Speaker 1: I'm Caroline Hyde of Bloomberg's world headquarters in New York,
Speaker 1: and I'med Lovelow in San Francisco. This is Bloomberg Technology.
Speaker 1: Twitter's workforce has shrunk, just as Elon Musk planned the problem.
Speaker 1: More employees are resigning than anticipated, and will ft X
Speaker 1: investors ever recoup their losses? We have the CEO of
Speaker 1: Do Not Pay, a company backed by f t X
Speaker 1: that automates legal issues. Let's talk about, of course, where
Speaker 1: Elon Musk has been distracted, because there have been so
Speaker 1: many updates on this day alone about Twitter ed and
Speaker 1: the latest being an email apparently that he sent out
Speaker 1: to all employees just before nine am local time and
Speaker 1: urging employees and engineers there are to fly to San
Speaker 1: Francisco to be there in person for a meeting at
Speaker 1: the social media platforms head quarters that very afternoon. Let's
Speaker 1: break the all down, brad Stone in place to say
Speaker 1: headed blue Blag's global technology coverage, Brad an extory storminary
Speaker 1: story that continues to unfold. What did you make of
Speaker 1: that email alone? I mean I would say it was surprise, Caroline,
Speaker 1: but nothing in these past few weeks have surprised me.
Speaker 1: I think the thing that jumps out is the remarkable inconsistency.
Speaker 1: I mean, wasn't it just yesterday? And again I've lost
Speaker 1: all track of time here. Just yesterday Ellen closed down
Speaker 1: Twitter headquarters until the Monday after Thanksgiving. Um, and of
Speaker 1: course let go you know, another another round of employees
Speaker 1: via his ultimatum to workers. Now you know, it shouldn't
Speaker 1: be surprising. He seems to be operating by the seat
Speaker 1: of his pants. But closing Twitter offices and then asking employees,
Speaker 1: the remaining engineers to come helped basically save the code
Speaker 1: base by coming into the office. Is is quite a
Speaker 1: turn about, and we're worried as uses about the stability
Speaker 1: of this platform. But it's also got the attention of
Speaker 1: regulators and amakers, first and foremost him in the US,
Speaker 1: I would actually say first and foremost in the EU.
Speaker 1: Twitter is absolutely on a collision course with European regulators.
Speaker 1: There's this thing called the Digital Services Act, which is
Speaker 1: going into effect basically at the beginning of three. The
Speaker 1: large They've been talking about it for years. The very
Speaker 1: large tech platforms have to report their numbers and if
Speaker 1: they qualify as as being large, then they're going to
Speaker 1: basically have to you know, make some assurances around um uh,
Speaker 1: content moderation and algorithmic transparency. And this is at a
Speaker 1: point where none of those workers responsible for those areas
Speaker 1: that Twitter or left. They've all left the company. And
Speaker 1: so you hear, you know, European regulators, regulators saying that
Speaker 1: they might make Twitter a test case. Brad, Hello, uh,
Speaker 1: you wrote a column the other day that Elon Musk
Speaker 1: is trying to pull off a sort of Steve Job
Speaker 1: sized turnaround a Twitter. Based on all the reporting that
Speaker 1: I've done, that all the pull it's as and editors
Speaker 1: that report into you have done, how's that turn around going?
Speaker 1: Thanks that. I I drew the comparison to Jobs returning
Speaker 1: to Apple in in the mid ninety nineties, and there
Speaker 1: were there are certain similarities. I mean, Jobs streamline the
Speaker 1: company back then to to a large degree. Um you
Speaker 1: remember stories about Apple employees walking into an elevator, not
Speaker 1: being able to describe to their boss what they did,
Speaker 1: and getting fired. I think the difference is Elon has
Speaker 1: been much more destructive than Jobs was back back in
Speaker 1: the day, and Jobs was returning to a company he
Speaker 1: knew intimately well. He was a co founder of Apple,
Speaker 1: and Elon's come into a company where he was a
Speaker 1: power user, but maybe didn't understand or doesn't understand the
Speaker 1: culture and the infrastructure and the product quite as well.
Speaker 1: So it's early. And look, I've always said Twitter is
Speaker 1: the company that can't kill itself. It's just way too
Speaker 1: addictive and effective a products. So I don't I'm not
Speaker 1: one of those who thinks Twitter is going away, but
Speaker 1: the last three weeks he's taken it in the wrong direction. Well,
Speaker 1: I wanted to ask you about that, Caroline, and I
Speaker 1: took part in actually a couple of Twitter spaces on Friday,
Speaker 1: one that we hosted, and then I joined Cut Wagoner's
Speaker 1: Social Power Hour. And you know, if anything, you still
Speaker 1: see people on the platform. One of the issues now
Speaker 1: is that everyone has a blue tick and I look
Speaker 1: on the Bloomberg terminal. Much of the new cycle is
Speaker 1: about the content moderation and authenticity and bought user issue.
Speaker 1: What is your read on what's going on that side
Speaker 1: of the platform. Well, it's interesting because we had this
Speaker 1: letter from Corey Booker and some other senators today urging
Speaker 1: the FTC to go kind of take a look at
Speaker 1: at Twitter. Um it's it's conduct with rolling out the
Speaker 1: Twitter Blue verified platform, which then Elan rescinded and has
Speaker 1: now talked about um suspending for a couple more weeks.
