WEBVTT - Nasdaq Drops 4% and Twitter's All-Hands Meeting

0:00:02.360 --> 0:00:05.720
<v Speaker 1>From the heart of where innovation, money and power collive

0:00:06.480 --> 0:00:11.000
<v Speaker 1>in Silicon Valley and beyond. This is Bloomberg Technology with

0:00:11.039 --> 0:00:26.759
<v Speaker 1>Emily Jay Primily Chang in San Francisco, And this is

0:00:26.800 --> 0:00:30.280
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Technology coming up in the next hour. Global recession

0:00:30.360 --> 0:00:34.159
<v Speaker 1>fears ramp up as a federal reserve struggle to tackle

0:00:34.479 --> 0:00:38.159
<v Speaker 1>widespread inflation, the NASTAC one hundred leading the charge in

0:00:38.320 --> 0:00:44.240
<v Speaker 1>tumbling US stocks, lost, potential layoffs, pay and freedom of speech.

0:00:44.280 --> 0:00:46.960
<v Speaker 1>It was all discussed at a virtual meeting with Elon

0:00:47.040 --> 0:00:49.800
<v Speaker 1>Musk and Twitter employees. We're gonna talk to a former

0:00:49.840 --> 0:00:54.720
<v Speaker 1>Twitter insider about the future of the social platform and

0:00:54.840 --> 0:00:57.800
<v Speaker 1>crypto crisis. A conversation with Mike nova Grats of Galaxy

0:00:57.840 --> 0:01:01.520
<v Speaker 1>Digital about when he expects this crisp crypto winter to

0:01:01.720 --> 0:01:05.120
<v Speaker 1>warm up. First, I want to talk about the markets

0:01:05.160 --> 0:01:10.320
<v Speaker 1>with Carol's Life BMO Family Office Deputy Chief Investment Officers. So, Carol,

0:01:10.400 --> 0:01:13.520
<v Speaker 1>how are you reading that up yesterday down today? How

0:01:13.520 --> 0:01:16.400
<v Speaker 1>do you make sense of it all? It's t It

0:01:16.480 --> 0:01:18.520
<v Speaker 1>is definitely tough to make sense of it, but I

0:01:18.560 --> 0:01:21.600
<v Speaker 1>think part of it reflects investors on a day to

0:01:21.680 --> 0:01:25.360
<v Speaker 1>day basis. Yesterday there was some exuberance particularly over Chairman

0:01:25.520 --> 0:01:29.560
<v Speaker 1>Powell's conversation after the actual FED meeting and the FED

0:01:29.640 --> 0:01:33.880
<v Speaker 1>release in the press conference talking about thinking that the

0:01:34.000 --> 0:01:38.280
<v Speaker 1>number of seventy basis point um increases might be limited.

0:01:38.319 --> 0:01:42.120
<v Speaker 1>So markets got a little bit exuberant about that yesterday

0:01:42.120 --> 0:01:45.119
<v Speaker 1>and relieved, if you will. Then flying into today, it's

0:01:45.120 --> 0:01:47.640
<v Speaker 1>sort of like the morning after, and people decided instead

0:01:47.640 --> 0:01:50.400
<v Speaker 1>of focusing on the glass half full, they focus on

0:01:50.440 --> 0:01:53.080
<v Speaker 1>all of the half empty things, and how much narrower

0:01:53.200 --> 0:01:56.360
<v Speaker 1>that makes the Fed's ability to traverse and trying to

0:01:56.480 --> 0:01:59.520
<v Speaker 1>stick a soft landing. So at this point, are you

0:01:59.560 --> 0:02:05.120
<v Speaker 1>thinking a recession is inevitable? Um, it's probably, it's it

0:02:05.560 --> 0:02:09.239
<v Speaker 1>maybe high higher likelihood, if you will. We weren't going

0:02:09.240 --> 0:02:12.840
<v Speaker 1>into this necessarily thinking a recession was highly probable. Markets

0:02:12.840 --> 0:02:16.080
<v Speaker 1>are discounting a seventy chance that you'll see a recession.

0:02:16.440 --> 0:02:18.679
<v Speaker 1>We do think if you see one, however, that it

0:02:18.720 --> 0:02:23.040
<v Speaker 1>will be shorter and then less deep than ever then

0:02:23.160 --> 0:02:25.840
<v Speaker 1>then we've seen in prior recessions. And so a piece

0:02:25.840 --> 0:02:28.600
<v Speaker 1>of that relates to the fact that there is so

0:02:28.720 --> 0:02:31.520
<v Speaker 1>much underlying business strength. And the other thing that goes

0:02:31.680 --> 0:02:33.960
<v Speaker 1>pretty unsung is the fact that a lot of our

0:02:34.000 --> 0:02:37.960
<v Speaker 1>companies have proven to be very adaptable and resilient and

0:02:38.160 --> 0:02:40.640
<v Speaker 1>able to shift their business model, but they're facing a

0:02:40.639 --> 0:02:44.919
<v Speaker 1>lot of challenges and so um the hope everyone is

0:02:44.960 --> 0:02:46.720
<v Speaker 1>waiting with bated breath to see if we're going to

0:02:46.800 --> 0:02:49.760
<v Speaker 1>have that recession, but we don't think it would be sharpened.

0:02:51.240 --> 0:02:53.560
<v Speaker 1>So how is this impacting your approach to tech? Of

0:02:53.560 --> 0:02:57.680
<v Speaker 1>course we're seeing Apple, Tesla, Twitter, mega cap tech stock sinking,

0:02:57.720 --> 0:02:59.560
<v Speaker 1>some other narratives going on there of course with this

0:02:59.680 --> 0:03:03.200
<v Speaker 1>elon Twitter thing, But how are you evolving your strategy

0:03:03.200 --> 0:03:05.839
<v Speaker 1>when it comes to big tech names. I think it's

0:03:05.880 --> 0:03:09.440
<v Speaker 1>not just big tech names, it's thinking through technology in general.

0:03:09.919 --> 0:03:14.079
<v Speaker 1>And typically what we've seen cycle after cycle over decades

0:03:14.160 --> 0:03:18.000
<v Speaker 1>is that what leads going into a recession isn't necessarily

0:03:18.000 --> 0:03:20.080
<v Speaker 1>what leads coming out, and so we might have to

0:03:20.120 --> 0:03:23.799
<v Speaker 1>be more discriminating figuring out where growth and technology comes.

0:03:24.160 --> 0:03:26.840
<v Speaker 1>A lot of the growth in this in the new scenario,

0:03:26.919 --> 0:03:32.800
<v Speaker 1>if you will will be reshoring, building, manufacturing, spending some

0:03:32.880 --> 0:03:36.200
<v Speaker 1>of the trillion dollars in aid money that is still

0:03:36.240 --> 0:03:39.240
<v Speaker 1>in the in the pipeline for infrastructure spend, that will

0:03:39.280 --> 0:03:42.760
<v Speaker 1>require your different kind of technology. So it's gonna require

0:03:42.800 --> 0:03:46.000
<v Speaker 1>investors to think more carefully about where their technology goes.

0:03:46.320 --> 0:03:49.600
<v Speaker 1>It's not necessarily just consumer based tech, which played so

0:03:49.680 --> 0:03:53.680
<v Speaker 1>well over the last couple of years a pandemic. You know,

0:03:53.720 --> 0:03:55.880
<v Speaker 1>we've been talking about the fact that Cisco, you know,

0:03:56.000 --> 0:03:58.160
<v Speaker 1>kind of like a poster child for the dot com bust,

0:03:58.320 --> 0:04:02.080
<v Speaker 1>hit its high before the combust and has since never recovered.

0:04:02.120 --> 0:04:04.200
<v Speaker 1>What do you think are going to be the ciscos

0:04:04.360 --> 0:04:09.320
<v Speaker 1>of this generation. It's tough. We're not necessarily allowed to

0:04:09.520 --> 0:04:13.040
<v Speaker 1>talk individual securities, but I do think looking at industries

0:04:13.080 --> 0:04:18.080
<v Speaker 1>that will support that restoring building and manufacturing and the

0:04:18.120 --> 0:04:23.599
<v Speaker 1>shifting of certain things like where individual people are in

0:04:23.720 --> 0:04:27.200
<v Speaker 1>lower paid or higher risk jobs, and you're automating, so robotics,

0:04:27.279 --> 0:04:30.440
<v Speaker 1>artificial intelligence, sensors, lots of different things that are going

0:04:30.480 --> 0:04:34.719
<v Speaker 1>to play into that new economy as we shift. Um.

0:04:34.760 --> 0:04:37.680
<v Speaker 1>It's not like technology as an entire industry needs to

0:04:37.720 --> 0:04:41.599
<v Speaker 1>be written off or pieces of it, because much of

0:04:41.640 --> 0:04:44.120
<v Speaker 1>it will still continue to play. But it's looking at

0:04:44.120 --> 0:04:47.599
<v Speaker 1>where you're going to have that investment and what industries

0:04:47.640 --> 0:04:50.560
<v Speaker 1>are likely to be able to play into the build out.

