Speaker 1: From the heart of where innovation, money and power COLLI
Speaker 1: in Silicon Valley and beyond. This is Bloomberg Technology with
Speaker 1: Emily Jay. I'm Emily Jack in San Francisco, and this
Speaker 1: is Bloomberg Technology. Coming up in the next hour, Tech Tenacity, stocks,
Speaker 1: and the week on a high with tech Shares helping
Speaker 1: Snap a seven week losing streak and yes that Snap
Speaker 1: pun is intended, plus lessons learned. I speak with the
Speaker 1: CEO of Solar Winds two years after that nightmare hack
Speaker 1: that started with Russia and blindsided Key customers and making
Speaker 1: money in the metaverse. We'll sit down with Roadblocks CEO
Speaker 1: David Bazuki to talk about the weird, the wonderful, and
Speaker 1: the lucrative as the form works to build a digital
Speaker 1: but civil community for kids around the world. We will
Speaker 1: get to all of that in a moment, but stocks
Speaker 1: climbing first. After another volatile day in week, tech stocks
Speaker 1: in particular bouncing back. Let's stick with the markets and
Speaker 1: the moves in tech this week and joining me from
Speaker 1: San Francisco, Mark Leman, CEO at j MP Securities, Mark,
Speaker 1: thank you so much for joining us. You know I
Speaker 1: asked at the same question, how are you making sense
Speaker 1: of all this week. You know, first the bottom falling
Speaker 1: out from under us, and now now suddenly investors are
Speaker 1: okay with it. Well, i'd say kind of yes. So
Speaker 1: a week and as that claimed a thousand points off
Speaker 1: the bottom at about three o'clock East coast time last
Speaker 1: Friday to today, it's almost a thousand point rally, and
Speaker 1: that's historic, um. But it shows you the amount of
Speaker 1: pessimism that was in the market. And look what's happened
Speaker 1: in a week. Okay, we like we've heard rates has
Speaker 1: stayed relatively tepid two or on the tenure, We've rallied massively,
Speaker 1: and we've actually had some earnings revisions that have been
Speaker 1: somewhat negative. But the market I think has seen some
Speaker 1: of those and said, you know, they're not as bad
Speaker 1: as I once would have thought. We've seen the consumers
Speaker 1: slow down a little bit, which is also a positive
Speaker 1: sign that this runaway inflation may be tempering a little bit.
Speaker 1: And I think most importantly, I think companies are getting
Speaker 1: more realistic and the market is getting more realistic. But
Speaker 1: the public market and the private market, and that is
Speaker 1: I think amplify about what we saw some m and
Speaker 1: A this week, So you take all those factors. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm not going to predict the other thousand point rally
Speaker 1: in the NAZAC this week, but I think we came
Speaker 1: so far so fast that we needed a little bit
Speaker 1: of some good news, and this week even some of
Speaker 1: the more moderate news was perceived as good news. That's
Speaker 1: a great sign. So let's go back to them. That
Speaker 1: snap pun is the snap case isolated to SNAP or
Speaker 1: two maybe social media stocks, and not potentially such an
Speaker 1: indication of such a broader narrative. Listen, I think Snaps
Speaker 1: over the zealousness at the last quarter is reaping some
Speaker 1: of the downside that we saw this week. So they
Speaker 1: put out a terrific fourth quarter, if you remember, and
Speaker 1: the stock zoomed up no pun intended to a much
Speaker 1: higher lofty level after that. And then when we saw
Speaker 1: this tempered note about the rest of the year, stock
Speaker 1: got punished greatly. And I think some of that quote
Speaker 1: unquote a rational exuberance from before they're paying for You
Speaker 1: also see some people like Workdre today which did not
Speaker 1: put out a particularly good report. The stock was down five,
Speaker 1: but that on a on a day like last week
Speaker 1: would have been down a lot more and when you
Speaker 1: see companies putting out more tepid guidance and the stocks
Speaker 1: really not getting creamed, I think that's a sign that
Speaker 1: investors are getting comfortable with multiples and maybe the worst
Speaker 1: is behind them, and that again is a good sign.
Speaker 1: The fastest way for things to go up is for
Speaker 1: things to stop going down, and I think we've seen
Speaker 1: some of that this week. And I think this is
Speaker 1: a really interesting point because again the consumer is slowing down,
Speaker 1: the high end consumer still has ample capital, and I
Speaker 1: think the market reflects that. We also saw one of
Speaker 1: the biggest tech deals in history sealed this week Broadcom
Speaker 1: and v n where. Of course, you know we've seen
Speaker 1: some big deals in the last few months, Microsoft Activision,
Speaker 1: of course, this potential deal Elon Musk buying Twitter. Are
Speaker 1: these unique one offs or are we going to see
Speaker 1: a trend in M and A. I think you'll see more,
Speaker 1: and I'll tell you why. Um companies obviously have balance
Speaker 1: sheets that are fortified. So you're seeing big tech have
Speaker 1: balance sheets that are fortified. You're seeing capital on the
Speaker 1: sidelines for interesting deals. It's ready to get deployed for this.
Speaker 1: So when you announce it to the market, the stocks
Speaker 1: obviously are working because they see the combination of those
Speaker 1: two companies working. Now we see some other things in
Speaker 1: the on the name m and A World, or to
Speaker 1: go private world with Twitter that are different. But when
Speaker 1: you see that kind of activity that we've seen earlier
Speaker 1: this year we saw with Tomo Bravo taking company private,
Speaker 1: those are signs that there's lots of capital on the sidelines.
