 1: previously been evaluating the offer. We understand the Twitter CEO
Speaker 1: has been ending a own meeting with its staff saying
Speaker 1: that they are evaluating the offer coming from Elon Musk.
Speaker 1: So we're actually going to weave all of this into
Speaker 1: our crypto report now because we keep on discussing how
Speaker 1: and when the platform could evolve. If Elon Musk in
Speaker 1: anyways intervention could add some more cryptocurrency impact within Twitter's space.
Speaker 1: And indeed, of course take it open source in terms
Speaker 1: of its algorithm and what would that look like. Let's
Speaker 1: bring in our next guest for Well, a really focused take.
Speaker 1: Nada Nagi is with us. Here's, of course, the creator
Speaker 1: of d SO, that's their DIC foundation. It's a layer
Speaker 1: one blockchain built on Well for the purpose of scaling
Speaker 1: decentralized social applications. Nada, your take on an open sourcing
Speaker 1: of the Twitter algorithm, would that in any way make
Speaker 1: it more decentralized in nature? That's a great question, Caroline,
Speaker 1: And actually just take it back a bit. You know, Um,
Speaker 1: it's funny because I actually think that Twitter right now
Speaker 1: is distracting people from a lot of the real innovation
Speaker 1: that's happening in social media. You know. I mean, I'd
Speaker 1: like to say, you know, imagine if the iPhone came
Speaker 1: out and yet all anyone wanted to talk about was
Speaker 1: their BlackBerry. You know, most of people don't even remember
Speaker 1: what a BlackBerry isn't anymore because it's no longer relevant.
Speaker 1: But really, right now Twitter and and centralized social media
Speaker 1: platforms are BlackBerry and do so is the iPhone? Um?
Speaker 1: And why is that? Well, really, it's because it's better
Speaker 1: in every way than centralized social media platforms like Twitter. Um.
Speaker 1: And to go now to your question about open sourcing, Well,
Speaker 1: it's exactly what you said. When you make the post
Speaker 1: on Twitter, a corporation owns it, they control who gets
Speaker 1: to see it, and they make all the money off
Speaker 1: of it, and all of that's completely opaque. Um. In contrast,
Speaker 1: when you make a post ond so it's stored on
Speaker 1: the diesel blockchain and you own it the same way
Speaker 1: you would own your bitcoin, and it goes on to
Speaker 1: a public ledger and shows that the hundreds of apps
Speaker 1: that all have their own approach to moderation, most of
Speaker 1: which are completely open source, and you can actually look
Speaker 1: into how they work. UM and so, you know, right
Speaker 1: now we're talking about which billionaire should control the Internet.
Speaker 1: You know, do we want Elon musk or or the
Speaker 1: Saudi Print, you know, to control Twitter? And the answer is,
Speaker 1: you know, we want nobody to control it. UD. So
Speaker 1: really is the social what what bit coin is to money.
Speaker 1: You can own your content for the first time and
Speaker 1: it's extremely exciting. What was interesting, of course, on the
Speaker 1: currently rather centralized website that is Twitter, you had the
Speaker 1: likes of Sam Banger Free un cause SPF, CEO of
Speaker 1: f t X the crypto Exchange, talking about what he
Speaker 1: thought a decentralized Twitter could look like talk to us
Speaker 1: about it. Is there any way that you can reverse
Speaker 1: engineer this because SPF a sort of talking about tweets
Speaker 1: going on chain, they're encrypted, the sender chooses who has
Speaker 1: access to them, so sort of unifies direct messages and tweets.
Speaker 1: Or you can monetize it by having the protocol charging
Speaker 1: something per message, or you could be about the user
Speaker 1: interface that monetizes as well. Is there any way you
Speaker 1: could reverse engineer Twitter in and of itself? Of course?
Speaker 1: And actually everything that Sam thing has been free described
Speaker 1: in his tweet already exists on dis uh and so really,
Speaker 1: like I said, it's like all anyone's talking about is
Speaker 1: is BlackBerry and get the iPhones right here, So including
Speaker 1: by the way, end to end encrypted group messaging exactly
Speaker 1: as he described it and for the exact purpose, and
Speaker 1: if you want to actually see it for yourself, there
Speaker 1: are many apps listed on dis dot org, but my
Speaker 1: favorite is diamond app dot com. And you can use
Speaker 1: exactly what Sam Bankman Freed describes as the epitome of
Speaker 1: decentralized social media if you go to diamond ap dot com. Uh.
