Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. Bloomberg Tech is alive
Speaker 1: from coast to coast, with Caroline Hide in New York
Speaker 1: and VLA low into San Francisco.
Speaker 2: This is Bloomberg Tech coming up.
Speaker 3: I RAN chooses its new leader as the conflict spreads
Speaker 3: further and sends oil prices jumping us.
Speaker 4: Oracle and OpenAI won't expand a flagship Texas data center
Speaker 4: to two gigawatts. Oracle maintains the BIGAI buildout as intact.
Speaker 3: An n Scale raises two billion dollars in new funding,
Speaker 3: valuing the UK based AI data center developer at fourteen
Speaker 3: zero point six billion dollars.
Speaker 4: But we start ed just broadening the scope of the
Speaker 4: market that we look at. At the moment, we're down
Speaker 4: four tens percent. We are off of our lows and
Speaker 4: the NASBAK one hundred. But once again, the conflict with
Speaker 4: the Middle East, the fact that we're and what with
Speaker 4: the RAN and that continues is still walking markets. We're
Speaker 4: currently up ten percent when you're looking at New York crewed.
Speaker 4: If we're looking at Brent at one point and it
Speaker 4: clicks one hundred and twenty dollars a barrel, there is
Speaker 4: clear fear consuming asset classes that have lost that's six
Speaker 4: trillion since the beginning of the conflict, and therefore we
Speaker 4: want to bring in Bloomberg Washington correspondent Tyler Kendall for
Speaker 4: a little bit more set the scene. What happened a
Speaker 4: new leader and continuing barrage.
Speaker 5: Yeah, Hey Caroline, good morning. While at the moment, it
Speaker 5: doesn't seem like there is any let up when it
Speaker 5: comes to the conflict, and that a diplomatic off ramp
Speaker 5: isn't on the table at the moment. In fact, we
Speaker 5: heard from President Trump over the weekend threatening to widen
Speaker 5: the war. In a post on truth Social he said
Speaker 5: that the US was looking to expand its list of
Speaker 5: targets as the President maintains that he is quote not
Speaker 5: happy with the new Supreme Leader that has been chosen.
Speaker 5: Analysts say that the fact that the sun of the
Speaker 5: late Supreme Leader is now the new one indicates that
Speaker 5: the regime is going to continue its hardline stance. In fact,
Speaker 5: we heard from Iranian state media over the weekend after
Speaker 5: the pick that the government maintains that it has enough
Speaker 5: weapons stockpiles to sustain a high intensity conflict for the
Speaker 5: next six months and that Iran will start to deploy
Speaker 5: more advanced and longer range weapons. Of course, this is
Speaker 5: all contributing to questions about the timeline here and what
Speaker 5: will be sustained disruptions when it comes to the oil
Speaker 5: market caroline. As you know, earlier this morning G seven
Speaker 5: finance ministers had met, but the potential to tap a
Speaker 5: coordinated release of strategic reserves. Ultimately French France's finance minister
Speaker 5: came out and said that the group of countries was
Speaker 5: not there yet, but the option still remains on the table.
Speaker 3: Tyler, the story in markets, stocks and bonds slide, but
Speaker 3: really it's oil. Right, You either look at Brent or
Speaker 3: West Texas. What's the President had to say about what
Speaker 3: is happening in oil markets as a result of the
Speaker 3: conflict in Iran. You know, energy affordability, oil prices a
Speaker 3: thing central to his platform.
Speaker 5: Right, you're really threading the needle there, ed, because at
Speaker 5: this point President Trump has downplayed the oil spike, telling
Speaker 5: Americans to be patient and that ultimately it's not going
Speaker 5: to be long sustained. We heard from the Energy Secretary
Speaker 5: over the weekend in an interview saying that this is
Speaker 5: not a long term conflict and other US officials have
Speaker 5: said that this is going to be a short term
Speaker 5: disruption in order for the long term gain of achieving
Speaker 5: the US's objectives when it comes to Iran. Still, we
Speaker 5: know that the White House has been trying to reassure
Speaker 5: Americans when it comes to the economy before this conflict
Speaker 5: even happened, and now as we see those higher prices
Speaker 5: trickle down to retail gasoline, that's putting the White House
Speaker 5: on the defense. Now our understanding is the administration is
Speaker 5: looking at some potential options to help domestic consumers. There
Speaker 5: had been reporting that the White House was set to
Speaker 5: ask Congress for a gas tax holiday to help lower prices,
Speaker 5: but we haven't really seen that emerge either. It appears
Speaker 5: that the Administration has taken off the table for now
Speaker 5: tapping the Strategic Petroleum Reservement questions about its REPS punishment,
Speaker 5: which was really at this point leaving the administration to
Speaker 5: have to reassure Americans that this ultimately is going to
Speaker 5: be worth the long term success of the military campaign
Speaker 5: and broader peace in the Middle East.
Speaker 3: The President calling one hundred dollars oil a small price
Speaker 3: to pay in the context of getting the war completed.
Speaker 3: Bloomberg Stylo Kendl with the latest from DC Oil surges
Speaker 3: past one hundred dollars as Saudi Arabia begins cutting production,
Speaker 3: with storage facilities nearing capacity amid disruptions tied to the
Speaker 3: straight of fuel moves, according.
Speaker 2: To a source.
Speaker 3: For more, let's talk about global energy the upheaval. Julianne Edwards,
Speaker 3: the nuclear company chief development officer, is with us. So this,
Speaker 3: as Tyler put it, is a difficult need order thread
Speaker 3: as well, because you know, long term you're going to
Speaker 3: say that the war in Iram puts a spotlight on
Speaker 3: American energy security. But you also have a firm grasp
Speaker 3: with the data, right So tell us what you on
Speaker 3: your desk are seeing right now in terms of oil
Speaker 3: disruption and oil supply, and then we'll get to.
Speaker 2: The UCULO part.
Speaker 6: Good morning and happy to see you guys this morning
Speaker 6: from our nation's capital. Yes, we are watching the oil
Speaker 6: prices continue to escalate. Our hope is that this will
Speaker 6: have only an indirect effect for a short period of
Speaker 6: time and that we will start to see resolution and
Speaker 6: i RAN soon.
Speaker 7: But that being said, these are long term.