Speaker 1: Evaluations are getting to a point where private equity really
Speaker 1: likes them, or public currency is enough where they want
Speaker 1: to use them again. That's another sign that there's lots
Speaker 1: of capital out there, and at these prices, buyers are
Speaker 1: going to show up. So if you're looking at the
Speaker 1: numbers right now, what do you think are the biggest risks?
Speaker 1: What are the names you see as most risky, What
Speaker 1: do you think could potentially behave in profitless tech continues
Speaker 1: to be a place that people are worried about. And
Speaker 1: I think companies, every boardroom, every venture capitalist, every private
Speaker 1: equity person has told their companies, show me your path
Speaker 1: to profitability and show it to me now. And I
Speaker 1: think that's really showing up in the boardrooms and showing
Speaker 1: up in investor's psyches, and frankly, showing up in private
Speaker 1: evaluations too. They were in denial because when you stay private,
Speaker 1: you can tell anybody what do you think you're worth it.
Speaker 1: You can tell what the last round you raised, and
Speaker 1: that probably was inaccurate if you did it at some point.
Speaker 1: So profitless tech with no path of profitability is worrisome.
Speaker 1: What I would point towards some of the darlings of
Speaker 1: last year that are not the darlings of this year.
Speaker 1: So I point to some of the I p O
Speaker 1: s last year is a company called legal Zoom that
Speaker 1: we were part of, trading at three times revenue. There's
Speaker 1: a smaller company in Israeli company. Israeli companies were the
Speaker 1: darling of the market last year called Walkbee two times revenues,
Speaker 1: almost market caps in cash. A big one. Airbnb fallen
Speaker 1: greatly from the April hives. And just because it's falling
Speaker 1: doesn't mean it's cheap. Okay, Well, we will see what
Speaker 1: the next week brings. At least after a holiday weekend
Speaker 1: here in the United States, we'll be watching crypto trading
Speaker 1: through the weekend. JMP Security CEO Mark Lehman. Mark, great
Speaker 1: to have you back with us here. The name Solar
Speaker 1: Winds and many of us might immediately think back to
Speaker 1: that major cyber it's hack that originated from Russia. Hackers
Speaker 1: gained access via a software update to major companies like Microsoft, Intel,
Speaker 1: and Cisco. Well, nearly two years later, the company is
Speaker 1: sharing more information about how it's gotten past that massive
Speaker 1: breach and its new approach to preventing it from ever
Speaker 1: happening again. I'm joined now by solar Wins President and
Speaker 1: CEO Sedaka Rama Krishna. Saka, thank you so much for
Speaker 1: joining us. So solar Wins doesn't actually sell cybersecurity project products,
Speaker 1: but I t management software to hundreds of thousands of customers.
Speaker 1: How is your new approach different from the approach you
Speaker 1: had two years ago? As fall Emily, thank you for
Speaker 1: having me here. You are right. We selling software and
Speaker 1: support and serve customers, in fact, more than three hundred
Speaker 1: thousands of them worldwide. As we came out of the
Speaker 1: cyber incident and learned some key lessons in terms of
Speaker 1: how to improve how soft ware is built not only
Speaker 1: today but into the future. Hopefully. There are some critical
Speaker 1: things that we've done in the context of what I
Speaker 1: call secure by Design. One of the fundamental aspects of
Speaker 1: that is how we actually build software with the key
Speaker 1: goal of reducing the threat surface and reducing the threat
Speaker 1: window for attackers to attack supply chains involved in building software.
Speaker 1: What do you mean by that? So every software product,
Speaker 1: such as the ones from US or Microsoft or actor
Speaker 1: who never involves the compilation of a large number of files. Uh,
Speaker 1: and many times we use third party software in the
Speaker 1: building of our product. So in essence, similar to hardware
Speaker 1: supply chains where you build let's call it a television
Speaker 1: with parts from various suppliers, you're doing the same thing
Speaker 1: with software as well, and so at every point there
Speaker 1: is a potential for security threats and hacks. And so
Speaker 1: what we've done is build a unique model of creating
Speaker 1: software which involves parallel build systems. So think of it
Speaker 1: as the same software is built in three different locations.
Speaker 1: I may not exactly know where they are being built,
Speaker 1: but at the end of the process we check the
Speaker 1: integrity across them such that an attack if they have
Speaker 1: to attack, will have to know these locations and attack
Speaker 1: them exactly consistently, making it more painful for them to attack. So,
Speaker 1: aside from building the software in different locations, a year
Speaker 1: and a half later, what would you do differently. Now
Speaker 1: when you look back terms of I wouldn't call them
Speaker 1: so much doing differently because the security posture and the
Speaker 1: security investments that Sullivan's may commensurate to the industry, but
Speaker 1: maybe I call it from my industry standpoint. Some key reinforcements.
Speaker 1: First I would say is you cannot do it alone. Uh,
Speaker 1: security breaches. No matter how big and how resourceful you are.
Speaker 1: You could be a Microsoft or an Octa or a Sullivance,
Speaker 1: you are not immune to it. So the notion of
Speaker 1: public and private partnerships are incredibly important and incredibly critical.