Speaker 1: And again it's all happening right before our eyes. It's
Speaker 1: kind of us gradually then suddenly kind of phenomenon. But
Speaker 1: so already has over one point five million accounts, hundreds
Speaker 1: of applications being built on it, people like Chamat of
Speaker 1: Social Capital, Brian Armstrong Winkle classes. Actually even Sam Bankman
Speaker 1: Freed UH a long time ago made an account on
Speaker 1: a dis app You probably doesn't even remember it right now,
Speaker 1: but I'm sure he's he's looking at it again. So
Speaker 1: a lot of very impactful people are are looking at this,
Speaker 1: and I think it's just a matter of time before
Speaker 1: the heat really gets gets on it. Yeah, So now
Speaker 1: that like, let's talk about this therefore as a bit
Speaker 1: of a if Twitter did embrace in some way Web
Speaker 1: three a little bit more than Web two and aided
Speaker 1: sort of the gateway drug to then jumping onto one
Speaker 1: of the apps built on d So, how would that
Speaker 1: what would that look like? What is the how can
Speaker 1: you help me? Others who are still just very used
Speaker 1: to Web two getting to grips with what really a
Speaker 1: decentralized social platform could look like, because a little it
Speaker 1: looks kind of scary, looks like, you know, or you're
Speaker 1: charging for certain bits the protocol is going to do this,
Speaker 1: it can sound in terribly intimidating, demystify, unintimidated for us. Absolutely.
Speaker 1: So if you go to an app like Diamond app
Speaker 1: dot com, you'll see that it's it's similar to Twitter.
Speaker 1: You can still follow people, you can make posts, but
Speaker 1: the difference is that when you follow someone that's stored
Speaker 1: on a public block chain, and when you make a post,
Speaker 1: it shows up in all the apps built on the
Speaker 1: DCEL block chain. Up there are hundreds, not just that
Speaker 1: one app. So all these different moderation policies that are
Speaker 1: totally open, uh impact your posts and you get much
Speaker 1: more reached. And then because you're on a block chain,
Speaker 1: you also have access to micro transactions, so you can
Speaker 1: tip via a diamond. So right right next to the
Speaker 1: light button is a diamond button where you can get
Speaker 1: anywhere between a penny and hundreds of dollars. Creators have
Speaker 1: earned over forty million dollars on dis apps across the ecosystem. Uh,
Speaker 1: your post can become an n f T automatically because
Speaker 1: it's stored on the blockchain. Uh. And then you know
Speaker 1: you're asking about what is the future of Twitter. Well, interestingly,
Speaker 1: no matter how you slice Elon Musk taking control of
Speaker 1: Twitter or not taking control of the Twitter, Uh, you know,
Speaker 1: d SO is really inevitable because either dis apps outcompete
Speaker 1: Twitter because open platforms out compete closed platforms, or Twitter
Speaker 1: ends up in the long run embracing do SO, storing
Speaker 1: its content on there so it can access things like
Speaker 1: the n f T S micro transactions and UH and
Speaker 1: coins associated with it. So either way, you know, d
Speaker 1: so I think is the future and um, that's why
Speaker 1: I think it's so exciting. And now that just quickly,
Speaker 1: how about content moderation therein absolutely so. This is the
Speaker 1: unintuitive thing that a lot of people take for granted
Speaker 1: is when you have an open platform like to be
Speaker 1: so uh, there's actually a lot more transparency into what
Speaker 1: is going viral and why the reputation of the people
Speaker 1: who are who are posting is it a bot or not?
Speaker 1: You can have the best machine learning researchers in the
Speaker 1: entire world analyzing the fire hose of content identifying bought
Speaker 1: fought farms, bought armies. Uh, and you know, even the
Speaker 1: UH in the long term, moderation can be uh something
Speaker 1: that a lot of people take part in by analyzing
Speaker 1: the chain, producing lists of things that they believe are
Speaker 1: harmful that other private apps get to consume. UH. And
Speaker 1: what's amazing is all of this can be done by
Speaker 1: smaller players with higher fidelity and higher accuracy than the
Speaker 1: platform monopolies today because everyone in the economy has an
Speaker 1: incentive to build a piece that they're really good at.
Speaker 1: So we're really good at building the blockchain. You know,
Speaker 1: we might not be the best of content moderation, but
Speaker 1: the best people in the world can do their part
Speaker 1: and then we can you know, utilize that service from
Speaker 1: them to just creates so much more efficiency around everything
Speaker 1: that's currently being done by kind of a stagnant platform
Speaker 1: monopoly today. Nada is always great to catch up with you.
