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 remember checking San Francisco, and this is
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Technology coming up in the next hour. A new
Speaker 1: court filing says Musk's buyout deal expected to close by October,
Speaker 1: but not a done deal by any means. We're gonna
Speaker 1: tell you what the hold ups are now. Plus, Google
Speaker 1: shows off its new collection of gadgets, including new phones
Speaker 1: and a watch, even teasing a new tablet. How does
Speaker 1: it all stack up to Apple? Will take you to
Speaker 1: the Maid by Google event? And a car that drives
Speaker 1: itself was supposed to be the future, but the reality
Speaker 1: for self driving cars seems to be getting further away.
Speaker 1: Will they even exist in our lifetime? Is this industry
Speaker 1: a one billion dollar bust? We'll discuss. Let's get into this.
Speaker 1: Musque Twitter and the latest back and forth. The deal
Speaker 1: could potentially close at the end of the month, but
Speaker 1: Twitter saying not necessarily so fast. Bloomer Zone. Uh, Kurt
Speaker 1: Wagner has been going back and forth now for months, Kurt,
Speaker 1: you know what's the hold up now? Why can't they
Speaker 1: just say let's do it. Yeah, well, there's a huge
Speaker 1: distrust factor, Emily. You have to keep that in mind
Speaker 1: as we're talking about this, right, because a few days ago,
Speaker 1: Ellen said hey, let's do the original deal at the
Speaker 1: original price, and Twitter didn't jump on that immediately, which
Speaker 1: kind of tells you something, right, because it seemed like
Speaker 1: the two were kind of meeting where they had originally
Speaker 1: thought they were going to in April, and today we
Speaker 1: learned that, you know, there's been a hang up around
Speaker 1: some of the language in uh, you know, what Elan
Speaker 1: ultimately said was that there would be a debt contingency
Speaker 1: right that that that wasn't in the original agreement. And
Speaker 1: now he's saying, hey, um, you know I have the debt.
Speaker 1: It's there, and Twitter is basically saying, prove it, show us,
Speaker 1: because we're not going to sign anything until we have,
Speaker 1: you know, a legal document here. And so in the
Speaker 1: last hour or so, the Musque team has said, hey,
Speaker 1: we want to stay this trial, we want to we
Speaker 1: want to pause this thing, and the Twitter team just
Speaker 1: responded not all that long ago, maybe ten fifteen minutes ago,
Speaker 1: to say, um, we don't want to do that. And
Speaker 1: now it's up to the judge as to whether or
Speaker 1: not they're gonna, you know, put this thing on pause
Speaker 1: or or continue. What's the likelihood the debt contingency would
Speaker 1: actually become an issue. That's a great question. And as
Speaker 1: far as we can tell, a lot of the commitments
Speaker 1: that Elon got with, you know, these debt commitments from
Speaker 1: the banks back in April, and may you know those
Speaker 1: are as far as we know, still still good. And
Speaker 1: so Ellen has been saying, well, hey, you know, Twitter
Speaker 1: is essentially dragging their feet, like there there's no reason
Speaker 1: that this debt isn't going to come through. Um, but
Speaker 1: you know, again, if your Twitter, all you've seen is
Speaker 1: this guy kind of play games with you and change
Speaker 1: his mind and flip flop. And so that's where I
Speaker 1: think this trust thing comes in, right, is even if
Speaker 1: it there is a high likelihood the debt is indeed there, Um,
Speaker 1: clearly Twitter is very nervous or uncomfortable with accepting that
Speaker 1: and moving forward. Now, it also came out that Must
Speaker 1: tried to negotiate a lower price for the deal, and
Speaker 1: this was, as I understand it, weeks ago. Twitter said no,
Speaker 1: not surprisingly, but he actually did come back to them
Speaker 1: earlier than we saw and said, Hey, maybe I I
Speaker 1: actually want to do this. Yeah, they're his lawyer. Um
Speaker 1: actually issued a public statement today that said that Um,
Speaker 1: you know, the two sides had talked about lowering that
Speaker 1: that deal price, which again is fifty four and twenty
Speaker 1: cents per share, and that Twitter had actually offered a
Speaker 1: slightly lower deal. He said that that cut billions of
Speaker 1: dollars off the price, and that Ellen ultimately said no
Speaker 1: because there were other kind of requirements or stipulations with
Speaker 1: with that price reduction. Now we're kind of at that stage, Emily,
Speaker 1: both sides and both lawyers are really kind of throwing
Speaker 1: everything they can at one another in public here and
Speaker 1: and so it's a little bit, uh, you know, we're
Speaker 1: still trying to figure out exactly how that negotiation may
Speaker 1: have played out. But again on the record from meon
Speaker 1: must employer basically saying Twitter tried to lower this by billions.
Speaker 1: Must have said no because he didn't like whatever stipulations
Speaker 1: were included with that. All right, Well, it seems to
Speaker 1: be an hour by hour, letter by letter, tweet by
Speaker 1: tweet situation. Ulris Kurt Wagner, thank you for continuing to
Speaker 1: follow it all for us For the fourth time this year,
Speaker 1: Peloton is laying off a significant number of employees. CEO
Speaker 1: Barry McCarthy told staff today it's part of the effort
Speaker 1: to save the struggling fitness maker. Roughly five hundred Peloton
Speaker 1: workers being let go now. This is about twelve of
Speaker 1: the workforce. In the span of a year, met as
Speaker 1: a market cap has plunged from over a trillion dollar
Speaker 1: is to just a few hundred million shares of the
Speaker 1: social media giant, collapsing some sixty percent over the last
Speaker 1: year meeting. The Facebook parent now accounts for less than
Speaker 1: one percent of the SMP five dred the lowest sin.