Speaker 1: So that is an area where I've been working on
Speaker 1: and others have been working on as well. We see progress,
Speaker 1: but we are not quite where we need to be.
Speaker 1: The second pieces, transparency is extremely important because as sooner
Speaker 1: we identify and report these issues, the sooner we inoculate,
Speaker 1: the less the damage. And oftentimes people tend to not
Speaker 1: come out in the fear of victim shaming or lawyer
Speaker 1: up and not address the real issues in war. And
Speaker 1: the other piece I would say, in addition to collaboration
Speaker 1: is humility because it is not a letter of when
Speaker 1: or if I should say, but when so let's talk
Speaker 1: about the when I'm curious if there have been any
Speaker 1: updates to the actual investigation. Is there any new information
Speaker 1: about when those hackers first breached solar winds? We we
Speaker 1: largely concluded our investigation last year and reported our findings,
Speaker 1: so there has been no new findings since then. It's
Speaker 1: all been focused on redeveloping our focus on how to
Speaker 1: build software in the best possible way and engaging with
Speaker 1: our customers and partners and employees worldwide. But there are
Speaker 1: still plenty of things that aren't known about this incident
Speaker 1: or understood. There really hasn't been a public accounting of
Speaker 1: what happened by the government, for example, and by most
Speaker 1: of those in the private sector. What questions should we
Speaker 1: be asking of government and industry officials about it? The
Speaker 1: key question to really ask is what key improvements in
Speaker 1: information sharing between public and private have been created and proliferated.
Speaker 1: That is still a very asymmetric relationship at this point
Speaker 1: in time. As I pledged, we are driving a greater
Speaker 1: level of trans spendency and collaboration with the government of parties.
Speaker 1: The reciprocation has been there, but I would also say
Speaker 1: that industry wide, it is extremely inconsistent, So I'll give
Speaker 1: you one statistic here. On an industry survey, more than
Speaker 1: nine percent of respondents said that public private relationships are
Speaker 1: important to addressing security issues. However, about said that these
Speaker 1: are effective today. So there's a wide disparity between what
Speaker 1: is perceived need versus what is actually there today. So
Speaker 1: Dr Rama Krishna, CEO of Solar Winds, thank you for
Speaker 1: sharing some of those lessons you learned with us. Coming up,
Speaker 1: if your kids are playing video games, they are likely
Speaker 1: on Roadblocks. My conversation with Roadblocks CEO David Bozuki on
Speaker 1: Studio one Point up next us it's the online platform
Speaker 1: kids are going gaga for. I spoke with Roadblocks CEO
Speaker 1: and co founder David Bozuki about the ind out of
Speaker 1: building a digital community that is safe and civil while
Speaker 1: it's gloring new ways to make money and scale a
Speaker 1: future metaverse on the latest Studio one Point out, Take
Speaker 1: a listen and um. It goes back to how exciting
Speaker 1: it is to have a company in this space that
Speaker 1: I think is ultimately got so many years of growth
Speaker 1: to it and is a new category following other types
Speaker 1: of technologies. There's still so much innovation to be done,
Speaker 1: and there's so much invention to be done in this
Speaker 1: category that it's mind boggling. The critics think that metaverse
Speaker 1: the term is just marketing. How do you respond to that?
Speaker 1: This type of technology is much more difficult than the
Speaker 1: net or the web, which was another huge thing that
Speaker 1: we saw predicted and has started to come. But but
Speaker 1: I think we're seeing early signs of it. When Mark
Speaker 1: Zuckerberg announced his plan to own the metaverse and change
Speaker 1: Facebook's name to meta as if it was something new,
Speaker 1: did that kind of bother you? Um? No, of course not.
Speaker 1: It's really hard to predict in five to ten or
Speaker 1: twenty years, what are the companies that really figure it out.
Speaker 1: And there's so many elements of innovation that are needed. Um,
Speaker 1: having a U g C community one of our strengths.
Speaker 1: We think that's like a huge starting point for us.
Speaker 1: But we're early in our quest for innovation here. Roadblocks
Speaker 1: has built a huge business selling road bucks. Does this
Speaker 1: evolve into a much bigger marketplace? It was this revelation
Speaker 1: that people would ultimately make a living on platforms like
Speaker 1: this that started this digital currency is very Roadblocks centric
Speaker 1: in netwere a systems company or utility so it has
Speaker 1: formed this robust economy. It's allowed us to keep robox.
Speaker 1: You know, roadblox is free for the vast majority. Would
Speaker 1: Roadblocks have a partner with some of these other companies
Speaker 1: working on the metaverse, whether it is Meta or Unity
Speaker 1: or Epic or Microsoft the core technology of you know,
Speaker 1: how are we going to ultimately support fifty people in
Speaker 1: real time on a phone and going to a concert
Speaker 1: together and waving your friends. I think that's going to
Speaker 1: be a lot of engineering work that each company is
Speaker 1: going to be working on, and it's going to be
Speaker 1: really hard. As far as ultimately can an avatar go
Speaker 1: from one place to another, I think they'll be lightweight
Speaker 1: ways of starting to think about that. So what role
Speaker 1: do you think Apple and Android should play in the
Speaker 1: metaphors and what their policies need to change to really
Speaker 1: support this vision? And the biggest thing we would take
Speaker 1: advantage of if it were to happen is a change
Speaker 1: in those store fees. We we stay out of it.
