1
00:00:02,200 --> 00:00:05,560
Speaker 1: From the heart of where innovation, money and power collive

2
00:00:06,320 --> 00:00:10,880
Speaker 1: in Silicon Valley and beyond. This is Bloomberg Technology with

3
00:00:10,920 --> 00:00:27,040
Speaker 1: Emily Jay I'm Emily checking San Francisco in This is

4
00:00:27,040 --> 00:00:30,080
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Technology. Coming up in the next hour, pinterest shares

5
00:00:30,440 --> 00:00:33,680
Speaker 1: soaring after hours, revenue meeting estimates with a forecast for

6
00:00:33,920 --> 00:00:37,040
Speaker 1: so modest growth is becoming order. More on the future

7
00:00:37,080 --> 00:00:40,360
Speaker 1: of pinterest in the social and e commerce landscape under

8
00:00:40,360 --> 00:00:43,720
Speaker 1: its new CEO just a moment, plus the future of

9
00:00:43,720 --> 00:00:47,320
Speaker 1: big tech antitrust maybe better getting closer. Over the next hour,

10
00:00:47,440 --> 00:00:51,000
Speaker 1: we will explore the American Innovation and Choice Act and

11
00:00:51,000 --> 00:00:53,800
Speaker 1: how this could be the bill that gets enough bipartisan

12
00:00:53,880 --> 00:00:58,280
Speaker 1: support to put big tech in its place, and how

13
00:00:58,360 --> 00:01:01,320
Speaker 1: do you balance innovation and regulation when it comes to crypto.

14
00:01:01,440 --> 00:01:03,560
Speaker 1: We will ask the former Assistant d o J Attorney

15
00:01:03,600 --> 00:01:07,200
Speaker 1: General where he weighs in on this rapidly evolving debate.

16
00:01:07,720 --> 00:01:09,160
Speaker 1: All of that in a moment, But first I want

17
00:01:09,160 --> 00:01:12,160
Speaker 1: to bring in role hit called Carney MKM Partners Managing Director.

18
00:01:12,280 --> 00:01:14,360
Speaker 1: So row is this where we are that we're expecting

19
00:01:14,360 --> 00:01:18,480
Speaker 1: such bad news when pinterest meets expectations and forecasts modest

20
00:01:18,600 --> 00:01:23,920
Speaker 1: growth that the state shares go bonkers. I think it's

21
00:01:23,959 --> 00:01:26,520
Speaker 1: a it's a fact. It's a function of two things.

22
00:01:26,600 --> 00:01:29,319
Speaker 1: One is obviously the fundamentals, and I think equally important

23
00:01:29,440 --> 00:01:33,839
Speaker 1: is Elliott's press release. Um, so expectations were low, they're

24
00:01:33,880 --> 00:01:37,120
Speaker 1: getting lower. Interest was trading as if it's going out

25
00:01:37,120 --> 00:01:39,400
Speaker 1: of business, to be honest, not like a growth company.

26
00:01:39,720 --> 00:01:42,520
Speaker 1: And now they jump over a very low bar. And

27
00:01:42,560 --> 00:01:45,119
Speaker 1: I think the most important thing here is the third

28
00:01:45,200 --> 00:01:49,120
Speaker 1: quarter of revenue outlook. Facebook is telling us sequential declines,

29
00:01:49,520 --> 00:01:52,520
Speaker 1: Snap is telling us sequential declines in the revenues, and

30
00:01:52,600 --> 00:01:55,840
Speaker 1: Pinterest comes along and says, okay, we might grow sequentially.

31
00:01:55,960 --> 00:01:58,800
Speaker 1: So this is uh, this is something not what people

32
00:01:58,840 --> 00:02:01,800
Speaker 1: have expected. On top of that, Elliott gives you this

33
00:02:01,880 --> 00:02:06,760
Speaker 1: presidentally is about Pinterest, them being the largest shareholder in pinterest.

34
00:02:06,800 --> 00:02:09,639
Speaker 1: So I think a lot of bad news was priced

35
00:02:09,680 --> 00:02:12,840
Speaker 1: in and here we here we are up twenty persons.

36
00:02:13,440 --> 00:02:15,360
Speaker 1: You of course have a big leadership change that's happened

37
00:02:15,360 --> 00:02:18,320
Speaker 1: at pincer as the co founder, longtime CEO Ben Silverman

38
00:02:18,440 --> 00:02:23,400
Speaker 1: out Bill Ready of Google long time payments executive is in.

39
00:02:23,560 --> 00:02:27,280
Speaker 1: How do you see Pinterests challenges differing from what's facing

40
00:02:27,480 --> 00:02:32,800
Speaker 1: Facebook and snap um Painters has always been a tweener.

41
00:02:32,880 --> 00:02:35,119
Speaker 1: There is always a debate between are they a real

42
00:02:35,200 --> 00:02:37,480
Speaker 1: social media company or are they a company that is

43
00:02:38,000 --> 00:02:41,840
Speaker 1: just singularly focused on a single person's hobbies needs and

44
00:02:42,000 --> 00:02:43,880
Speaker 1: going down the funnel of what they may want to

45
00:02:43,919 --> 00:02:48,000
Speaker 1: buy to convert their hobbies and needs into want and

46
00:02:47,520 --> 00:02:49,919
Speaker 1: uh and put ads in front of them. So as

47
00:02:49,960 --> 00:02:52,639
Speaker 1: we go down the funnel, Pinteress is doing what they

48
00:02:52,680 --> 00:02:56,000
Speaker 1: need to do, putting shopping on the social media platform,

49
00:02:56,480 --> 00:03:00,000
Speaker 1: putting payments, tagging along some of the bells and whistles

50
00:03:00,040 --> 00:03:02,240
Speaker 1: along with it. But I think they've been doing it

51
00:03:02,440 --> 00:03:05,160
Speaker 1: very slowly. If Bill Ready comes in, he has a

52
00:03:05,240 --> 00:03:08,120
Speaker 1: very complimentary skill set. You talked about well he was

53
00:03:08,160 --> 00:03:11,320
Speaker 1: advent more Bradery, now you talk about Google Commerce. So

54
00:03:11,480 --> 00:03:14,840
Speaker 1: he's bringing a very commerce oriented skill set here. And

55
00:03:14,880 --> 00:03:17,840
Speaker 1: that's what probably is something to be excited about. And

56
00:03:17,880 --> 00:03:20,840
Speaker 1: we'll be watching it from the sidelines here now Petters

57
00:03:20,919 --> 00:03:22,640
Speaker 1: is of course it's a much smaller player than of

58
00:03:22,639 --> 00:03:25,560
Speaker 1: course Meta, you know, even Snap and Twitter. But do

59
00:03:25,600 --> 00:03:28,360
Speaker 1: you see what what's happening here as some sort of

60
00:03:28,480 --> 00:03:31,600
Speaker 1: broader signal about what's happening in the broader economy or

61
00:03:31,639 --> 00:03:36,720
Speaker 1: with digital adspent um. Broadly, we are quite certain the

62
00:03:36,760 --> 00:03:41,280
Speaker 1: digital AdSpend is shifting slowly downwards, the pie shrinking in

63
00:03:41,360 --> 00:03:45,520
Speaker 1: there the pie. I think market share is shifting. For example,

64
00:03:45,600 --> 00:03:47,760
Speaker 1: we think that Google is getting a little bit of

65
00:03:47,800 --> 00:03:50,360
Speaker 1: extra market share away from so some of the social

66
00:03:50,360 --> 00:03:53,640
Speaker 1: media platforms, as Google is more bottom of funlance, searches

67
00:03:53,720 --> 00:03:56,400
Speaker 1: doing well. Search tends to do better in recessions, and

68
00:03:56,440 --> 00:03:59,560
Speaker 1: tends to do better when advertisers getting very very cautious

69
00:03:59,560 --> 00:04:02,560
Speaker 1: about end um. That's what is happening. But when Pinterest,

70
00:04:02,600 --> 00:04:05,000
Speaker 1: it's a very small player, it could just be a

71
00:04:05,080 --> 00:04:07,040
Speaker 1: play on Okay, what do you think some of the

72
00:04:07,040 --> 00:04:10,960
Speaker 1: suburban moms are thinking about holiday shopping? That could be

73
00:04:11,400 --> 00:04:15,040
Speaker 1: they're not completely pessimistic about it. So that's if you

74
00:04:15,040 --> 00:04:17,520
Speaker 1: look at engagement on Pinterest, I think that may be

75
00:04:17,600 --> 00:04:19,880
Speaker 1: the only leading in data. But it's still too small

76
00:04:19,920 --> 00:04:22,400
Speaker 1: for us to make a macro call right now. All right,

77
00:04:22,480 --> 00:04:25,080
Speaker 1: you do cover Uber and Left. We're expecting their earnings

78
00:04:25,080 --> 00:04:28,279
Speaker 1: out later this week as well. What are you looking

79
00:04:28,279 --> 00:04:31,800
Speaker 1: for their um? Again? I think in terms of Uber,

80
00:04:31,880 --> 00:04:34,960
Speaker 1: we prefer Uber versus Left, but both companies should have

81
00:04:35,440 --> 00:04:39,560
Speaker 1: should have earnings that should probably exceed expectations. I think

82
00:04:39,600 --> 00:04:42,400
Speaker 1: the biggest kind of question mark. There are two question

83
00:04:42,440 --> 00:04:45,440
Speaker 1: marks in front of investors. Do higher gas prices way

84
00:04:45,480 --> 00:04:48,000
Speaker 1: on drivers? We think so yes? And how does that

85
00:04:48,040 --> 00:04:50,920
Speaker 1: translate into driver incentives? That's been a very big debate.