Speaker 1: What is its signal about the company's future? Let's ask
Speaker 1: our next guest, Chris Kelly. He is Facebook's former chief
Speaker 1: privacy officer, it's first general counsel and head of global
Speaker 1: public Policy. Chris, thank you so much for joining us. So,
Speaker 1: of course, market cap isn't everything, but it's astounding to
Speaker 1: look at those numbers. Do you think we're seeing a
Speaker 1: changing of the guard happened before our very eyes, whereby
Speaker 1: Meta's influence and power will be significantly diminished relative I
Speaker 1: think there's obviously a lot of market concern about the
Speaker 1: direction um that the company's going that the move to
Speaker 1: the meta versus a focus, the name change, all of
Speaker 1: these different things that have gone into you know, what
Speaker 1: the what the streets assessment of the business prospects of
Speaker 1: the company are are in the long term, and so
Speaker 1: that has obviously weighed on the stock quite extensively. Um
Speaker 1: in the long run that companies will position and I
Speaker 1: think in general, but needs to to figure out what
Speaker 1: it's going to emphasize in terms of how they're going
Speaker 1: to continue to make, you know, great profits and how
Speaker 1: to you know, lead this transition into the metaverse, which
Speaker 1: is one of the things that they've articulated as the
Speaker 1: as the you know, the main goal of the company
Speaker 1: by changing the name. Um. You know, in the meantime,
Speaker 1: they have a whole bunch of these different businesses that
Speaker 1: operate extraordinarily well, and they're gonna need to make the
Speaker 1: case um more to the street about about how those
Speaker 1: have growth prospects and and ultimately that should result in
Speaker 1: a recovering the market cap over time. But you know,
Speaker 1: this is the way that the marks major companies these days.
Speaker 1: It's always it's always a challenge. Meantime, you've got the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court taking a look at Section to thirty. How
Speaker 1: big a blow could that be for META if the
Speaker 1: power of that law is eroded or erased. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: Section two thirty has has had a great deal of power,
Speaker 1: I think in protecting UM the reasonable business decisions of
Speaker 1: all companies in the space, not just you know, Facebook
Speaker 1: Meta UM. And and the threats to that are very
Speaker 1: real right now. UM. The upholding of the Texas law
Speaker 1: by the Fifth Circuit, the upholding of the Florida law
Speaker 1: in the in the eleven circuits so far. UM, there's
Speaker 1: just a whole bunch of kind of wacky stuff from
Speaker 1: traditional first amateurs prudence going on right now in the
Speaker 1: courts because of the way that they've been packed UM.
Speaker 1: And from there, you know, the companies have to be
Speaker 1: very focused on this. UM. I think that there's been
Speaker 1: a lot of good commentary that says that that the
Speaker 1: companies might end up engaging in kind of more UM
Speaker 1: takedowns of of improper behavior, even more takedowns of improper
Speaker 1: behavior if there were to be some sort of repeal
Speaker 1: of Section to thirty or or or limitation of it
Speaker 1: by the interpretation of these statutes, which pretty clearly both
Speaker 1: conflict with Section two thirty UM and and the first
Speaker 1: Amendment in a lot of these cases is too So
Speaker 1: I think that that's a it's an ongoing work for
Speaker 1: the companies that they're watching it very closely. But you know,
Speaker 1: Facebook and Facebook, Meta Google in their you know, in
Speaker 1: their YouTube division, UM, all sorts of the different companies
Speaker 1: that are offering media UM and and also content um
Speaker 1: you know, user generated content have been adapting their policies
Speaker 1: to to get to some sort of stasis, which is
Speaker 1: I think okay right now, UM. But they might have
Speaker 1: to change it pretty radically if their protections are repeated. Meantime,
Speaker 1: you've got federal regulation you know that could potentially come
Speaker 1: with this clobusch Are Grassley law. But there's this market
Speaker 1: cap provision as I understand it, and Facebook wouldn't even
Speaker 1: qualify because you know, in terms of its market size
Speaker 1: it's too small. You've got leader culture the ftc UM
Speaker 1: scrutinizing Facebook from another direction, and you know, some of
Speaker 1: the you know, let's say Facebook uh defenders would say
Speaker 1: Facebook is getting an undue amount of scrutiny for the
Speaker 1: size UM at least if you look at the market
Speaker 1: size of the company today. What do you think about that.
Speaker 1: The idea that Facebook is a you know, is a
Speaker 1: monopolist exercising you know, unjust unallowable monopoly power to either
Speaker 1: maintain a monopoly or to gain a monopoly has always
Speaker 1: been a pretty far fetched vision. A whole bunch of
Speaker 1: people who just didn't like some decisions that the company
Speaker 1: was making. Um, you know, the antitrust law is supposed
Speaker 1: to to protect competition, not competitors, and Facebook has had
Speaker 1: some competitors who are who are complaining over time, and
Speaker 1: some smaller companies who would like to get into the field.