Speaker 1: We let Google and Apple kind of run their businesses.
Speaker 1: But when we think about more and more developers making
Speaker 1: a living on platforms like us and having to build stuff,
Speaker 1: if those store fees were to change, we would move
Speaker 1: most of that money back to our developers. Your goal
Speaker 1: is to build an entirely new category of human co experience,
Speaker 1: the next phase of human interaction. Yeah, how do you
Speaker 1: moderate that on such a massive scale? Are you doing
Speaker 1: a good enough job? In the third week when we
Speaker 1: were live, you can go imagine Eric and myself back
Speaker 1: in our small office. Eric and I said, oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: safety and civilities, We're going to have to do it.
Speaker 1: We had maybe a hundred people at the time chatting
Speaker 1: on roadblocks. We saw a few not that agreed just
Speaker 1: by early signs, and we just made the call. This
Speaker 1: is going to be the foundation of what we do
Speaker 1: in the early years of Roadblocks. As we've gotten bigger,
Speaker 1: we've gotten to the point where there's thousands of moderators.
Speaker 1: Every image that goes on our platform gets human reviewed.
Speaker 1: We filter texts very stringently, especially for thirteen and under players.
Speaker 1: We use a lot of AI and mL to help
Speaker 1: do this. We're always getting better, um, but it is
Speaker 1: a key thing for us. How optimistic are you about
Speaker 1: AI and tech being able to do that? I'm really
Speaker 1: actually opt mystic. We would never compare to the real
Speaker 1: world because our standards are so much more stringent. But
Speaker 1: I do believe this will just keep getting better and better,
Speaker 1: and I think over time it will get to the
Speaker 1: point where if a six year old is on our platform,
Speaker 1: it's literally as if the parents wanted to be there
Speaker 1: with them watching everything. We'll be able to offer that
Speaker 1: type of thing. Now, a lot of parents are terrified.
Speaker 1: They're terrified of a future metaverse. They don't understand the
Speaker 1: parental controls. Do you understand that feeling? We do. We
Speaker 1: actually have to. I think it creates a higher standard
Speaker 1: for us, because I think we can't assume every parent
Speaker 1: is going to get that involved with their kids. There
Speaker 1: have been some serious content challenges. You know, stories about
Speaker 1: roadblocks being a playground for virtual fascists. Well, there was
Speaker 1: just this story about Kim Kardashian's own child seeing an
Speaker 1: ad for a game that claimed to have a sex
Speaker 1: tape of her. What happened there that was very unfortunate.
Speaker 1: There was a text blurb very shortly that very very
Speaker 1: few people saw. We took the place down, We moderated
Speaker 1: that user, and they're off our platform. It was now
Speaker 1: the video was never on our platform. There was no
Speaker 1: imagery on our platform. It was a very short mention,
Speaker 1: but very unfortunate and um, well, you know, our vision
Speaker 1: is to be the most civil place for everyone. You
Speaker 1: can check out the full studio one point at Bloomberg
Speaker 1: dot com or listen to the podcast and later the
Speaker 1: company that is partnering with Row Blocks on a brand
Speaker 1: new f D A approved video game to help kids
Speaker 1: with a d h D that's up later in the show,
Speaker 1: and the pay equity start up backed by Steph Curry.
Speaker 1: Welcome back to Bloomberg Technology. I'm Emily checking in San Francisco.
Speaker 1: Let's turn out to what is becoming one of the
Speaker 1: biggest stories of the year, and that is Elon Musk's
Speaker 1: bid to buy Twitter shares of the company, rising for
Speaker 1: the third day in a row. Now it's best streak
Speaker 1: in a month. Twitter chaining at about forty dollars to share,
Speaker 1: closing that gap, getting a bit closer to that fifty
Speaker 1: four and twenty cents per share offer from Elon Musk.
Speaker 1: But in another twist, news that regulators are looking into
Speaker 1: how Musk said about building his steak in the company,
Speaker 1: joining me to unpack it all. Who else but our
Speaker 1: very own ed Ludlow so ed what exactly is the
Speaker 1: SEC looking at now? So they released the letter on Friday,
Speaker 1: dated April four, and that's important because April fourth is
Speaker 1: the date that Elon Musk first disclosed his nine points
Speaker 1: you percent stating the company and they're asking him for information.
Speaker 1: Why did you use this particular filing type. The filing
Speaker 1: type he used was for passive investors, but he had
Speaker 1: more than five cents steak and as we now know,
Speaker 1: he had activist intentions. He went on to put a
Speaker 1: bit in for the company. And there was also a timing.
Speaker 1: You know, when you build up a steak, you have
Speaker 1: a window to disclose it, and they asked him why
Speaker 1: he disclosed it outside or after that window. But the
Speaker 1: reason we care this is serious. This is the SEC
Speaker 1: taking a real look at this deal and perhaps the
Speaker 1: inference being they could look at it even closer. Right,
Speaker 1: So what could the consequences be or the fall outbeat? Well, simply,
Speaker 1: did Elon Musk breach any securities laws? We don't know,
Speaker 1: but that is what the question is at least. So
Speaker 1: you were at the a g M earlier this week
Speaker 1: when Dan Durban Silver Lake board member doesn't get the
Speaker 1: votes to stay on the board, he resigns, but Twitter's
Speaker 1: board doesn't accept his resignation. Correct, so he's still on
Speaker 1: the board. And this is, by the way, someone who
Speaker 1: is an ally or known as an ally who masks.