Speaker 6: Decision makings that occur with these infrastructure projects. And so
Speaker 6: the fact is is that these disruptions that we're seeing
Speaker 6: from these geopolitical tensions are going to have a direct
Speaker 6: impact on our energy prices are oil and gas prices domestically,
Speaker 6: and why it's so critical to continue to invest domestically
Speaker 6: in onshore capabilities related to baseload energy, related to on
Speaker 6: shoring and manufacturing so that we're less vulnerable to these
Speaker 6: market disruptions that can help it overseas.
Speaker 3: There's a note out there this morning from Jeffreys saying
Speaker 3: that despite the sort of volatility and uncertainty, clients should
Speaker 3: be encouraged to continue to stick with clean tech, you know,
Speaker 3: renewable tech stocks in that in that instance, do you
Speaker 3: take a sort of reputational hit in the environment like
Speaker 3: this for your industry when there is such a microfocus
Speaker 3: on oil.
Speaker 6: I'm seeing the actual a pivot towards understanding the importance
Speaker 6: of reliability and dependability.
Speaker 7: Nuclear energy has long.
Speaker 6: Been a backbone of our electricity system and producing electrons
Speaker 6: for ninety to ninety five percent of the time, so
Speaker 6: almost twenty four to seven power, and I'm seeing that
Speaker 6: there's more of an understanding and an informative set of
Speaker 6: policy making and tied to that versus its clean air attributes.
Speaker 7: But it is no secret that nuclear energy is a
Speaker 7: zero carbon.
Speaker 6: Source of electrons, but it is a base load source
Speaker 6: that is dependable for sixty eighty years. And we're hoping
Speaker 6: that this administration will continue to a push to investing
Speaker 6: more into that infrastructure so that we can continue to
Speaker 6: be resilient to times like these.
Speaker 8: Jdian.
Speaker 4: How quickly can that sort of energy get online? Because
Speaker 4: you're thinking about how currently useful technology can be deployed,
Speaker 4: how currently useful is any that is an United States.
Speaker 7: These are long term capital projects.
Speaker 6: I mean you're thinking you're looking at roughly two to
Speaker 6: four years for pre development and then roughly a five
Speaker 6: to eight year built cycle before you can put electrons
Speaker 6: on the grid. But we're seeing in China that they're
Speaker 6: able to build nuclear power plants in roughly seven years,
Speaker 6: and so the United States needs needs to keep up
Speaker 6: and ensure that we continue to invest streamline regulatory and
Speaker 6: that's actually why I'm here in our nation's capital today
Speaker 6: at the Regulatory Information Conference, where we're seeing a strong
Speaker 6: push and delivering on this administration's executive orders to have
Speaker 6: more sensible regulations when it comes to nuclear energy.
Speaker 4: Go there about the seven years in China? Is that
Speaker 4: just a quicker turnaround in terms of getting the ability
Speaker 4: the capability of putting it in certain jurisdictions.
Speaker 8: Basically, the regulatory sign off is faster.
Speaker 7: That's a large component.
Speaker 6: You need to have sensible policy making and regulations that
Speaker 6: are applied to these. You also have to have premier
Speaker 6: locations that have access to water and.
Speaker 7: To the grid. And in China that's very much state
Speaker 7: backed program.
Speaker 6: We're in the United States, it's a little bit government endorsed,
Speaker 6: but its industry led. And so we're seeing this administration
Speaker 6: extend things like the investment tax credits, the production tax credits,
Speaker 6: and extending the timeline from the Loan Program Office.
Speaker 7: These are all great things that are going to.
Speaker 6: Enable the industry to keep up with China and making
Speaker 6: sure that we maintain our nuclear dominance.
Speaker 3: In October, we got an eighty billion dollar deal for
Speaker 3: nuclear Right, you are a company that wants to develop
Speaker 3: nuclear reactors. In fact, you're one of the name's few
Speaker 3: names that wants to actually go out and develop a
Speaker 3: big nuclear plant. What progress have you made on that?
Speaker 3: What details can you share? And again in the context
Speaker 3: of what's happening with the war in Iran, how is
Speaker 3: that impacting your ability to execute on it.
Speaker 6: Our company has been laser focused on building the bench
Speaker 6: strength and capability, a muscle that our country actually has
Speaker 6: lost since we have not built any new reactors in
Speaker 6: thirty years, with exception to the two plants down in Georgia.
Speaker 6: So we've been focusing on all the front and loading
Speaker 6: activities required for megaprojects, so citing and characterizing land, making
Speaker 6: sure that we're building out our governance, structure and capability set,
Speaker 6: especially working with the government closely and also working with
Speaker 6: the design firms those design reactors like the ge and
Speaker 6: Westinghouse of the world.
Speaker 4: You've talked about US energy security, talked about how we're
Speaker 4: seeing China revolve. Talked about Europe for a minute here
Speaker 4: because it's interesting on this day. They're pitching an infrastructure
Speaker 4: fund at the moment and billions in terms of almost
Speaker 4: eight hundred and three billion dollars equivalent to try and
Speaker 4: speed up their own infrastructure, maying it clean and make
Speaker 4: it more effective. But how much we see in Europe ever,
Speaker 4: thinking more about nuclear.
Speaker 6: We're seeing a large uptick in activity in nuclear in Europe,
Speaker 6: and I think what's driving a lot of that is
Speaker 6: recognizing that national security and energy security are interconnected.
Speaker 7: We saw this really unfold as.
Speaker 6: They become became more vulnerable during the Ukraine War and
Speaker 6: their overdependence on Russian gas started to create our abilities
Speaker 6: in their system.
Speaker 7: So they want to make sure that they have their.
Speaker 6: Domestic manufacturing capability set for their own energy infrastructure and
Speaker 6: less dependent on neighboring nations. So I think we're going
Speaker 6: to see a rapid incline of building nuclear infrastructure in Europe,
Speaker 6: especially Eastern Europe, and even in the Nordics. We're seeing
Speaker 6: a large amount of activity eyeing to US technology wondering
Speaker 6: when will our technology, if you're writing.
Speaker 7: And how quickly can we export that to those countries.
Speaker 4: Juliana Edwards of the Nuclear Company, thank you so much
Speaker 4: for joining us today from DC. Meanwhile, coming up Ora
Speaker 4: Cool Open AI have scrapped plans to expand the Stargate
Speaker 4: Data Center project. We'll have the details of why and
Speaker 4: what comes next up in the break.
Speaker 8: Is it a break? This is blit a beg tech.