Speaker 1: But the the idea that that that they're exercising the
Speaker 1: sort of bottleneck control that's the historic worry of antitrust
Speaker 1: law has just always been incredibly difficult, which is why
Speaker 1: Judge Bosberg you know, dismissed the suit in the first
Speaker 1: instance that the FDCs you know, you know, pleadings were
Speaker 1: sort of conclusory on that front. He came back and
Speaker 1: he let the lawsuit pursue with the regard to the
Speaker 1: federal gover the states, you know, lawsuit was dismissed and
Speaker 1: its entirety they're on appeal right now. But I don't
Speaker 1: think that appeal will be successful, um ultimately, and so
Speaker 1: it's it's a it's a and if you look at
Speaker 1: the things that they wanted to go after Facebook for
Speaker 1: the acquisition of Instagram, the acquisition of WhatsApp, UM, there's
Speaker 1: a real read of those is more defensive against other
Speaker 1: big players in the industry like Apple and Google who
Speaker 1: controlled the mobile operating systems UM at the time. And
Speaker 1: so it's it's one of those things where from a
Speaker 1: traditional antitrust law perspective, it was always a pretty far
Speaker 1: fetched case and um, you know, it's proceeding now, but
Speaker 1: after you know, some significant um, you know, kind of
Speaker 1: hand slapping by a fairly good and you know, principle
Speaker 1: of traditional antitrust judge in in d C. That said,
Speaker 1: Facebook still has a massive cultural and societal impact. We
Speaker 1: were just speaking with Francis Hogan, the you know now
Speaker 1: famous uh Facebook with whistleblower, and she expressed her concern that,
Speaker 1: you know, especially with Cheryl Sandberg leaving that Mark zucker
Speaker 1: still only really has Mark Zuckerberg to hold him accountable.
Speaker 1: Take a listen to what she had to say. You know,
Speaker 1: Marcus surrounded himself with people who tell him the same
Speaker 1: kinds of stories over and over again. You know, Facebook,
Speaker 1: it's just a mirror. It doesn't have responsibility. All these
Speaker 1: things that we're complaining about have always been present. We're
Speaker 1: just showing them to people who don't. We don't play
Speaker 1: any role in this. We have no power. What do
Speaker 1: you think? I mean? I do think that there's a
Speaker 1: degree to which, um, you know, Facebook as a gatherer
Speaker 1: of um of of cultural expression is merely reflecting what
Speaker 1: what is going on in reality. But the idea that
Speaker 1: it shapes it instead is something that the company has
Speaker 1: has embraced in its research internally, as as a lot
Speaker 1: of the documents that Francis Haggan put out showed that that,
Speaker 1: you know, I do think that the company should be
Speaker 1: more transparent about that research and that they should be
Speaker 1: engaged in a dialogue saying, look, we understand that that
Speaker 1: there are challenges um to the change that social media presents,
Speaker 1: UH to the way that people traditionally experienced media, and
Speaker 1: and we're trying to lead them and and and now
Speaker 1: you know, moving into the metaverse. We want to make
Speaker 1: sure that that safety and you know, and and sort
Speaker 1: of mental health as people experience these platforms is part
Speaker 1: of the mission UM and doing that in a good
Speaker 1: way is part of the mission. You know, I think
Speaker 1: I've seen some pretty good action on that front from
Speaker 1: the company in the essay as the metaverse pivot has
Speaker 1: continued to happen UM on that front, and I think
Speaker 1: that that, you know, the fact that a lot of
Speaker 1: these documents have come out and have revealed internal research
Speaker 1: um UH in the company has been mostly a cleansing
Speaker 1: opportunity for the company to to talk about these things
Speaker 1: more openly. That Francis point seems to be that the
Speaker 1: company shouldn't be hiding these and I think that that's
Speaker 1: mostly right. I kind of ask your thoughts about Elon
Speaker 1: Musk and Twitter. I'm curious what you think the risks are.
Speaker 1: Does Twitter and Twitter under Elon Musk attract or Facebook
Speaker 1: like problems because it's run by a soul and very
Speaker 1: public billionaire. You know his commentary about how simple this
Speaker 1: could be, and you just, you know, reinstate some of
Speaker 1: these figures you just allow, you know, we we want
Speaker 1: to go to the limits to free speech in in
Speaker 1: law and America where we're gonna try to step back
Speaker 1: seem a lot more like what you know, people like
Speaker 1: Francis Huggan or accusing Mark Zuckerberg of than what has
Speaker 1: actually happened at Facebook and Meta and there's a real danger.
Speaker 1: And Ellen's commentary on this has been simplistic and um
Speaker 1: and and and ill informed in most cases, um, almost
Speaker 1: as zill informed as some of the stuff that he
Speaker 1: put out recently about you know, it was effectively Russian
Speaker 1: propaganda about Ukraine. A lot of these commentary there are
Speaker 1: areas where he just doesn't have a lot of expertise.
Speaker 1: And look, I I drive a Tesla, I was an
Speaker 1: investor in space accent. I mostly believe in Eila Musk
Speaker 1: and in his ability in certain areas. But the way
Speaker 1: that he is you know, roundly dismissed, you know, years
Speaker 1: of research and thoughtfulness in Twitter's content policies and in
Speaker 1: terms of ways to approach these difficult matters, Um doesn't
Speaker 1: bode well for Nilon must brunch Twitter, and so I
Speaker 1: mean if it if it ends up descending into four chan, Um,
Speaker 1: it's not something that's ever going to be as valuable
Speaker 1: as he needs it to be. All Right, Well, that's
Speaker 1: quite a you know put comparison there. Uh, certainly much
Speaker 1: remains to be seeing Chris Kelly, Facebook former chief privacy officer,
Speaker 1: are gonna have you back here on the show, Chris,
Speaker 1: uh and hearing away and thank you all right. Coming
Speaker 1: up the myth of the driverless car, we're gonna talk
Speaker 1: about why a future where you can relax behind the
Speaker 1: wheel is still pretty far out. That's our big take.