Speaker 1: And how much just chaos that unleashed where you had
Speaker 1: impersonators of President Biden and other world leaders and companies
Speaker 1: like Hili, Lily and uh, you know, the all the instability,
Speaker 1: they're prominent figures be basically you know, spoofed on the platform.
Speaker 1: And look, I mean some of this was predictable, probably
Speaker 1: eminently so to people who have worked on Twitter a
Speaker 1: long time. But Ellen, he's gotten as far as he's
Speaker 1: gotten by not listening to people, by um going against
Speaker 1: the grain and listening to his own intuition. And you know,
Speaker 1: for a lot of his career that's worked out quite well,
Speaker 1: and with regards to Twitter right now it hasn't. And
Speaker 1: I think there's gonna be a lot of blowback from
Speaker 1: the FDC, from the EU, from other regulators as he
Speaker 1: tries to straighten us out. Interesting that this is such
Speaker 1: a global story, as you say, the EU regulators looking in,
Speaker 1: we understand maybe the Spanish government, the German government having
Speaker 1: respond to questions is whether they should keep their Twitter
Speaker 1: handles on the product to tool Brad what about the
Speaker 1: global nature of the owners of this business. Now there
Speaker 1: is still some questions about Sephius, or indeed about some
Speaker 1: sort of investigation as to whether Kata Saudi Arabian money
Speaker 1: should be helping own this business right And there was
Speaker 1: I think another letter by Senator Mark Warner from Virginia.
Speaker 1: Basically he's he's the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee,
Speaker 1: you know, raising concerns about those outside investors, but also
Speaker 1: the reliance of of Elon Musk's other businesses on other countries,
Speaker 1: for a, China for example, and the and the strength
Speaker 1: of Tesla in China, and it raises all sorts of concerns,
Speaker 1: you know, particularly when those countries are also um, you know,
Speaker 1: regulating Twitter when they have interest in maybe styming some
Speaker 1: free speech on the platform. Elon has put himself in
Speaker 1: a unique and extraordinarily difficult situation I and I do
Speaker 1: expect different countries to kind of look at that and
Speaker 1: interpret it differently. Brad, what are we trying to find
Speaker 1: out next? What is the kind of big question that
Speaker 1: hangs out of Twitter outside of the regulatory side of things.
Speaker 1: I think right now, it's a it's a it's a
Speaker 1: culture issue, it's it's who's left, Who's going to rebuild
Speaker 1: this thing, who's going to keep it operating? I mean
Speaker 1: that's really the question that everybody's asking. Well, is Twitter
Speaker 1: gonna be there when we check it in the morning,
Speaker 1: you know, that's the first question. And then I think
Speaker 1: the second as some of these big debt payments come
Speaker 1: to at the beginning of three you know what, what
Speaker 1: does what does the business look like right now? You've
Speaker 1: had so many advertisers leave the platform um Twitter blue
Speaker 1: if it if it shows results, it's not that they're
Speaker 1: not going to be immediate. So can he rebuild this
Speaker 1: as a business again? Can he you know, turn it
Speaker 1: around and maybe start to grow it again? Those are
Speaker 1: the questions I will be looking at going in the
Speaker 1: next year. Now, we just want to pivot a little bit,
Speaker 1: with you, Brad being of course the global head of technology.
Speaker 1: We can do this because the judge in Elizabeth Holmes
Speaker 1: trial at the moment, Judge Davila is giving a lengthy
Speaker 1: explanation ahead of sentencing, and we have had some headlines
Speaker 1: saying there's no question them as Holmes as bright says
Speaker 1: the judge, and just now saying Elizabeth's homes Judges pointing
Speaker 1: to the many misrepresentations. Everyone's waiting with bated breath as
Speaker 1: to what the length of time could be here. What's
Speaker 1: the top of mind for you? Um, well, Carol, I
Speaker 1: mean that's a that's I guess maybe a personal question. Obviously,
Speaker 1: I'm curious what the verdict is. I would be in
Speaker 1: or sit and seeing maybe a little bit of equity
Speaker 1: um reflected in the in the decision. What I mean
Speaker 1: by that is, you know, Elizabeth Holmes was you know
Speaker 1: she she she seemed unique back when this story was
Speaker 1: breaking a couple of years ago. And since then we've
Speaker 1: had Adam Newman that we work and now more recently
Speaker 1: Samuel Bankman freed at ft X. And the size and
Speaker 1: the scale of the fraud is almost just as draw droppering.
Speaker 1: And I know they're different situations, um uh. And and
Speaker 1: and the health of patients was at play in the
Speaker 1: Tharnos case. But you know, Adam Adam Newman starting a
Speaker 1: new business and SPF while he may be arrested as
Speaker 1: a freeman in the Bahamas, and I guess I would
Speaker 1: I'm curious to see, you know, how the how the
Speaker 1: legal process plays out with this very prominent female founder
Speaker 1: Visa be some of these more explicit examples of male
Speaker 1: founders and fraud. Brad, this is probably a difficult question
Speaker 1: for me to ask you, but what is the health
Speaker 1: of the founder broadly right now in Silicon Valley, in
Speaker 1: the world that we cover you've written a lot about
Speaker 1: is in Jeff Bezos is kind of taken a step back.