Speaker 3: We have some breaking us crossing the Bloomberg terminal. Anthropic
Speaker 3: has sued the Defense Department over being labeled a supply
Speaker 3: chain risk red headline. Anthropic has sued the Defense Department
Speaker 3: over being labeled supply chain risk, which happened at the
Speaker 3: end of last week. You'll remember that we had reported
Speaker 3: ongoing negotiations between Dario Amma Day, the CEO of and Thropic,
Speaker 3: and the Pentagon and Department of Defense and basically what
Speaker 3: our redlines around Thropic in how their technology is used
Speaker 3: throughout the hour. Carra, I'm sure we'll get more when
Speaker 3: we have for somebody able to come to set and
Speaker 3: we get more details in the suits filing, But that
Speaker 3: is the headline for now. Another story that we are
Speaker 3: across and working on, Oracle and open Ai won't expand
Speaker 3: their flagship Texas data center from one point two gigawatts
Speaker 3: to two gigawatts after negotiations stalled over financing and shifting
Speaker 3: computing needs. Bloomberg reported that story on Friday. The existing
Speaker 3: campus is still being built, an Oracle's broader agreement to
Speaker 3: develop four point five gigawats of data center capacity for
Speaker 3: open Ai remains on track. Developer Cruso is now seeking
Speaker 3: a tenant for the shelved expansion, with Meta in talks
Speaker 3: Nvidia helping facilitate discussions the most Brady Ford part of
Speaker 3: the team that broake the story. A lot of names
Speaker 3: in there, but that's the basics of it, right. There
Speaker 3: was an expansion due to take place one point two
Speaker 3: gig watts. Our understanding is it's not happening. The other details, As.
Speaker 9: You said, it's a lot of names involved here, And
Speaker 9: what this story really shows is that so much money
Speaker 9: is tied up in these huge data center projects that
Speaker 9: require some pretty tight logistics. In this specific case, the
Speaker 9: flagship Stargate data center, they are going to expand it further.
Speaker 9: Whether the negotiations had dragged on for months and months
Speaker 9: and eventually Oracle and OI decided that they're not going
Speaker 9: to take this additional capacity.
Speaker 4: Brady, what has Open AI and indeed Oracle's response been
Speaker 4: to your reporting about how deeply aligned they are on
Speaker 4: continuing to build infrastructure.
Speaker 9: The message we've essentially received is that their overall work
Speaker 9: together is still on track, and that is also our understanding.
Speaker 2: What is it in your regional story? Exactly? Yeah, please
Speaker 2: carry on, yeah, exactly.
Speaker 9: But I think what's interesting is just looking at, you know,
Speaker 9: how do these projects actually play out?
Speaker 2: Right?
Speaker 9: The big contract is there, but certain sites that they
Speaker 9: thought they wanted maybe they don't. Right, and you think
Speaker 9: about all the capital that's tied up in these projects,
Speaker 9: it's interesting to see how these are going to progress.
Speaker 4: Most Bradie forward across that reporting along with Ed Ludlow
Speaker 4: brilliant scoop.
Speaker 8: Thank you very much.
Speaker 4: Let's stick on oracle on the global race to build
Speaker 4: out data centers with Anna Rathman, CEO of Grenadilla Advisory,
Speaker 4: and talk to us about whether or not these sorts
Speaker 4: of stories about the difficulty of actually ensuring you're building
Speaker 4: where you want it, when you want it, it affects
Speaker 4: the overall investment attitude you have towards the data center
Speaker 4: build out.
Speaker 7: Hi, good morning.
Speaker 10: You know these are the type of stories that would
Speaker 10: make the private credit investors a little bit nervous, right
Speaker 10: because our private credit has been really into the infrastructure
Speaker 10: bill out, the big players have been. But if there's
Speaker 10: are hiccups like this where what you intended doesn't actually happen,
Speaker 10: of course meta may be coming in maybe a different story,
Speaker 10: but certainly what happens to your collateral, what happens to
Speaker 10: the project? Is it going to keep going? I mean
Speaker 10: this situation is different. But if it happens again, these
Speaker 10: are the things that make people take a step back
Speaker 10: and take a look at the private credit again.
Speaker 4: And certainly that has an impact on certain stocks like Well, Blue,
Speaker 4: Oul and others that are very much dependent on the
Speaker 4: private credit story. But how much does it affect the
Speaker 4: Oracle story.
Speaker 10: Oh, I think it impacts the Oracle story as well.
Speaker 10: I think this is the type of news that can
Speaker 10: actually have investors actually stop because we're hearing about six
Speaker 10: hundred and fifty billion dollars going into these AI projects, right,
Speaker 10: and we haven't heard of big hiccups like this in
Speaker 10: big names in Oracle and Open AI, and so I
Speaker 10: think people will stopped, be stopping and taking a look
Speaker 10: whether or not this is going to be a more
Speaker 10: widespread thing, right, because there are data centers being built
Speaker 10: everywhere and in some minds indiscriminately, right, So we may
Speaker 10: be hearing more of this, and we may be hearing
Speaker 10: of investors taking a pause.
Speaker 3: The macro point, right, is that there's so much money
Speaker 3: tied up in what is something very complex to achieve
Speaker 3: in terms of the build out. By the way, over
Speaker 3: the weekend prior to the Oracle post, on x. The
Speaker 3: Open AI executive whose response for infrastructure also posts and
Speaker 3: explained they are not proceeding with the expansion there because
Speaker 3: they put the resources into other sites, just as Brody
Speaker 3: had explained in his reporting. But a part of it
Speaker 3: is that capital tied up. I mean, do you see
Speaker 3: that kind of anxiety focus on capital expenditures, focus on
Speaker 3: the credit that's underpinning all of these projects.
Speaker 7: Yeah, I mean there would be.
Speaker 10: But I mean if you're worried about private credit, you
Speaker 10: should also be worried about some of the equity that
Speaker 10: is being tied up, right, I mean, we have to
Speaker 10: think about the cap structure. This is we're I mean,
Speaker 10: I keep saying, we're still in the nascent part of
Speaker 10: AI development, even in the infrastructure part, which is why
Speaker 10: the spend is so high. So it actually makes sense
Speaker 10: that companies can change their minds and perhaps say, Okay,
Speaker 10: we don't need this here anymore. Perhaps we're putting our
Speaker 10: assets over there, and sometimes investors can remain stranded. So
Speaker 10: I just think that this is part of the story
Speaker 10: of being very very early in the AI story.