Speaker 1: Next this is Bloomberg Investors have been a hundred billion
Speaker 1: dollars on the self driving car industry, but how close
Speaker 1: are we really to truly seeing them? On the oade Well,
Speaker 1: driverless car engineer and Pronto CEO Anthony Lewandowski says this
Speaker 1: future is years, if not decades away work. Max Chafkin
Speaker 1: spoke to him and joins us now for more details
Speaker 1: on what that means exactly and if that name sounds
Speaker 1: familiar Max, of course. Anthony Lewandowski, I feel like we
Speaker 1: have to say at the start was indicted for charges
Speaker 1: of theft and stealing trade secrets from Google. Uh. He
Speaker 1: served a few months in prison. Um, what's he up
Speaker 1: to now? So yeah, Lewandowski is a very well known
Speaker 1: figure in this field and as he said, extremely controversial.
Speaker 1: So he is kind of the guy who kicked the
Speaker 1: whole thing off. He created the prototype that became Google's
Speaker 1: driverless car. Then, as he said, when he went to Uber,
Speaker 1: he uh was in the middle of this very messy
Speaker 1: two billion dollar lawsuit that ended, um, you know, with
Speaker 1: money being paid and also this this indictment, and then
Speaker 1: he was pardoned by foreign President Trump. Uh, he's back
Speaker 1: and he has kind of turned critic, which is very
Speaker 1: interesting because he was probably you know, one of the
Speaker 1: most outspoken boosters in the industry, particularly one of the
Speaker 1: people you know, pushing towards commercialization of these robotaxis. And
Speaker 1: what are you saying now, basically is that when you
Speaker 1: look at the progress that the industry has made, when
Speaker 1: you look at what Weymo and Crews and some of
Speaker 1: these smaller companies that have raised huge amounts of money
Speaker 1: have done, you know, it isn't a whole lot. It's
Speaker 1: a handful of cars and a handful of cities. They're
Speaker 1: still extremely restricted, and you're still getting you know, all
Speaker 1: of these sort of videos on YouTube and else where
Speaker 1: on social media of driverless cars behaving badly or weird
Speaker 1: or whatever. And and so there are a lot of reasons,
Speaker 1: uh to to have skepticism about the industry, and it's
Speaker 1: and and yet another one is you know this pioneer,
Speaker 1: this booster, turning critic. So the headline of your story
Speaker 1: is self driving cars are starting to look like a
Speaker 1: hundred billion dollar bust. You talk about weymo car is
Speaker 1: getting confused by things as simple as traffic cones. What's
Speaker 1: the real outlook? When are they When are they going
Speaker 1: to be hitting the roads or or are they ever? Well,
Speaker 1: you know what we've heard from the kind of industry, Waymo,
Speaker 1: Cruise and so on, it is basically it's been two
Speaker 1: years out uh for like the last ten years. I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, even going all the way back to like
Speaker 1: twenty when Google at the time was unveiling these cars.
Speaker 1: They were saying, oh, we can handle any road. And
Speaker 1: then we saw Chris Urmson, who was running the program
Speaker 1: for a while, say that his child was eleven, was
Speaker 1: gonna have um, you know, his drivers was never gonna
Speaker 1: have a driver's license. And we're kind of still in
Speaker 1: that place where where it's this kind of near term
Speaker 1: uh thing, but it's all very vague. And what what
Speaker 1: would Lewandowski is saying, and what what you hear if
Speaker 1: you talk to people who are outside of the of
Speaker 1: the sort of core of this industry is that we're
Speaker 1: talking decades, We're not talking years. Now. This isn't to
Speaker 1: say that there aren't advances, There are an important technology
Speaker 1: happening that some of this stuff won't in fact change
Speaker 1: the world. It's just that the full blown you know,
Speaker 1: level four, level five autonomy, this is the idea that
Speaker 1: you get in a car with out of steering wheel
Speaker 1: that is looking increasingly shaky. And I think one of
Speaker 1: the reasons you see, really the only two companies who
Speaker 1: are who are putting huge amounts of money into this,
Speaker 1: Weymo and Cruise both have you know, big corporate backing
Speaker 1: Weymo in the case of Google Alphabet and Cruise of
Speaker 1: course is GM quickly Max. Our kids are still going
Speaker 1: to get driver's licenses, right, yeah, I think unfortunately that's
Speaker 1: the case. Um. Now again, there are huge improvements, and
Speaker 1: I think on the kind of advanced driver assistance technology,
Speaker 1: our kids will maybe driving much safer cars. Um we're
Speaker 1: seeing that, you know, Tesla's autopilot, even though they market
Speaker 1: that as self driving, but but it's really a really
Speaker 1: great driver assistance technology as well as GM, Super Cruise
Speaker 1: and others. So cars are definitely getting safer. There are
Speaker 1: technological advances, but this kind of crazy steering wheel free
Speaker 1: future um looks increasingly shaky. All right, take note parents everywhere.
Speaker 1: Max Chafkin excellent story by You can check it out
Speaker 1: in Bloomberg Business Seek Thanks back, Welcome back to Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Technology and Emily Chang in San Francisco. We're gonna get
Speaker 1: back to September payrolls coming out Friday. But jobs news
Speaker 1: has been moving markets for months as the FED works
Speaker 1: to cut inflation. Thursday, no exception. Tech again in the headlines.