86
00:04:51,240 --> 00:04:53,240
Speaker 1: We think that's been a way on the staff tomorrow

87
00:04:53,360 --> 00:04:57,000
Speaker 1: for Uber. And the second question is with inflation, with

88
00:04:57,080 --> 00:05:01,280
Speaker 1: consumer discretionaries spend with rising right share prices, how does

89
00:05:01,320 --> 00:05:03,880
Speaker 1: that rain do on the share of wallet for right sharing?

90
00:05:03,960 --> 00:05:06,800
Speaker 1: We think that is very basiliant. So with that, for

91
00:05:07,000 --> 00:05:09,039
Speaker 1: that we give them a checkmouk a question amount for

92
00:05:09,120 --> 00:05:13,480
Speaker 1: driving incentives? What we like heading into earnings tomorrow? All right,

93
00:05:13,920 --> 00:05:16,479
Speaker 1: hit called Carney Mcam partners. Thank you so much for

94
00:05:16,560 --> 00:05:19,200
Speaker 1: joining us. Of course, we'll be across Uber, Lift and

95
00:05:19,279 --> 00:05:30,839
Speaker 1: many more companies reporting this week. We compete hard, we

96
00:05:30,880 --> 00:05:33,640
Speaker 1: compete fairly. We try to be the best. We have

97
00:05:33,920 --> 00:05:38,360
Speaker 1: fierce competition at the developers side and the customer SIDEBC

98
00:05:38,640 --> 00:05:42,400
Speaker 1: vigorous competition. Our business model is advertising and we faced

99
00:05:42,440 --> 00:05:46,880
Speaker 1: intense competition. We don't have a dominant share in any market.

100
00:05:47,040 --> 00:05:52,080
Speaker 1: We have a policy against using individual seller data to

101
00:05:52,160 --> 00:05:54,240
Speaker 1: compete with our private label. I would describe it as

102
00:05:54,279 --> 00:05:57,159
Speaker 1: a street fight for market share in the smartphone business.

103
00:05:57,279 --> 00:05:59,520
Speaker 1: I've been clear that Instagram was a competitor. It wouldn't

104
00:05:59,560 --> 00:06:02,839
Speaker 1: surprise me. Refilexus sometimes does promote our own products. Competition

105
00:06:02,920 --> 00:06:05,839
Speaker 1: drives us to history shows that if we don't keep innovating,

106
00:06:06,279 --> 00:06:12,880
Speaker 1: someone will replace every company here today Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos,

107
00:06:12,880 --> 00:06:15,919
Speaker 1: Sundar Pachai, and Tim Cook just two years ago testifying

108
00:06:15,920 --> 00:06:19,080
Speaker 1: it a virtual hearing focused on big tech power in

109
00:06:19,960 --> 00:06:23,760
Speaker 1: two years later, regulators and lawmakers are still considering rules

110
00:06:23,760 --> 00:06:26,120
Speaker 1: that will rain in big tech's biggest players. In an

111
00:06:26,120 --> 00:06:29,880
Speaker 1: effort to boost competition and protect consumers, The American Innovation

112
00:06:29,880 --> 00:06:32,760
Speaker 1: and Choice on Line Act would bar major platforms from

113
00:06:32,760 --> 00:06:36,120
Speaker 1: giving advantages to their own products over those of rivals.

114
00:06:36,120 --> 00:06:39,440
Speaker 1: This is the legislation proposed by Senators Clobuscher and Grassley

115
00:06:39,560 --> 00:06:42,680
Speaker 1: last year. Joining me now David Kapatrick, founder and editor

116
00:06:42,720 --> 00:06:46,280
Speaker 1: in chief of Teconomy, as well as bloombergs Emily Burnbaum

117
00:06:46,320 --> 00:06:48,640
Speaker 1: in d C, who covers big tech anti tries, Emily,

118
00:06:48,680 --> 00:06:50,440
Speaker 1: let's start with you set the stage for us. Because

119
00:06:50,440 --> 00:06:53,920
Speaker 1: there've been so many competing bills, so many competing approaches

120
00:06:53,960 --> 00:06:57,760
Speaker 1: here but this one seems to be gaining steam. Talk

121
00:06:57,839 --> 00:07:01,560
Speaker 1: to us about what klobus are actually have proposed and

122
00:07:01,640 --> 00:07:04,600
Speaker 1: the status of it at this moment. Yeah. So there

123
00:07:04,720 --> 00:07:08,080
Speaker 1: was a wide array of tech related anti trust build

124
00:07:08,160 --> 00:07:12,320
Speaker 1: that passed the House Fishery Committee UH last year. Since then,

125
00:07:12,440 --> 00:07:16,160
Speaker 1: the conversation is coalesced around. UM. This legislation you're talking about,

126
00:07:16,320 --> 00:07:19,160
Speaker 1: the American Innovation and Choice Online Act. UM. It would

127
00:07:19,200 --> 00:07:24,080
Speaker 1: prevent the companies from UH giving preference to their own products.

128
00:07:24,080 --> 00:07:27,520
Speaker 1: So for instance, on you know, Amazon, UH, Amazon's e

129
00:07:27,520 --> 00:07:31,600
Speaker 1: commerce platform, it couldn't privilege its own private label products

130
00:07:31,640 --> 00:07:35,480
Speaker 1: over UM products from small businesses that rely on its platform. UM.

131
00:07:35,560 --> 00:07:38,280
Speaker 1: Right now. You know, there was a huge amount of

132
00:07:38,280 --> 00:07:42,520
Speaker 1: momentum behind this legislation. UM. There was serious talk that

133
00:07:42,920 --> 00:07:45,960
Speaker 1: this legislation is going to get a vote this summer. UM,

134
00:07:46,280 --> 00:07:50,200
Speaker 1: and Chuck Schumer himself had pledged to put it on

135
00:07:50,240 --> 00:07:52,920
Speaker 1: the floor. UM in the early summer. It didn't happen.

136
00:07:53,000 --> 00:07:55,920
Speaker 1: Now we have a week till August resets. It's not

137
00:07:55,960 --> 00:07:58,600
Speaker 1: going to be happening this week. His office has confirmed,

138
00:07:58,640 --> 00:08:01,800
Speaker 1: and we reported recently that he told a group of

139
00:08:01,840 --> 00:08:04,360
Speaker 1: donors that it wasn't going to happen, but now people

140
00:08:04,360 --> 00:08:09,040
Speaker 1: are looking to fall potentially in September. Um, this legislation

141
00:08:09,120 --> 00:08:11,400
Speaker 1: might come to a vote, but that's a very unusual

142
00:08:11,400 --> 00:08:16,160
Speaker 1: time for bills to be considered a mid terms though. UM,

143
00:08:16,160 --> 00:08:19,400
Speaker 1: it's all up in the air right now. Interested indeed, David,

144
00:08:19,480 --> 00:08:22,960
Speaker 1: that big tech stance on big tech could become you know,

145
00:08:23,000 --> 00:08:27,080
Speaker 1: a real issue for voters, uh in the November midterms

146
00:08:27,120 --> 00:08:31,560
Speaker 1: after so many years of figuring out how to regulate them.

147
00:08:31,600 --> 00:08:35,720
Speaker 1: What do you make of this particular bill and how

148
00:08:35,800 --> 00:08:39,400
Speaker 1: it could impact these companies. First of all, I loved

149
00:08:39,400 --> 00:08:41,679
Speaker 1: your montage at the beginning of the segment. It was

150
00:08:41,760 --> 00:08:45,920
Speaker 1: quite amusing. Uh. To be honest, I don't think even

151
00:08:45,920 --> 00:08:50,480
Speaker 1: though surveys show that most consumers slash voters do feel

152
00:08:50,520 --> 00:08:53,760
Speaker 1: that tech companies are too powerful, I don't think this

153
00:08:53,880 --> 00:08:56,800
Speaker 1: kind of issue is anywhere near the top of the

154
00:08:56,880 --> 00:09:01,480
Speaker 1: agenda for voters in general. So I think legislators do

155
00:09:01,679 --> 00:09:05,040
Speaker 1: have to be careful as they're taking actions that might

156
00:09:05,120 --> 00:09:08,439
Speaker 1: seem based on hearings they've had, etcetera, to be rational

157
00:09:08,480 --> 00:09:12,040
Speaker 1: ones that they don't annoy the voters that put them

158
00:09:12,040 --> 00:09:16,720
Speaker 1: in office. Because the problem with regulating Amazon, Apple, Google,

159
00:09:17,000 --> 00:09:22,000
Speaker 1: Meta etcetera. Is these services are essentially as present in

160
00:09:22,120 --> 00:09:26,480
Speaker 1: people's lives as government itself, so you don't want to

161
00:09:26,520 --> 00:09:29,640
Speaker 1: mess with them lightly. Now, I do think many of

162
00:09:29,679 --> 00:09:32,960
Speaker 1: the things that were demonstrated in especially the House hearings

163
00:09:33,240 --> 00:09:37,760
Speaker 1: were egregious. That quote from Bezos just based on reporting

164
00:09:37,760 --> 00:09:40,280
Speaker 1: that we've seen elsewhere and some of the evidence that

165
00:09:40,360 --> 00:09:43,559
Speaker 1: the hearing is flat wrong. They do preference their own

166
00:09:43,600 --> 00:09:46,720
Speaker 1: products at Amazon, so some things need to be fixed.

167
00:09:46,920 --> 00:09:49,240
Speaker 1: But I just worry that we have a sledgehammer here

168
00:09:49,280 --> 00:09:52,360
Speaker 1: and maybe we need like a very fine tooth nail,

169
00:09:52,760 --> 00:09:56,880
Speaker 1: you know, and find nail in a very little hammer. Emily,

170
00:09:57,600 --> 00:09:59,480
Speaker 1: what do you make of that? And and talk to

171
00:09:59,559 --> 00:10:02,800
Speaker 1: us about how sentiment towards big tech has changed since.