Speaker 3: One of the considerations of the market this morning as
Speaker 3: it relates to Iran, is just generally, what will happen
Speaker 3: with inflation across everything, energy, materials. You know, that to
Speaker 3: me would really seem to be a factor when you're
Speaker 3: building out massive infrastructure, data center infrastructure across the country,
Speaker 3: to people start to remodel the costs of everything going
Speaker 3: into this build out.
Speaker 10: You know, I think it's too early. I mean it's
Speaker 10: been you know, eight nine days of war. The Trump
Speaker 10: administrations says that it's going to be short term. I
Speaker 10: don't know what that actually means. Does that mean a
Speaker 10: few weeks, a few months, a few days. It is
Speaker 10: sort of a wait and see thing. You know, Kinetic
Speaker 10: war is completely unpredictable because you have people making decisions
Speaker 10: out of existential fear. Right, So it could be tomorrow,
Speaker 10: it could be, you know, several weeks from now. So
Speaker 10: I think it's a little too early to be pricing
Speaker 10: in such high inflation and maybe making changes to the
Speaker 10: underwriting process and the models. It really is a wait
Speaker 10: and see, maybe sometimes even by the hour.
Speaker 3: Anna Rothband of Grende Dillar Advisory, thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Coming up next, we have more details on Anthropics suing
Speaker 3: the Defense Department to carry You're also looking at other names.
Speaker 4: And other legal news, shares of Live Nation actually pushing
Speaker 4: high on five point six percent. This is its ticket
Speaker 4: Master subsidiary, along with Live Nation, have reached a settlement
Speaker 4: with the federal anti trust authorities.
Speaker 8: The dj have been saying this Monday. It kind of.
Speaker 4: Throws a bit of a wrench in to this mid
Speaker 4: trial of an anti trust case. It accuse the company,
Speaker 4: remember of illegally monopolizing the lie music industry.
Speaker 8: As a Bloomberg Tech.
Speaker 3: Back to the breaking news just moments ago, Anthropic is
Speaker 3: suing the Defense Department after it was labeled a supply
Speaker 3: chain risk, a designation usually reserved for foreign advasarys. Let's
Speaker 3: get to our AI editor Bloomberg Seth Figureman for more,
Speaker 3: and actually, what it is that Entropics challenging, it would
Speaker 3: appear from the suits, is the Department's decision to shift
Speaker 3: the contracts to others.
Speaker 2: Essentially.
Speaker 11: Yeah, and what we're hearing from Anthropic here in a
Speaker 11: statement as they're taking this step to protect their customers
Speaker 11: and their business. At the same time, though, they're telling
Speaker 11: us that they intend to pursue all avenues here to
Speaker 11: track immediate this relationship with the government, including direct conversation
Speaker 11: with the government. So they're not foreclosing the continuation and
Speaker 11: talks here, but they are still pursuing litigation.
Speaker 4: These actions are unprecedented and unlawful, the company said in
Speaker 4: the complaint that was filed over in San Francisco Federal court,
Speaker 4: and they say the constitution does not allow for the
Speaker 4: government to wield its enormous power to punish a company
Speaker 4: for its protected speech. What's been so extraordinary is the
Speaker 4: way in which anthropobists continue to speak out against the government.
Speaker 4: Dario Amade basically told us already he was going to
Speaker 4: go and do this.
Speaker 2: That's right.
Speaker 11: Yeah, they're clearly being outspoken and taking a stand on
Speaker 11: this issue here. They're not just taking this sitting down.
Speaker 11: But it's clear behind the scenes that the tone might
Speaker 11: be a little bit different privately, but they're looking for
Speaker 11: a resolution. They're also not looking to just take this,
Speaker 11: you know, sitting down.
Speaker 3: A part of what's happened in parallel stef in recent
Speaker 3: days is that, you know, Open AI has negotiated with
Speaker 3: the Department of Defense, you know, basically to come in,
Speaker 3: do we know what the status quo is now, what
Speaker 3: the latest is in where the department stands on its
Speaker 3: AI tool policy, and who it's using.
Speaker 11: Yeah, I mean, the last we've heard is has been
Speaker 11: seeking additional protections and safeguards for some of the same
Speaker 11: concerns that Anthropic I previously raised publicly and privately. We
Speaker 11: don't know yet if the Pentagon has agreed to all
Speaker 11: those provisions, but it does seem that the tenor of
Speaker 11: the debate between Opening AI and the Defense Department has
Speaker 11: been much more civil in some respects and what we've
Speaker 11: seen with Anthropic.
Speaker 4: But what about the reporting of how this is affecting
Speaker 4: those that work for the businesses. A lot of these
Speaker 4: compans who say they're nothing without their talent, and we
Speaker 4: already know a key senior Open AI leader and the
Speaker 4: robotics department is left.
Speaker 11: Yeah. I think we're still waiting to see if there's
Speaker 11: a meaningful attrition from either or both companies as a
Speaker 11: result of the uncertainty and tension here at the moment. Yes,
Speaker 11: there's one high profile example over the weekend, but we
Speaker 11: haven't yet seen others, And of course we're still waiting
Speaker 11: to see on the customer side of things, or people
Speaker 11: rallying to the defense of Anthropic for taking the stand,
Speaker 11: or are they at risk of losing more business even
Speaker 11: if they're not legally required to cut business with Anthropic,
Speaker 11: might some still do it?
Speaker 3: So, if we're going back to a question that we've
Speaker 3: asked you and your team will report is quite a
Speaker 3: lot recently. But do we have any sense of like
Speaker 3: how important from a financial standpoint a deal with the
Speaker 3: Defense Department actually ates to Anthropic or open AI, like
Speaker 3: you say, a major part of their business we're fighting
Speaker 3: for sorry now.
Speaker 11: Of course, now from a pure dollars perspective, it seems
Speaker 11: pretty marginal. At least at the current moment. The Anthropic
Speaker 11: Pentagon deal was worth up to two hundred million, but
Speaker 11: our understanding from procurement records was that it was really
Speaker 11: just a couple of million to day. That's good to
Speaker 11: think about how much a might have been over the
Speaker 11: long term. And again, the larger blast radius of customers
Speaker 11: who either legally might feel that they can't do visits
Speaker 11: with Anthropic now or just optically or for fear pressure
Speaker 11: from the administration might rethink how much they commit. So
Speaker 11: that is much harder to quantify.
Speaker 4: We've obviously putting all of this in the context of
Speaker 4: an actual war that seems to have erupted over the
Speaker 4: course of the internal dialogue that we're having between Anthropic
Speaker 4: or AI providers in the military in the United States.