Speaker 1: So there was a vote whether he should stay on
Speaker 1: the board or not. He didn't receive enough votes. Some
Speaker 1: of the funds that voted against it, for example, said
Speaker 1: he's on too many boards. He's on like six public
Speaker 1: company boards. That's too many. So Twitter cited their proxy
Speaker 1: by laws of theme, and he's saying, we don't accept
Speaker 1: his resignation from the board. We're keeping him on the board.
Speaker 1: They exercise the right to do it. And it's as simple.
Speaker 1: So what's the point of his older's voting. I don't
Speaker 1: think it's a great question. It's a good corporate governance question.
Speaker 1: But they basically said the Twitter's management and the rest
Speaker 1: of the board he has exceptional history skills, he adds
Speaker 1: incredible value, he understands the industry. He's an asset. We
Speaker 1: would like him sell on the board. That's the matter.
Speaker 1: So shares are up, of course, the broader markets are up.
Speaker 1: Is this also confidence that the deals will happen because
Speaker 1: we've seen Elon Musk makes some moves this week to
Speaker 1: restructure the deal. So when we saw the big sell
Speaker 1: off in tech Stox, Twitter didn't really follow suit, and
Speaker 1: so the the idea was that why would it. It's
Speaker 1: kind of up for purchase. The deal has gaining a
Speaker 1: bit of confidence right that. We call it the spread,
Speaker 1: the gap between where the shares are currently trading and
Speaker 1: the offer price four dollar twenty cents. I don't know
Speaker 1: if we have a chart on that we can show
Speaker 1: very quickly. But the other big news this week was
Speaker 1: Elon Musk took out the margin loan component component basically
Speaker 1: debt to on the deal that's secured against some of
Speaker 1: his test assault. That's now gone and it's a pretty
Speaker 1: much majority equity financing deal. He still has to ask others,
Speaker 1: including Jack Ducy, if they'll participate, maybe rollover existing shares,
Speaker 1: But I think all told, in a crazy week, we're
Speaker 1: moving towards a place where the deal could happen. We'll see,
Speaker 1: all right, Aboma, thank you well, Instacart, PayPal, Microsoft all
Speaker 1: announced this week that they are cutting staff or slowing hiring.
Speaker 1: It is part of a larger trend across tech as
Speaker 1: companies prepare for a possibly prolonged downturn. I want to
Speaker 1: talk about all this and more with Maria Colacuccio. She
Speaker 1: is the CEO of Cindio, which helps companies not only identify,
Speaker 1: but address and resolve pay disparities. Marie, it's great to
Speaker 1: have you back here on the show. So you have
Speaker 1: a really unique window into how companies are navigating some
Speaker 1: major cultural shifts, the move to work from home, the
Speaker 1: great resignation, now this downturn, and you know, perhaps some
Speaker 1: rethinking of the potential to resign and how exactly our
Speaker 1: companies navigating this. Yeah, and thanks for having me. It's
Speaker 1: a great question. So I think we're seeing a really
Speaker 1: interesting trend start to unfold here. And if you just
Speaker 1: look at what you reported on today around Microsoft, you
Speaker 1: see it very clearly. So Number one, Microsoft just to
Speaker 1: x their comp in this initiative to increase retention and
Speaker 1: keep their workers in seat. And on the second, they
Speaker 1: also just announced that they're slowing down the rate of hiring.
Speaker 1: So there's this really interesting environment going on right now,
Speaker 1: particularly in tech, where a lot of us founders, entrepreneur
Speaker 1: CEOs are thinking about cash preservation. We're thinking about runway,
Speaker 1: we're thinking about optimizing efficiency, but we cannot lose sight
Speaker 1: of the fact that we're also still in a very
Speaker 1: very tight labor market, and so how do we keep
Speaker 1: the folks that we fought so hard to get into
Speaker 1: our companies? How do we keep them there well? And
Speaker 1: so how our employees approaching it? Are some employees rethinking
Speaker 1: whether or not they want to make that job change
Speaker 1: right now? Given that we're now seeing layoffs and hiring phrases.
Speaker 1: We're not seeing that yet, at least amongst our customer set,
Speaker 1: and we deal primarily with the Fortune two thousand, But
Speaker 1: I think we will. I think what we'll start to
Speaker 1: see is a little bit of a weight and see
Speaker 1: mode coming from employees. I think we'll also see a
Speaker 1: continuation in employee demands of employers to sort of make
Speaker 1: sure they want to know, why are you worthy of
Speaker 1: my labor? So, if I'm going to make a change,
Speaker 1: particularly in a market that might be a little bit
Speaker 1: more volatile, I want to make sure I'm going to
Speaker 1: a place that's going to stick. So how much progress
Speaker 1: our companies really making on pay equity? I mean, there's
Speaker 1: been this concern that let's say women, for example, might
Speaker 1: be backsliding uh in the pandemic because companies are just
Speaker 1: prioritizing staying afloat um and not thinking about these things.