Speaker 1: Are at bood Log back with the top tech stories,
Speaker 1: and yeah, believe it not. There was news in the
Speaker 1: last twenty four hours that had nothing to do with
Speaker 1: Elon Musk, and it was very focused on jobs. As
Speaker 1: you say, you see Amazon softed by half of the cent.
Speaker 1: They're adding a hundred and fifty thousand workers for the
Speaker 1: holiday period, same as they added one temporary workers to
Speaker 1: handle that demand. But what's interesting is it to assign
Speaker 1: the demands there. Bloomberg scoop General Electric cutting hundreds of jobs,
Speaker 1: according to sources, in its manufacturing unit that's responsible for
Speaker 1: making wind turbines for wind energy because the demand has
Speaker 1: gone and of course Peloton we've been speaking about during
Speaker 1: the show. I find Amazon really interesting. Right We're all
Speaker 1: braced for payrolls data on Friday. There's mixed signals about
Speaker 1: what the jobs market is like right now in the
Speaker 1: United States. But it's a big vote of confidence in
Speaker 1: consumer demand that Amazon is bringing in the same reinforcement
Speaker 1: for this holiday shopping period that it did in one,
Speaker 1: even at a time where sellers and merchants and the
Speaker 1: Amazon dot Com platform are worried they're bracing for a
Speaker 1: slowdown in consumer spending due to inflation and perhaps and
Speaker 1: pulled forward if that spending to earlier in the year.
Speaker 1: You see the details of what Amazon's doing behind me.
Speaker 1: But you know, remember between March and June of this year,
Speaker 1: largely through attrition, they reduced headcount by around a hundred
Speaker 1: thousand to undo the investment of the pandemic era. Then
Speaker 1: this Peloton. Another five hundred jobs to be cut from Peloton,
Speaker 1: and make that around forty six hundred so far this year.
Speaker 1: Is this the final step in Baron McCarthy's plan to
Speaker 1: turn around Peloton's fortunes. Of course, we've all gone back
Speaker 1: to the gym, some of us, some of us back
Speaker 1: to the office using our pelotons less. But they've had
Speaker 1: to reduce head count in a period where growth has
Speaker 1: gone and they're pivoting to a more asset light model.
Speaker 1: So really interesting to see what text doing in this climate,
Speaker 1: particularly when it comes to the jobs front. All right,
Speaker 1: I'd love to thank you. Meantime, Google announced a suite
Speaker 1: of new products at the annual Made by Google event.
Speaker 1: Along with the Pixel seven and Pixel Watch, Google teased
Speaker 1: an upcoming Pixel tablet to take on Apple's iPad and
Speaker 1: Amazon's Echo devices. Let's bring in Rick Osterlowe, Google Senior
Speaker 1: vice president of Devices and Services. Rit great to have
Speaker 1: you back with us. So new phones and features, uh
Speaker 1: and you know, well, we're in a very difficult economic
Speaker 1: time where consumers are under pressure paying more for everything
Speaker 1: from gas to groceries. What's your argument to customers about
Speaker 1: why they should upgrade their smartphones now? Well, first of all,
Speaker 1: thanks for having the Emily, and secondly, we're really excited
Speaker 1: about our announcements today. UM for a variety of reasons,
Speaker 1: but we we believe that personal computing technology like phones, watches,
Speaker 1: UH and earphones UM and tablets are just absolutely essential
Speaker 1: computing capabilities. So well, I know that right now a
Speaker 1: lot of people might be concerned with all the economic uncertainty.
Speaker 1: I think it's really critical that that these products are
Speaker 1: in marketing in the hands of users. UM were are
Speaker 1: also offering uh some new phone capabilities with our Pixel
Speaker 1: seven and seven Pro that I think people find just
Speaker 1: a terrific value. We have our Pixel seven products we
Speaker 1: introduced today at five, nine, and nine and a Pixel
Speaker 1: seven Pro with some awesome capabilities for eight ninety nine,
Speaker 1: which is significantly less than other options in the market.
Speaker 1: So we wanted to make sure that people had some
Speaker 1: great options to choose from in today's economic uncertainty. So
Speaker 1: let's talk about some of the new tech you brought
Speaker 1: back face unlock after you actually removed it a few
Speaker 1: years back. Why is that, UM, Well, you know, we
Speaker 1: have a variety of ways to unlock your phone. We
Speaker 1: wanted to make sure that we had a really convenient
Speaker 1: way for people to unlock their phone. The primary way
Speaker 1: is through a fingerprint sensor, which is right on the display,
Speaker 1: makes it really easy to unlock your phone. But also
Speaker 1: for convenience, we've added the ability just using the front
Speaker 1: facing camera and a lot of our AI technology to
Speaker 1: be able to unlock the phone using your face as well,
Speaker 1: So that added element makes it much easier to do
Speaker 1: something that you probably do a hundred times a day.