Speaker 4: Is this something that is happening abroad as well? Is
Speaker 4: it something that is causing tension about use of AI
Speaker 4: in Europe and elsewhere.
Speaker 11: Yeah, I don't know if we've seen it play out
Speaker 11: quite the same way as it has here. I think
Speaker 11: that question of how who has a say over this
Speaker 11: powerful technology, how much can the government dictate the way
Speaker 11: that gets used, and how much can they force private
Speaker 11: companies to sort of cow to that, I think that
Speaker 11: is a very much a global debate. It's just taking
Speaker 11: place here in a more prominent way. And these are
Speaker 11: the companies at the forefront of that technology.
Speaker 8: And American companies of that.
Speaker 4: Soeth Figermann across the breaking news, of course, has anticipated.
Speaker 4: Anthropic is indeed suing the US government. Coming up, we
Speaker 4: go back to Iran after it destroyed a key million
Speaker 4: radar system to guide US missile defenses in the Gulf.
Speaker 8: That is next, and this is Bloomberg Tech.
Speaker 2: Welcome back to Bloomberg Tech.
Speaker 3: Over the last hour, equity markets technology shares in particular,
Speaker 3: actually raised a lot of the declines that we saw
Speaker 3: earlier in the session, and that's that one hundred is
Speaker 3: now effectively flat. The story with regards to what's happening
Speaker 3: to the ongoing war in Iran is once again oil.
Speaker 3: You're looking at New York crewed at ninety five ninety
Speaker 3: six dollars a barrel, but at one point above one
Speaker 3: hundred dollars a barrel Brent similar picture up to one
Speaker 3: twenty down to one hundred. Partly disruption and partly the
Speaker 3: market trying to interpret how long this will go on
Speaker 3: for you know, the administration is Tyler Kendall outlined earlier,
Speaker 3: thinking and communicating it will be short, but actually a
Speaker 3: lot of evidence to the country.
Speaker 4: Carract Yeah, disruption and destruction because Iran has destroyed a
Speaker 4: key three hundred million dollar radar system used to guide
Speaker 4: US missile defenses in the Gulf. And that's according to
Speaker 4: a US official, it's a blow the cold widen gaps
Speaker 4: in the region's ability to counterfeuture attacks.
Speaker 8: For more, Bloombair Defense.
Speaker 4: Editor Jerry Doyle joins, US just give us the context,
Speaker 4: because we're not suddenly completely down by defense systems here, Jerry.
Speaker 8: But it is a key target that was managed to
Speaker 8: be struck.
Speaker 2: That's right.
Speaker 12: It was the one that we know that was destroyed
Speaker 12: was located in enjoyed as part of the bad radar battery.
Speaker 12: Now that that is called terminal high altitude air defense, right,
Speaker 12: It's meant to shoot down advanced ballistic missiles traveling extremely
Speaker 12: fast above the atmosphere, and the radar guides these missiles
Speaker 12: and has an extremely high resolution, can spot targets extremely
Speaker 12: long ranges. It's very useful, very high power, very expensive.
Speaker 12: Now with that radar gone, the bad battery is still operational.
Speaker 12: It just had to take queuing from other US advanced radars,
Speaker 12: such as those that work with the nearby Patriot missile systems.
Speaker 3: Jerry on Blueberg Tech, We've been looking at technology on
Speaker 3: the battlefield.
Speaker 2: Essentially.
Speaker 3: One of the data sets that Bloomberg has been tracking
Speaker 3: is Iran's use of drones, particularly against what are neighboring
Speaker 3: countries in the Gulf. What is the latest data tell
Speaker 3: us about Iran's munition stockpile, where they are in their
Speaker 3: use of drones versus ballistic missiles, etc.
Speaker 12: Well, to some degree, it's impossible to say, you know
Speaker 12: how many drones Iran has left, whether the temple of
Speaker 12: operations has slowed down because they simply don't have as
Speaker 12: many ammunitions. Whether their commund and communications have been disrupted
Speaker 12: from strikes, whether production has been disrupted, whether they're husbanding
Speaker 12: their resources for a larger attack, is really difficult to say.
Speaker 12: We can, however, say that the number of strikes has
Speaker 12: decreased quite a bit from the opening days of the war,
Speaker 12: and that Iran has started to rely more heavily on
Speaker 12: the use of these Shah had one thirty six drones,
Speaker 12: which are essentially low cost, rudimentary cruise missiles as opposed
Speaker 12: to using more expensive long range ballistic missiles which Iran
Speaker 12: started the war was somewhere in the neighborhood of two
Speaker 12: thousand to twenty five hundred of but clearly has many
Speaker 12: fewer now, Jerry.
Speaker 3: The market's also trying to interpret long term how this
Speaker 3: changes the defense technology industry. There's a note from Turis,
Speaker 3: for example, that puts the spotlight on the use of
Speaker 3: autonomous maritime technology in the context of the war of Iran.
Speaker 3: For you and the team at Bloomberg across the defense desk, like,
Speaker 3: what are we seeing? What are some of the stories
Speaker 3: coming out of this conflict?
Speaker 12: Well, so far we haven't seen, as far as I know,
Speaker 12: the use of autonomous maritime strike platforms in the Persian Golf.
Speaker 12: We have seen those obviously use quite a bit in
Speaker 12: the Ukraine War, so we know they can be effective,
Speaker 12: and we know they can be built relatively cheaply and
Speaker 12: operated in sort of an ad hoc way, again to
Speaker 12: great effect. It's not clear how many of these Iran has,
Speaker 12: or how it might be able to deploy them, or
Speaker 12: whether the US has destroyed them over the course of
Speaker 12: strikes in the last week, but platforms like those would
Speaker 12: be extremely useful in a scenario which Iran finds itself
Speaker 12: in right now, where it's trying to shut down a
Speaker 12: waterway and narrow waterway like the Strait of Homos. Obviously,
Speaker 12: we've seen a lot of autonomous aerial platforms such as
Speaker 12: Ahead one thirty six drones, which have been used in
Speaker 12: strikes all across the Gulf. Those are not controlled by
Speaker 12: the ground but are guided by GPS technology. They're fairly
Speaker 12: easy to make, fairly cheap to produce in large numbers,
Speaker 12: and we've actually seen in this war the US use
Speaker 12: its own version of the Shahead one thirty six. It's
Speaker 12: called Lucas I believe a long range unmanned combat aerial system,
Speaker 12: I think is what that's a strange acronym for. But
Speaker 12: we've seen that use and the US of course has
Speaker 12: plans to manufacture these at scale and use them in
Speaker 12: a way that Iran sort of is to use them
Speaker 12: to overwhelm or confuse or deplete enemy air defenses or
Speaker 12: enemy defenses in general, in advance of a more advance
Speaker 12: or higher end type strike bimbag defense out.