172
00:10:03,640 --> 00:10:06,440
Speaker 1: I mean, we're still too we're too long years now

173
00:10:06,880 --> 00:10:10,760
Speaker 1: away from that, A lot has changed and it doesn't

174
00:10:10,800 --> 00:10:15,320
Speaker 1: look good for tech. Yeah, sentiment soured on the big

175
00:10:15,360 --> 00:10:18,280
Speaker 1: tech companies, you know. It started souring in twenty six

176
00:10:19,120 --> 00:10:23,880
Speaker 1: UM mostly related to concerns around than Facebook now Meta Um,

177
00:10:23,920 --> 00:10:27,239
Speaker 1: and it's only continued to become more and more politically

178
00:10:27,320 --> 00:10:30,400
Speaker 1: potent to UM, you know, put yourself in opposition to

179
00:10:30,880 --> 00:10:33,400
Speaker 1: the major tech companies, you know, as part of a

180
00:10:33,440 --> 00:10:37,880
Speaker 1: broader sort of anti corporate push UM during the Biden

181
00:10:37,880 --> 00:10:43,079
Speaker 1: administration and during the Biden presidency. UM. So uh at

182
00:10:43,120 --> 00:10:48,000
Speaker 1: this point, UM, the major message that's being pushed by

183
00:10:48,040 --> 00:10:51,720
Speaker 1: the tech companies is, um, this is not what your

184
00:10:51,800 --> 00:10:56,280
Speaker 1: voters care about. Um. They are running um uh tens

185
00:10:56,320 --> 00:10:58,840
Speaker 1: of millions of dollars worth of ads. We did account

186
00:10:58,960 --> 00:11:01,600
Speaker 1: um this week. They've spent a hundred and twenty million

187
00:11:01,640 --> 00:11:06,480
Speaker 1: dollars on advertising, essentially trying to convince voters. Um, you know,

188
00:11:06,559 --> 00:11:10,079
Speaker 1: Congress is trying to meddle in your phone while so

189
00:11:10,120 --> 00:11:12,200
Speaker 1: many other more important things are going on, you know,

190
00:11:12,320 --> 00:11:15,920
Speaker 1: inflation and uh, the and uh you know gas prices

191
00:11:15,920 --> 00:11:18,760
Speaker 1: that affect you. Why are they looking at this and

192
00:11:19,160 --> 00:11:21,400
Speaker 1: so Um It's yet to be seen if that's a

193
00:11:21,440 --> 00:11:25,319
Speaker 1: winning argument, but it definitely was voting enough that Schumer

194
00:11:25,400 --> 00:11:29,000
Speaker 1: didn't put the those up for vote. Now, David, I

195
00:11:29,040 --> 00:11:31,600
Speaker 1: want to get your thoughts on this latest action from

196
00:11:31,600 --> 00:11:35,400
Speaker 1: the FTC suing Meta over its attempt to buy this

197
00:11:36,200 --> 00:11:40,679
Speaker 1: fairly small VR company within unlimited. The FTC is now

198
00:11:40,760 --> 00:11:44,319
Speaker 1: challenging this, and we've learned that, uh, the FTC filed

199
00:11:44,360 --> 00:11:47,640
Speaker 1: this lawsuit because Lena Khan wanted to do it, even

200
00:11:47,640 --> 00:11:51,120
Speaker 1: though her staff disagreed. What do you make of this

201
00:11:51,200 --> 00:11:53,640
Speaker 1: that it seems the FTC, or at least Lena con

202
00:11:53,760 --> 00:11:58,160
Speaker 1: is determined not to let Meta grow by acquisition like

203
00:11:58,200 --> 00:12:02,360
Speaker 1: it did with Instagram? And what's that? Really good question?

204
00:12:02,440 --> 00:12:05,000
Speaker 1: But before I answer, I just want to make it

205
00:12:05,080 --> 00:12:09,280
Speaker 1: clear I don't intend to echo industry talking points about

206
00:12:09,400 --> 00:12:13,000
Speaker 1: this big bill. I do think the industry has made

207
00:12:13,200 --> 00:12:16,920
Speaker 1: enormous errors and and there's huge resentment against big tech,

208
00:12:17,000 --> 00:12:20,640
Speaker 1: big corporate generally, as as the other Emily said, but

209
00:12:21,440 --> 00:12:24,680
Speaker 1: I just think it's very risky to just go after

210
00:12:24,760 --> 00:12:28,120
Speaker 1: these companies wholesale the way they're doing it. But back

211
00:12:28,120 --> 00:12:31,240
Speaker 1: to Meta and within at the moment, I think that

212
00:12:31,520 --> 00:12:34,840
Speaker 1: Meta has made so many mistakes and gotten so many

213
00:12:34,880 --> 00:12:38,000
Speaker 1: people angry that there is going to be support for

214
00:12:38,040 --> 00:12:41,680
Speaker 1: almost any pushback against that particular company, And to some extent,

215
00:12:41,920 --> 00:12:44,240
Speaker 1: I think even on the other bill, one of the

216
00:12:44,280 --> 00:12:47,040
Speaker 1: reasons so many legislators are so willing to go after

217
00:12:47,080 --> 00:12:51,280
Speaker 1: the entire group of companies is because Meta slash Facebook's

218
00:12:51,400 --> 00:12:56,200
Speaker 1: crimes are really so vividly obvious that it seems justified

219
00:12:56,240 --> 00:13:00,280
Speaker 1: to go after quote unquote big tech. But I think

220
00:13:00,280 --> 00:13:02,960
Speaker 1: It's going to be very hard for Zuckerberg to get

221
00:13:03,000 --> 00:13:06,880
Speaker 1: any kind of significant acquisition through with Lena khan Um

222
00:13:06,960 --> 00:13:11,239
Speaker 1: in there. And certainly maybe he'll even succeed in ultimately

223
00:13:11,320 --> 00:13:16,680
Speaker 1: achieving this acquisition, but everything is gonna encounter pushback. And

224
00:13:16,880 --> 00:13:18,560
Speaker 1: one other point I just want to make. Let's not

225
00:13:18,600 --> 00:13:21,520
Speaker 1: forget what's happening in Europe with the Digital Markets Act

226
00:13:21,600 --> 00:13:24,480
Speaker 1: Digital Services Act, which is very parallel to some of

227
00:13:24,480 --> 00:13:26,440
Speaker 1: the efforts being made in the US, and which is

228
00:13:26,679 --> 00:13:31,320
Speaker 1: further along legislative Absolutely, Europe is a whole another hour

229
00:13:31,400 --> 00:13:34,040
Speaker 1: long show in itself. Emily, I gotta ask you, what

230
00:13:34,120 --> 00:13:38,360
Speaker 1: are the chances the FTC can stop this latest Meta deal,

231
00:13:38,480 --> 00:13:42,679
Speaker 1: even though it is smaller scale. Yeah. I think a

232
00:13:42,720 --> 00:13:47,079
Speaker 1: lot of experts looking at this particular lawsuit by the

233
00:13:47,160 --> 00:13:50,560
Speaker 1: FTC are saying this is a very novel theory, um

234
00:13:50,640 --> 00:13:54,400
Speaker 1: because essentially they're not challenging um. You know, they're not

235
00:13:54,480 --> 00:13:58,720
Speaker 1: saying Meta is currently monopoly in the virtual reality space.

236
00:13:58,720 --> 00:14:01,240
Speaker 1: Is saying that this acquisition could set the stage for

237
00:14:01,320 --> 00:14:03,800
Speaker 1: them monopolize and get another market. This is a sort

238
00:14:03,800 --> 00:14:08,120
Speaker 1: of untested and a new way of approaching acquisitions. Um.

239
00:14:08,360 --> 00:14:11,280
Speaker 1: So there's a lot the you know, there's a lot

240
00:14:11,320 --> 00:14:14,320
Speaker 1: of people who are skeptical about how winning this argument

241
00:14:14,360 --> 00:14:18,040
Speaker 1: could be under correct antitrust laws. But it's not even

242
00:14:18,080 --> 00:14:22,600
Speaker 1: about blocking this particular acquisition. Um. It's it's more a

243
00:14:22,680 --> 00:14:25,960
Speaker 1: show of course by Nina Kan's FTC. You know, she said,

244
00:14:26,080 --> 00:14:28,200
Speaker 1: you have to bring cases even if you're not going

245
00:14:28,240 --> 00:14:30,720
Speaker 1: to win them, because that's how, you know, if you

246
00:14:30,840 --> 00:14:34,960
Speaker 1: change practices within particular industries. Um. And that's how you

247
00:14:35,160 --> 00:14:38,080
Speaker 1: kind of like, you know, put fear in companies that

248
00:14:38,200 --> 00:14:41,520
Speaker 1: they make these kinds of acquisitions. Well, certainly an interesting

249
00:14:41,880 --> 00:14:44,000
Speaker 1: step by the FTC, and we'll be watching to see

250
00:14:44,040 --> 00:14:46,640
Speaker 1: how that one plays APT bloom Examily, bern Bam. Thank you,

251
00:14:46,680 --> 00:14:50,280
Speaker 1: along with our Teconomy founder and editor in chief David Kirkpatrick.

252
00:14:50,440 --> 00:14:53,840
Speaker 1: So much here to continue to discuss over months and

253
00:14:53,920 --> 00:14:57,520
Speaker 1: I'm sure years. Meantime, the White House has urged China

254
00:14:57,720 --> 00:15:00,520
Speaker 1: not to escalate tensions in the with the US in

255
00:15:00,560 --> 00:15:03,880
Speaker 1: response to how Speaker Nancy Pelosi's expected visit to Taiwan,

256
00:15:04,280 --> 00:15:08,040
Speaker 1: signaling that the Biden administration is preparing for Beijing to retaliate.

257
00:15:08,400 --> 00:15:11,160
Speaker 1: A Pelosi visit would be a landmark move by a

258
00:15:11,280 --> 00:15:14,240
Speaker 1: US official and raise the risk of a military confrontation

259
00:15:14,360 --> 00:15:17,400
Speaker 1: given China's view that Taiwan is part of its territory.