Speaker 1: Thank you for painting that picture for us now that
Speaker 1: Al Naji, Thank you so much for the creator dies
Speaker 1: and the head of the Diso Foundation. Let's talk soccer now.
Speaker 1: French football club Parasangeman getting into e commerce through a
Speaker 1: deal with Goat Group. This is the online sneaker marketplace,
Speaker 1: moves into team sponsorship and looks to expand, perhaps outside
Speaker 1: the United States and springetting Goats co founder CEO Eddie
Speaker 1: Lou for more on this fascinating deal. Talk to us
Speaker 1: about YPSG. Caroline. Great to be here, so excited. Go
Speaker 1: is continuing its international expansion through a strategic partnership with
Speaker 1: one of the most iconic football clubs and all the
Speaker 1: lands Paras and we are a principal partner, So that
Speaker 1: means the Go brand it's going to be on the
Speaker 1: sleeve of the jerseys all across the arena, and of
Speaker 1: course in the Goat out there's going to be a
Speaker 1: dedicated PSG experience with exclusive drops, content, media and more.
Speaker 1: Talk to us about those exclusive products, because it's so
Speaker 1: interesting to go onto the GOAT website. I see, like
Speaker 1: Lana Messi, now we go on his sleeve. But you're
Speaker 1: getting into the world of new products, apparel and more,
Speaker 1: not more, not so much. You know, you're a sneaker
Speaker 1: exchange and marketplace, but what other offerings offerings are you
Speaker 1: looking at well? With PSG? I mean, the great thing
Speaker 1: about that is that they're not just a football club.
Speaker 1: They're building a brand, a lifestyle and fashion brand, and
Speaker 1: that's similar to what Goat is doing. We're not just
Speaker 1: the sneaker marketplace anymore. We've built our own fashion and
Speaker 1: lifestyle brand full of accessories, fashion, sneakers and more. And
Speaker 1: you know, when looking at the PSG partnership was just
Speaker 1: so natural because our visions for very much a line
Speaker 1: and we were when we were thinking about expanding an
Speaker 1: increasing brand awareness through Europe and beyond, they were just
Speaker 1: such a natural partner for us. What about Lana Messi,
Speaker 1: What about some of the players, How do you team
Speaker 1: up with some of these sports stars and the brand
Speaker 1: of them as well. Well. It's great that they have
Speaker 1: some of the goats of football. I mean we're talking
Speaker 1: about Messi, embob A, neymar et cetera, and aligning the
Speaker 1: goats of football with Goat the brand. There's gonna be
Speaker 1: so many fun activations and experiences with both the club
Speaker 1: and the players, So stay tuned for that, Carolina, what
Speaker 1: about you know overall Europe as a marketplace to expand in,
Speaker 1: how big is the sneaker resale market there? Well, Goat
Speaker 1: started in and now we've become the leading and most
Speaker 1: trusted sneaker and fashion marketplace in the United States. But
Speaker 1: we've seen that fashion, just like football, it's not just
Speaker 1: a domestic market. It's global and we're seeing so much
Speaker 1: growth in Europe and beyond. So for us, we know
Speaker 1: that we're great in the US, we want to continue
Speaker 1: to provide that experience for the rest of the world,
Speaker 1: and so this partnership is key in helping us expand
Speaker 1: to Europe. And I love that you just called it football. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: I'm talking to us about sort of the world of
Speaker 1: Darrive and se it. I feel like sports people all
Speaker 1: over the US are verily embracing n f T S
Speaker 1: and the like. Is that going to be something that
Speaker 1: you sort of look at in your space n f
Speaker 1: T S. Of course, there is something that they're working
Speaker 1: out for us. We know that there's still so much
Speaker 1: value in bringing products to consumers in the real world
Speaker 1: and that's what we're focused on now. But we're always
Speaker 1: keeping an eye on it because the digital experience will
Speaker 1: be something in the future. Eddie, I wish we had
Speaker 1: more time. It's fantastic to catch up with your congratulations.
Speaker 1: Interesting deal. Tell us how that expansion into Europe goes
Speaker 1: Eddie lou Goat Group co founder CEO, some time with
Speaker 1: him and an exclusive conversation. Meanwhile, that does it for
Speaker 1: this addition of blue Bag technology. Don't forget to check
Speaker 1: out our new podcast. You can find it on the
Speaker 1: terminal as well as online on Apple, Spotify, iHeart, wherever
Speaker 1: you choose to get your fixed