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Holmes is a different example of a founder that's
Speaker 1: moved on. Jack Dorsey is nowhere to be seen at Twitter,
Speaker 1: for example, And there there don't seem to be as
Speaker 1: many superstar founders right now out there in the world
Speaker 1: that you and I operate it well. I would say
Speaker 1: the mystique of the founder is cracked for for sure,
Speaker 1: all the examples that you've cited, but it's it's I
Speaker 1: think it's so strong and it's so foundational to the
Speaker 1: Silicon Valley myth that I think we'd be making a
Speaker 1: mistake if we said that the next iconoclastic genius founder
Speaker 1: who comes along isn't you know, isn't going to have
Speaker 1: as much success with sand Hill Road and mentor Capital.
Speaker 1: I I think that, um, you know, we have all
Speaker 1: these examples, but you play them against the examples of
Speaker 1: everything Bezos created at Amazon and Steve Jobs and and
Speaker 1: and the mystique is there might be cracked. But I
Speaker 1: don't think the founder, visionary, genie, a CEO, that that
Speaker 1: archetype is going anywhere in Silicon Valley. I think it's trunditional. Okay.
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Holmes has been sentenced to a hundred and thirty
Speaker 1: five months imprisonment four fraud. A hundred and thirty five
Speaker 1: months is just over eleven years. The defense team had
Speaker 1: asked for eighteen months or at home imprisonment or you know,
Speaker 1: being confined to home instead of being imprisoned. But this,
Speaker 1: and there's the redhead crossing. The Bloomberg terminal is official.
Speaker 1: Now Elizabeth Holmes sentenced to one hundred and thirty five
Speaker 1: months for the fraud relating to Farnos, which is just
Speaker 1: little more than eleven years. Brad back to you, a
Speaker 1: little over eleven years. What sort of signal does that sound?
Speaker 1: It sounds horrendous to me to feel that I would
Speaker 1: be incarcerated with that length of time. Yeah, no, eleven
Speaker 1: years for for now. A disgrace from a CEO with
Speaker 1: with one key and another on the way. It's it's
Speaker 1: a tragedy. Like across the board, and hopefully it does
Speaker 1: send a signal to other CEOs and other venture capitals.
Speaker 1: But you know, Caroline, we're coming up, We're coming off
Speaker 1: this major scandal in the crypto world, and you know,
Speaker 1: the lessons are there for the investors who who who
Speaker 1: backed SPF and f t X and and they were ignored.
Speaker 1: So I'd love to say that Silicon Valley has learned
Speaker 1: its lesson, but I think the history of financial scandal
Speaker 1: in this country and in the world is that there
Speaker 1: are always new mistakes to be made. Despite the hefty
Speaker 1: sentence that's been leveled here today. All right, Bloomberg's Bradstone,
Speaker 1: thank you. We're going to take a quick break and
Speaker 1: be right back with more details from the Elizabeth Hoimes sentencing.
Speaker 1: Coming up, will also speak with the new Grinder CEO
Speaker 1: George Harrison about everything from his first couple of months
Speaker 1: in the top role to his big ideas for the
Speaker 1: popular dating app. This is Bloomberg. The sentencing has been
Speaker 1: read on Elizabeth Holmes, the founder, of course of Sarons,
Speaker 1: being sent us to a hundred thirty five months for
Speaker 1: the fraud now, of course, equates to a little more
Speaker 1: than eleven years in prison, and we understand that then
Speaker 1: the judge won't impose a fine postpons restitution order and
Speaker 1: also is getting three years supervised release after prison. All
Speaker 1: of this with the expectation we understand that it's likely
Speaker 1: to be appealed. But for now, Elizabeth Holmes being sentenced
Speaker 1: to an enormous more than eleven years prison for fraud,
Speaker 1: but noting that this is on the lower end of
Speaker 1: the maximum amount, and we understand Elizabeth Holmes is hugging
Speaker 1: her parents in court after the sentence was imposed. We'll
Speaker 1: return to that in a moment, but now let's get
Speaker 1: you some more breaking news of the day, because Friday
Speaker 1: was a very big day for Grinder, the dating app
Speaker 1: specializing in LGBTQ plus communities, saw it shares absolutely surge
Speaker 1: in its trading debuted. Yeah. I've seen a few spack
Speaker 1: list things in my time at this company, Karay, this
Speaker 1: is impressive. Up more than two first day of trading
Speaker 1: after the d SPAC from Thursday's close of the pre
Speaker 1: spack trading. Two charts that I want to look at
Speaker 1: really quickly to give some context here, first look at
Speaker 1: the d spack index on the bloombew terminal. This is
Speaker 1: a basket of twenty five companies that have gone before Grinder,
Speaker 1: and look at that two year performance. I used two
Speaker 1: year because two years ago there was euphoria around companies
Speaker 1: going public. Vice back. Look at how some of those
Speaker 1: companies have fared since then, not so well. The second thing,
Speaker 1: the number of special purpose acquisition companies that are actually
Speaker 1: I p O in other words, the vehicles themselves that
Speaker 1: seek to go public and then merge with the company
Speaker 1: taking it public via the de SPAC process has completely
Speaker 1: drowned up. That's where are aunt? So why has Grinder different? Well,
Speaker 1: asks the man behind it ground As CEO, George Arison.
Speaker 1: Of course, extraordinary day of celebration for you and one
Speaker 1: where we saw it the nice see the listing and
Speaker 1: of course performances and a real celebration for what has
Speaker 1: been a moment to see if for LGBTQ people as well.