260
00:15:17,560 --> 00:15:20,160
Speaker 1: The White House detailed possible actions China could take in

261
00:15:20,200 --> 00:15:23,720
Speaker 1: response to Pelosi's trip, including firing missiles into the Taiwan

262
00:15:23,840 --> 00:15:28,040
Speaker 1: straight Pelosi's office has yet to officially confirm her visit

263
00:15:29,600 --> 00:15:33,160
Speaker 1: and coming up Activision results also out. Where does it's

264
00:15:33,200 --> 00:15:37,280
Speaker 1: deal with microstos stand will give you an update on that. Next,

265
00:15:37,440 --> 00:15:59,240
Speaker 1: this is Bloomberg. Let's get back to earnings and shares

266
00:15:59,280 --> 00:16:01,560
Speaker 1: of Activision? Is there a touch higher in late training

267
00:16:01,560 --> 00:16:04,640
Speaker 1: after the video GameMaker posted sales and been expectations, but

268
00:16:04,720 --> 00:16:08,240
Speaker 1: had little to say about its pending deal with Microsoft

269
00:16:08,120 --> 00:16:10,600
Speaker 1: or at Ludlow. Here with the top lines, let's talk

270
00:16:10,600 --> 00:16:13,760
Speaker 1: about the numbers. First, Where are we so better than expected?

271
00:16:13,840 --> 00:16:16,320
Speaker 1: Revenue one point six four billion dollars? Very nice, but

272
00:16:16,480 --> 00:16:19,920
Speaker 1: context down fifteen percent from a year ago, Earnings half

273
00:16:19,960 --> 00:16:22,360
Speaker 1: what they were a year ago. And you know, it's

274
00:16:22,360 --> 00:16:26,400
Speaker 1: a weird situation for Activision Blizzard right with depending acquisition.

275
00:16:26,640 --> 00:16:29,200
Speaker 1: But the reality is that the video games instruced is

276
00:16:29,240 --> 00:16:31,160
Speaker 1: not as strong right now as it was last year.

277
00:16:31,200 --> 00:16:33,040
Speaker 1: You know Call of Duty Vanguard, which came out in

278
00:16:33,080 --> 00:16:35,840
Speaker 1: the fall has performed poorly. That's had an impact on

279
00:16:36,080 --> 00:16:38,880
Speaker 1: the company's finances, and frankly, we're all at home anymore.

280
00:16:38,880 --> 00:16:41,520
Speaker 1: I've stopped playing as much video games as many video

281
00:16:41,560 --> 00:16:44,440
Speaker 1: games and some of their competitors, like Halo, for example,

282
00:16:44,480 --> 00:16:47,120
Speaker 1: have just done better to gravitate what interest there is.

283
00:16:47,240 --> 00:16:49,560
Speaker 1: How much of this has to do with uncertainty surrounding

284
00:16:49,560 --> 00:16:52,080
Speaker 1: the deal. I mean, this would be the biggest acquisition

285
00:16:52,080 --> 00:16:54,640
Speaker 1: in the last year at least, and we don't know

286
00:16:54,640 --> 00:16:56,480
Speaker 1: if it's going to happen or not, so I think

287
00:16:56,920 --> 00:16:59,480
Speaker 1: merger arbitrary specialists that Bloomberg spoken to say the odds

288
00:16:59,520 --> 00:17:02,280
Speaker 1: of it going through around sevent Bloomberg Intelligence think there's

289
00:17:02,280 --> 00:17:04,880
Speaker 1: going to be tough, but it will ultimately go through.

290
00:17:04,880 --> 00:17:07,120
Speaker 1: And if you look at the stock, you know it's game.

291
00:17:07,760 --> 00:17:10,439
Speaker 1: Since the deals announced, it trades a significant discount to

292
00:17:10,480 --> 00:17:14,160
Speaker 1: the A share that were offered. But it's a mega deal,

293
00:17:14,440 --> 00:17:16,840
Speaker 1: and you know, we always thought there would be regulatory scrutiny,

294
00:17:16,920 --> 00:17:20,639
Speaker 1: and investors seem confident. But as we've learned with well,

295
00:17:20,720 --> 00:17:22,879
Speaker 1: let's not go their Twitter and mask anything could happen

296
00:17:22,880 --> 00:17:24,959
Speaker 1: with a deal of this size. Activision has also been

297
00:17:24,960 --> 00:17:27,440
Speaker 1: dealing with some cultural issues. There's questions about the future

298
00:17:27,440 --> 00:17:31,480
Speaker 1: of CEO Bobby Kolda stays on Microsoft or if this

299
00:17:31,560 --> 00:17:34,399
Speaker 1: deal is the start of his swansan. Yeah, And what

300
00:17:34,440 --> 00:17:36,800
Speaker 1: analysts a point to is that Microsoft went into the

301
00:17:36,800 --> 00:17:39,080
Speaker 1: deal with their eyes open, So it seems you know

302
00:17:39,160 --> 00:17:42,200
Speaker 1: that they bought the company or said they would buy

303
00:17:42,200 --> 00:17:43,640
Speaker 1: the company of the time that that was going through.

304
00:17:44,080 --> 00:17:46,520
Speaker 1: The biggest kind of world card is one Lena can

305
00:17:46,600 --> 00:17:48,240
Speaker 1: I think you were just discussing in the last blog

306
00:17:48,480 --> 00:17:50,400
Speaker 1: as this sort of general appetite to look at big

307
00:17:50,440 --> 00:17:53,960
Speaker 1: tech deals. In the first quarter, the FTC asked both

308
00:17:54,000 --> 00:17:57,920
Speaker 1: sides for evidence. We thought we'd get responses on Monday

309
00:17:58,040 --> 00:18:00,439
Speaker 1: as part of earnings, but in the earnings statement they

310
00:18:00,440 --> 00:18:03,159
Speaker 1: just said, Hey, as is normal, we're pending a deal. Sorry,

311
00:18:03,240 --> 00:18:06,399
Speaker 1: can't comment, can't give you any more information. Maybe by

312
00:18:06,440 --> 00:18:08,520
Speaker 1: the fourth quarters what bloom bag intelligence things will get

313
00:18:08,520 --> 00:18:10,240
Speaker 1: some more detail here. Well, its interest is to see,

314
00:18:10,280 --> 00:18:14,680
Speaker 1: Lena can't scrutinizing a much smaller deal between Meta and uh,

315
00:18:14,800 --> 00:18:18,280
Speaker 1: you know, a small VR company, and not to have

316
00:18:18,440 --> 00:18:21,239
Speaker 1: the same kind of scrutiny of Microsoft and Activision yet

317
00:18:21,520 --> 00:18:24,040
Speaker 1: that we know of. Yet again, we're in a pretty

318
00:18:24,040 --> 00:18:27,280
Speaker 1: primary stage and the deal is on tracked close in June,

319
00:18:28,160 --> 00:18:30,400
Speaker 1: which you know, given the new cycle, seems a very

320
00:18:30,440 --> 00:18:32,639
Speaker 1: long way away. And don't think it. This isn't just

321
00:18:32,760 --> 00:18:35,720
Speaker 1: us story. The cmn UK announced early July they're looking

322
00:18:35,720 --> 00:18:38,200
Speaker 1: at this. This is a global player. Activation has partners

323
00:18:38,200 --> 00:18:40,159
Speaker 1: in China with Nettes. It's going to get a lot

324
00:18:40,160 --> 00:18:42,960
Speaker 1: of attention alright, a lot at stake at Bloodlow. Thank

325
00:18:43,000 --> 00:18:54,919
Speaker 1: you for that update. I think simply because you've been

326
00:18:54,960 --> 00:18:59,159
Speaker 1: successful in a few different businesses doesn't somehow mean that

327
00:18:59,240 --> 00:19:01,880
Speaker 1: you have a napped from market power. It just means

328
00:19:01,880 --> 00:19:04,400
Speaker 1: you've been successful in a couple of different customer experiences.

329
00:19:04,480 --> 00:19:07,359
Speaker 1: I look at the opportunity we provide. I look at

330
00:19:07,359 --> 00:19:10,320
Speaker 1: the skills people are learning through YouTube, you know. I

331
00:19:10,320 --> 00:19:13,280
Speaker 1: feel like everywhere when I go talk to people and

332
00:19:13,280 --> 00:19:16,560
Speaker 1: and providing access to information and knowledge, I think we'll

333
00:19:16,600 --> 00:19:18,240
Speaker 1: end up being on the right side of history as well.

334
00:19:18,560 --> 00:19:21,240
Speaker 1: I don't think big by itself is bad or but

335
00:19:21,400 --> 00:19:25,400
Speaker 1: competition is good. And every business, in particular the businesses

336
00:19:25,440 --> 00:19:29,119
Speaker 1: that are large and have high scale. The unintended consequences

337
00:19:29,160 --> 00:19:32,159
Speaker 1: of your scale cannot be dealt after the fact. They

338
00:19:32,160 --> 00:19:35,439
Speaker 1: need to be dealt while you're scaling. Regulation will have

339
00:19:35,480 --> 00:19:38,160
Speaker 1: an important role to play here. I think privacy regulation

340
00:19:38,280 --> 00:19:41,800
Speaker 1: is important. In the areas like AI regulation will be important.