0:04:51.240 --> 0:04:54.360
<v Speaker 1>All right, uh cause life Thanks for sharing your views

0:04:54.400 --> 0:05:00.479
<v Speaker 1>with us. BMO Family Office Deputy Chief Investment Officer appreciate it. Meantime,

0:05:00.520 --> 0:05:03.719
<v Speaker 1>it stocks plunge and inflation rises, some companies are trying

0:05:03.720 --> 0:05:07.440
<v Speaker 1>to allure customers with new features. T Mobile just announced

0:05:07.440 --> 0:05:10.320
<v Speaker 1>it is expanding its coverage to hundreds of countries around

0:05:10.360 --> 0:05:13.400
<v Speaker 1>the globe and two flights. Let's get into that and

0:05:13.440 --> 0:05:15.440
<v Speaker 1>how it fits into the macro environment with T Mobile

0:05:15.440 --> 0:05:18.680
<v Speaker 1>CEO Mike sever Mike, always good to have you back

0:05:18.720 --> 0:05:20.640
<v Speaker 1>with us. Tell us about this announcement and why you

0:05:20.680 --> 0:05:23.240
<v Speaker 1>think now with all of this going on, is the

0:05:23.320 --> 0:05:27.159
<v Speaker 1>right time. Well, let's start with now. You know, consumers

0:05:27.160 --> 0:05:29.480
<v Speaker 1>are concerned, Emily, as you've been saying in this whole segment,

0:05:29.960 --> 0:05:32.280
<v Speaker 1>and that's not just about the possibility of a recession

0:05:32.320 --> 0:05:34.320
<v Speaker 1>that may or may not unfold throughout the rest of

0:05:34.320 --> 0:05:38.640
<v Speaker 1>this year. Consumers are feeling the pinch right now and

0:05:38.720 --> 0:05:40.720
<v Speaker 1>our view as we can use the size and the

0:05:40.760 --> 0:05:43.320
<v Speaker 1>scale of T Mobile to help. And what's interesting is

0:05:43.560 --> 0:05:46.960
<v Speaker 1>summers here and after two years, while feeling the pinch,

0:05:47.240 --> 0:05:50.320
<v Speaker 1>customers want to get out there and travel. Travels back

0:05:50.440 --> 0:05:55.279
<v Speaker 1>spendings up at at higher than pre pandemic levels, and

0:05:55.320 --> 0:05:57.560
<v Speaker 1>so you have this dual force, a desire to travel,

0:05:57.880 --> 0:06:00.719
<v Speaker 1>combined with pinched pockets, and we're here to help. And

0:06:00.760 --> 0:06:03.880
<v Speaker 1>so today's announcements are all about making travel easier for

0:06:03.920 --> 0:06:07.520
<v Speaker 1>the tens of millions of T mobile customers everywhere. I

0:06:07.600 --> 0:06:11.000
<v Speaker 1>have to ask your thoughts on the macro economic environment.

0:06:11.040 --> 0:06:13.760
<v Speaker 1>What do you see over the next six to twelve months.

0:06:13.760 --> 0:06:16.240
<v Speaker 1>If Elon Musks has a super bad feeling about the

0:06:16.279 --> 0:06:20.159
<v Speaker 1>economy and Jamie diamond says we're headed for an economic hurricane,

0:06:20.160 --> 0:06:23.479
<v Speaker 1>You've got the World Bank slashing their growth forecast, how

0:06:23.480 --> 0:06:25.960
<v Speaker 1>are you watching all of this? Well, I can tell

0:06:26.000 --> 0:06:28.000
<v Speaker 1>you that you know, we're in touch with our customers

0:06:28.040 --> 0:06:31.000
<v Speaker 1>and they're concerned. And my view is our job when

0:06:31.040 --> 0:06:34.200
<v Speaker 1>we have customers that are concerned about the economic situation

0:06:34.640 --> 0:06:37.200
<v Speaker 1>is to be ready to help. And that's why we're

0:06:37.240 --> 0:06:39.039
<v Speaker 1>doing the things that we're doing. And it's so different

0:06:39.040 --> 0:06:41.120
<v Speaker 1>than the rest of the industry. You know, our competitors

0:06:41.520 --> 0:06:44.320
<v Speaker 1>over the last month have, at this very moment, while

0:06:44.400 --> 0:06:47.560
<v Speaker 1>consumers are concerned about everything you're asking about, have done

0:06:47.600 --> 0:06:51.800
<v Speaker 1>two billion dollars of price increases between them. And so

0:06:51.839 --> 0:06:54.960
<v Speaker 1>it really showcases how different our strategy is. Ours is

0:06:55.000 --> 0:06:58.920
<v Speaker 1>to look forward at what's unfolding, understand the concerned consumers

0:06:58.960 --> 0:07:02.240
<v Speaker 1>have and poor value into our plans so that we

0:07:02.279 --> 0:07:04.840
<v Speaker 1>can help them. And by the way, this isn't just altruistic.

0:07:04.839 --> 0:07:07.479
<v Speaker 1>If we help them, it makes our most popular plan

0:07:07.600 --> 0:07:11.320
<v Speaker 1>more popular, Magenta Max. And if that continues to gain popularity,

0:07:11.360 --> 0:07:14.880
<v Speaker 1>well that helps our revenues to and everyone wins. So

0:07:15.280 --> 0:07:18.080
<v Speaker 1>you did raise some fees on on millions of customers

0:07:18.120 --> 0:07:21.920
<v Speaker 1>wireless bills earlier this year, and I'm curious how as

0:07:21.960 --> 0:07:29.000
<v Speaker 1>we move forward your plan to navigate inflation is evolving. Well,

0:07:29.000 --> 0:07:31.080
<v Speaker 1>one of the things that makes us different is that

0:07:31.120 --> 0:07:33.960
<v Speaker 1>we have what's called price lock, and so what we

0:07:34.000 --> 0:07:36.880
<v Speaker 1>don't do is take the fee that you signed up

0:07:36.920 --> 0:07:39.360
<v Speaker 1>for and during the term of an agreement with you

0:07:39.680 --> 0:07:42.680
<v Speaker 1>is change your price your ongoing price per month. And

0:07:42.720 --> 0:07:45.600
<v Speaker 1>so that's really important to people right now. And by

0:07:45.600 --> 0:07:48.200
<v Speaker 1>the way, our business as an industry and as a

0:07:48.240 --> 0:07:51.000
<v Speaker 1>sector is a little different than some We are probably

0:07:51.080 --> 0:07:55.160
<v Speaker 1>more insulated from inflationary pressures as a company than many

0:07:55.200 --> 0:07:57.600
<v Speaker 1>businesses and other sectors. You know, we have long term

0:07:57.640 --> 0:08:03.240
<v Speaker 1>tower contracts, long term connectivity contracts, long term technology contracts

0:08:03.240 --> 0:08:05.960
<v Speaker 1>with our tech vendors, and so those things insulate us

0:08:06.000 --> 0:08:08.880
<v Speaker 1>somewhat and allow us to do things like today's news.

0:08:08.880 --> 0:08:11.880
<v Speaker 1>You know, we're pouring hundreds of millions of dollars of

0:08:11.880 --> 0:08:16.040
<v Speaker 1>incremental value into Magenta Max and making travel easier for

0:08:16.120 --> 0:08:20.120
<v Speaker 1>customers by doing something nobody has ever done before, which

0:08:20.200 --> 0:08:23.720
<v Speaker 1>is put globally high speed data right into our most

0:08:23.720 --> 0:08:27.600
<v Speaker 1>popular plan at no extra charge. Plus connect you on

0:08:27.640 --> 0:08:30.600
<v Speaker 1>all of your flights for free on the most popular

0:08:30.640 --> 0:08:35.200
<v Speaker 1>airlines American, Delta, Alaska and coming soon United. No one's

0:08:35.200 --> 0:08:38.040
<v Speaker 1>ever done anything like this before. And you know, there's

0:08:38.080 --> 0:08:42.240
<v Speaker 1>so much to today's news, but it's about making travel easier. Now,

0:08:42.360 --> 0:08:46.640
<v Speaker 1>we are seeing a number of different companies hiring freezes, layoffs.

0:08:46.880 --> 0:08:49.120
<v Speaker 1>Are you considering are you having to make any cost

0:08:49.160 --> 0:08:52.439
<v Speaker 1>cutting measures? Um? Do you have any plans like that?

0:08:53.679 --> 0:08:56.520
<v Speaker 1>We're executing our post merger playbook and by the way,

0:08:56.559 --> 0:09:01.080
<v Speaker 1>I'll remind you, was the biggest growth here in our history.

0:09:01.440 --> 0:09:04.040
<v Speaker 1>The first quarter was the biggest growth queue one in

0:09:04.080 --> 0:09:07.240
<v Speaker 1>our history on new accounts. And so we're executing our

0:09:07.360 --> 0:09:10.760
<v Speaker 1>successful business plan. And obviously, over time we have to

0:09:10.800 --> 0:09:13.560
<v Speaker 1>be really smart about how we manage our company and

0:09:13.600 --> 0:09:16.480
<v Speaker 1>we'll do that. UM. But look, this is a model

0:09:16.520 --> 0:09:20.080
<v Speaker 1>that's unfolding exactly like we told investors it would unfold

0:09:20.240 --> 0:09:22.120
<v Speaker 1>when we did our analysts day and laid out our

0:09:22.160 --> 0:09:26.440
<v Speaker 1>five year plan last spring. All right, Mike Sivert, CEO

0:09:26.720 --> 0:09:28.800
<v Speaker 1>of T Mobile, Good to have you back with us.

0:09:28.840 --> 0:09:30.760
<v Speaker 1>Thanks for sharing the news with us, and hear your

0:09:30.840 --> 0:09:35.600
<v Speaker 1>views on the macro environment ahead. Meantime, the world largest

0:09:35.800 --> 0:09:39.600
<v Speaker 1>theater chain is once again branching out. AMC will create

0:09:39.640 --> 0:09:42.320
<v Speaker 1>a one million dollar fund to invest in other businesses.

0:09:42.400 --> 0:09:45.319
<v Speaker 1>That's from CEO Adam Aaron at the company's annual meeting.

0:09:45.440 --> 0:09:48.439
<v Speaker 1>A MCS board approve this plan, but Aaron didn't say

0:09:48.440 --> 0:09:51.079
<v Speaker 1>where the cash will come from. In March, am C

0:09:51.440 --> 0:09:56.440
<v Speaker 1>bought of high Craft Mining, a gold and silver mining stock.

0:09:57.480 --> 0:10:00.720
<v Speaker 1>Coming up. Musk stands his ground, tell us Twitter employees

0:10:00.720 --> 0:10:05.280
<v Speaker 1>the platform should allow quote pretty outrageous, thinks more on

0:10:05.360 --> 0:10:08.520
<v Speaker 1>his virtual visit to the all hands meeting next this

0:10:08.640 --> 0:10:38.400
<v Speaker 1>is Bloomberg. Ellen Musk took questions from Twitter employees at

0:10:38.400 --> 0:10:41.240
<v Speaker 1>an all hands meeting, addressing everything from potential layoffs to

0:10:41.280 --> 0:10:44.600
<v Speaker 1>remote work to his vision for free speech on the platform.