Speaker 1: Let's talk that about your projections. There's this report from
Speaker 1: nik that you're hoping to double Pixel sales compared Is
Speaker 1: that the goal and given these economic times, what makes
Speaker 1: you think that's realistic? Well, I mean, I think our
Speaker 1: products just keep getting better and better, and so our
Speaker 1: aim is certainly to continue to grow our business. Here
Speaker 1: you know, we have a comment on exact projections, but
Speaker 1: certainly we have been growing and our intention is to
Speaker 1: continue to do so, and we're doing that through innovations
Speaker 1: in AI, making sure that our products are more and
Speaker 1: more helpful for our users using our underlying AI technology,
Speaker 1: and then also by expanning our portfolio. We now have
Speaker 1: three terrific phone products with six A, seven and seven
Speaker 1: Pro hitting the market, and then we introduced the pixel
Speaker 1: Watch for the first time UM and we also have
Speaker 1: Pixel Buds Pro earphones, and this combination of technology we
Speaker 1: think is what people are looking for right now. So
Speaker 1: hang on, Rick, we're getting some breaking news out of
Speaker 1: the Elon Musk Twitter saga. The judge in Delaware has
Speaker 1: said the deal must close by five pm on October
Speaker 1: has paused the court case until October. Remember we were
Speaker 1: expecting to go to trial on October sev the judge
Speaker 1: saying if a deal isn't closed by October, they will
Speaker 1: set a trial date of November. We're gonna get a
Speaker 1: little more context in a moment, Rick, Let's talk a
Speaker 1: little bit about what you see as the long term
Speaker 1: viability of the hardware business. How much runway do you
Speaker 1: think you have given you know, all this company I mentioned,
Speaker 1: I mentioned Apple, I mentioned Amazon, given all this competition
Speaker 1: out there. Oh well, I mean this is a very
Speaker 1: long term investment for the company, and the market we're
Speaker 1: pursuing is absolutely enormous UM. But probably most importantly, this
Speaker 1: space of delivering personal technology to our users is absolutely
Speaker 1: critical for end users UM and we see it as
Speaker 1: a great way for people to experience the very best
Speaker 1: technology that Google has to offer. We literally take our
Speaker 1: latest AI research and machine learning models and bring that
Speaker 1: right to our users with Pixel and so this we see,
Speaker 1: this is absolutely essential alright, Google Senior vice president of
Speaker 1: Devices and Services, Rick Australo with all the news from
Speaker 1: the Made by Google event, thank you Rick for joining us.
Speaker 1: I want to get back to that Twitter news. Uh.
Speaker 1: The judge halting the court case until October twenty saying
Speaker 1: the deal must close by five pm. So ed, if
Speaker 1: you're going to Delaware, it's not going to be until
Speaker 1: October twenty eight. Uh, potentially at least talk to us
Speaker 1: about the latest headlines. What are we hearing? Yes, so
Speaker 1: the deal has until five pm October two close, as
Speaker 1: you say. If the deal does not close by that period,
Speaker 1: Kathleene st Je the call make. The chancery judge in
Speaker 1: Delaware overseeing this m and A case this dispute says
Speaker 1: that she will go to trial in November, so you know,
Speaker 1: the door is still open to kind of any outcome here.
Speaker 1: You see Twitter shares rising in after hours, were up
Speaker 1: about one point two percent right now, we were as
Speaker 1: higher as as high as three percent. And remember with
Speaker 1: that share pushing higher, it's kind of an indication from
Speaker 1: Wall Street that they see the chances of this deal
Speaker 1: now happening. Twitter indicating their court filing earlier on Thursday
Speaker 1: that they wanted this to happen much sooner. They said
Speaker 1: that MUSK could close as soon as next week. By
Speaker 1: the tent date was the one that was originally put
Speaker 1: out by the Musque team in their court filing where
Speaker 1: they requested that the stay of proceedings happened that this
Speaker 1: trial be paused. Remember, Twitter opposed that in a court
Speaker 1: filing later in the day. Thursday has said we do
Speaker 1: not want to pause these proceedings. But Kafine and St
Speaker 1: Jude McCormick, the Chance re judge, appears to have sided
Speaker 1: with Team Musk at this time, the judge saying, so
Speaker 1: set a date for November for a trial. If the
Speaker 1: deal doesn't close by October, there's still this contingency of
Speaker 1: the debt financing. Are we to understand by this that um,
Speaker 1: that's not going to be an issue or do we
Speaker 1: believe that's basically the main issue that remains. Yes. So,
Speaker 1: in the first court filing Thursday, Musk's team said that Twitter,
Speaker 1: you know, wouldn't say yes to the deal, that they
Speaker 1: were hung up on this idea of the debt not
Speaker 1: being there, which Musk team kind of indicated was not
Speaker 1: a problem. In the filing that Twitter's team gave us later,
Speaker 1: they said that Musk could not even discuss closing the
Speaker 1: deal with the banks, you know, The concern is that
Speaker 1: Musk has this twelve point five billion dollars of debt
Speaker 1: split between a six point five billion dollar loan, three
Speaker 1: billion of un secured, three billion of secured bonds. There's
Speaker 1: also revolving credit line in there as well. Times have
Speaker 1: changed since that deal and that package was agreed in
Speaker 1: April um and so I guess the concern in the
Speaker 1: background is is the viability of that debt. You know,
Speaker 1: here at Bloomberg, our expert analysts are are beat reporters
Speaker 1: have dug into this issue, and it's kind of unthinkable
Speaker 1: that the banks would walk away from giving Musk a
Speaker 1: Musk team the money or the proceeds from that debt.
Speaker 1: You know, it would be a big hit to their
Speaker 1: credibility for one, but the banks do then need to
Speaker 1: go to Wall Street and sell the debt to institutional investors.
Speaker 1: So clearly, Twitter, if they don't have concerns about the debt,
Speaker 1: I think they still have concerns about what Musk's true
Speaker 1: intentions are. That much we can gather from the court
Speaker 1: filings Thursday. So what's your hunch are you going to do?
Speaker 1: You're asking me if we're going to Delaware that's the question.
Speaker 1: I mean, look, we're not going to Delaware on October seventeen.