Speaker 1: It's such a good point, and I think the pandemic
Speaker 1: is a key data point in this, and that we
Speaker 1: went backwards and we were already making glacial progress against
Speaker 1: closing the pay gap, and then COVID actually disproportionately added
Speaker 1: a number of years to our progress, so it made
Speaker 1: it worse. And I think there's a real danger here
Speaker 1: of the same thing happening. And particularly among my colleagues
Speaker 1: and friends that are black entrepreneur, entrepreneurs, people of color,
Speaker 1: they're really concerned that people will start using the recession
Speaker 1: as an excuse to go away from some of these
Speaker 1: commitments toward diversity, increasing representation, committing to pay equity. But
Speaker 1: on the flip side, I think this is an opportunity
Speaker 1: for companies because the toothpaste is out of the tube.
Speaker 1: There's really no going back in terms of what employees want.
Speaker 1: And with legislation accelerating around pay transparency California just passed
Speaker 1: a state bill and medium pay gap disclosure on Tuesday,
Speaker 1: this is going to continue. So companies that are really
Speaker 1: progressive and think about how can we maintain progress against
Speaker 1: these initiatives. They're the ones that will ultimately on the
Speaker 1: talent side and out when we come out the other
Speaker 1: side of this. Okay, but California just overturned a law
Speaker 1: SP eight two six that mandated that companies add women
Speaker 1: to their boards. Here we are moving backwards, what like,
Speaker 1: what what happened there? Yeah, So it's interesting because the
Speaker 1: acceleration has really been on the pay transparency side. So
Speaker 1: you've got California joining Washington State, New York City, New Jersey,
Speaker 1: Colorado passing laws that require companies with over a hundred
Speaker 1: employees to post the range of salary for particular roles.
Speaker 1: So you've got that happening on the employee side. And then,
Speaker 1: like you said, you've got the backsliding on the board.
Speaker 1: On the board piece. But I think, I think that's
Speaker 1: going to be a blip in the road, particularly because
Speaker 1: you're going to start seeing and continue seeing institutional investors
Speaker 1: like Goldman Sachs continue to push for more diversity on boards.
Speaker 1: I mean, they've already expanded from saying one board member
Speaker 1: has to be you from a diverse background to two.
Speaker 1: And so I think even as you see things like
Speaker 1: the board decision that was just overturned. You're going to
Speaker 1: see institutional investors. You're going to see a continuation of
Speaker 1: activist shareholders and this coming up in proxy in addition
Speaker 1: to hearing from employees who really want this stuff. Well,
Speaker 1: speaking of investors, Steph Curry is, of course one of
Speaker 1: your investors. And the Warriors just made it officially to
Speaker 1: the NBA Finals. Yeah, go dubs um. How involved is
Speaker 1: he in the business and how has his activism around
Speaker 1: social equity made a difference. It's it's made a really
Speaker 1: big difference. If you think about what's going on in
Speaker 1: sports with the U S women's national team, I think
Speaker 1: we're hearing a lot more from people like Candice Parker
Speaker 1: the w n b A, You're hearing from Eric Armstead
Speaker 1: on the forty Niners, You're hearing from Steph Curry, all
Speaker 1: laying in on this really important topic, not just pay
Speaker 1: equity broadly, but pay equty, particularly in sports. And we're
Speaker 1: starting to see the fruits of that come out. And
Speaker 1: I think what's great about Stephen is that he was
Speaker 1: in this game literally and figuratively, long before it became
Speaker 1: the cool thing to do. I mean, he wrote an
Speaker 1: article about pay equity as far back as two thousand
Speaker 1: and eight team when he had his daughters and was
Speaker 1: really starting to think about the type of world he
Speaker 1: wanted to invest in in order to create a better
Speaker 1: environment for them and others like them. So I think
Speaker 1: what's great about stuff is he's not performative performative. This
Speaker 1: isn't just words and talk. He is truly invested in
Speaker 1: the business and does what he can to help the business. Now,
Speaker 1: Warriors coach Steve Kerr made really impassion remarks, UM, a
Speaker 1: couple of days ago on the day of the you've
Speaker 1: all the shot shooting, and I just want to take
Speaker 1: a moment to listen to what he had to say.
Speaker 1: I'm not going to talk about basketball. Nothing's happened with
Speaker 1: our team in the last six hours. We're gonna start
Speaker 1: the same way tonight. Um, any basketball questions don't matter.
Speaker 1: When are we going to do something? I'm tired. I'm
Speaker 1: I'm so tired of getting up here and offering condulces
Speaker 1: to to the devastated families that are out there. Maria,
Speaker 1: what do you make of of those remarks and him
Speaker 1: using that moment to say what he said, Yeah, I mean, so, Emily,
Speaker 1: you have four kids, I have seven. I think, I
Speaker 1: think what's happening right now and it's really critical that
Speaker 1: leaders pay attention to this. That the Edelman Trust Barometer
Speaker 1: just came out this week saying that workers have the
Speaker 1: most trust in business than they ever have. It's the
Speaker 1: highest amount of trust in any institution, over government, over media,
Speaker 1: over Google, which is new. And with that trust, they
Speaker 1: require transparency. They want CEOs to be speaking out about
Speaker 1: what they believe can be done on some of these issues.