0:10:44.720 --> 0:10:47.520
<v Speaker 1>Musk didn't address whether he was committed to a deal

0:10:48.000 --> 0:10:50.680
<v Speaker 1>to buy Twitter. We're joined out by former Twitter employee

0:10:50.679 --> 0:10:53.440
<v Speaker 1>clar Diaz. Ortiz, author of a book called Twitter for Good.

0:10:53.520 --> 0:10:56.760
<v Speaker 1>She's also currently a venture scout at Kleiner Perkins. Bloomberg's

0:10:56.840 --> 0:11:00.280
<v Speaker 1>Ed Ludlow here as well. And you were obviously covering

0:11:00.320 --> 0:11:02.560
<v Speaker 1>the meeting in real time. We had the contents of

0:11:02.600 --> 0:11:05.240
<v Speaker 1>the meeting leak to Bloomberg in real time. Just remind

0:11:05.320 --> 0:11:09.319
<v Speaker 1>us what happened, what the flashpoints. You're right to phrase

0:11:09.360 --> 0:11:11.400
<v Speaker 1>it in that it's what he did not say, because

0:11:11.400 --> 0:11:13.160
<v Speaker 1>he had been built and reported in the Wall Street

0:11:13.200 --> 0:11:16.400
<v Speaker 1>Journal that he kind of outline his interest in buying

0:11:16.400 --> 0:11:20.000
<v Speaker 1>the company, you know, and and he didn't explicitly say

0:11:20.080 --> 0:11:22.680
<v Speaker 1>I'm committed to this deal, but he wasn't explicitly asked

0:11:22.679 --> 0:11:25.520
<v Speaker 1>if he was not explicitly asked, And basically how this

0:11:25.559 --> 0:11:28.760
<v Speaker 1>works was Twitter staff were invited to ask questions through

0:11:28.760 --> 0:11:32.959
<v Speaker 1>an internal Slack channel. Those questions were aggregated by U,

0:11:33.640 --> 0:11:36.079
<v Speaker 1>the CMO, who then asked the dealon must But you know,

0:11:36.160 --> 0:11:38.400
<v Speaker 1>he did give some really interesting insight into how he

0:11:38.520 --> 0:11:40.920
<v Speaker 1>changed the platform. You know, he actually left the door

0:11:40.920 --> 0:11:44.640
<v Speaker 1>open to advertising model, which was interesting because many assumed

0:11:44.640 --> 0:11:46.679
<v Speaker 1>that the ad model wasn't good. In his mind, he

0:11:46.720 --> 0:11:49.440
<v Speaker 1>talked about subscriptions being good, but the one that really

0:11:49.480 --> 0:11:52.720
<v Speaker 1>jumped out of me was this idea that he would

0:11:52.800 --> 0:11:57.320
<v Speaker 1>charge users for verification to verify that you're an actual

0:11:57.600 --> 0:11:59.640
<v Speaker 1>human as opposed to a bot, and obviously bought the

0:11:59.679 --> 0:12:01.959
<v Speaker 1>top of mind Frelon Musk, Claire, what do you make

0:12:02.040 --> 0:12:04.800
<v Speaker 1>of Let's start with the business plan. So I think

0:12:05.080 --> 0:12:08.640
<v Speaker 1>you know, some of these ideas are great. The verification program,

0:12:08.679 --> 0:12:10.560
<v Speaker 1>if you can call it, that has been broken since

0:12:10.600 --> 0:12:12.960
<v Speaker 1>it was created, so it would be fantastic if someone

0:12:12.960 --> 0:12:14.520
<v Speaker 1>comes in with some idea to fix that. And I

0:12:14.559 --> 0:12:17.160
<v Speaker 1>don't know the nuances of it, if charging is actually

0:12:17.160 --> 0:12:19.400
<v Speaker 1>a good idea or not. Yeah, But I think the

0:12:19.480 --> 0:12:21.760
<v Speaker 1>larger question here is just like I think all of

0:12:21.800 --> 0:12:23.560
<v Speaker 1>this is sort of window dressing. I don't think Elon

0:12:23.640 --> 0:12:26.320
<v Speaker 1>Musk wants to buy Twitter anymore. Right, His idea, if

0:12:26.320 --> 0:12:28.000
<v Speaker 1>you don't know, dumming, His idea was that if you

0:12:28.120 --> 0:12:31.000
<v Speaker 1>charge people, and he didn't put a price on it,

0:12:31.040 --> 0:12:34.440
<v Speaker 1>but to verify if you run a scam or a

0:12:34.480 --> 0:12:37.400
<v Speaker 1>spam or a organization where you have lots of accounts.

0:12:37.720 --> 0:12:40.439
<v Speaker 1>He kind of talks about disincentivizing bonds that to make

0:12:40.480 --> 0:12:43.440
<v Speaker 1>it so expensive they're having a load of fake accounts

0:12:43.520 --> 0:12:45.800
<v Speaker 1>is not worth as will be. Is that going to work?

0:12:46.000 --> 0:12:47.679
<v Speaker 1>And maybe it would work. I don't know. Twitter says

0:12:47.720 --> 0:12:49.760
<v Speaker 1>they've had less than five percent boats other people say

0:12:49.800 --> 0:12:52.360
<v Speaker 1>they have up to But is this relevant? I mean,

0:12:52.440 --> 0:12:55.640
<v Speaker 1>isn't sort of this whole elon Musk buy Twitter, dumpster

0:12:55.720 --> 0:12:59.080
<v Speaker 1>fire just kind of like extending on and on and on.

0:12:59.120 --> 0:13:01.560
<v Speaker 1>What do you think I I don't think he wants it.

0:13:01.640 --> 0:13:03.679
<v Speaker 1>I mean, you have kids. I have kids. There are

0:13:03.679 --> 0:13:05.360
<v Speaker 1>a lot of them in my house. When they want

0:13:05.360 --> 0:13:07.480
<v Speaker 1>a cookie, they start throwing a tantrum and eventually they

0:13:07.480 --> 0:13:10.000
<v Speaker 1>don't want the cookie anymore, but they're still throwing the tantrum.

0:13:10.360 --> 0:13:13.800
<v Speaker 1>I don't think he wants this. So you know, today

0:13:13.800 --> 0:13:16.240
<v Speaker 1>he says you should be able to say pretty outrageous

0:13:16.280 --> 0:13:19.480
<v Speaker 1>things on Twitter short of anything that breaks the law.

0:13:19.720 --> 0:13:22.920
<v Speaker 1>Is that good enough as a content moderation policy? That's

0:13:22.920 --> 0:13:24.240
<v Speaker 1>not good enough at all. I mean, I think you've

0:13:24.240 --> 0:13:26.719
<v Speaker 1>talked to Jason Goldman, one of my favorite bosses when

0:13:26.720 --> 0:13:28.640
<v Speaker 1>I worked there, and he's I think said it best

0:13:28.640 --> 0:13:29.920
<v Speaker 1>when he said that, you know, if you take the

0:13:29.920 --> 0:13:33.080
<v Speaker 1>guardrails off the platform, that in definition is anti free

0:13:33.160 --> 0:13:36.080
<v Speaker 1>speech because you're preventing a bunch of people from being

0:13:36.080 --> 0:13:37.960
<v Speaker 1>able to say anything because they don't feel safe on it.

0:13:39.679 --> 0:13:41.800
<v Speaker 1>Talking to Twitter employees who are still there today, I mean,

0:13:41.920 --> 0:13:44.280
<v Speaker 1>how do they feel? How do I feel for them?

0:13:44.360 --> 0:13:47.520
<v Speaker 1>I feel sad. I feel very sad. These are very smart,

0:13:47.760 --> 0:13:50.760
<v Speaker 1>wise people, you know, supporting families, and they're stuck in

0:13:50.800 --> 0:13:52.800
<v Speaker 1>the middle of this. And you know, I, like everyone else,

0:13:52.840 --> 0:13:54.800
<v Speaker 1>makes jokes on Twitter all the time about it because

0:13:54.800 --> 0:13:57.200
<v Speaker 1>it's so ridiculous and it just doesn't seem to end.

0:13:57.720 --> 0:13:59.839
<v Speaker 1>But but these are real people. I think it's pointing

0:13:59.840 --> 0:14:02.160
<v Speaker 1>out what Elomas said as well as it relates to

0:14:02.160 --> 0:14:04.400
<v Speaker 1>the staff. You know, the idea of work from home

0:14:04.480 --> 0:14:07.920
<v Speaker 1>remote work was really went over and over, and must

0:14:07.920 --> 0:14:11.080
<v Speaker 1>made the point that if you do excellent work, you

0:14:11.120 --> 0:14:13.560
<v Speaker 1>may have an exception to be a remote worker. But

0:14:13.640 --> 0:14:16.720
<v Speaker 1>he kind of seems to suggest that it's not gonna happen.

0:14:16.760 --> 0:14:18.800
<v Speaker 1>This is after Jack Dorsey had decided two years ago

0:14:18.840 --> 0:14:21.800
<v Speaker 1>that Twitter employees could work from home forever. So that

0:14:21.840 --> 0:14:24.000
<v Speaker 1>and that, I think, at least in our reporting of

0:14:24.040 --> 0:14:27.000
<v Speaker 1>the meeting, was the most disruptive part of it. You

0:14:27.040 --> 0:14:30.120
<v Speaker 1>had like absolute the employee chat just lighting up with it,

0:14:30.120 --> 0:14:32.760
<v Speaker 1>and he's saying excellent work. That's like Silicon Valley code

0:14:32.800 --> 0:14:34.840
<v Speaker 1>for saying, you know, if you're the best bro, we'll

0:14:34.920 --> 0:14:36.720
<v Speaker 1>let you work from home, but everyone else has to

0:14:36.760 --> 0:14:39.200
<v Speaker 1>be in the office. I think what's interesting for me

0:14:39.240 --> 0:14:41.000
<v Speaker 1>and I'd love your take on this is he talks

0:14:41.000 --> 0:14:43.360
<v Speaker 1>about what Twitter would look like as a private company

0:14:43.360 --> 0:14:45.240
<v Speaker 1>and compensation is is a big part of that. He

0:14:45.240 --> 0:14:47.760
<v Speaker 1>said it would be like SpaceX, where you have stock

0:14:47.800 --> 0:14:50.760
<v Speaker 1>and options awards a liquidity event every six months, which

0:14:50.760 --> 0:14:53.040
<v Speaker 1>I think he means stock would be able to trade

0:14:53.040 --> 0:14:56.680
<v Speaker 1>on the secondaries market. Um, but Twitter is kind of

0:14:56.680 --> 0:14:59.640
<v Speaker 1>like a San Francisco Silicon Valley mainstay. It has a culture.