Speaker 1: Certainly Twitter employees I've spoken to this week, many of
Speaker 1: them outlined early they thought this was a play for
Speaker 1: time by Musks to go back to the original offer.
Speaker 1: We don't know. We don't know what the psychology around
Speaker 1: this is from Elon must but Kathleen st Judy McCormick
Speaker 1: has made a very fast decision. I don't think anyone
Speaker 1: expected her to take both court filings one us to
Speaker 1: stay one didn't, and then decide this quick. That's where
Speaker 1: we stand. We do not know, except that it's still
Speaker 1: not a done deal. Okay, thank you for the play
Speaker 1: by play. As always, what we do know about the
Speaker 1: executive who withdrew millions before Celsius's bankruptcy. Another scandal unfolding.
Speaker 1: That's next. This is Bloomberg time now for our crypto report,
Speaker 1: and remember Celsius. Well, we're now learning the former CEO
Speaker 1: of the bankrupt crypto lender withdrew millions just before stopping
Speaker 1: customer withdrawals. Bloom Worth Katie Greifeld here to explain, Katie,
Speaker 1: what do we know? Well, just to reach out the
Speaker 1: timeline a little bit like you said we had the
Speaker 1: former CEO withdrawal about ten million dollars in May. He
Speaker 1: wasn't allow. You also had co founder Dan Leon and
Speaker 1: chief technology officer Nuke Goldstein also withdraw millions. That was
Speaker 1: in May, and if we remember, in June, Celsius halted
Speaker 1: customer withdrawals and then ultimately filed for bankruptcy in July.
Speaker 1: So the timing here obviously a bit of a question
Speaker 1: mark as we work through this bankruptcy and we'll see
Speaker 1: how this shakes out. And just to remind the audience,
Speaker 1: Celsius was one of the highest flying lenders, obviously promising returns,
Speaker 1: trying to take on actual traditional banks by saying you
Speaker 1: can investor coins, received interest on them. Obviously that came
Speaker 1: crashing down in a pretty spectacular way. And this slow
Speaker 1: drip of news has been just fascinating to watch as
Speaker 1: we get closer and deeper into this bankruptcy. So it's
Speaker 1: hard to believe anything could be more exciting or volatile
Speaker 1: in terms of news than crypt show markets. But elon
Speaker 1: Musk and Twitter, I've given us just that. That said,
Speaker 1: there is still action in crypto markets. I know you've
Speaker 1: been watching bitcoin and how uh it's been related to
Speaker 1: the market rally or not. What trends are you pulling out?
Speaker 1: It is pretty amusing that crypto is sort of the
Speaker 1: ho hull market right now. But a trend that I
Speaker 1: have noticed is that actually it's the crypto equities that
Speaker 1: have been outperforming this week. You have Bitcoin holding up
Speaker 1: relatively well amid all the volatility that we've seen in
Speaker 1: the stock market. Bitcoin is about four percent higher over
Speaker 1: the past four days or so. But if you look
Speaker 1: at micro Strategy micro Strategy coin based Marathon, they're all
Speaker 1: up by double digits, which is pretty amazing to me.
Speaker 1: Part of the reason could just be that they fell
Speaker 1: much more dramatically than Bitcoin itself. For example, if you
Speaker 1: look at bitcoin, it's down about fifty seven percent year
Speaker 1: to date. If you look at coin based that number
Speaker 1: is seventy one percent. So it could be a function
Speaker 1: of the fact that they fell further they have more
Speaker 1: room to rise. But it's definitely a trend to keep
Speaker 1: an eye on amid this mild resilience, I would almost
Speaker 1: call it in the crypto market. So what are you
Speaker 1: gonna be watching in the in the US overnight? Can
Speaker 1: I shamelessly plug something? Of course, that I'm gonna go
Speaker 1: ahead and do that. So Crypto I RA all. It's
Speaker 1: show that I host with Tim Stanovic. It's gonna be
Speaker 1: on Quick Take at eight thirty pm Eastern tonight a
Speaker 1: thirty pm Eastern on Friday night. We're gonna dig into
Speaker 1: after this amazing draw down that we've seen Bitcoin down
Speaker 1: fifty seven percent this year alone, who's going to lead
Speaker 1: the rebuild, who's going to be the winner, who's going
Speaker 1: to be the loser, and whether that's going to be
Speaker 1: sort of the crypto native companies or whether we're going
Speaker 1: to see traditional finance come in here. All right, So
Speaker 1: my bad is that's not going to be home at all.
Speaker 1: Excited to see it. Katie Greifeld Crypto I r L
Speaker 1: take a watch. Thank you, Katie. There's another sign that
Speaker 1: labor demand in the US may be starting to moderate.
Speaker 1: Unemployment applications rose more than expected last week by twenty
Speaker 1: nine thousand. This after the Labor Department said that the
Speaker 1: number of available jobs in August decreased by a million.
Speaker 1: This as the return to the office is waning or ebbing,
Speaker 1: let's say nationwide. Last week was the second straight week
Speaker 1: or office occupancy barely budged after shooting up right after
Speaker 1: Labor Day. For more on the labor market in the
Speaker 1: future of work, I want to bring in Fran Katsua,
Speaker 1: Cisco Executive Vice president in chief, People Policy and Purpose Officer. Fran,
Speaker 1: it's great to have you back with us. So it's
Speaker 1: been called the Great Resignation. Now we're hearing the great realignment.