Speaker 3: It's a Jerry Doyle, thank you very much, Caro. Plenty
Speaker 3: more news headlines today.
Speaker 8: There are ed and it's time now for talking tech.
Speaker 4: And first up, the head of Open a Eyes Robotics team,
Speaker 4: Caitlin Kalinowski, resigned Saturday. So I think companies deal to
Speaker 4: deploy its AI models when then Pentdican's classified network. Kalanowski
Speaker 4: said in a post on x and on LinkedIn that
Speaker 4: those issues needed quote more deliberation before signing the deal. Plus,
Speaker 4: Ceubrus has picked Morgan Stanley to lead as IBO. That's
Speaker 4: according to sources who say Cerebras says.
Speaker 8: Filed fresh paperwork for the IPO and.
Speaker 4: Is set to meet with analysts and prospective investors this month.
Speaker 4: The offering could raise about two billion dollars in a
Speaker 4: listing as soon as April, and ten Cent it doesn't
Speaker 4: tend to invest several one hundred million dollars in Paramount's
Speaker 4: acquisision of Warner Brothers Discovery, according to sources who say
Speaker 4: the Chinese company would be acting as a passive financial investor,
Speaker 4: though it might still decide not to invest. Ten Cent
Speaker 4: and Paramount declined to commentment.
Speaker 3: Okay, coming up, we're going to discuss how AI is
Speaker 3: shaking up the legal profession with Harvey CEO Winston Weinberg.
Speaker 2: That's next. This is Bloomberg Tech Harvey.
Speaker 4: You know it is the AI platform for the legal
Speaker 4: profession today unveiling new tool to let law firms build
Speaker 4: custom AI agents even faster that should give more control
Speaker 4: over multi step processes they ask AI to complete. Let's
Speaker 4: discuss with Harvey's co founder and CEO, Sin Weinberg and Whinson.
Speaker 4: What's so interesting is about the human in the loop,
Speaker 4: the oversight, the control. How do they maintain that when
Speaker 4: you're leaving AI agents to go and do work for
Speaker 4: multi step processes.
Speaker 13: Yeah, thank you so much for having me. I'm excited
Speaker 13: to be here. Also for legal Week, which has basically
Speaker 13: all of the legal tech industry in New York for
Speaker 13: one gathering. The way that we think about it is
Speaker 13: in law. It's incredibly complex and it's multiplayer. And so
Speaker 13: if you're building this agentic system that is kind of
Speaker 13: the infrastructure for completing legal work, you need it to
Speaker 13: be able to actually interact with all of the different
Speaker 13: specialized agents to do that task. The multiple law firms
Speaker 13: working on a project, and the Fortune five hundred that
Speaker 13: is thinking about buying another company or involved in a
Speaker 13: litigation or something like that. And so it's a really
Speaker 13: complex process of integrating with all the correct data, having
Speaker 13: the humans in the loop when they need to be,
Speaker 13: and handing off between the different experts that are specialists
Speaker 13: in that particular domain.
Speaker 4: Let's talk about your specialization and the fact that you
Speaker 4: have all these integrations and have such a wide scope
Speaker 4: of legal companies you're already working with. Because the age
Speaker 4: old criticism is you're just a wrapper of GPT or
Speaker 4: whether it's anthropic, you're agnostic to the model's underlying How
Speaker 4: are you making yourself so necessary for the legal profession?
Speaker 13: Yeah, the best way to think about this is in
Speaker 13: these incredibly highly regulated industries, the work that they have
Speaker 13: to do is very complex, and all the data is
Speaker 13: in all these different silos, right, and again it's multi
Speaker 13: party and collaborative, and so what you need to solve
Speaker 13: is which model is the best for this particular part
Speaker 13: of a task, how do you route that to the
Speaker 13: human And then what's going to become really important is
Speaker 13: how do you actually review all those outputs and evaluate
Speaker 13: them for accuracy. If you think about what's going to
Speaker 13: happen in the next ten years, think about how complex
Speaker 13: an international merger is going to be. Right now that
Speaker 13: we're using AI to produce more products, to produce more
Speaker 13: msas more contracts, etc. We're viewing those Honestly, in ten years,
Speaker 13: I think you can't do it. A human cannot do
Speaker 13: this without aisystems that can integrate with everything else.
Speaker 2: Winston, I want to hold you to this to be succinct.
Speaker 3: This is a tool that makes a practicing lawyer more
Speaker 3: productive and better at their job. Or it is a
Speaker 3: tool that in the future displaces the role will function
Speaker 3: of certainty members within illegal practice.
Speaker 13: Yeah, the best way to think about this is this
Speaker 13: is task automation, and I think it will always be
Speaker 13: task automation. Right, So, if you think about like a
Speaker 13: very complex fund formation that involves fifty LPs or something
Speaker 13: like that, there are certain tasks like doing comment memos
Speaker 13: or something like that that are going to get automated away.
Speaker 13: But a lot of the high value is that strategic
Speaker 13: advice on top of those tasks, right, And so as
Speaker 13: these task get automated, the job of a lawyer is
Speaker 13: just going to level up over time.
Speaker 3: I ask you that because one of the show's biggest fans,
Speaker 3: my father is almost certainly watching, who has more than
Speaker 3: three decades of practice in English and European law, and
Speaker 3: our member as a kid the whole billable hours thing, right,
Speaker 3: You know, lawyers across the world used to scan bar
Speaker 3: codes for fifteen minutes of work. Really interested therefore, for
Speaker 3: how you price this? You know, I think you guys
Speaker 3: run a subscription based model, right, which can also be
Speaker 3: priced depending on the volume of use of any customer.
Speaker 3: But that's the debate, where's the value?
Speaker 2: Yeah?
Speaker 13: Exactly so, right now, that is how we do our
Speaker 13: all of our pricing. Over time, what we're starting to
Speaker 13: do a lot more of is how do you do
Speaker 13: custom build for a lot of different customers? And the
Speaker 13: reality is doing these custom builds, these forward deployees solutions
Speaker 13: is with how good the coding models are getting a
Speaker 13: lot lot stronger gross margins, right, And so a lot
Speaker 13: of what we're starting to do is we'll work with
Speaker 13: like a large bank or private equity or telco and
Speaker 13: a law firm that's partnered with them, and we'll actually
Speaker 13: redesign or transform how they deliver those services entirely right,
Speaker 13: and that we are going to price much differently and
Speaker 13: probably closer to do the outcomes work? And how does
Speaker 13: consumption on top of that work.