0:15:01.720 --> 0:15:03.760
<v Speaker 1>How does that quote to change? I think the culture

0:15:03.800 --> 0:15:06.360
<v Speaker 1>will change dramatically. But I don't think employees are stupid,

0:15:06.400 --> 0:15:08.000
<v Speaker 1>you know. I mean at the beginning of this whole

0:15:08.000 --> 0:15:11.120
<v Speaker 1>sort of journey, we we all sort of I think

0:15:11.160 --> 0:15:14.000
<v Speaker 1>many of us thought this could actually be an interesting

0:15:14.040 --> 0:15:18.000
<v Speaker 1>but crazy idea. You know, Twitter stock has historically underperformed.

0:15:18.040 --> 0:15:19.720
<v Speaker 1>All of us who are early employees have probably cried

0:15:19.760 --> 0:15:21.560
<v Speaker 1>into our bank statements as sometime that we you know,

0:15:21.600 --> 0:15:23.840
<v Speaker 1>didn't work at LinkedIn instead or whatever. The talk. The

0:15:23.880 --> 0:15:26.760
<v Speaker 1>stock has been performing really badly since an I p O.

0:15:26.880 --> 0:15:28.400
<v Speaker 1>So I think there was some sort of a hope

0:15:28.800 --> 0:15:31.480
<v Speaker 1>that maybe this crazy idea could do something good, But

0:15:31.520 --> 0:15:34.280
<v Speaker 1>I think at this point it's just derailed. So where

0:15:34.280 --> 0:15:36.120
<v Speaker 1>does this leave Twitter? I mean, he you know, he

0:15:36.160 --> 0:15:38.680
<v Speaker 1>has these lofty goals get to a billion users. Again,

0:15:38.760 --> 0:15:40.960
<v Speaker 1>we don't know if he's still really committed to to

0:15:41.040 --> 0:15:44.040
<v Speaker 1>buying the platform, but he's got a deal assigned deal

0:15:44.160 --> 0:15:48.200
<v Speaker 1>that binds him to buying the platform. Nobody knows how

0:15:48.240 --> 0:15:50.040
<v Speaker 1>this is all going to play out. I think we

0:15:50.080 --> 0:15:52.520
<v Speaker 1>should acknowledge there is a contingent of people who are

0:15:52.720 --> 0:15:56.360
<v Speaker 1>super excited about Elon Musk buying Twitter, including some people

0:15:57.040 --> 0:16:01.200
<v Speaker 1>at the company. Um. I think the very best thing

0:16:01.240 --> 0:16:05.320
<v Speaker 1>that could happen in this situation is like like I

0:16:05.400 --> 0:16:08.120
<v Speaker 1>act with my toddlers when they're out of control. I

0:16:08.520 --> 0:16:11.160
<v Speaker 1>think we can convince Ellen he has won in some

0:16:11.200 --> 0:16:13.800
<v Speaker 1>way by giving him something, but then making this all

0:16:13.840 --> 0:16:16.440
<v Speaker 1>go away in some legal manner, something like what kind

0:16:16.440 --> 0:16:18.480
<v Speaker 1>of something? I don't know. Well, he said he wasn't

0:16:18.520 --> 0:16:21.520
<v Speaker 1>interested in the CEO role necessarily. He said he was

0:16:21.520 --> 0:16:24.760
<v Speaker 1>more focused on product development than a title. But from

0:16:24.800 --> 0:16:27.200
<v Speaker 1>what you know about Twitter, is the bod thing as

0:16:27.240 --> 0:16:29.640
<v Speaker 1>big a problem as he seems to think it is um.

0:16:29.680 --> 0:16:31.920
<v Speaker 1>I think we all think that that's just cover for

0:16:32.000 --> 0:16:34.360
<v Speaker 1>what's happening. Right. I'm sure there's a bod problem. There

0:16:34.360 --> 0:16:37.520
<v Speaker 1>always has been. But this is his, this is his out.

0:16:37.920 --> 0:16:40.240
<v Speaker 1>And remind us what the next steps are, the time

0:16:40.240 --> 0:16:43.880
<v Speaker 1>frame for this to this this to actually move forward,

0:16:44.320 --> 0:16:47.560
<v Speaker 1>standard deal stuff, schedule a vote with the shareholders. You know,

0:16:47.680 --> 0:16:49.880
<v Speaker 1>the board has given its unanimous approval of this deal

0:16:49.920 --> 0:16:52.960
<v Speaker 1>at twenty cents to share. As far as Twitter's concerned,

0:16:52.960 --> 0:16:54.920
<v Speaker 1>mindstanding that you want to hold him to the terms

0:16:54.920 --> 0:16:59.000
<v Speaker 1>of the deal. Signed, all right, basic stuff basic indeed

0:16:59.240 --> 0:17:02.160
<v Speaker 1>or not basic at home? And thank you, Claire. Thank

0:17:02.200 --> 0:17:05.600
<v Speaker 1>you for sharing your very unvarnished view of the state

0:17:05.600 --> 0:17:16.359
<v Speaker 1>of flight. Thank you, Clary as artees Now to a

0:17:16.359 --> 0:17:18.880
<v Speaker 1>few other stories we continue to watch. Tesla has hiked

0:17:18.880 --> 0:17:21.160
<v Speaker 1>prices across its line up by as much as six

0:17:21.160 --> 0:17:24.359
<v Speaker 1>thousand dollars. This at least the third price hype for

0:17:24.400 --> 0:17:27.040
<v Speaker 1>Tesla this year. CEO Elon must said earlier this week.

0:17:27.040 --> 0:17:29.720
<v Speaker 1>The electric car company has weathered a tough patch the

0:17:29.800 --> 0:17:33.800
<v Speaker 1>last three months, facing a month long lockdown in Shanghai

0:17:34.000 --> 0:17:38.960
<v Speaker 1>and supply chain snarls that have challenged production and Musk

0:17:39.040 --> 0:17:42.399
<v Speaker 1>and his companies Tesla and SpaceX were sued for billion

0:17:42.440 --> 0:17:45.399
<v Speaker 1>dollars over claims they're part of a racketeering scheme to

0:17:45.440 --> 0:17:48.959
<v Speaker 1>back the cryptocurrency dog Point. A man named Keith Johnson

0:17:48.960 --> 0:17:50.720
<v Speaker 1>is seeking to represent a class of people who have

0:17:50.800 --> 0:17:54.679
<v Speaker 1>lost money trading in DOS since April. He's asking for

0:17:54.720 --> 0:17:58.119
<v Speaker 1>eighty six billion dollars in damages, plus triple damages of

0:17:58.400 --> 0:18:02.280
<v Speaker 1>a hundred seventy two billion dollars, and an order blocking

0:18:02.359 --> 0:18:06.040
<v Speaker 1>musk At his companies from promoting dose coin. He also

0:18:06.040 --> 0:18:10.000
<v Speaker 1>wants the court to declare does trading constitutes gambling under

0:18:10.160 --> 0:18:15.080
<v Speaker 1>US and New York law. Inflation market turmoil investors pulling

0:18:15.119 --> 0:18:18.520
<v Speaker 1>back has many a startup tightening their belts and cutting costs.

0:18:18.680 --> 0:18:21.199
<v Speaker 1>But there's one new unicorn that didn't wait for the

0:18:21.240 --> 0:18:24.760
<v Speaker 1>downturn to be thirsty or maybe it's savvy. Start up

0:18:24.960 --> 0:18:29.080
<v Speaker 1>Vanta helps businesses protect against dated breaches. It's co founder

0:18:29.119 --> 0:18:32.680
<v Speaker 1>and CEO, Christina Cassiopo, joins US now along with David Sachs,

0:18:32.680 --> 0:18:36.520
<v Speaker 1>a partner at Craft Vncher's who led the investment in Vanta.

0:18:36.680 --> 0:18:38.400
<v Speaker 1>Thank you both so much for joining us. Christina, I'll

0:18:38.400 --> 0:18:41.359
<v Speaker 1>start with you. You started off in venture capital. You

0:18:41.440 --> 0:18:43.840
<v Speaker 1>worked in product at drop Box and you left to

0:18:43.960 --> 0:18:46.600
<v Speaker 1>form Vanta. What is the problem that you're trying to

0:18:46.640 --> 0:18:51.040
<v Speaker 1>solve here? So really broadly, we're trying to help software

0:18:51.040 --> 0:18:55.680
<v Speaker 1>companies be more trustworthy with their customers and build that trust.

0:18:56.000 --> 0:18:57.920
<v Speaker 1>And so the way we do that is help those

0:18:57.920 --> 0:19:01.320
<v Speaker 1>software companies improve their secure artie and then go off

0:19:01.320 --> 0:19:04.399
<v Speaker 1>and prove it, often through something like a compliance at it,

0:19:04.720 --> 0:19:08.119
<v Speaker 1>a stock to GDPR hit the you know, showing that

0:19:08.160 --> 0:19:11.560
<v Speaker 1>they're taking these regulations seriously and really using them as

0:19:11.560 --> 0:19:15.760
<v Speaker 1>an opportunity to build trust with their customers and ultimately

0:19:15.760 --> 0:19:19.879
<v Speaker 1>grow their revenue in businesses. Now, David, I know a

0:19:19.920 --> 0:19:22.199
<v Speaker 1>lot of investors are being very careful about where they

0:19:22.200 --> 0:19:26.320
<v Speaker 1>put their money right now. What attracted you to this company? Well,

0:19:26.640 --> 0:19:28.359
<v Speaker 1>Vanta as a company have been interested in for a

0:19:28.359 --> 0:19:31.000
<v Speaker 1>long time. UM. We started to notice a number of

0:19:31.040 --> 0:19:34.199
<v Speaker 1>years ago that many of our portfolio companies were using Vanta.