Speaker 1: I'm interested in your perspective on well, now is a
Speaker 1: public company? How it makes you different from a private company? Um? Well,
Speaker 1: public companies you have to have really good controls, which
Speaker 1: we're really excited to have. Secondly, we get to report
Speaker 1: numbers regularly and I think it'll be awesome to tell
Speaker 1: the story of how well our business is doing, but
Speaker 1: also the story of what we do for the community
Speaker 1: that we serve, because Grinder is not just a business,
Speaker 1: it's also a mission, and our employees are really tighteder
Speaker 1: that mission are used as are really tighter the mission.
Speaker 1: And then thirdly, you know, Grinder moving forward is going
Speaker 1: to have a board of nine pybole governing the company,
Speaker 1: six of which are LGBTQ plus community members, which is
Speaker 1: completely incredible, Right, That's never happened in the history of
Speaker 1: public companies, and that just makes me so proud that
Speaker 1: that's the company that we're going to be. George, that
Speaker 1: the overwhelming number of investors voted in favor of the
Speaker 1: reverse merger, not sure how surprising that is. What is
Speaker 1: it that you think we're so convincing? Is it actually
Speaker 1: Grinder and the opportunity for the business, the addressable market,
Speaker 1: or are you just another stack. Grinder is a really
Speaker 1: unique company because we are both growing really fast, right,
Speaker 1: thirty plus percent year over year growth, while also we
Speaker 1: are profitable and our EBADA number is extremely strong and
Speaker 1: very very positive, and we expect that to continue in
Speaker 1: the years to come. Because our opportunity for growth is
Speaker 1: so strong ahead of us, and I think that makes
Speaker 1: us really unique. Right. You showed this back index, Well,
Speaker 1: you could put up a similar index for high growth
Speaker 1: money losing companies and they're going to be in a
Speaker 1: similar situation. Right, Those correlate. I think in general, tech
Speaker 1: world has had a lot of companies not do well
Speaker 1: because they're losing money. Grinder is very different because it's
Speaker 1: making money while growing at a really fast clip. We're
Speaker 1: very early in our monization journey. You know. We've only
Speaker 1: started to really charge for our services in the last
Speaker 1: three or four years, and there's still a lot of
Speaker 1: monization that we can achieve by having people pay for
Speaker 1: service that they really want, right, So we're building those
Speaker 1: products for them and then they're monetizing those and that it's,
Speaker 1: as I think, in a really pole position to grow
Speaker 1: a revenue really nicely while do it in a in
Speaker 1: a positive uneconomic way. I mean, Grands, I mean, it's
Speaker 1: a pretty amazing thing to say we have nearly two
Speaker 1: hunter million in revenue as a as a guidance point
Speaker 1: for this year, and we're doing that with two hundred
Speaker 1: people working at render, right, So that I think is
Speaker 1: a is a pretty awesome story I talk to us about.
Speaker 1: You speak very eloquently about your stakeholders in terms of
Speaker 1: people who work for you and the people that you
Speaker 1: serve through the app. Now your shareholders. The volatility is
Speaker 1: there because in large part there's a very small float,
Speaker 1: and I'm interested as to whether you want to build that.
Speaker 1: You want to have more liquidity, want to have more
Speaker 1: shares outstanding so that we don't get these huge sudden
Speaker 1: surges in the share price. Yeah, I mean, obviously we
Speaker 1: want to have a float um that's much bigger, and
Speaker 1: we want to spend time with investors, telling them our
Speaker 1: story and having them invest. We've done somewhere that already.
Speaker 1: We've been out there talking to large investors that invest
Speaker 1: in companies like us, and we'll continue to do that.
Speaker 1: I'm fortunate to have done this once before I've taken
Speaker 1: another company public, so that's something I enjoyed going. We
Speaker 1: have a very strong CFO who is very good at
Speaker 1: this as well, and so we'll be out there telling
Speaker 1: our story and hopefully, you know, big inst issue investors
Speaker 1: who want to hold a stock for a long time
Speaker 1: and will come in and become our shareholders over the
Speaker 1: months to come. George, I'm really interesting about the concept
Speaker 1: of the app and how you make money in other ways.
Speaker 1: You know, if you look, for example, a Bumble and
Speaker 1: how they moved away from just simply dating, what are
Speaker 1: the opportunities for you to branch out monetize new functionality.
Speaker 1: So obviously, the majority of what we do today is
Speaker 1: around dating and relationships. People come to Grinder to either
Speaker 1: have casual dating for long term relationships or friendships, and
Speaker 1: that we know that from all the data that we collect.
Speaker 1: But we also know that people use Grinder in a
Speaker 1: lot of other ways and travels a very logical example,
Speaker 1: people like to take me right, I could have been
Speaker 1: Grinder traveling from San Francisco to New York, longing in
Speaker 1: talking to people about where I should stay, what I
Speaker 1: should do, what restaurants I should go to, what activities
Speaker 1: are happening. We don't monetize that at all. Now we
Speaker 1: know people use a Grinder that way. It's like a
Speaker 1: very organic thing that happens in the app, but we
Speaker 1: don't actually monetize that that feature or that that set
Speaker 1: of features. Imagine a world where inside Grinder we there
Speaker 1: and actually give you a map of the place you're
Speaker 1: going to and say hey, here are five hotels that
Speaker 1: I users really like. Here the three restaurants that people
Speaker 1: really want to go to and that it can be monetized.