341
00:19:43,640 --> 00:19:45,920
Speaker 1: Some thoughts there from my interviews with various big text

342
00:19:45,920 --> 00:19:48,840
Speaker 1: CEOs in the last eighteen months. As big tech regulation

343
00:19:48,960 --> 00:19:52,800
Speaker 1: is still pending in Washington, can Congress rain in these

344
00:19:53,000 --> 00:19:57,200
Speaker 1: major platforms well. The American Innovation and Choice Online Act

345
00:19:57,280 --> 00:20:00,480
Speaker 1: is Congress's first major effort to regulate big since the

346
00:20:00,520 --> 00:20:04,359
Speaker 1: inception of the Internet, and it has bipartisan support. Here's

347
00:20:04,359 --> 00:20:09,720
Speaker 1: the bills leading Democratic sponsor, Senator Amy Klobuchar. At some point,

348
00:20:10,119 --> 00:20:14,120
Speaker 1: if there's no competition, these companies are allowed to become

349
00:20:14,200 --> 00:20:20,040
Speaker 1: these monopolistic, dominant um providers. And in the case of

350
00:20:20,080 --> 00:20:22,600
Speaker 1: a t n T, no one wanted to destroy a

351
00:20:22,720 --> 00:20:24,960
Speaker 1: t n T. They just wanted to make sure that

352
00:20:25,119 --> 00:20:31,000
Speaker 1: new competitors can develop. Votes could come before November's mid terms,

353
00:20:31,040 --> 00:20:34,119
Speaker 1: and if it passes, what does it mean for big tech? Really?

354
00:20:34,320 --> 00:20:37,159
Speaker 1: Let's discuss that and more with the Chamber of Progress

355
00:20:37,160 --> 00:20:40,159
Speaker 1: founder and CEO. Adam Kovakovitch, a long time former Google

356
00:20:40,160 --> 00:20:44,359
Speaker 1: executive and Charlotte's Laman competition policy director at Public Knowledge,

357
00:20:44,359 --> 00:20:47,040
Speaker 1: an organization that works to promote freedom of expression and

358
00:20:47,359 --> 00:20:49,640
Speaker 1: an open Internet. So Charlotte will start with you. What's

359
00:20:49,680 --> 00:20:54,520
Speaker 1: your sense of this bill? Does it go far enough? Yes?

360
00:20:54,600 --> 00:20:57,560
Speaker 1: I think it would be a huge step forward. Of course,

361
00:20:57,600 --> 00:21:00,040
Speaker 1: there is a lot more that we are hoping and

362
00:21:00,200 --> 00:21:04,480
Speaker 1: happen in the future, but being able to stop the

363
00:21:04,560 --> 00:21:07,920
Speaker 1: anti competitive discrimination that these companies are engaging in to

364
00:21:08,480 --> 00:21:12,000
Speaker 1: prevent small competitors from getting a fair shot would make

365
00:21:12,040 --> 00:21:15,600
Speaker 1: a huge difference towards promoting competition and making sure that

366
00:21:15,640 --> 00:21:20,359
Speaker 1: consumers actually have access to the best products. Adam, would

367
00:21:20,359 --> 00:21:24,480
Speaker 1: you agree or does this bill go too far? Respectfully disagree?

368
00:21:24,680 --> 00:21:26,719
Speaker 1: I I have great respect for Charlotte, but we disagree

369
00:21:26,720 --> 00:21:28,560
Speaker 1: on this one. Look, I think this this bill is

370
00:21:28,600 --> 00:21:30,760
Speaker 1: languishing for a pretty simple reason, which is that what

371
00:21:30,840 --> 00:21:33,520
Speaker 1: it's proposing to do just isn't that popular if you

372
00:21:33,560 --> 00:21:36,080
Speaker 1: look at another space, which is drugs. Right now, in contrast,

373
00:21:36,160 --> 00:21:38,560
Speaker 1: Congress is on the verge of passing an extremely popular

374
00:21:38,640 --> 00:21:42,080
Speaker 1: regulatory change over the objections of the pharmaceutical industry, which

375
00:21:42,080 --> 00:21:44,840
Speaker 1: is allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices. That's something that

376
00:21:45,119 --> 00:21:48,320
Speaker 1: voters have been clamoring for for decades. It's their pocketbooks.

377
00:21:48,520 --> 00:21:50,840
Speaker 1: They've have senators about it at town hall meetings. Tech

378
00:21:50,920 --> 00:21:53,320
Speaker 1: regulation isn't like that. I think we see the polls

379
00:21:53,320 --> 00:21:56,400
Speaker 1: show that the public favors regulation of big tech platforms

380
00:21:56,400 --> 00:21:59,440
Speaker 1: in general. But this bill does something in particular that's

381
00:21:59,480 --> 00:22:02,359
Speaker 1: not particularly popular, which is banned big tech from offering

382
00:22:02,440 --> 00:22:06,159
Speaker 1: vertically integrated services like Google Maps, Amazon Basics. And it's

383
00:22:06,200 --> 00:22:09,000
Speaker 1: always been clear why smaller companies like Yelp and Spotify

384
00:22:09,040 --> 00:22:11,520
Speaker 1: and match would benefit from that law. But I think

385
00:22:11,560 --> 00:22:13,640
Speaker 1: senators have sort of seen for themselves of the last

386
00:22:13,680 --> 00:22:15,520
Speaker 1: couple of months that no voters are really marching on

387
00:22:15,600 --> 00:22:19,200
Speaker 1: Washington to demand big changes to Google search results or

388
00:22:19,240 --> 00:22:22,399
Speaker 1: Amazon Prime and and that's just the reality. Charlotte, how

389
00:22:22,440 --> 00:22:25,840
Speaker 1: do you respond to that? So I think it may

390
00:22:25,920 --> 00:22:31,720
Speaker 1: not be yet a household discussion about um competition and antitrust,

391
00:22:31,880 --> 00:22:34,440
Speaker 1: But I think what people notice is that these products

392
00:22:34,480 --> 00:22:37,159
Speaker 1: are not serving them. They might not know that that

393
00:22:37,280 --> 00:22:40,400
Speaker 1: is because of a lack of competition, because, uh, these

394
00:22:40,480 --> 00:22:45,360
Speaker 1: gatekeepers don't have to face the new entrepreneurs who sometimes

395
00:22:45,359 --> 00:22:48,199
Speaker 1: have better ideas, and that's why we're stuck with the

396
00:22:48,240 --> 00:22:51,240
Speaker 1: same old products. UM. So, I think, you know, people

397
00:22:51,280 --> 00:22:54,000
Speaker 1: are learning, and that's part of the effort of advocacy

398
00:22:54,119 --> 00:22:57,160
Speaker 1: for this legislation. People are learning what the root causes

399
00:22:57,320 --> 00:22:59,400
Speaker 1: and that it's a lack of competition. But I think

400
00:22:59,400 --> 00:23:01,760
Speaker 1: people are are familiar with the results of that lack

401
00:23:01,800 --> 00:23:04,280
Speaker 1: of competition because they see it every day in these

402
00:23:04,320 --> 00:23:06,840
Speaker 1: products that are no longer innovating in the way that

403
00:23:06,880 --> 00:23:10,560
Speaker 1: we really should see in this space, Adam, We've seen

404
00:23:10,560 --> 00:23:14,000
Speaker 1: big tech kind of stepping up its efforts to lobby

405
00:23:14,160 --> 00:23:17,400
Speaker 1: lawmakers as this bill inches closer. You've got Amazon News

406
00:23:17,480 --> 00:23:22,200
Speaker 1: today hiring a top Republican Congressional aid on its lobbying side.

407
00:23:22,240 --> 00:23:27,040
Speaker 1: You have Apple spending more on antitrust lobby lobbying than

408
00:23:27,080 --> 00:23:30,720
Speaker 1: ever so fartherest here in Tim Cooke himself personally going

409
00:23:30,760 --> 00:23:33,920
Speaker 1: to Washington. Just how scared is big tech of this

410
00:23:33,960 --> 00:23:38,000
Speaker 1: particular bill. Well, it's not something they love. And I

411
00:23:38,080 --> 00:23:40,600
Speaker 1: think again there's a pretty simple reason, which is that

412
00:23:41,119 --> 00:23:42,959
Speaker 1: if you look at the number of people in this

413
00:23:43,040 --> 00:23:47,440
Speaker 1: country who are happy and satisfied with their iPhone, with

414
00:23:47,480 --> 00:23:50,080
Speaker 1: their Google search results, with Amazon, we're talking about hundreds

415
00:23:50,119 --> 00:23:51,919
Speaker 1: of millions of people. And I do think there is

416
00:23:51,960 --> 00:23:55,160
Speaker 1: something about politics that sort of rewards, you know, kind

417
00:23:55,160 --> 00:23:58,399
Speaker 1: of the vocal activists few over the kind of the

418
00:23:58,480 --> 00:24:00,880
Speaker 1: happy many. And I think that's one of the dynamics

419
00:24:00,880 --> 00:24:02,840
Speaker 1: of this debate, that there's a lot of people who

420
00:24:02,840 --> 00:24:05,320
Speaker 1: are not paying attention to this debate at all. What

421
00:24:05,440 --> 00:24:07,960
Speaker 1: do I think would be pretty upset if they're those

422
00:24:07,960 --> 00:24:10,439
Speaker 1: products change? And so I think in some ways the

423
00:24:10,480 --> 00:24:12,359
Speaker 1: companies are kind of in this position, and it's not

424
00:24:12,520 --> 00:24:14,960
Speaker 1: it's awkward, but they're in this position. Of course they're

425
00:24:14,960 --> 00:24:17,520
Speaker 1: defending themselves, but they're also defending sort of they're happy

426
00:24:17,560 --> 00:24:20,199
Speaker 1: customers at the same time. What do you make of

427
00:24:20,200 --> 00:24:24,160
Speaker 1: that argument, Charlotte, that you know, supporters of big tech

428
00:24:24,280 --> 00:24:26,800
Speaker 1: or you know, regular people maybe actually wouldn't want these

429
00:24:26,840 --> 00:24:29,919
Speaker 1: things to be happening if they understood what is to

430
00:24:30,000 --> 00:24:33,560
Speaker 1: be fair a very complicated set of issues, right. I

431
00:24:33,600 --> 00:24:35,439
Speaker 1: don't think that's right. I think the reason that the

432
00:24:35,440 --> 00:24:38,120
Speaker 1: Czech companies don't like this legislation is that it's much

433
00:24:38,160 --> 00:24:41,720
Speaker 1: easier for them if they don't have to face fair competition. Um.