0:19:34.440 --> 0:19:36.240
<v Speaker 1>You know, we invest in a lot of SAS companies

0:19:36.240 --> 0:19:39.760
<v Speaker 1>and we saw Vanta becoming a critical enabler for SAS

0:19:39.760 --> 0:19:42.000
<v Speaker 1>companies that want to sell into enterprises. Basically, if you

0:19:42.040 --> 0:19:44.920
<v Speaker 1>want to sell enterprise deals, you have to get a

0:19:44.960 --> 0:19:48.600
<v Speaker 1>stock to certification you have to do twenty seven thousand one.

0:19:49.000 --> 0:19:51.080
<v Speaker 1>You have to comply with pc I and g D

0:19:51.200 --> 0:19:53.800
<v Speaker 1>p R. And we saw that the market was shifting

0:19:53.880 --> 0:19:57.760
<v Speaker 1>from using high priced, expensive and slow consultants to using

0:19:57.800 --> 0:20:00.640
<v Speaker 1>a software platform like Vanta. So we wanted to invest

0:20:00.680 --> 0:20:02.800
<v Speaker 1>in Banta for a long time, and when the opportunity

0:20:02.800 --> 0:20:05.880
<v Speaker 1>came up, despite their being this downturn, we really jumped

0:20:05.920 --> 0:20:09.399
<v Speaker 1>up the opportunity. So Christina talked to us about this

0:20:09.520 --> 0:20:12.720
<v Speaker 1>costco coffee only approach. I mean, I don't I love

0:20:12.760 --> 0:20:17.479
<v Speaker 1>actually food at Costco, but I understand that you guys

0:20:17.560 --> 0:20:20.879
<v Speaker 1>have been very conscious about, you know, keeping costs down,

0:20:21.080 --> 0:20:25.240
<v Speaker 1>you know, even before we found ourselves in this macro environment. Yes,

0:20:25.359 --> 0:20:27.840
<v Speaker 1>you mentioned. I was fortunate to start my career at

0:20:27.840 --> 0:20:30.600
<v Speaker 1>an early stage VC firm and unit to grad Ventures

0:20:30.640 --> 0:20:32.720
<v Speaker 1>and learned a lot there um. And one thing in

0:20:32.760 --> 0:20:37.000
<v Speaker 1>particular was that investors prefer funding businesses that don't really

0:20:37.040 --> 0:20:40.440
<v Speaker 1>need funding, um. And that's just informed how we've froun

0:20:40.560 --> 0:20:44.959
<v Speaker 1>Banta from the early days is to grow and be aggressive,

0:20:45.040 --> 0:20:47.479
<v Speaker 1>but also do so with an eye to controlling our

0:20:47.520 --> 0:20:50.760
<v Speaker 1>own destiny um. And so one early example of that

0:20:51.080 --> 0:20:53.640
<v Speaker 1>is we actually got to ten million dollars in revenue

0:20:53.760 --> 0:20:57.720
<v Speaker 1>onjust a seed round. Uh. And again some of that were,

0:20:57.760 --> 0:21:00.480
<v Speaker 1>you know, hopefully printing business decisions. And then there's a

0:21:00.520 --> 0:21:02.520
<v Speaker 1>lot of things kind of like the cost co coffee

0:21:02.600 --> 0:21:06.199
<v Speaker 1>that both help cut some costs that you might be

0:21:06.240 --> 0:21:09.760
<v Speaker 1>spending otherwise, and they're just a helpful cultural signal to

0:21:09.800 --> 0:21:12.320
<v Speaker 1>folks that you know, hey, we're here to build a business.

0:21:12.560 --> 0:21:16.800
<v Speaker 1>That's what's most important. David, you know, what's your advice

0:21:16.840 --> 0:21:19.640
<v Speaker 1>to start ups right now? In this macro environment, all

0:21:19.640 --> 0:21:22.679
<v Speaker 1>of this uncertainty. You had people comparing this to the

0:21:22.760 --> 0:21:26.400
<v Speaker 1>dot com bust. Mm hmmm, Well, this is clearly one

0:21:26.400 --> 0:21:29.040
<v Speaker 1>of the top three worst downturns that Silicon Valley has

0:21:29.080 --> 0:21:30.960
<v Speaker 1>seen in the last twenty years, along with the dot

0:21:30.960 --> 0:21:33.400
<v Speaker 1>com crash back in two thousand and then the Great

0:21:33.400 --> 0:21:36.440
<v Speaker 1>Recession in two thousand eight, and so I think this

0:21:36.480 --> 0:21:38.439
<v Speaker 1>one is on track to be worse than two thousand eight.

0:21:38.440 --> 0:21:40.520
<v Speaker 1>I don't think somebody as bad as two thousand, but

0:21:40.560 --> 0:21:43.040
<v Speaker 1>I think founders need to get aware that we are

0:21:43.080 --> 0:21:46.479
<v Speaker 1>probably headed into recession. The capital raising environment is very

0:21:46.480 --> 0:21:48.720
<v Speaker 1>different than it was last year. They need to lengthen

0:21:48.760 --> 0:21:52.159
<v Speaker 1>their runway advising all of our portfolio companies to try

0:21:52.240 --> 0:21:54.080
<v Speaker 1>and have at least two and a half years runway,

0:21:54.119 --> 0:21:56.800
<v Speaker 1>because you can't wait till the very end to raise.

0:21:57.119 --> 0:21:58.400
<v Speaker 1>So if you want to have two years to work

0:21:58.400 --> 0:22:00.440
<v Speaker 1>on your business, you actually need to a half years

0:22:00.440 --> 0:22:04.640
<v Speaker 1>of runway. So we are advising our founders cut your burn. Uh,

0:22:04.680 --> 0:22:07.960
<v Speaker 1>you know, do everything you can to survive this this downturn.

0:22:08.040 --> 0:22:10.679
<v Speaker 1>And I think, you know, Vanta one of the reasons

0:22:10.720 --> 0:22:12.840
<v Speaker 1>why we wanted to invest because they have been so

0:22:12.960 --> 0:22:16.840
<v Speaker 1>incredibly capital efficient. What Christina did in terms of setting

0:22:16.880 --> 0:22:19.479
<v Speaker 1>a frugal tone at the company, I think really worked.

0:22:20.080 --> 0:22:22.760
<v Speaker 1>The company has one of the best burn multiples we've seen.

0:22:23.320 --> 0:22:26.320
<v Speaker 1>That is our metric for measuring the capital efficiency of

0:22:26.320 --> 0:22:30.560
<v Speaker 1>a startup. And so you know, vcs are looking two.

0:22:30.640 --> 0:22:32.919
<v Speaker 1>We're still looking to invest in high growth companies, but

0:22:33.000 --> 0:22:36.119
<v Speaker 1>we also want to see capital efficiency and so the

0:22:36.160 --> 0:22:38.359
<v Speaker 1>trick for founders right now is they can't just grow,

0:22:38.640 --> 0:22:42.720
<v Speaker 1>They have to grow in a capital efficient way. Christina

0:22:42.960 --> 0:22:45.240
<v Speaker 1>tell us a little bit about your fundraising journey. Given

0:22:45.240 --> 0:22:48.200
<v Speaker 1>all the market dynamics right now, your own background as

0:22:48.200 --> 0:22:49.879
<v Speaker 1>a VC, what was it like being on the other

0:22:49.920 --> 0:22:51.920
<v Speaker 1>side of the table, you know, did you have any

0:22:51.960 --> 0:22:54.800
<v Speaker 1>moments of panic where you were worried are we gonna

0:22:54.800 --> 0:22:57.560
<v Speaker 1>be able to close this deal in this macro environment?

0:22:58.480 --> 0:23:02.040
<v Speaker 1>So what you will say, it's the fundraising in two

0:23:02.200 --> 0:23:06.240
<v Speaker 1>is quite different from doing so UM, I'm going to

0:23:06.320 --> 0:23:09.240
<v Speaker 1>two fold, right. There's just more scrutiny across the board

0:23:09.320 --> 0:23:12.480
<v Speaker 1>this year. Uh, and then a different set of metrics.

0:23:12.560 --> 0:23:15.320
<v Speaker 1>Right In one, it was all about revenue growth and

0:23:15.520 --> 0:23:19.400
<v Speaker 1>you know kind of how much are you growing how quickly? Uh?

0:23:19.440 --> 0:23:23.680
<v Speaker 1>And this year, as daven mentioned, burn multiple big deal, right,

0:23:23.960 --> 0:23:26.320
<v Speaker 1>So for every dollar revenue you're bringing in, how much

0:23:26.359 --> 0:23:33.200
<v Speaker 1>do you spend to do that? Um? Gross margin, burn rate, runway. Like,

0:23:33.560 --> 0:23:36.800
<v Speaker 1>all of these questions were just kind of not new

0:23:36.880 --> 0:23:39.280
<v Speaker 1>for us, because we've been thinking about these things for

0:23:39.320 --> 0:23:42.400
<v Speaker 1>the last couple of years and trying to manage them

0:23:42.400 --> 0:23:45.400
<v Speaker 1>internally and keep an eye on them. But it's certainly

0:23:45.440 --> 0:23:50.040
<v Speaker 1>different than the series A we raised last year. David,

0:23:50.119 --> 0:23:53.480
<v Speaker 1>You've been building and investing since before the dot com bust,

0:23:53.520 --> 0:23:57.199
<v Speaker 1>and I'm so curious if you think a recession is

0:23:57.200 --> 0:24:00.000
<v Speaker 1>inevitable at this point. If so, is it a risk

0:24:00.000 --> 0:24:02.560
<v Speaker 1>session with a capital ARE or a lower case are?