Speaker 1: So that's one of just many kind of product extensions
Speaker 1: that we are envisioning. Now we're going to launch these three.
Speaker 1: These are all more long term because there's still so
Speaker 1: much low hanging food in our core product that we
Speaker 1: can monetize. But over the long term we see a
Speaker 1: ton of opportunity to kind of grow and really be
Speaker 1: a brand for the entire community. Right we have this
Speaker 1: brand recognition among our community members which is frankly incredible
Speaker 1: and priceless. Well, we need to take advantage of that
Speaker 1: and really serve them in many other careers besides just
Speaker 1: the coordinating features that Grinder has to Okay, grind to
Speaker 1: see you, George Harrison, thank you. We got to run
Speaker 1: welcome backt toly Bad Technology. I'm coindline Horde in New
Speaker 1: York along with the d Love in San Francisco. And
Speaker 1: we've got to talk about Twitter again because it's closed
Speaker 1: its officers until Monday after Elonmask gave staff an ultimatum
Speaker 1: to either commit to working long hours at high intensity
Speaker 1: or to leave. Sources say many more workers decided well
Speaker 1: to leave than he expected, potentially putting Twitter's operations at risk.
Speaker 1: A memo scene by Bloomberg also urges staff to refrain
Speaker 1: from discussing confidential information on social media or elsewhere. Broomberg's
Speaker 1: intelligence mandate, Singh is with us following every nook and
Speaker 1: cranny of this story, Mandy, But ultimately, how worried are
Speaker 1: you about the product? How worried are you about the
Speaker 1: platform and its ability to continue being as rich as
Speaker 1: it is for people when there's no one really working there. Look,
Speaker 1: you make a great point that to keep a service
Speaker 1: like Twitter up, there is a lot that go behind
Speaker 1: the scenes in terms of infrastructure and system software. And
Speaker 1: Twitter isn't even deployed on a public cloud that you know,
Speaker 1: Amazon or Microsoft is taking care of the infrastructure. Twitter
Speaker 1: is still a lot of the services deployed on its
Speaker 1: own private data centers. So you need those type of resources.
Speaker 1: And with this kind of leoffsman he has already you know,
Speaker 1: fired servant the staff. You don't know which are the
Speaker 1: critical people. Maybe he has a good sense, but we
Speaker 1: don't know it yet, and he's too focused on costs.
Speaker 1: So I think a combination of you know, what he
Speaker 1: wants to do in terms of the blue checks and
Speaker 1: just get the costs under control. To me, it's just
Speaker 1: too scary right now and too risky in terms of
Speaker 1: how he's going about I love that carry the data
Speaker 1: driven Mandy saying saying Musk is too focused on costs.
Speaker 1: I love it. But Mandy, my question for you, who
Speaker 1: or what is Twitter's competitor? Well, so that's the saving
Speaker 1: race that they have that there isn't you know, a
Speaker 1: Twitter like service out there, and Google probably wish they
Speaker 1: had something similar to Twitter or you know, even better
Speaker 1: for that matter. Some people may argue, you know, the
Speaker 1: creators may go to Instagram. It's just not saying Twitter
Speaker 1: is the service for live events. We have a World
Speaker 1: Cup coming up, and look, people still will engage with Twitter.
Speaker 1: But the real risk here is the service may go
Speaker 1: down because we like there is no one doing the
Speaker 1: basic maintenance in terms of kicking laws and you know,
Speaker 1: the underlying infrastructure, and I just feel like in this case,
Speaker 1: there is anything that could happen. I mean, we've seen
Speaker 1: what the lack of governments can do at a company
Speaker 1: like FDx. You know, the whole thing We talked about
Speaker 1: it the whole of this week, and there is no garments,
Speaker 1: There is no one looking at compliance, and that is
Speaker 1: the risk right now with Twitter. Of course, this is
Speaker 1: now a private company, so we don't try to stock.
Speaker 1: But there's a lot of key people who have put
Speaker 1: a lot of money to work alongside e Lomask and
Speaker 1: there's also a lot of banks holding the debt. How
Speaker 1: concerned do you think these people are right now? What
Speaker 1: are the fundamentals even looking like in a business li this? Yes,
Speaker 1: So to what Musk has told us is Twitter was
Speaker 1: losing four millions a day, so that basically means that
Speaker 1: they're losing about you know, one point five billion in revenue.