434
00:24:41,840 --> 00:24:44,040
Speaker 1: Right now, they can rest on their laurels and they

435
00:24:44,040 --> 00:24:48,160
Speaker 1: can use anti competitive tools to prova competition from getting

436
00:24:48,160 --> 00:24:50,280
Speaker 1: a fair shot against them, and that is a lot

437
00:24:50,320 --> 00:24:53,240
Speaker 1: easier for them. I understand that, but I think consumers

438
00:24:53,280 --> 00:24:55,920
Speaker 1: really would be better served by fair competition and by

439
00:24:55,960 --> 00:24:59,639
Speaker 1: making sure that those alternatives that are out there or

440
00:24:59,760 --> 00:25:03,040
Speaker 1: in cases you know, are unable to get funded, making

441
00:25:03,040 --> 00:25:05,720
Speaker 1: sure that those alternatives actually get a chance to thrive.

442
00:25:06,160 --> 00:25:09,159
Speaker 1: I think consumers will really benefit from those new innovations

443
00:25:09,200 --> 00:25:11,720
Speaker 1: that we would see if there was fair competition in

444
00:25:11,760 --> 00:25:14,760
Speaker 1: this space. On that note, I'm curious what you both

445
00:25:14,760 --> 00:25:18,320
Speaker 1: think of the FTC challenging Meta's attempts to buy this

446
00:25:18,480 --> 00:25:23,040
Speaker 1: VR company within unlimited Uh. It sounds like Lena Khan

447
00:25:23,160 --> 00:25:29,000
Speaker 1: moved forward with this challenge despite her staff recommending against it. Adam,

448
00:25:29,119 --> 00:25:32,120
Speaker 1: is this, you know, the FTC trying to prevent Facebook

449
00:25:32,160 --> 00:25:35,280
Speaker 1: slash Meta from resting on its laurels and not innovating

450
00:25:35,320 --> 00:25:39,400
Speaker 1: and trying to innovate by buying instead of building. Look,

451
00:25:39,440 --> 00:25:41,520
Speaker 1: I think the case is more rooted in politics than

452
00:25:41,560 --> 00:25:45,320
Speaker 1: the laws. You said. Her staff attorneys recommended against this case,

453
00:25:45,640 --> 00:25:47,800
Speaker 1: and this is coming on a week right where Meta

454
00:25:47,960 --> 00:25:51,040
Speaker 1: actually their revenue was down. Everythink everybody knows that they're

455
00:25:51,040 --> 00:25:55,159
Speaker 1: facing pretty existential competition from TikTok, right, and so I

456
00:25:55,160 --> 00:25:56,680
Speaker 1: think one of the things you see in this new

457
00:25:56,720 --> 00:25:59,400
Speaker 1: case is that the FTC had to draw a very

458
00:25:59,520 --> 00:26:03,080
Speaker 1: narrow market definition in order to make this argument that

459
00:26:03,400 --> 00:26:06,080
Speaker 1: the Meta was monopolizing. And they said that Meta was

460
00:26:06,080 --> 00:26:11,080
Speaker 1: monopolizing when they called the market for VR fitness apps right,

461
00:26:11,440 --> 00:26:14,280
Speaker 1: and they did something similar in their VR dedicated fitness apps.

462
00:26:14,280 --> 00:26:17,560
Speaker 1: They did something similar in their case against Meta over

463
00:26:17,600 --> 00:26:20,480
Speaker 1: the Instagram and WhatsApp uh deals, and the judge in

464
00:26:20,520 --> 00:26:22,439
Speaker 1: that case said that they had failed to prove the

465
00:26:22,480 --> 00:26:25,520
Speaker 1: market definition. I think in this case, I predict the

466
00:26:25,560 --> 00:26:28,000
Speaker 1: judge is going to say they drew the market too narrowly.

467
00:26:28,600 --> 00:26:30,639
Speaker 1: It's a little bit like saying that, like fruit Loops

468
00:26:30,640 --> 00:26:34,480
Speaker 1: has monopolized, you know, the market for rainbow colored fruity cereal. Well,

469
00:26:34,520 --> 00:26:36,800
Speaker 1: that's not its own market right to compete. Competes against

470
00:26:36,840 --> 00:26:39,920
Speaker 1: fruity pebbles and frosted flakes and lucky charms and bagels

471
00:26:39,960 --> 00:26:42,040
Speaker 1: and English muffins, and judges know that, right. And so

472
00:26:42,080 --> 00:26:45,119
Speaker 1: I think this case is is I think likely to

473
00:26:45,200 --> 00:26:50,120
Speaker 1: fall into a similar trap of defining a market too narrowly. Charlotte,

474
00:26:50,119 --> 00:26:53,760
Speaker 1: what do you think about this FTC challenge? It certainly

475
00:26:54,160 --> 00:26:57,280
Speaker 1: has a ring of of of of some skeptics who

476
00:26:57,280 --> 00:27:00,000
Speaker 1: think maybe the Instagram and what's app deals should never

477
00:27:00,040 --> 00:27:03,960
Speaker 1: have happened. So first, I really don't think we should

478
00:27:03,960 --> 00:27:09,320
Speaker 1: read too much into this idea that the staff were overruled. UM.

479
00:27:09,359 --> 00:27:11,840
Speaker 1: I worked at the FTC. I know that there are

480
00:27:12,240 --> 00:27:16,520
Speaker 1: usually many staff involved in an investigation like this. UM.

481
00:27:16,560 --> 00:27:20,120
Speaker 1: I think it's not at all clear from these unofficial leaks. Uh,

482
00:27:20,440 --> 00:27:22,920
Speaker 1: you know what the view of the staff was. And

483
00:27:23,040 --> 00:27:25,480
Speaker 1: there's a lot of staff with their name on this complaint,

484
00:27:25,600 --> 00:27:28,119
Speaker 1: so I think they stand behind it. UM. And I

485
00:27:28,160 --> 00:27:31,199
Speaker 1: think it's a strong argument. Uh. I'm so glad to

486
00:27:31,240 --> 00:27:36,080
Speaker 1: see that the FTC is UM not waiting to see UM,

487
00:27:36,080 --> 00:27:38,320
Speaker 1: you know, not letting this one go by as they

488
00:27:38,320 --> 00:27:42,119
Speaker 1: have so many times before. I imagine, uh, you know,

489
00:27:42,200 --> 00:27:45,240
Speaker 1: ten years from now, maybe we'll be so glad that

490
00:27:45,359 --> 00:27:48,560
Speaker 1: this was the merger where the FTC decided to step in.

491
00:27:49,320 --> 00:27:52,359
Speaker 1: It is a situation of uncertainty, and part of what

492
00:27:52,520 --> 00:27:56,040
Speaker 1: I think is really needed to improve antitrust enforcement today

493
00:27:56,200 --> 00:28:00,080
Speaker 1: is bringing those cases and situations of uncertainty, especially in

494
00:28:00,119 --> 00:28:03,719
Speaker 1: tech markets, were not always going to be completely sure UM.

495
00:28:03,800 --> 00:28:07,520
Speaker 1: But what economists have seen is that the prior strategy

496
00:28:07,880 --> 00:28:11,760
Speaker 1: of wave and see and UM not bringing a case

497
00:28:11,840 --> 00:28:16,000
Speaker 1: in situations of uncertainty really lead to so many more

498
00:28:16,040 --> 00:28:20,359
Speaker 1: mergers going through than should have, and the economic theory

499
00:28:20,560 --> 00:28:23,280
Speaker 1: that new competitors were going to come in and compete

500
00:28:23,280 --> 00:28:27,520
Speaker 1: away those monopoly rents just wasn't right. That's not what happened.

501
00:28:27,840 --> 00:28:31,040
Speaker 1: It turns out that the costs of inaction are much

502
00:28:31,119 --> 00:28:34,000
Speaker 1: higher than the costs of action. So I think they're

503
00:28:34,040 --> 00:28:36,480
Speaker 1: absolutely making the right decision here, and I was glad

504
00:28:36,520 --> 00:28:40,080
Speaker 1: to see it. Interesting now there are some potential big

505
00:28:40,120 --> 00:28:43,400
Speaker 1: concessions that big tech could make. We have seen some

506
00:28:43,440 --> 00:28:47,120
Speaker 1: concessions over the last several weeks potentially to divert the spotlight.

507
00:28:47,160 --> 00:28:50,520
Speaker 1: But one of those adam is Google potentially offering to

508
00:28:50,560 --> 00:28:54,880
Speaker 1: spin off its ad business to fend off anti trust scrutiny.

509
00:28:54,920 --> 00:28:58,480
Speaker 1: How likely is that. I don't know how likely that is.

510
00:28:58,480 --> 00:29:00,120
Speaker 1: I think one of the things that this is come

511
00:29:00,200 --> 00:29:03,000
Speaker 1: up is in this context of this d j uh

512
00:29:03,040 --> 00:29:06,440
Speaker 1: investigation supposedly of Google's ad tech business. One of the

513
00:29:06,440 --> 00:29:08,320
Speaker 1: things that's interesting to me about that is that the

514
00:29:08,360 --> 00:29:12,320
Speaker 1: Texas Attorney General already has a lawsuit that has pretty

515
00:29:12,360 --> 00:29:16,239
Speaker 1: advanced against Google over the same topic. Uh, And so

516
00:29:16,320 --> 00:29:18,960
Speaker 1: it's interesting to me to see that that that um,

517
00:29:19,000 --> 00:29:21,640
Speaker 1: that kind of happening in parallel I don't know what

518
00:29:21,760 --> 00:29:23,840
Speaker 1: to make in terms of kind of how that will unfold.