Speaker 4: You've got some heavyweight investors to quire, kPa, sixt, ZGV, the.
Speaker 8: List goes on.
Speaker 4: They want to hear about how you're able to monetize this.
Speaker 4: When someone is sat within the innovation part of the
Speaker 4: legal business and I do I do a claud plug in,
Speaker 4: Do I do Harvey?
Speaker 8: Do I keep with Lexus and Nexus? What's your answer?
Speaker 2: Yeah?
Speaker 13: The best way I think about this is everything else
Speaker 13: out there is a points solution, and what we're building
Speaker 13: is a platform, right, And with that platform you have
Speaker 13: all of the integrations, you have security, you respect, ethical walls, permissions,
Speaker 13: We grab the correct data, so we ground it in
Speaker 13: truthful data into instead of bad data that is going
Speaker 13: to give you a bad answer. And as this scales
Speaker 13: over time, you really just have to outrun these model
Speaker 13: providers that are trying to build the general system right
Speaker 13: and the best that I have and I'm very confident
Speaker 13: in my team's ability to deliver on this is we
Speaker 13: can raise faster in the legal vertical than they can generally.
Speaker 3: Wins In Weinberg, CEO of BE really good to have
Speaker 3: you here on Bloomberg Tech.
Speaker 2: Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: Now, coming up on the program, we're going to discuss
Speaker 3: the top generative AI apps for consumers and Resa Horowitz
Speaker 3: partner Olivia Moore joins us for that conversation.
Speaker 2: A's next, This is Bloomberg Tech.
Speaker 3: Enscale has raised two billion dollars in new funding. The
Speaker 3: deal values the UK based AI data center developer at
Speaker 3: fourteen point six billion dollars and places it amongst Europe's
Speaker 3: most valuable startups. Nscale has also named a trio of
Speaker 3: high profile tech leaders to its board of directors, including
Speaker 3: shel Samdberg, Nick Clegg, and Suzanne Decca Carot.
Speaker 8: Fascinating.
Speaker 4: Now, let's just think about how for a few years
Speaker 4: our AI native firms had the edge with consumers for
Speaker 4: generative AI apps.
Speaker 8: As the market matures, that's kind of fading.
Speaker 4: It's one of the findings and report released today by
Speaker 4: Andrews and Horowitz on the top generitor AIAI. I asked
Speaker 4: a sixteen Z partner Olivia Moore has been doing this
Speaker 4: for three years and what's so interesting is number one
Speaker 4: is still CHATCHYPT.
Speaker 8: We have Gemini, but where are we starting.
Speaker 4: To see just if we're thinking about the consumer and
Speaker 4: consumer focused, that's Claude coming in and how are we
Speaker 4: seeing people using different chapels.
Speaker 14: Yeah, absolutely, there were a lot of This was actually
Speaker 14: the most fun and exciting report to do out of
Speaker 14: the six we've done.
Speaker 7: Because there were a lot of changes.
Speaker 14: First, as you mentioned, we did add for the first
Speaker 14: time companies that are not AI native but are significantly
Speaker 14: AI in hand so Notion as an example, they reported
Speaker 14: that fifty percent of their arr is now coming from
Speaker 14: AI features Canvas another one free pick Grammarly. Then beyond that,
Speaker 14: I think the other really interesting trend in this edition
Speaker 14: of the list is just the continued battle between Chad Chat, GBT, Claude,
Speaker 14: and Gemini for the mainstream consumer, and we've seen some
Speaker 14: pretty significant changes there over the last couple months.
Speaker 4: What sparks the change other than press and coverage of
Speaker 4: what's happening with the Pentagon is that a model comes
Speaker 4: out and eclips is it people are actually using these
Speaker 4: things that.
Speaker 8: Working out which one is better than the other.
Speaker 14: Yeah, it's a great question. So for a while we
Speaker 14: saw consumers were using one generative AI product, if fat
Speaker 14: even and now they're multi tenanting across products but for
Speaker 14: different use cases. So Gemini, if you look at their
Speaker 14: user growth, it's basically perfectly correlated to the release of
Speaker 14: like Nano Banana Vo three, all of these new creative models.
Speaker 14: Where Claud is really starting to shine, I think is
Speaker 14: in the prosumer and work tools. So Claud Code of
Speaker 14: course had a crazy ramp to a billion in arar.
Speaker 14: Claud Cowork is now their product for consumers that's being
Speaker 14: picked up pretty quickly.
Speaker 2: They also put Claud.
Speaker 14: In Excel in Google Sheets. Probably the best way to
Speaker 14: understand this is both Claud and CHATCHYBT now have their
Speaker 14: own app stores. They each have more than two hundred
Speaker 14: apps that they offer access to, but there's only eleven
Speaker 14: percent overlap between them. CHATCHYBT is leaning in on the
Speaker 14: mainstream consumer like fashion, shop, thing, travel, transportation. Sam Altman
Speaker 14: has said he wants CHATCHYBD to be for everyone. Claude
Speaker 14: is leaning in on like deep premium data sets for
Speaker 14: scientific work, medical work, data analysis, and so I think
Speaker 14: we're seeing them go in slightly different directions in terms
Speaker 14: of the audience they're trying to win.
Speaker 2: Team.
Speaker 3: Let's bring back up the top one hundred ranking and
Speaker 3: then focus in on I guess the top five ten.
Speaker 3: I'll find this Olivia is so interesting that deep seek
Speaker 3: is so high up. Maybe through explaining the methodology of
Speaker 3: how you put the ranking together. Like some of these names,
Speaker 3: you kind of touched on it there, but you more
Speaker 3: associate them with enterprise, you'd associate their use outside of
Speaker 3: the United States potentially.
Speaker 2: What are you seeing in the data?