Speaker 1: And I think when you look at Starbucks, you know,
Speaker 1: shutting down stores in Ukraine, you look at Dick Sporting
Speaker 1: Goods saying they're going to stop selling weapons in certain stores,
Speaker 1: the pressure for companies to start having a voice on
Speaker 1: these things is going to increase. And and I also
Speaker 1: think just the human side of this. I mean, what
Speaker 1: Steve Kurt did that was so remarkable is he showed
Speaker 1: his humanness, and in that he he gave other people
Speaker 1: the right and ability to be vulnerable and to also
Speaker 1: show their humanness. I mean, if you're a leader, your
Speaker 1: people are struggling when they see people that look like
Speaker 1: them killed because of their race. They're struggling when they
Speaker 1: see people with children that are the same age as
Speaker 1: their own being slaughtered. So we've got to start thinking
Speaker 1: about not only taking a stand, but leading with empathy
Speaker 1: and understanding that we're all humans and and this is
Speaker 1: tough stuff, tough stuff to process. Indeed, Well, mom to mom,
Speaker 1: thank you for sharing your human nous with us today.
Speaker 1: CEO of Cyndio, thank you well. Crypto had another bad
Speaker 1: week and it may only get worse. Joining me now,
Speaker 1: Katherine Dowling, Chief Compliance Officer and general counsel at bit
Speaker 1: Wise Asset Management. So look in bitcoin right now, trading
Speaker 1: at just under twenty nine thou dollars. Of course it
Speaker 1: will continue trading through the weekend, but we did see
Speaker 1: tech stocks bounce back, why not crypto well, and thank
Speaker 1: you very much for having me. Despite the volatility we're
Speaker 1: seeing in prices, crypto is it is a volatile asset,
Speaker 1: and it is a risky asset, and it's gonna it's
Speaker 1: gonna be affected or impacted a little bit more than
Speaker 1: the general market. But we've we've seen the pullback in
Speaker 1: the stock market, we've seen the pullback and crypto as well.
Speaker 1: But we've had a number of pullbacks and crypto since
Speaker 1: its start, and it has survived each one, and it
Speaker 1: continues to be up into the right. So I think
Speaker 1: my message is really just keep calm and carry on,
Speaker 1: look at the long term horizons. None of the business
Speaker 1: fundamentals have changed, and we will look at this, learn
Speaker 1: the lessons and continue. So, you know, what do you
Speaker 1: think is going to be needed to turn crypto into
Speaker 1: a truly you know, inflation act? Will it ever be that? Well?
Speaker 1: What we've seen happen over this year, I've been calling
Speaker 1: it the Year of the definition. We're getting into a
Speaker 1: more mainstream, pushing into institutional audiences. You've seen Fidelity has
Speaker 1: now added bitcoin as an option in IRA accounts. This
Speaker 1: is huge, This is not going away. And now what
Speaker 1: we're also seeing more of this year is a is
Speaker 1: the crypto education. UM I just came back from the
Speaker 1: DC Blockchain Conference, and what was really positive and compelling
Speaker 1: was seeing the number of Members of Congress who attended
Speaker 1: the event. They were engaged, they were talking about learning more,
Speaker 1: they were engaging in person, which was great to be
Speaker 1: able to have that in person with members of industry
Speaker 1: saying teach us more. We want to learn more about
Speaker 1: these businesses and whether they were taking the approach of
Speaker 1: Corey Brooke Booker, who was taking the approach of my
Speaker 1: constituency needs access and this technology will give my constituency
Speaker 1: access that they haven't had from a number of the
Speaker 1: financial intermediaries that have shut them out of the financial system.
Speaker 1: Or if you're taking the approach of a Senator Haggerty
Speaker 1: who's saying, look, this is innovative and we need to
Speaker 1: keep this business on our shores. The message between that
Speaker 1: is we need regulatory clarity, and we've got a number
Speaker 1: of folks who are really pushing towards regulatory clarity, looking
Speaker 1: forward to seeing the Lemmits Ujila brand bill coming down
Speaker 1: the pike, and all of these are pushing that year
Speaker 1: of the definition where it needs to be get more
Speaker 1: regulatory clarity, which is what this as needs. Okay, so
Speaker 1: teach our audience please this terror situation. How damaging is
Speaker 1: this gonna be when we look back? So I think
Speaker 1: it's gonna be a pets dot com right, I mean
Speaker 1: it's I don't mean to be cute. I know people.
Speaker 1: I'm sympathetic to the that's helpful. The metaphor is helpful.
Speaker 1: I'm sympathetic to the folks who lost money in that investment.
Speaker 1: It was a risky investment, and I think what it
Speaker 1: is is one of the headlines I saw spoke to me,
Speaker 1: which was, you know, the ground shook, but the foundations
Speaker 1: are still solid with regard to the crypto ecosystem. So
Speaker 1: it had its impact and we learn from that. We
Speaker 1: learn from what happened with this particular digital asset, and
Speaker 1: the people who made that investment also learned, Okay, this
Speaker 1: is very risky. Did I make the did I do
Speaker 1: my homework? Did I Did I put it in the
Speaker 1: correct category? It's not backed by fiat currency. There are
Speaker 1: other stable coins that are much less risky UM that
Speaker 1: are pegged and they're backed one to one with real
Speaker 1: assets UM algorithmic stable coins on the other hand, or not.
Speaker 1: It was backed by code, it's backed by you know,
Speaker 1: if you're looking at something that's backed by code, then
Speaker 1: you have to kind of look one step further. Okay,
Speaker 1: what are we looking for? And if you continue to
Speaker 1: look and you can't really figure it out. One gentleman
Speaker 1: at the conference I just attended had a great line.