Speaker 1: And if you think about you know, what he's trying
Speaker 1: to upset the layoffs is really make the Twitter company,
Speaker 1: you know, break even, you know, in terms of the
Speaker 1: fundamental So that should please the deadholders. But at the
Speaker 1: same time it also shows that, you know, Twitter as
Speaker 1: a company is losing revenue. So in my mind, the
Speaker 1: fact that you know they are focusing that much on
Speaker 1: pass is a sign that they're already losing revenue. And
Speaker 1: and I wouldn't be surprised if the revenue is down
Speaker 1: almost like since must took over. Alright, bloom Bag Intelligence
Speaker 1: is Man Deep saying thank you very much for more
Speaker 1: on what's next for Twitter. Let's bring in Liz pol
Speaker 1: Form ahead of teen community Instagram and now consults with
Speaker 1: big tech companies in the creator economy, and Liz, welcome
Speaker 1: to the show. I want to ask you a similar
Speaker 1: thing to what I ask men Deep. Where does Twitter
Speaker 1: sit within the ecosystem of social media platforms? What is
Speaker 1: it that Twitter does and who does it appeal to? Well? Um,
Speaker 1: you know, as you mentioned, I am someone who specializes
Speaker 1: in how young people and young communities use technology in
Speaker 1: the Internet, right and specifically how their behavior today influences
Speaker 1: and shapes what technology is going to look like. So
Speaker 1: um when I hear you know, Ellen sharing his vision
Speaker 1: in pieces over the past week, and part of that
Speaker 1: is potentially paying focusing on monetization of leve all else
Speaker 1: and putting a paywall around Twitter, and that of course
Speaker 1: makes my brain go, oh, that's a kiss of deaf routines,
Speaker 1: right um. And one of the problems I thought there
Speaker 1: not a team platform, right Like, the universal truth about
Speaker 1: social media is that adults will literally always get on
Speaker 1: the platforms that teams congregate to, and teams will rarely
Speaker 1: if ever grow into the platforms that adults are on,
Speaker 1: So like they have a team problem as it is,
Speaker 1: even if it is like incredibly culturally relevant as a
Speaker 1: platform in a way that there are no competitors, right, Like,
Speaker 1: teams are getting information from Twitter disseminated across the platforms
Speaker 1: they do use, and maybe like ways they may not
Speaker 1: even realize. So cultural relevance, relevance really important user base
Speaker 1: in trouble. I guess you know what I've learned in
Speaker 1: recent weeks with this growth story that Musk is talking
Speaker 1: about more users coming to the platform, is the role
Speaker 1: of the content creator, right, you know, on Instagram TikTok,
Speaker 1: Caroline knows all about this. That platform is about the
Speaker 1: people that use it. Is Twitter about the content creators?
Speaker 1: Is it about the people using the platform or is
Speaker 1: it about I mean the alternative being like more about information,
Speaker 1: dispensing information in a real time about news. So the alternative, Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean it is. It is and can be a
Speaker 1: content creation platform, you know on a high level when
Speaker 1: you're talking about competition, like something that I'm seeing happen
Speaker 1: that I'm honestly like kind of excited about as we
Speaker 1: see all these really big social companies that are we
Speaker 1: framed as competitors to each other, so have Twitter, Facebook,
Speaker 1: snapchats to talk um, and we're seeing like, finally, um,
Speaker 1: this system this uh sort of the melting of them,
Speaker 1: like looking at them all like they're all for everybody
Speaker 1: doing everything all of the time, right, Not finally we're
Speaker 1: realizing and we're seeing this movement towards apsolutely the sport
Speaker 1: and things that we're realizing not every platform can be
Speaker 1: for everybody all the time, right. We're seeing these mass layoffs,
Speaker 1: all of these big bets not playing out. And I
Speaker 1: think it would be nice to see a future where, um,
Speaker 1: the platforms that survive, and it's the likely future are
Speaker 1: the ones that actually like define their audience and focus
Speaker 1: on them really clearly. And I think Twitter has gotta
Speaker 1: lay up in that sense because it's like it's one
Speaker 1: of the platforms where it's extremely clear who uses Twitter, right,
Speaker 1: who gets valued from Twitter? And there are you know,
Speaker 1: young active we're talking about young people activists right, like
Speaker 1: there are there are very specific communities for whom that
Speaker 1: actually make Twitter really really culture relevant. If you want
Speaker 1: if you were advising now you know musk on how
Speaker 1: to make it more for content creators, how to now
Speaker 1: lean into making really unique storytelling ways in which But
Speaker 1: I'm looking at my own Twitter feed right now and
Speaker 1: the amount of people who are giving me their Instagram links,
Speaker 1: their TikTok links because they're worried is to wear next.
Speaker 1: They're going to be and be able to have these
Speaker 1: conversations in case the platform doesn't survive. But if it does,
Speaker 1: and if we managed to see an innovate do you
Speaker 1: want to see or turn to periscope? Do you want
Speaker 1: to see more video products? What do you want to
Speaker 1: do as someone who advises companies on attracting a team
Speaker 1: community on providing content. Yeah, I mean it's I say,
Speaker 1: like every platform the future is a multiform at right,
Speaker 1: like we they're used to. We kind of sometimes treat
Speaker 1: social media like it's you know, two thousands thirteen, where
Speaker 1: each platform has a thing they're good at. So like
Speaker 1: Instagram's images, youtubes, video, Twitter's texts, and you know, everything
Speaker 1: you're supposed to do a separate thing on each platform.