519
00:29:23,880 --> 00:29:26,240
Speaker 1: But um, but but we'll see if the d J

520
00:29:26,440 --> 00:29:30,120
Speaker 1: takes that step. Given that the Texas a G is prosecuting,

521
00:29:30,160 --> 00:29:32,280
Speaker 1: Sometimes to enforcers say well, you know that's an issue

522
00:29:32,280 --> 00:29:34,840
Speaker 1: that another enforcement agency has already tackling, so well, you know,

523
00:29:34,880 --> 00:29:37,560
Speaker 1: maybe maybe we focus on some other issue in our investigations.

524
00:29:38,280 --> 00:29:42,280
Speaker 1: All right, Well, much here to continue to discuss. But

525
00:29:42,360 --> 00:29:46,200
Speaker 1: thank you both for waning in Adam Kovakovitch of the

526
00:29:46,280 --> 00:29:49,600
Speaker 1: Chamber of Progress as well as Charlotte Sliman Public Knowledge.

527
00:29:49,920 --> 00:29:53,480
Speaker 1: Appreciate it. Okay, coming up the regulation that could becoming

528
00:29:53,520 --> 00:29:56,320
Speaker 1: to crypto making, Del Raheem, a partner at lath and

529
00:29:56,360 --> 00:29:59,880
Speaker 1: Watkins and a former d o J Assistant Attorney General,

530
00:30:00,440 --> 00:30:19,080
Speaker 1: is with us. Next this is Bloomberg. Instead of doing

531
00:30:19,080 --> 00:30:22,360
Speaker 1: this regulation by enforcement, we should be looking at the

532
00:30:22,440 --> 00:30:27,240
Speaker 1: legislative process. If you raise money from the public and

533
00:30:27,520 --> 00:30:32,280
Speaker 1: and that public is anticipating based on your efforts, uh,

534
00:30:32,600 --> 00:30:37,120
Speaker 1: some profit that comes into the securities laws. The laws

535
00:30:37,320 --> 00:30:41,200
Speaker 1: around determining what a security are is very complex. I

536
00:30:41,200 --> 00:30:43,160
Speaker 1: would stay with talking to industry groups, I was like,

537
00:30:43,360 --> 00:30:46,080
Speaker 1: we need to self regulate or the regulators are coming

538
00:30:46,960 --> 00:30:51,120
Speaker 1: and when you look back, there was very little self regulation.

539
00:30:51,400 --> 00:30:55,320
Speaker 1: We want to make sure that we have thoughtful regulatory

540
00:30:55,360 --> 00:31:01,840
Speaker 1: frameworks so that these industries can survive and thrive. Let's

541
00:31:01,880 --> 00:31:05,160
Speaker 1: take a view on another bursioning tech industry that is

542
00:31:05,200 --> 00:31:07,800
Speaker 1: primed for more regulation, and that is crypto. I want

543
00:31:07,800 --> 00:31:10,640
Speaker 1: to bring in Making Del Rahee now partner at Latham

544
00:31:10,680 --> 00:31:13,400
Speaker 1: and Watkins and former Assistant Attorney General for the Justice

545
00:31:13,440 --> 00:31:17,160
Speaker 1: Department's Antitrust Division under the Trump administration. He oversaw the

546
00:31:17,160 --> 00:31:19,880
Speaker 1: review and resolution of hundreds of mergers and acquisition and

547
00:31:19,880 --> 00:31:23,120
Speaker 1: played a vital role in building the Antitrust divisions engagement

548
00:31:23,160 --> 00:31:26,280
Speaker 1: with its international counterparts. Making. Thank you so much for

549
00:31:26,360 --> 00:31:29,000
Speaker 1: joining us. I've wanted to interview you for a long time,

550
00:31:29,040 --> 00:31:32,320
Speaker 1: and I'm so curious what you make of the debate

551
00:31:32,680 --> 00:31:35,320
Speaker 1: uh in the crypto universe right now about how to

552
00:31:35,360 --> 00:31:39,200
Speaker 1: balance innovation and regulation. Obviously, there's been a ton of

553
00:31:39,240 --> 00:31:42,280
Speaker 1: volatility in this space, there have been bankruptcies, but also

554
00:31:42,360 --> 00:31:46,480
Speaker 1: a ton of enthusiasm. What's the right balance? Well, thanks

555
00:31:46,760 --> 00:31:49,560
Speaker 1: first of all for having me on. It's it's interesting

556
00:31:49,600 --> 00:31:51,720
Speaker 1: there's this debate that you know, whenever you have a

557
00:31:51,720 --> 00:31:56,800
Speaker 1: foundational technology that could disrupt incumbent players. There's a big debate,

558
00:31:56,960 --> 00:32:00,640
Speaker 1: and the legislative process is that it's a very slow

559
00:32:00,760 --> 00:32:04,160
Speaker 1: process because you need a lot of education. You need

560
00:32:04,200 --> 00:32:08,640
Speaker 1: to educate the policy members, the policy makers, members of

561
00:32:08,720 --> 00:32:12,320
Speaker 1: Congress and others about exactly what it does and what

562
00:32:12,440 --> 00:32:15,440
Speaker 1: should they be afraid of to get in there. Of course,

563
00:32:15,840 --> 00:32:19,560
Speaker 1: I think the less regulation you have, especially at the

564
00:32:19,600 --> 00:32:24,200
Speaker 1: infancy of a new technology, the greater, uh the innovation

565
00:32:24,680 --> 00:32:27,080
Speaker 1: that is going to be surrounding that. Of course, if

566
00:32:27,120 --> 00:32:29,960
Speaker 1: there's abuses, that's when regulations should come in, but not

567
00:32:30,400 --> 00:32:34,560
Speaker 1: to come in early at the early stages of developing

568
00:32:34,600 --> 00:32:38,360
Speaker 1: a new foundational technology like blockchain. And so you've you've

569
00:32:38,360 --> 00:32:40,400
Speaker 1: seen a lot of changes in the marketplace. Of course,

570
00:32:40,440 --> 00:32:45,240
Speaker 1: it's largely related to cryptocurrencies rather than the broader space

571
00:32:45,320 --> 00:32:49,240
Speaker 1: of blockchain that has many applications. So President Bind's Crypto

572
00:32:49,240 --> 00:32:51,720
Speaker 1: Executive Order, for example, what's your view on that from

573
00:32:51,720 --> 00:32:55,480
Speaker 1: an antitrust perspective. Look, I think one of the very

574
00:32:55,560 --> 00:32:58,760
Speaker 1: positive things about the executive Order it brings the whole

575
00:32:58,800 --> 00:33:02,280
Speaker 1: of government. It it's the views of different folks looks

576
00:33:02,360 --> 00:33:05,840
Speaker 1: at competition area. The area that I'm very much concerned

577
00:33:05,880 --> 00:33:10,240
Speaker 1: about is making sure that you know, regulation UH is

578
00:33:10,280 --> 00:33:13,680
Speaker 1: not put in place where you have you know, static

579
00:33:13,760 --> 00:33:18,800
Speaker 1: regulation x anti UH that puts UH you know, that

580
00:33:18,840 --> 00:33:21,920
Speaker 1: puts shackles on the on the engineers and the business

581
00:33:21,960 --> 00:33:25,840
Speaker 1: models rather than letting get developed into its full potential.

582
00:33:26,080 --> 00:33:29,479
Speaker 1: And what I'm hoping is that different aspects of the government. So,

583
00:33:29,520 --> 00:33:32,320
Speaker 1: of course there's this very important role for the SEC

584
00:33:32,520 --> 00:33:35,520
Speaker 1: and the CFTC and and those types of agencies that

585
00:33:35,680 --> 00:33:39,480
Speaker 1: regulated from investment standpoint, but there's also an important role

586
00:33:39,520 --> 00:33:42,560
Speaker 1: for the Departments of Commerce and Department of Justice, particularly

587
00:33:42,760 --> 00:33:47,360
Speaker 1: the Antitrust Division, to ensure that the regulations will allow

588
00:33:47,480 --> 00:33:52,040
Speaker 1: maximum competition and provide the greatest incentives for further innovation.

589
00:33:52,440 --> 00:33:56,560
Speaker 1: This is the technology that I think has uh infinite

590
00:33:56,960 --> 00:34:01,200
Speaker 1: potential to really disrupt many areas and provide efficiencies that

591
00:34:01,280 --> 00:34:07,640
Speaker 1: ultimately benefit consumers, such as lowering transaction costs. Sure, now

592
00:34:07,680 --> 00:34:10,880
Speaker 1: we've seen firms like f t X take on a

593
00:34:10,960 --> 00:34:13,719
Speaker 1: lot more of the market, striking deals left and right.

594
00:34:13,880 --> 00:34:16,279
Speaker 1: Is that something that we should be worried about from

595
00:34:16,280 --> 00:34:19,600
Speaker 1: an anti trust perspective or are there other red flags

596
00:34:19,800 --> 00:34:24,319
Speaker 1: that you see? It's it's look, there's a market that's

597
00:34:24,360 --> 00:34:26,680
Speaker 1: just developing. So there's gonna be some winners, there's going

598
00:34:26,719 --> 00:34:29,719
Speaker 1: to be some losers, and it's going to develop. Uh.

599
00:34:29,719 --> 00:34:33,719
Speaker 1: You know, you're you're probably not fold enough like I

600
00:34:33,760 --> 00:34:37,400
Speaker 1: am to remember back in two thousand, right at the

601
00:34:37,400 --> 00:34:40,560
Speaker 1: height of the Internet bubble, where you had everything, you know,

602
00:34:41,000 --> 00:34:43,239
Speaker 1: you PLoP the name added dot com to it, and

603
00:34:43,280 --> 00:34:45,400
Speaker 1: all of a sudden, it's a billion dollar company. Not

604
00:34:45,480 --> 00:34:47,440
Speaker 1: all of them survived because they didn't have all the

605
00:34:47,560 --> 00:34:51,680
Speaker 1: essential elements. So I think the industry is going through

606
00:34:51,719 --> 00:34:55,279
Speaker 1: some changes. And some transactions are very good because it

607
00:34:55,320 --> 00:34:59,800
Speaker 1: allows for some technologies or some engineers and other talent

608
00:35:00,280 --> 00:35:04,799
Speaker 1: to be absorbed into something another entity that could be productive.