0:24:02.800 --> 0:24:05.800
<v Speaker 1>How bad does it get? I do? I mean, I've

0:24:05.800 --> 0:24:08.520
<v Speaker 1>been saying since February that I thought there were warning

0:24:08.560 --> 0:24:11.359
<v Speaker 1>signs of a slowdown, impossible recession, and now we have

0:24:11.480 --> 0:24:15.480
<v Speaker 1>the FED raising rates very aggressively. I think they waited

0:24:15.520 --> 0:24:17.480
<v Speaker 1>a year too long. We had the warning signs of

0:24:17.480 --> 0:24:19.760
<v Speaker 1>inflation a year ago, and they waited nine months before

0:24:19.800 --> 0:24:21.919
<v Speaker 1>doing anything, and now as a result of that, they

0:24:21.960 --> 0:24:25.280
<v Speaker 1>have to overcompensate by raising rates very very quickly. That's

0:24:25.760 --> 0:24:29.600
<v Speaker 1>basically causing the economy, I think to UH, to basically

0:24:29.680 --> 0:24:32.640
<v Speaker 1>do somersaults. So I think we are headed into recession.

0:24:32.680 --> 0:24:34.720
<v Speaker 1>There's already a slowdown. We had negative one a half

0:24:34.760 --> 0:24:37.480
<v Speaker 1>percent growth in the last quarter. So I think everyone

0:24:37.520 --> 0:24:41.119
<v Speaker 1>should be uh, I guess expecting a recession and if

0:24:41.119 --> 0:24:43.040
<v Speaker 1>it doesn't material lot and I think probably a pretty

0:24:43.040 --> 0:24:46.879
<v Speaker 1>serious recession. And if it doesn't materialize, that's great news.

0:24:46.920 --> 0:24:49.080
<v Speaker 1>But I think that's what founders should be expecting at

0:24:49.080 --> 0:24:53.600
<v Speaker 1>this point. Which of the company, now you're old enough

0:24:53.640 --> 0:24:56.320
<v Speaker 1>to remember, until them, I Cisco, you know, hitting its

0:24:56.320 --> 0:24:59.520
<v Speaker 1>peak in in the dot com boom, and it still

0:24:59.600 --> 0:25:03.280
<v Speaker 1>hasn't recovered. Of you know, the big established tech companies

0:25:03.320 --> 0:25:06.199
<v Speaker 1>that have enjoyed this ride, do you think any of

0:25:06.240 --> 0:25:10.200
<v Speaker 1>those could could become the next Cisco. Well, I think

0:25:10.320 --> 0:25:13.399
<v Speaker 1>I think the big public companies aren't much better shape

0:25:13.440 --> 0:25:15.520
<v Speaker 1>than they were. The big public tech companies are much

0:25:15.560 --> 0:25:17.720
<v Speaker 1>better shape than they were during the dot com crash.

0:25:17.800 --> 0:25:19.280
<v Speaker 1>I mean, in the days of the dot com crash,

0:25:19.320 --> 0:25:21.399
<v Speaker 1>many of those companies were just kind of illusory. They

0:25:21.400 --> 0:25:23.600
<v Speaker 1>didn't have real business models, they didn't have real customers,

0:25:23.640 --> 0:25:25.879
<v Speaker 1>they didn't have real revenue. That's not the case today.

0:25:25.880 --> 0:25:29.480
<v Speaker 1>I think what's happening today is evaluation multiples are changing,

0:25:30.000 --> 0:25:32.520
<v Speaker 1>but these are real businesses. Software is of service is

0:25:32.560 --> 0:25:37.040
<v Speaker 1>not going away. Software businesses are still incredible businesses. Their

0:25:37.080 --> 0:25:40.199
<v Speaker 1>high gross margins. Uh, they're eating more and more of

0:25:40.200 --> 0:25:43.280
<v Speaker 1>the economy. They're becoming a larger and larger category of

0:25:43.359 --> 0:25:46.919
<v Speaker 1>spend by enterprises on software. So I don't think that

0:25:46.960 --> 0:25:50.480
<v Speaker 1>this is existential. I think this is simply a big

0:25:50.520 --> 0:25:54.440
<v Speaker 1>rerating in terms of valuation multiples, driven mainly by interest rates.

0:25:54.920 --> 0:25:57.800
<v Speaker 1>And I think that, um, you know, what founders need

0:25:57.840 --> 0:26:00.000
<v Speaker 1>to do is just make sure that they've given them

0:26:00.000 --> 0:26:05.480
<v Speaker 1>sells the runway to persevere through a recession or downturn. Christina,

0:26:05.520 --> 0:26:06.960
<v Speaker 1>how do you think this is all going to impact

0:26:06.960 --> 0:26:10.960
<v Speaker 1>the war for talent? I mean, obviously you have employees

0:26:10.960 --> 0:26:13.320
<v Speaker 1>probably thinking twice about whether they want to make a jump.

0:26:13.600 --> 0:26:16.320
<v Speaker 1>You know, do do do workers want to work at

0:26:16.320 --> 0:26:21.640
<v Speaker 1>startups right now? Given the uncertainty? Yeah, I think. Look,

0:26:21.720 --> 0:26:23.840
<v Speaker 1>there's a lot of doom and gloom that we talk about,

0:26:23.880 --> 0:26:27.720
<v Speaker 1>you know, within an upcoming potential recession. And you know,

0:26:27.760 --> 0:26:30.439
<v Speaker 1>I don't think it's all bad news. I think, as

0:26:30.480 --> 0:26:33.680
<v Speaker 1>you've both implied, like downturns or when some really great

0:26:33.720 --> 0:26:37.320
<v Speaker 1>businesses have gotten built, um, and I think we'll actually

0:26:37.359 --> 0:26:41.200
<v Speaker 1>become easier to recruit for the companies that correctly manage

0:26:41.240 --> 0:26:43.720
<v Speaker 1>their burn and you know, stick around and are able

0:26:43.760 --> 0:26:47.040
<v Speaker 1>to you know, not just persist, but almost accelerate through

0:26:47.160 --> 0:26:51.840
<v Speaker 1>the downturn. David, I would agree with that, But I

0:26:51.840 --> 0:26:54.359
<v Speaker 1>would agree with that. You know, PayPal was largely built

0:26:54.359 --> 0:26:56.000
<v Speaker 1>in the wake of the dot com crash. You know,

0:26:56.040 --> 0:26:59.320
<v Speaker 1>my company Amor would be sold to Microsoft for unicorn valuation.

0:26:59.440 --> 0:27:01.200
<v Speaker 1>That company was mainly built in the wake of the

0:27:01.840 --> 0:27:04.520
<v Speaker 1>Great Recession of two thousand eight. So downturns can be

0:27:04.560 --> 0:27:08.359
<v Speaker 1>a great time to build enduring companies. Uh, the warfare

0:27:08.359 --> 0:27:12.359
<v Speaker 1>talent gets easier. Uh, there are fewer copycasts getting funded,

0:27:12.400 --> 0:27:14.560
<v Speaker 1>so the competition could be easier the only thing that

0:27:14.560 --> 0:27:17.320
<v Speaker 1>gets harder is fundraising. And so if you make sure

0:27:17.800 --> 0:27:19.800
<v Speaker 1>that you're that you raise money at the right time,

0:27:19.800 --> 0:27:23.040
<v Speaker 1>and you make that funding last lengthen your runway, then uh,

0:27:23.080 --> 0:27:25.320
<v Speaker 1>you know, building during a downturn could be a great

0:27:25.320 --> 0:27:28.520
<v Speaker 1>time to build a great company. Well, I have to

0:27:28.560 --> 0:27:31.680
<v Speaker 1>ask you about your former PayPal colleague and friend, Elon Musk.

0:27:31.760 --> 0:27:34.640
<v Speaker 1>He spoke to Twitter employees as at an all hands meeting.

0:27:34.680 --> 0:27:37.879
<v Speaker 1>We got some more details about his vision for Twitter.

0:27:38.280 --> 0:27:42.200
<v Speaker 1>Um the proposing the idea that all users get verified

0:27:42.280 --> 0:27:45.119
<v Speaker 1>to crack down on bots, also saying that, you know,

0:27:45.200 --> 0:27:48.119
<v Speaker 1>he believes folks should be able to say pretty outrageous

0:27:48.160 --> 0:27:52.280
<v Speaker 1>things on Twitter short of breaking the law. Um, you know,

0:27:53.359 --> 0:27:56.280
<v Speaker 1>do you think he I know you've obviously been supportive

0:27:56.359 --> 0:28:00.199
<v Speaker 1>of him buying the company, supportive of his idea. Is

0:28:00.760 --> 0:28:03.680
<v Speaker 1>what do you think is going to be most impactful

0:28:03.800 --> 0:28:08.480
<v Speaker 1>about Elon Musk potentially taking over? Well, you know, I

0:28:08.520 --> 0:28:10.639
<v Speaker 1>already see a lot of outrageous things on Twitter. So

0:28:10.680 --> 0:28:12.480
<v Speaker 1>I think what what Ellen is saying is that he

0:28:12.480 --> 0:28:14.480
<v Speaker 1>believes in the principle of free speech and he thinks

0:28:14.520 --> 0:28:16.280
<v Speaker 1>it needs to be applied in an even handed way.

0:28:16.320 --> 0:28:18.640
<v Speaker 1>I mean, we need rules created by Twitter that aren't

0:28:18.720 --> 0:28:20.600
<v Speaker 1>just made up as they go along, and that only

0:28:20.600 --> 0:28:22.399
<v Speaker 1>effect one side of the debate. They need to be

0:28:22.440 --> 0:28:25.480
<v Speaker 1>an honest, open marketplace for ideas. I think that's part

0:28:25.520 --> 0:28:27.520
<v Speaker 1>of what he's saying. And then the other part that

0:28:27.640 --> 0:28:29.359
<v Speaker 1>I hear is he's saying that Twitter needs to be

0:28:29.400 --> 0:28:32.200
<v Speaker 1>a real business. He's saying that your costs now exceed

0:28:32.240 --> 0:28:35.800
<v Speaker 1>your revenues. That's not sustainable. We need to cut costs,

0:28:35.800 --> 0:28:38.080
<v Speaker 1>we need to grow revenue. It sounds to me like

0:28:38.200 --> 0:28:41.760
<v Speaker 1>he wants to apply some business rigor to the company,

0:28:41.960 --> 0:28:44.360
<v Speaker 1>and um so I would expect that if he takes

0:28:44.400 --> 0:28:46.840
<v Speaker 1>over the company there will be some cost cutting. Sounds like,

0:28:46.960 --> 0:28:49.800
<v Speaker 1>you know, he believes in in person work. He said

0:28:49.840 --> 0:28:52.400
<v Speaker 1>that he would prefer that people be in the office,

0:28:52.440 --> 0:28:56.200
<v Speaker 1>although exceptions be made for you know, truly exceptional cases.