Speaker 1: But the reality is every person is doing everything, and
Speaker 1: particularly if you're a content creator, right and you're expected
Speaker 1: to do every format and every platform, so it's, um,
Speaker 1: that's a lot. And I do think like Twitter is
Speaker 1: behind in terms of the amount, like the types of
Speaker 1: formats you can use if you want to go on
Speaker 1: and express yourself and you're part of one of the
Speaker 1: core communities, right, like the video sucks. That's insane. Video
Speaker 1: sucks on the platform, it's crazy, but it does so
Speaker 1: being multi format and like a real way catching up
Speaker 1: to everyone in that sense and then focusing in on
Speaker 1: the actual communities that utilize their product um that are
Speaker 1: already the foundational communities would be my suggestions. I'm just
Speaker 1: going to follow up in terms of your moderation focus
Speaker 1: as well, because of course we're hearing from Europe that
Speaker 1: they are worried about moderation in particular. They've got a
Speaker 1: different type of type of consideration there in terms of
Speaker 1: actual real rules, real policy, real fines for you if
Speaker 1: you don't live up to the content moderation that they
Speaker 1: want to see, particularly against hate speech. But how much
Speaker 1: is that something that you have to be thinking about
Speaker 1: when you're advising these companies and how much worry and
Speaker 1: resistence is the companies at the moment aligning themselves with
Speaker 1: come with social media platforms that don't seem to care
Speaker 1: about it enough, right. I mean, I think, first of all,
Speaker 1: um Yoel Roth, who has formed Twitter's former head of safety,
Speaker 1: wrote and offbed for New York Times about content moderation
Speaker 1: and Twitter. That's like the musty today that talks a
Speaker 1: lot about the fact that like outside forces really do
Speaker 1: in influence and in force in many ways like moderation
Speaker 1: on any platform, you know, including for example, of the
Speaker 1: app store. But yeah, different countries of different child safety
Speaker 1: laws for example. UM, So it is something you have
Speaker 1: to keep in mind. And I when I see news
Speaker 1: like you know, the hundreds or thousands of contractors being like,
Speaker 1: oh from a big social media company, you always I
Speaker 1: will always assume it's continent of moderation because right now
Speaker 1: every company outsources that, um, And I think that you know,
Speaker 1: these are vitally important jobs. And I can't help but
Speaker 1: wonder how much safer and cleaner for advertisers these platforms
Speaker 1: would be if they were able to keep these teams
Speaker 1: in houses they stale, right, And then also like, are
Speaker 1: you know, be able to treat tree the regional and globally,
Speaker 1: So that's like a That's something I think about a lot,
Speaker 1: and it's too bad that it's right now that these
Speaker 1: teams are treated a little bit like they're expendable. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think a lot more to learn on the fallout.
Speaker 1: Their former head of teen community at Instagram, Liz Pearl,
Speaker 1: thank you coming up? Can f t X investors get
Speaker 1: their money back? Will chat with the CEO of Do
Speaker 1: Not Pay who's trying to do just that? This is Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank President Neil cash Cary is slamming
Speaker 1: the concept of cryptocurrencies. He says the whole idea of
Speaker 1: cryptocurrency is quote nonsense. After the implosion of f t
Speaker 1: X group revealed the industry shortcomings. While many officials have
Speaker 1: warned about crypto risks and the need for regulation, cash
Speaker 1: carries comment represents one of the most let's say, forceful
Speaker 1: denunciations by a FED policymaker. For more on the crypto fallout,
Speaker 1: let's bring in Do Not Pay CEO Joshua Browder. His
Speaker 1: company aims to recoup losses similar to what has now
Speaker 1: happened with FDx investors, as well as automate legal issues.
Speaker 1: Fd X is actually one of your backers, right so
Speaker 1: let's put that out on the table. You are working
Speaker 1: though to get investors money back, Josh, this is complicated.
Speaker 1: Walk us through it. Yeah. So they invested in US
Speaker 1: about a year ago, and from a practical standpoint, it
Speaker 1: was a very small investment. But it's culturally it goes
Speaker 1: against everything we believe in, and so we're working hard
Speaker 1: to help people get money back from f t X.
Speaker 1: The most important thing to know is there's this regulation.
Speaker 1: It's called Regulation E, and it means that if you've
Speaker 1: deposited money in f t X through a c H
Speaker 1: direct deposit, you can actually get it back if you've
Speaker 1: deposited within the last sixty days. Um, there's no discretion
Speaker 1: that the banks or anyone has. You can tell your
Speaker 1: bank I want to reverse the deposit, and then they
Speaker 1: can reverse it. And then what happens is ft X
Speaker 1: is payment processor is on the hook for refunding the
Speaker 1: money to you, and so we've been automating a lot
Speaker 1: of these sorts of refunds. One other type of refund
Speaker 1: you can do is if you load it up your
Speaker 1: ft X balance with a credit or debit card. You
Speaker 1: can also dispute the payment under something called the fair
Speaker 1: credit building apt and it's the least we can do,
Speaker 1: given that he was actually a small investor in our company.
Speaker 1: Talk to us about that experience, Josh, about getting funding.
Speaker 1: Did anything make you think it was a miss? There
Speaker 1: were many, many things. There was a bait and switch.
Speaker 1: I felt like um. I had a friend introducers and
Speaker 1: and they said f t X f t X Ventures
Speaker 1: would love to invest a small check in your round.
Speaker 1: And it turned out that when the documents were being circulated,
Speaker 1: they changed the name of the entity to the Lameter
Speaker 1: Research And I didn't even know what that was at
Speaker 1: the time, but I thought it was very shady that
Speaker 1: it wasn't actually f t X investing when it was
Speaker 1: presented to us that they would be the ones investing.
Speaker 1: On top of that, I told f t X, I
Speaker 1: think crypto is a scam. Our company helps consumers fight
Speaker 1: other companies like Celsius. There's no value to crypto, and
Speaker 1: they said, no problem, we would still love to invest
Speaker 1: so against x that you told f t X that
Speaker 1: crypto is a scam, but you still took money from
Speaker 1: them for your business. Let's be clear about that. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I thought they could give us expertise on going after
Speaker 1: other crypto exchanges. I think the last time we spoke,
Speaker 1: we were going after Celsius and they were very helpful there,
Speaker 1: and no one could have imagined that six months to
Speaker 1: a year later they would be doing all of this stuff.