609
00:35:05,040 --> 00:35:07,799
Speaker 1: So I don't I think every transaction needs to be

610
00:35:07,920 --> 00:35:10,359
Speaker 1: looked at on its own specific facts and its own

611
00:35:10,400 --> 00:35:13,560
Speaker 1: specific merits. And that's what the antitrust laws do. They

612
00:35:13,560 --> 00:35:16,520
Speaker 1: don't look at it holistically about you know, a bunch

613
00:35:16,520 --> 00:35:20,200
Speaker 1: of acquisitions, Uh, whether they're bad or good. We look

614
00:35:20,239 --> 00:35:23,880
Speaker 1: at the effects of that transaction. What's your view on

615
00:35:23,960 --> 00:35:27,640
Speaker 1: the Klobuchar grass Lee bill designed to reign in big

616
00:35:27,680 --> 00:35:30,799
Speaker 1: tech is not the correct framework by which big tech

617
00:35:30,960 --> 00:35:36,600
Speaker 1: should be regulated. Look, I think it's it's a difficult

618
00:35:36,600 --> 00:35:39,640
Speaker 1: one because there's the there's existing law, and there's a

619
00:35:39,719 --> 00:35:43,200
Speaker 1: number of litigation that is that is ongoing, both in

620
00:35:43,239 --> 00:35:46,399
Speaker 1: the United States and abroad, and I won't comment on that,

621
00:35:46,480 --> 00:35:51,440
Speaker 1: but the legislative process whenever you are going to impact

622
00:35:53,040 --> 00:35:57,160
Speaker 1: ahead of time. Uh, this is really industrial policy. This

623
00:35:57,280 --> 00:36:00,960
Speaker 1: is not really anti trust laws that are being proposed.

624
00:36:01,280 --> 00:36:06,200
Speaker 1: You're making a policy judgment call about certain businesses. There's

625
00:36:06,239 --> 00:36:09,240
Speaker 1: gonna be some harms because you're gonna lose some efficiencies

626
00:36:09,640 --> 00:36:13,879
Speaker 1: when those business practices are precluded. Uh, And those are

627
00:36:13,960 --> 00:36:17,120
Speaker 1: judgment calls that policy makers are making. There's gonna be

628
00:36:17,160 --> 00:36:20,800
Speaker 1: some harm to consumers by some aspects of these bills.

629
00:36:21,160 --> 00:36:24,120
Speaker 1: And there's you know, for example, there's another legislation that

630
00:36:24,239 --> 00:36:28,239
Speaker 1: makes illegal every merger that's worth folk that's worth over

631
00:36:28,320 --> 00:36:31,000
Speaker 1: five billion dollars. That just doesn't make a whole lot

632
00:36:31,040 --> 00:36:33,680
Speaker 1: of sense to me. And some of these bills, they

633
00:36:33,719 --> 00:36:37,799
Speaker 1: really need to be refined. There needs to be um

634
00:36:38,160 --> 00:36:41,160
Speaker 1: a lot of debate about this. There isn't. I don't

635
00:36:41,160 --> 00:36:46,839
Speaker 1: think the requisite amount of proper debate and the implications

636
00:36:46,880 --> 00:36:51,320
Speaker 1: of all these bills has been had there in Congress yet. Okay,

637
00:36:51,440 --> 00:36:53,960
Speaker 1: then what's your view on the state of antitrust enforcement.

638
00:36:54,080 --> 00:37:00,120
Speaker 1: More broadly, under the Biden administration, Look, President Biden came it.

639
00:37:00,600 --> 00:37:03,200
Speaker 1: He issued an executive order from the White House to

640
00:37:03,280 --> 00:37:08,000
Speaker 1: the agencies and also to every regulated regulated industry agency.

641
00:37:08,080 --> 00:37:11,800
Speaker 1: Every executive branch has to look at it for competition purposes.

642
00:37:12,080 --> 00:37:15,960
Speaker 1: I think that's good. That is fine to look at, uh,

643
00:37:16,000 --> 00:37:20,040
Speaker 1: you know, the competitive effects and impacts of your regulatory actions.

644
00:37:20,320 --> 00:37:23,040
Speaker 1: What I don't like is that if particular industries are

645
00:37:23,080 --> 00:37:26,279
Speaker 1: just targeted. I don't think that's that should be the goal.

646
00:37:26,640 --> 00:37:30,239
Speaker 1: And I hope that the two antitrust agencies, the enforcement agencies,

647
00:37:30,400 --> 00:37:33,840
Speaker 1: the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice, look at

648
00:37:33,880 --> 00:37:39,359
Speaker 1: each case, each transaction, each company, and the effects of

649
00:37:39,400 --> 00:37:42,560
Speaker 1: the conduct that they have, rather than trying to target

650
00:37:42,640 --> 00:37:45,680
Speaker 1: you know, you pick your name, big tech, big health, big,

651
00:37:45,719 --> 00:37:49,880
Speaker 1: whatever it might be. Big in a capitalist system is

652
00:37:49,920 --> 00:37:53,799
Speaker 1: not bad big behaving badly as bad as I've in

653
00:37:53,840 --> 00:37:58,239
Speaker 1: a sophomoric way described once so quickly. What's your take

654
00:37:58,280 --> 00:38:01,200
Speaker 1: on on Lena con and in her latest approach, we've

655
00:38:01,280 --> 00:38:05,160
Speaker 1: learned about the FTC challenging metas attempt to acquire within

656
00:38:05,280 --> 00:38:08,919
Speaker 1: unlimited a VR company, and obviously she's you know, she's

657
00:38:08,920 --> 00:38:11,360
Speaker 1: certainly made it clear she wants to take on big,

658
00:38:11,400 --> 00:38:13,640
Speaker 1: big tech quickly. Do you think that she is going

659
00:38:13,680 --> 00:38:19,799
Speaker 1: to succeed? Well, look, I had an old mentor, Jack M. Lenny,

660
00:38:19,880 --> 00:38:22,480
Speaker 1: who was the head of the Motion Pictures of Association

661
00:38:22,520 --> 00:38:25,279
Speaker 1: and a colorful guy, and once he told me making

662
00:38:25,680 --> 00:38:27,600
Speaker 1: you can tell a man to go to hell getting

663
00:38:27,640 --> 00:38:30,919
Speaker 1: him there's a whole different story. My experience in law

664
00:38:31,000 --> 00:38:33,640
Speaker 1: enforcement is that you can say you know you're gonna

665
00:38:33,680 --> 00:38:36,920
Speaker 1: break up any company you want, or any industry you've

666
00:38:36,960 --> 00:38:40,239
Speaker 1: got to. You have to develop the facts, develop the law,

667
00:38:40,320 --> 00:38:42,799
Speaker 1: and go prove it in court. That's not always very

668
00:38:42,880 --> 00:38:46,359
Speaker 1: easy to do. I think they have taken on their looked,

669
00:38:46,480 --> 00:38:49,399
Speaker 1: taken a hard look at some cases. But I think,

670
00:38:49,400 --> 00:38:51,320
Speaker 1: as they have found in the past year and a half,

671
00:38:51,920 --> 00:38:56,319
Speaker 1: actually bringing specific cases and winning them in court, it's

672
00:38:56,400 --> 00:38:59,000
Speaker 1: not as easy as saying, so you know why, because

673
00:38:59,000 --> 00:39:01,680
Speaker 1: we're a country of law laws and there's precedent of

674
00:39:01,680 --> 00:39:06,000
Speaker 1: the antitrust laws out there. I commend them for pushing

675
00:39:06,000 --> 00:39:09,440
Speaker 1: the envelope within the boundaries of the ball, but I

676
00:39:09,480 --> 00:39:12,600
Speaker 1: think success is going to be a challenge unless the

677
00:39:12,640 --> 00:39:15,320
Speaker 1: facts and the laws are there. That is a metaphor

678
00:39:15,400 --> 00:39:18,440
Speaker 1: that I will remember. Thank you, Makon del Raheem, partner

679
00:39:18,440 --> 00:39:22,600
Speaker 1: at Lataman Watkins, former d o J assistant attorney in general.

680
00:39:22,680 --> 00:39:34,680
Speaker 1: Thank you for weighing in a Twitter shareholder hit Elon

681
00:39:34,760 --> 00:39:38,040
Speaker 1: Musque with a class action lawsuit, effectively joining Twitter's bid

682
00:39:38,080 --> 00:39:40,919
Speaker 1: to hold him to a forty four billion dollar deal.

683
00:39:41,200 --> 00:39:45,640
Speaker 1: Investor Luigi Crispo calling out Musk's quote lane rationales for

684
00:39:45,760 --> 00:39:49,960
Speaker 1: renegging on this contract, accusing the billionaire fabricating excuses to

685
00:39:49,960 --> 00:39:51,919
Speaker 1: get out of the buy up. He's seeking a court

686
00:39:52,080 --> 00:39:57,880
Speaker 1: order compelling Musk to consummate that deal. And that does it.

687
00:39:58,000 --> 00:40:01,240
Speaker 1: For this edition of Bloomberg techn Apology coming up tomorrow,

688
00:40:01,280 --> 00:40:03,640
Speaker 1: we're gonna be sitting down with Uber CEO Dara Kazra Shy.

689
00:40:03,719 --> 00:40:06,399
Speaker 1: We're gonna talk about earnings and his plans to turn

690
00:40:06,520 --> 00:40:09,879
Speaker 1: Uber into a super app. Is it working? And don't

691
00:40:09,920 --> 00:40:13,400
Speaker 1: forget to check out our podcast wherever you get your podcasts.

692
00:40:13,440 --> 00:40:16,279
Speaker 1: I'm Emily Changing in San Francisco. This is Plumberg