0:28:56.520 --> 0:28:58.760
<v Speaker 1>But I would expect him to apply some business rigger.

0:28:59.040 --> 0:29:00.520
<v Speaker 1>And that's half of what you do. In the other

0:29:00.560 --> 0:29:05.960
<v Speaker 1>half is um is basically creating some predictable rules around speech. Now,

0:29:06.000 --> 0:29:08.360
<v Speaker 1>there are some doubts as to whether he's really committed

0:29:08.480 --> 0:29:11.080
<v Speaker 1>to doing this deal, whether he's using bots. We had

0:29:11.080 --> 0:29:14.000
<v Speaker 1>a former Twitter employee on earlier who believes he's using

0:29:14.000 --> 0:29:16.280
<v Speaker 1>this spot issue to try to get out of it,

0:29:16.320 --> 0:29:19.040
<v Speaker 1>that he's not really serious, that he doesn't necessarily really

0:29:19.040 --> 0:29:21.160
<v Speaker 1>want it. Do you think he's Is he serious? Is

0:29:21.160 --> 0:29:24.680
<v Speaker 1>he committed to buying Twitter? Well, the fact he did

0:29:24.720 --> 0:29:27.800
<v Speaker 1>this town hall with the employees today actually is is

0:29:27.840 --> 0:29:30.520
<v Speaker 1>assigned to me that the deal is actually likely to happen.

0:29:30.560 --> 0:29:32.240
<v Speaker 1>I agree that there was some question a few weeks

0:29:32.280 --> 0:29:35.720
<v Speaker 1>ago about whether it was actually gonna happen, but I

0:29:35.720 --> 0:29:37.200
<v Speaker 1>think the fact that he did this meeting with the

0:29:37.200 --> 0:29:40.000
<v Speaker 1>employees leads me to believe it's more likely than not

0:29:40.080 --> 0:29:41.640
<v Speaker 1>that it's actually going to happen, that he intends to

0:29:41.680 --> 0:29:43.720
<v Speaker 1>fall through with it. So you know, I don't know

0:29:43.800 --> 0:29:46.520
<v Speaker 1>anything that he hasn't said publicly about it, but I

0:29:46.520 --> 0:29:50.960
<v Speaker 1>would take that as a signal. David Sacks Craft Ventures

0:29:51.080 --> 0:29:55.680
<v Speaker 1>and Christina Caciopo, CEO of Vanta, thank you both. Appreciate

0:29:55.720 --> 0:29:59.160
<v Speaker 1>you covering wide range of issues today. Okay, come up,

0:29:59.160 --> 0:30:02.200
<v Speaker 1>we're gonna hear from Gala see Digital founder Mike novograts

0:30:02.240 --> 0:30:07.200
<v Speaker 1>on Crypto's fall from grace and the sudden exodus of investors.

0:30:07.520 --> 0:30:35.480
<v Speaker 1>He's next. This is Bloomberg. It is time for our

0:30:35.520 --> 0:30:37.560
<v Speaker 1>Crypto Report. Now and there's no end to the pain

0:30:37.640 --> 0:30:40.360
<v Speaker 1>in the space as the route and bitcoin rolls on

0:30:40.480 --> 0:30:44.760
<v Speaker 1>now down for ten consecutive sessions. Galaxy Digital founder Mike

0:30:44.800 --> 0:30:48.120
<v Speaker 1>Novograt spoke earlier on Bloomberg Today about these headwinds in

0:30:48.200 --> 0:30:52.120
<v Speaker 1>digital assets. You have the whole crypto and context what's

0:30:52.160 --> 0:30:55.160
<v Speaker 1>going on macro right and we talked about there we're

0:30:55.160 --> 0:30:57.320
<v Speaker 1>gonna be headwinds this year because the FED was gonna

0:30:57.320 --> 0:31:00.560
<v Speaker 1>have to withdraw all liquidity and so assets that went

0:31:00.680 --> 0:31:05.240
<v Speaker 1>up based on cheap money forever, if they're growth stocks

0:31:05.360 --> 0:31:10.959
<v Speaker 1>or expensive watches or crypto, we're under certainly under pressure

0:31:11.000 --> 0:31:16.560
<v Speaker 1>all year long. What's exacerbated this move in crypto is,

0:31:17.400 --> 0:31:20.720
<v Speaker 1>you know a bunch of leveraged players that had far

0:31:20.800 --> 0:31:23.560
<v Speaker 1>more leverage I think people thought, uh, and so you

0:31:23.600 --> 0:31:27.760
<v Speaker 1>can talk about Celsius or three hours capital um. That's

0:31:27.840 --> 0:31:32.360
<v Speaker 1>caused almost something familiar similar to what happened with long

0:31:32.480 --> 0:31:37.280
<v Speaker 1>term capital management, UH alleged. You know market neutral players

0:31:37.280 --> 0:31:40.880
<v Speaker 1>with monster leverage and that's being unwound, and that's created

0:31:40.920 --> 0:31:43.000
<v Speaker 1>a ton of fear in the space. And so you've

0:31:43.040 --> 0:31:45.400
<v Speaker 1>seen lots of credit being withdrawn from the space. And

0:31:45.440 --> 0:31:48.560
<v Speaker 1>when credits with drawn, you know, you've seen prices collapse,

0:31:48.680 --> 0:31:51.440
<v Speaker 1>and so I had hoped this year was thirty thousand

0:31:51.520 --> 0:31:57.400
<v Speaker 1>fifty thousand bitcoin, and once we took out eight thousand,

0:31:57.400 --> 0:32:02.360
<v Speaker 1>we've cascaded. Uh. Yeah, twenty thousand is a pretty good

0:32:02.360 --> 0:32:04.800
<v Speaker 1>target with one thousand of the theory, and we've tested

0:32:04.840 --> 0:32:06.720
<v Speaker 1>that two days. You know, when I look at the

0:32:06.800 --> 0:32:10.680
<v Speaker 1>US stock market, um, it looks like it's got probably

0:32:10.680 --> 0:32:13.200
<v Speaker 1>four percent more to go to thirty five hundred, which

0:32:13.240 --> 0:32:17.200
<v Speaker 1>is where the two d week moving averages, whereas support

0:32:17.280 --> 0:32:20.960
<v Speaker 1>comes in, and I think you're seeing this liquidation of

0:32:21.080 --> 0:32:25.480
<v Speaker 1>risks and cryptos got caught up with it. Mike, tough question,

0:32:25.520 --> 0:32:27.760
<v Speaker 1>but did you directly have any sort of exposure to

0:32:27.800 --> 0:32:30.200
<v Speaker 1>those counterparts that you mentioned, the likes of Celsius, the

0:32:30.280 --> 0:32:33.840
<v Speaker 1>likes of three urrows, or is it more third you know,

0:32:34.000 --> 0:32:37.520
<v Speaker 1>third order effects that you gain the exposure and is

0:32:37.520 --> 0:32:41.160
<v Speaker 1>it you get you get exposure indirectly from any big

0:32:41.160 --> 0:32:44.880
<v Speaker 1>player in the space, right and when you have really

0:32:44.920 --> 0:32:47.520
<v Speaker 1>big players that have borrowed money from all over the place,

0:32:47.560 --> 0:32:50.600
<v Speaker 1>it creates this daisy chain effect. And I think that's

0:32:50.640 --> 0:32:54.240
<v Speaker 1>burning through the system right now. My senses, it's mostly

0:32:54.320 --> 0:32:57.240
<v Speaker 1>burned out, like these fires go until they run out

0:32:57.240 --> 0:33:00.200
<v Speaker 1>of oxygen, and so, uh, you know, you'd up to

0:33:00.240 --> 0:33:03.840
<v Speaker 1>be one heck of a diamond handed player to have

0:33:03.960 --> 0:33:06.280
<v Speaker 1>sustained all of this if you have too much leverage.

0:33:06.680 --> 0:33:09.080
<v Speaker 1>And so my guesses leverage has been knocked out of

0:33:09.080 --> 0:33:11.920
<v Speaker 1>the system. But humpty dumpy, doesn't you know, get put

0:33:11.960 --> 0:33:14.880
<v Speaker 1>back together right away. It takes a while to kind

0:33:14.880 --> 0:33:19.120
<v Speaker 1>of sort through. They'll be bankruptcy proceeds, uh in many companies,

0:33:19.560 --> 0:33:21.640
<v Speaker 1>And so I think while we should bounce off of

0:33:21.680 --> 0:33:24.640
<v Speaker 1>twenty tho and bounce off of a thousand, it's gonna

0:33:24.680 --> 0:33:26.480
<v Speaker 1>take a little while for a cryptot to regain and

0:33:26.560 --> 0:33:31.640
<v Speaker 1>narrative regain honors. Galaxy Digital's Mike novograts who can catch

0:33:31.680 --> 0:33:43.520
<v Speaker 1>up full interview at Bloomberg dot com. Rising inflation and

0:33:43.600 --> 0:33:47.760
<v Speaker 1>a looming recession have hit all sectors hard, but especially retail.