Speaker 1: He said, you know what, if you can't find the yield,
Speaker 1: chances are you are the yield. So I think on
Speaker 1: the go forward, we learned from this example, and for
Speaker 1: every pets dot com there are hundreds of amazons. Interesting. Well,
Speaker 1: I appreciate the crisp comparisons there, and I think it
Speaker 1: definitely helps us better understand that. Katherine Dowling, bit Wise
Speaker 1: Asset Management, thanks for sharing your definitions with us. Well.
Speaker 1: For most video gamers, playing games is a way to
Speaker 1: unwind or connect with friends, but for some it can
Speaker 1: also be a medical treatment. There is now an AFT
Speaker 1: approved racing game called Endeavor r X that's being prescribed
Speaker 1: by doctors four kids with a d h D. The
Speaker 1: company behind that game, Achille Interactive, just announced a first
Speaker 1: of its kind partnership with Roadblocks. Joining me now, Eddie Martucci,
Speaker 1: CEO and co founder of Achille, So explain to me
Speaker 1: how what are the mechanics of this? How can a
Speaker 1: video game help cure or treat a d h D? Sure,
Speaker 1: no problem, nom only, thanks for having me. This is
Speaker 1: really a digital medicine. That's that's what we've built here,
Speaker 1: and that's what we've spent about a decade building. Um
Speaker 1: It's built on another decade of research on a very
Speaker 1: specific sensory and motor stimuli that activate the midline prefrontal cortex,
Speaker 1: the part of the brain that actually controls attention functioning
Speaker 1: and other related cognitive issues. We coded that into an
Speaker 1: environment that looks and feels an acts every single second
Speaker 1: like a video game. So you can really think about
Speaker 1: this as underneath the hood, there's this really strong neuroscience
Speaker 1: patented has been taken all the way through trials the FDA.
Speaker 1: It's a aura, um, but the delivery of this is
Speaker 1: something that we think, um can really fulfill a need
Speaker 1: in the marketplace, which is medicine that isn't scary but
Speaker 1: actually can be fun. And so we've decided to deliver
Speaker 1: this in a unique way, which is through a video
Speaker 1: game platform. So so what do you say to the
Speaker 1: skeptics that, you know, more video games means more screen time,
Speaker 1: could fuel more addiction to games, which isn't necessarily good. No,
Speaker 1: it's a it's a really fair point, I think, Um.
Speaker 1: I think skeptics are there for a reason. It's usually
Speaker 1: because people have been burned, right, and so certainly, um,
Speaker 1: you have kids, I have kids. We see we see
Speaker 1: children play a whole lot of video games, and we're
Speaker 1: probably nervous most of the time what they're doing to
Speaker 1: their brains. There's a little bit of research out there
Speaker 1: on what they do to the brains. Um Our point
Speaker 1: here is not to significantly increase random screen time. Our
Speaker 1: point here is to say we know parents understand that
Speaker 1: there's good and bad screen time, that there can be
Speaker 1: benefits to using phones and tablets UM, and to in
Speaker 1: our case, have a proven and in this case, the
Speaker 1: only proven and prescription enabled video game. UM. So you're
Speaker 1: really thinking about offsetting some of the screen time that
Speaker 1: children might take for other things YouTube, etcetera, and using
Speaker 1: that to get proven benefits when you have UM a
Speaker 1: condition like a d h D and you need help.
Speaker 1: And you're also working on potentially applying gaming to long
Speaker 1: COVID in addition to this roadblock partnership, tell us a
Speaker 1: little bit bit more about how that will work. Sure, sure, yeah,
Speaker 1: this is not This is not a technology approach that's
Speaker 1: based on any single game or any single population. So
Speaker 1: this is really about a new way to activate neural
Speaker 1: networks in the brain that control attention. We think one
Speaker 1: of the largest unmet needs in central nervous system medicine
Speaker 1: is actually cognitive functioning. It's how the brain's processing information
Speaker 1: on a second by second basis that's been pushed aside
Speaker 1: in medicine that's been treated a little bit more as
Speaker 1: holistic medicine or occupational therapy. We think that's wrong. We
Speaker 1: think that it's something that patients deal with on a
Speaker 1: daily basis. And that is true in a d h
Speaker 1: D where we have a first product FDA cleared, but
Speaker 1: it's true in many other populations depression, multiple sclerosis, autism,
Speaker 1: and yes, even long COVID. And those are all areas
Speaker 1: where we have completed our ongoing clinical trials. Because our
Speaker 1: aim here is really to create a class of medicine,
Speaker 1: a new business um that is specializing in the best
Speaker 1: and ideally most effective and safe way to intervene in
Speaker 1: cognitive function across different ages and across different diseases. Absolutely fascinating.
Speaker 1: Addie Marcucci, CEO of a Chilly Interactive We'll keep watching,
Speaker 1: thank you, and that does it for the decision of
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Technology. Wall Street Week with my colleague David Weston
Speaker 1: is coming up next. Got a great round of guests
Speaker 1: they're including, of course Larry Summers. Um have a wonderful weekend. Everyone.
Speaker 1: Don't forget to check out our podcast anywhere you get
Speaker 1: your podcast, and again you can catch that full Roadblocks
Speaker 1: episode at Bloomberg dot com. Who do we have any
Speaker 1: day to U