Speaker 1: We're hearing about quiet quitting, what in your view is
Speaker 1: actually happening within the workforce. Thank you, Emily, I'm so
Speaker 1: glad to be with you. I think what we're talking
Speaker 1: about is an amazing opportunity to to really think about work.
Speaker 1: I think sometimes when we talk about this phase, we're
Speaker 1: so focused on whether people are working from home or
Speaker 1: from the office that we don't look at this opportunity
Speaker 1: from a future of work perspective. As you know, at Cisco,
Speaker 1: we have worked hybrid actually before the pandemic, we've had
Speaker 1: a lot of flexibility, and what we see at this
Speaker 1: moment is that one of the most critical elements about
Speaker 1: work is inclusion and flexibility and really understanding there isn't
Speaker 1: a one size fits all to the amazing work that
Speaker 1: we have to do, and if we're able to intersect
Speaker 1: flexibility with the work and innovation and connection that we're building,
Speaker 1: it can be an amazing opportunity and not something to dread.
Speaker 1: So give me some specifics about how Cisco is changing
Speaker 1: its strategy now. Um, you know we're you know, we're
Speaker 1: coming out of of the pandemic, but it's hard to
Speaker 1: know where new normal is really going to be. Yeah,
Speaker 1: So the first thing that I would say is, I
Speaker 1: think all companies are still learning and evolving, and the
Speaker 1: way that we're handling this at Cisco is in a
Speaker 1: very decentralized way. We've asked every leader at Cisco to
Speaker 1: really work with their team to figure out against the
Speaker 1: backdrop of the work and how people are at their
Speaker 1: best to make arrangements. And for some people Emily, that
Speaker 1: means that maybe they're coming in once or twice a week.
Speaker 1: Sometimes it's a little bit more. But because from a
Speaker 1: Cisco perspective, we have been doing this for for so long,
Speaker 1: what we can see is there's amazing opportunities. We see
Speaker 1: that career trajectory for people, regardless of where they're working,
Speaker 1: can be equal. And we also see another opportunity from
Speaker 1: a Cisco perspective, which is really all about the tech.
Speaker 1: What we see from our customers is they want to
Speaker 1: have an experience for their people that is similar whether
Speaker 1: they're sitting in the office or sitting at home. And
Speaker 1: I think the other interesting thing right now is that
Speaker 1: we're seeing inclusion really intersect technology in a very different way,
Speaker 1: where the tech is working harder to make sure that
Speaker 1: every person is pulled into a meeting, innovation, a brainstorming
Speaker 1: session on a white board, and I think that's going
Speaker 1: to be critical for all companies moving forward. Well, that's
Speaker 1: certainly an opportunity for Cisco's WebEx. I'm curious for your
Speaker 1: take on San Francisco's downtown, which still hasn't recovered from
Speaker 1: the pandemic and it seems to be coming back much
Speaker 1: more slowly than other US cities. Do you think it
Speaker 1: ever will be the same and what does that mean
Speaker 1: for for tech culture. I don't think it will be
Speaker 1: the same, and I think that's part of the problem.
Speaker 1: I think that a lot of companies are stepping into
Speaker 1: this wanting to go back, and what we're realizing at
Speaker 1: Cisco is that we have to invite our people back
Speaker 1: into the office. Right now, Emily, we're talking about our
Speaker 1: leaders as having a new role, which is these event
Speaker 1: managers that are really thinking about that connection. I think
Speaker 1: the amazing things that all companies want the connection. They
Speaker 1: want to have the culture. But asking people to come
Speaker 1: in and sit on their own while they do their
Speaker 1: video calls or their emails just doesn't make sense to
Speaker 1: our people. And so I think it's going to be
Speaker 1: really the focus on, uh, the anniversary celebration, the brainstorming session,
Speaker 1: maybe the community give back that will bring our people
Speaker 1: to the office in a different way. And I think
Speaker 1: we just have to lean into that trend and try
Speaker 1: new things until we find what works. So as the
Speaker 1: Silicon Valley kind of standard of you know, office gyms
Speaker 1: and catered food and on site laundry is not era over,
Speaker 1: Oh goodness, that's a really tough question. I will tell
Speaker 1: you that at the moment, I don't think those perks
Speaker 1: are as valuable as they once were. What we're hearing
Speaker 1: from our people is they want to work in an
Speaker 1: environment where they can contribute, where they can have impact,
Speaker 1: where they can decide on a week to week basis
Speaker 1: whether or not they're coming in. And so I do
Speaker 1: think there's going to be a new set of benefits
Speaker 1: and perks that are more meaningful to our people. It's interesting, Emily,
Speaker 1: because when I talk to my peers a US industries
Speaker 1: and for those companies that are mandating that their people
Speaker 1: come back, they're sharing that their people are still not
Speaker 1: coming back. And so it's it's not these perks that
Speaker 1: will bring them back. I think it's going to be
Speaker 1: one another. It's going to be teams and really having
Speaker 1: a career that fits your goals. All right, Francot Suit,
Speaker 1: us executive vice president of Cisco fran good to have
Speaker 1: you back with us. Thank you for sharing your thoughts
Speaker 1: on the changing lay of the land that does it.
Speaker 1: For this edition of Bloomberg Technology, We've got a great
Speaker 1: show coming up Friday. Sarah couldn't of Cleo. We'll be
Speaker 1: joining us to talk about tech sentiment in response to
Speaker 1: the US jobs report. And don't forget to check out
Speaker 1: our podcast wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Emily Changing,
Speaker 1: San Francisco. This is Bloomberg