0:33:47.840 --> 0:33:50.080
<v Speaker 1>But Rent the Runway was one of the few companies

0:33:50.080 --> 0:33:54.080
<v Speaker 1>this earning season to beat estimates and raise guidance, joining

0:33:54.160 --> 0:33:57.200
<v Speaker 1>us NOW CEO and co founder Jennifer Hyman. So, Jen,

0:33:57.680 --> 0:34:00.680
<v Speaker 1>how are you bucking the trend here? I think the

0:34:00.760 --> 0:34:04.200
<v Speaker 1>Rent the Runway is about delivering enormous financial value to

0:34:04.240 --> 0:34:06.520
<v Speaker 1>the customer. So if you rent address for a special

0:34:06.520 --> 0:34:10.799
<v Speaker 1>occasion from US, you're paying off the retail price, and

0:34:10.800 --> 0:34:13.320
<v Speaker 1>if you have a subscription, each item is like eighteen

0:34:13.360 --> 0:34:16.640
<v Speaker 1>twenty bucks, So it's even cheaper than shopping at an

0:34:16.640 --> 0:34:19.720
<v Speaker 1>off price channel. It's cheaper than fast fashion and abborce

0:34:19.920 --> 0:34:22.279
<v Speaker 1>is the real thing. So we think that in an

0:34:22.400 --> 0:34:24.880
<v Speaker 1>environment where we've been cooped up for the last two years,

0:34:25.200 --> 0:34:27.600
<v Speaker 1>you're certainly seeing in kind of the earnings calls of

0:34:27.640 --> 0:34:30.600
<v Speaker 1>Airbnb and bookings dot Com and live Nation that people

0:34:30.600 --> 0:34:34.319
<v Speaker 1>are going out and they want ways to wear something new.

0:34:34.360 --> 0:34:36.440
<v Speaker 1>They just want to do it affordably. So rent the

0:34:36.520 --> 0:34:40.040
<v Speaker 1>runways an experience that goes along with events and travel

0:34:40.239 --> 0:34:43.040
<v Speaker 1>and going out to restaurants, going out to concerts, and

0:34:43.080 --> 0:34:46.640
<v Speaker 1>that's why we've been able to perform. There's no question though,

0:34:46.680 --> 0:34:50.719
<v Speaker 1>that inflation is going to hit folks even harder. People

0:34:50.760 --> 0:34:54.319
<v Speaker 1>are paying more for gas, more for groceries. What's your

0:34:54.760 --> 0:34:58.640
<v Speaker 1>forecast on how customer spending habits are going to change?

0:34:58.680 --> 0:35:01.040
<v Speaker 1>How much are they going to be willing to spend

0:35:01.360 --> 0:35:05.319
<v Speaker 1>on apparel versus some of these essential items, and and

0:35:05.360 --> 0:35:07.960
<v Speaker 1>how do they think about appare is it is it

0:35:08.000 --> 0:35:10.120
<v Speaker 1>more of an essential because we've been cooked up for

0:35:10.160 --> 0:35:16.399
<v Speaker 1>so long. I think that UM, first of all, rent

0:35:16.480 --> 0:35:19.560
<v Speaker 1>the runway has a customer base that's slightly different. It's

0:35:19.640 --> 0:35:24.560
<v Speaker 1>more of a higher income customer base. So I think, listen,

0:35:24.600 --> 0:35:27.560
<v Speaker 1>everyone is impacted by the by inflation and buy an

0:35:27.640 --> 0:35:30.320
<v Speaker 1>upcoming recession, and people are going to think about smarter

0:35:30.520 --> 0:35:33.279
<v Speaker 1>ways to spend in the category. So I think the

0:35:33.320 --> 0:35:35.680
<v Speaker 1>only data we really have is what happened in two

0:35:35.680 --> 0:35:40.200
<v Speaker 1>thousand eight was fascinating. In two thousand eight, Americans continued

0:35:40.239 --> 0:35:43.520
<v Speaker 1>to buy sixty five articles of apparel per year, which

0:35:43.560 --> 0:35:46.279
<v Speaker 1>was the exact same amount they bought in two thousand five,

0:35:46.400 --> 0:35:49.239
<v Speaker 1>six and seven. What they did is they flipped into

0:35:49.280 --> 0:35:53.640
<v Speaker 1>lower price per unit retailers. So they flipped into off chrice,

0:35:53.719 --> 0:35:56.239
<v Speaker 1>they flipped into value. And I really believe that re

0:35:56.400 --> 0:35:58.960
<v Speaker 1>commerce in general can now be part of that cost

0:35:59.000 --> 0:36:03.480
<v Speaker 1>consideration set. So even in recessionary times, people still want

0:36:03.640 --> 0:36:07.000
<v Speaker 1>variety in their wardrobes. Now, how does the fact that

0:36:07.040 --> 0:36:12.040
<v Speaker 1>we all went through covid um factor into this. I

0:36:12.080 --> 0:36:15.880
<v Speaker 1>think that this procession might feel different, might look different

0:36:15.920 --> 0:36:19.000
<v Speaker 1>than the last one. I think that we may end

0:36:19.080 --> 0:36:23.880
<v Speaker 1>up spending more on experiences in this uh, in this

0:36:23.960 --> 0:36:26.800
<v Speaker 1>recessionary period than we did in the last one because

0:36:26.840 --> 0:36:29.200
<v Speaker 1>we didn't travel over the last two years. We didn't

0:36:29.200 --> 0:36:32.360
<v Speaker 1>really go out to eat, we didn't see friends and rent.

0:36:32.360 --> 0:36:36.480
<v Speaker 1>The runway is spend that tracks with experiences. So I

0:36:36.520 --> 0:36:39.719
<v Speaker 1>think that you might travel you have inflation, maybe you

0:36:39.719 --> 0:36:42.240
<v Speaker 1>don't travel to Italy and you travel to Florida instead,

0:36:42.280 --> 0:36:44.959
<v Speaker 1>and you kind of book a cheaper hotel. You're still

0:36:44.960 --> 0:36:46.839
<v Speaker 1>going to get out there and go out. And I

0:36:46.920 --> 0:36:49.960
<v Speaker 1>think that as long as we can market value, we

0:36:50.040 --> 0:36:53.879
<v Speaker 1>will be able to be more. Uh. Part of her

0:36:54.600 --> 0:36:58.160
<v Speaker 1>considerations that now we're saying a lot of tech companies

0:36:58.160 --> 0:37:01.840
<v Speaker 1>have to make hard decisions layoffs downstizing you had to

0:37:01.880 --> 0:37:04.200
<v Speaker 1>make some tough decisions during the pandemic, and you've been

0:37:04.320 --> 0:37:07.200
<v Speaker 1>very open about that. Do you have any reflections on

0:37:07.280 --> 0:37:10.480
<v Speaker 1>that now, and you know, you know, potentially input for

0:37:10.520 --> 0:37:15.600
<v Speaker 1>these founders who are having to make those tough decisions now. Um,

0:37:15.640 --> 0:37:19.000
<v Speaker 1>we cut over our expenses in a three week period

0:37:19.040 --> 0:37:24.560
<v Speaker 1>in March, and it was a dramatic situation. And that

0:37:24.640 --> 0:37:28.959
<v Speaker 1>one weekend in March, you know, over of our subscribers

0:37:29.040 --> 0:37:34.000
<v Speaker 1>paused or canceled and so we had to act extremely quickly.

0:37:34.280 --> 0:37:37.120
<v Speaker 1>We had to change the way We acquired inventory too,

0:37:37.719 --> 0:37:41.360
<v Speaker 1>from buying inventory outright to actually revenue sharing and receiving

0:37:41.360 --> 0:37:45.280
<v Speaker 1>our inventory and consignment. So I would say to other

0:37:46.200 --> 0:37:49.640
<v Speaker 1>ceo s that there's not a moment to lose that

0:37:49.800 --> 0:37:52.120
<v Speaker 1>cash is king. You have to think about all of

0:37:52.200 --> 0:37:56.120
<v Speaker 1>your investments and be more conservative and kind of the

0:37:56.239 --> 0:37:59.680
<v Speaker 1>great thing about this environment is it's not happening overnight.

0:37:59.680 --> 0:38:02.840
<v Speaker 1>There will never be another experience where, like a pandemic,

0:38:02.880 --> 0:38:06.279
<v Speaker 1>we're all locked inside. You know, from March eighth to

0:38:06.400 --> 0:38:10.120
<v Speaker 1>March nine, we were living different lives. So we're constantly

0:38:10.200 --> 0:38:13.560
<v Speaker 1>looking at the data. Internally, we feel that we're able

0:38:13.600 --> 0:38:16.960
<v Speaker 1>to react and thus far we feel positively. We gave

0:38:17.000 --> 0:38:21.160
<v Speaker 1>great guidance for Q two. But and for you know,

0:38:21.239 --> 0:38:25.560
<v Speaker 1>reaffirmed our guidance for the year. We think that um

0:38:25.680 --> 0:38:28.280
<v Speaker 1>we every business has to be smart right now because

0:38:28.320 --> 0:38:32.480
<v Speaker 1>no business is pession or inflation proof. So last quick question,

0:38:32.520 --> 0:38:35.040
<v Speaker 1>if you beat estimates and you raise your guidance, does

0:38:35.080 --> 0:38:38.960
<v Speaker 1>that mean the pandemic era of sweatpants is over? Yes,

0:38:39.440 --> 0:38:43.919
<v Speaker 1>Black Time twenty two like sweatpants is to I mean,

0:38:44.239 --> 0:38:47.399
<v Speaker 1>people are dressing up in a way that I've never

0:38:47.440 --> 0:38:51.880
<v Speaker 1>seen before. They are bolder, brighter than they've ever been before.

0:38:51.880 --> 0:38:54.120
<v Speaker 1>And I think that this is just the example, like

0:38:54.200 --> 0:38:57.400
<v Speaker 1>they're dating again, they're going to parties again, like people

0:38:57.440 --> 0:39:00.160
<v Speaker 1>aren't going to stop doing that now, and so I

0:39:00.200 --> 0:39:03.280
<v Speaker 1>do believe that this recession might be different for service

0:39:03.320 --> 0:39:07.200
<v Speaker 1>based companies. All right, Jennifer Hyman, CEO and co founder

0:39:07.280 --> 0:39:09.239
<v Speaker 1>Rent the Runway. Always good to have you, Jen, Thank

0:39:09.280 --> 0:39:12.800
<v Speaker 1>you for stopping by. That does it for this edition

0:39:12.920 --> 0:39:15.400
<v Speaker 1>of the show. We will be right back here tomorrow.

0:39:15.400 --> 0:39:18.520
<v Speaker 1>I'm Emily Chang in San Francisco. This is Bloomberg