Speaker 14: Yeah, deep seek is a fascinating one because it was
Speaker 14: actually higher on prior versions of the list and has
Speaker 14: dropped down. What basically is happening with deep seek on
Speaker 14: a country by country basis is that China and Russia
Speaker 14: are blocked from using many of the Western AI tools,
Speaker 14: So China is heavily deep seak. It's their number one
Speaker 14: product than something like a dowbou from by Dan, something
Speaker 14: like a Kimmi, and Russia's the number two market for
Speaker 14: deep Seek. It has fallen off a cliff in terms
Speaker 14: of usage in the US. I think it's fair to say,
Speaker 14: and I actually think that goes back to the question
Speaker 14: about what's going to happen with Claude, because what we
Speaker 14: saw with deep Seek in the US was all press
Speaker 14: was good press, even if it was bad press, just
Speaker 14: because people didn't know about the product. And I think
Speaker 14: the same thing happened with Claude in the past week,
Speaker 14: in that a couple months ago, market awareness of Claude
Speaker 14: amongst US consumers was maybe two percent, And so now
Speaker 14: they're topping the app store just because many people have
Speaker 14: never heard of the product and they're downloading it for
Speaker 14: the first time. So it'll be interesting to see if
Speaker 14: they're able to retain those users or if, like deep Seek,
Speaker 14: they will only keep users in countries that can't access
Speaker 14: other products.
Speaker 2: Olivia Moore Andresen Horwitz. Is great to have you back
Speaker 2: on the program. Thank you very much.
Speaker 3: I want to get back to that breaking news from
Speaker 3: earlier in the hour. Anthropic is suing the Defense Department
Speaker 3: after it was labeled a supply chain risk, a designation
Speaker 3: usually reserved for foreign adversaries. Matt Settlemanhelm of Bloomberg Intelligence
Speaker 3: joins us now and Matt appreciate you you're running in.
Speaker 3: It's a breaking new scenario. But from the Bloomberg Intelligence perspective,
Speaker 3: what is the react to this latest development where essentially
Speaker 3: Anthropic is pushing back on the Department of Defense saying
Speaker 3: hold on, we don't want you to look elsewhere, we
Speaker 3: want you to use our tech will explain it.
Speaker 15: Yeah, So this is exactly what we expected after the
Speaker 15: developments from not this most recent Friday, but the friday
Speaker 15: before when the government announced it was taking this action.
Speaker 15: That was a tweet from Pete Hegseth announcing this decision.
Speaker 15: Since then, in the middle of last week, the Defense
Speaker 15: Department sent the company a two page letter informing it
Speaker 15: of this supply chain designation. And now within ours we
Speaker 15: have this lawsuit filed by the company. It pursues what
Speaker 15: we expected was really a claim that this violates the
Speaker 15: r arbitrary and capricious standard under the Administrative Procedures Act,
Speaker 15: which basically says that the government has to use reasoned
Speaker 15: decision making. It can't penalize a company just because it
Speaker 15: wants to. It has to look at the law and ask, hey,
Speaker 15: is Anthropic violating the law? And what we haven't seen
Speaker 15: really from the Defense Department is any connection between this
Speaker 15: supply chain statute and anything that Anthropic itself has done. Instead,
Speaker 15: this has been about a dispute about contract negotiations, an
Speaker 15: agreement that the Defense Department had agreed to in July.
Speaker 15: It wanted to change it. Anthropic resisted all of a
Speaker 15: sudden it was deemed a much larger supply chain risk.
Speaker 15: So I think we're going to see an immediate court
Speaker 15: fight on whether that Defense Department decision should be stayed
Speaker 15: because it doesn't constitute reason decision making.
Speaker 4: They talk about how the actions are unprecedented. So what precedent, Matthew,
Speaker 4: can lawyers legal lees go to in this moment to
Speaker 4: decide who has the uphand in what will be a
Speaker 4: more drawn out conversation to have in front of the courts.
Speaker 15: Yeah, so under this exact statute, it's rarely been litigated
Speaker 15: and it's rarely been used. It only dates back from
Speaker 15: about twenty eighteen. But what lawyers are going to look
Speaker 15: to here is defense decisions under other statutes, and you've
Speaker 15: seen that in some cases where under other supply chain
Speaker 15: risk determinations under these other laws, companies have been able
Speaker 15: to bring lawsuits and say, Okay, this is not reason
Speaker 15: decision making.
Speaker 2: This violates the law.
Speaker 15: It's an arbitrary and capricious exercise of your authority. And
Speaker 15: you know, it's very difficult to beat the Defense Department.
Speaker 15: That's the first thing to know. The court gives them
Speaker 15: great deference on national security, so this isn't easy at
Speaker 15: all paranthropic, but if the Defense Department didn't try to
Speaker 15: connect it to the law, and so far we haven't
Speaker 15: seen much of a record really connecting it to this law.
Speaker 15: We've seen criticism of the company's policies, you know, a
Speaker 15: criticism of it as being a woke company. It's going
Speaker 15: to take more than that to justify this in court,
Speaker 15: and that's going to be the question for a judge.
Speaker 15: Is there a real basis under this supply chain law
Speaker 15: that justifies such an extreme action. The company is going
Speaker 15: to say, this inflicts irreparable harm on us and it's
Speaker 15: not justified under the law.
Speaker 2: Matthew.
Speaker 3: That's why I ask about the idea that Anthropic is
Speaker 3: challenging the Pentagon in deciding to negotiate with open Ai.
Speaker 3: For example, in parallel right, they will say, when this
Speaker 3: supply chain risk label was given just quickly, well okay,
Speaker 3: we'll turn someone else for their technology.
Speaker 2: How does that factor in?
Speaker 15: I think that you know, that raises concerns about the
Speaker 15: arbitrariness of what's going on here, especially if open Ai
Speaker 15: insisted on terms and restrictions that were really not that
Speaker 15: different from what Anthropic took a hard line on. That's
Speaker 15: also going to play into whether this was reason decision
Speaker 15: making or whether this was a desire by the Defense
Speaker 15: Department to make an example of this company.
Speaker 4: Matthew Shetenhaum bloomeg Intelligence, fantastic expertise there.
Speaker 8: We thank you. That does it for this edition of
Speaker 8: Bloomberg Tech Ed once again your legal degree coming out strong.
Speaker 2: Yeah, a little bit.
Speaker 3: I mean, fascinating coverage are both private markets and public markets,
Speaker 3: and obviously in the markets, the war in Iran continues
Speaker 3: to be a massive factor. Really great conversations worth recapping
Speaker 3: on the podcast.
Speaker 2: No where to find it.
Speaker 3: It's on the Bloomberg terminal, as well as online on Apple,
Speaker 3: Spotify and iHeart It's another big week ahead, and this
Speaker 3: is Bloomberg Tech