Speaker 1: No one could have predicted it. And I thought ft
Speaker 1: X was one of the good ones and I was wrong.
Speaker 1: That's absolutely extraordinary. And to that end, are you are
Speaker 1: you getting involved in any sort of class action and
Speaker 1: you looking at any form of legal action yourself or
Speaker 1: is this more a focus on how your business can
Speaker 1: help others? Right now, we're just trying to help others.
Speaker 1: There are amazing lawyers working on the consumer side with
Speaker 1: class actions. There's a firm called and and we're so
Speaker 1: on Capucci. They were big in the mad Off class
Speaker 1: class action and MF Global class action, and so we're
Speaker 1: sending people their way. We're working in small claims court.
Speaker 1: One area that hasn't been explored enough is going after
Speaker 1: the YouTubers um There are a lot of people in
Speaker 1: the ft X orbit who are pushing consumers to sign up,
Speaker 1: saying this thing is totally safe, use my referral code.
Speaker 1: And I think regulators and courts need to look into
Speaker 1: the personal finance YouTubers who ordinary people trusted with their
Speaker 1: life savings. Josh, I want to ask you about your
Speaker 1: users and customers. I appreciate there may be an element
Speaker 1: of confidentiality or privacy, but can you give us any
Speaker 1: sense of how much money people are trying to claim
Speaker 1: back and win back? You know, what are the losses
Speaker 1: that people in the real world have suffered on a
Speaker 1: on a ground scale. I think it's publicly reported to
Speaker 1: be over ten billion. But on our end, we've helped.
Speaker 1: We have millions being processed, being refunded through the banks.
Speaker 1: So if you've lost money in f t X, I
Speaker 1: can't stress this enough. If you direct a positive in
Speaker 1: the last sixty days, you should phone up your bank
Speaker 1: and say, under Section E of the CFPP regulations, I
Speaker 1: want a refund and your bank can't say no um,
Speaker 1: and they don't want to tell you about this, but
Speaker 1: but you should definitely go that route if it's an
Speaker 1: option for you. Josh, what what did you learn actually
Speaker 1: from ft X about the ability to call back money
Speaker 1: from other celsius and the like, many of which you
Speaker 1: know they themselves were acting as a white knight involved in.
Speaker 1: Was it and is it easy transparent to be able
Speaker 1: to do such. It's really not that the system is
Speaker 1: built on so much trust that consumers and regulators could
Speaker 1: never have imagined that all the money would never be there,
Speaker 1: and so in a lot of these cases, when a
Speaker 1: company declares bankruptcy, everything gets frozen, as is the case
Speaker 1: with f t X and Celsius. But there are other
Speaker 1: things you can do, like these workarounds with reversing the funds,
Speaker 1: contacting your credit card company, taking third parties to small
Speaker 1: claims court who aren't being properly held responsible. Hey Josh,
Speaker 1: if you raise money again from an outside investor, what
Speaker 1: lessons have you learned from your involvement with f t X.
Speaker 1: I think our name and our brand is extremely important,
Speaker 1: and we should be very careful to make sure that anyone,
Speaker 1: even if they're putting in a small check um and
Speaker 1: they have no influence, we should make sure that everything
Speaker 1: is like squeak and clean um. I thought that that
Speaker 1: was the case with f TX. There are investors in Sequoia,
Speaker 1: all of Silicon Valley, but in reality, all of these
Speaker 1: crypto companies had shaky foundations when looking at the other
Speaker 1: backers that you have. Of course, ce Andrewson's the founders
Speaker 1: found the lux is. I mean, you've taken money from
Speaker 1: the standout Silicon Valley players and it's notable of the
Speaker 1: lessons down learned. But we really thank you for your
Speaker 1: clarity and for really being so true to yourself with us.
Speaker 1: We appreciate it. Do not pay Ceo Josh Browder stay well.
Speaker 1: So you're coming to the World Club this November or December.
Speaker 1: You know, Cutter is a conservative country, but you want
Speaker 1: to enjoy the sun and sand. What do you wear?
Speaker 1: The answer is complicated. Country men and women mostly wear
Speaker 1: traditional dress while out and about, long white sobs for
Speaker 1: men with a court on their heads. Women wear black
Speaker 1: robes called baias with her jumps to cover their hair.
Speaker 1: Oh and their makeup is typically flawless. But unless you
Speaker 1: wear this on a day to day basis, stick dear
Speaker 1: normal wardrobe with a few rules. In public places like
Speaker 1: malls and parks, both women and men are obliged to
Speaker 1: cover everything from their shoulders to their knees. It's particularly
Speaker 1: strict with women, but enforcements not in uniform. However, you
Speaker 1: can be and people are kicked out of public places
Speaker 1: if they don't comply. There are two main places where
Speaker 1: this rule doesn't apply. One the Pearl, a large residential
Speaker 1: development on artificial islands that stretches out into the Persian Gulf.
Speaker 1: It's home to loss of the white collar residents from
Speaker 1: Western countries and also luxury hotels around the country. In
Speaker 1: both places you'll see mini skirts and tank tops bikinis
Speaker 1: are standard. Where at the Fool, it's clear how strictly
Speaker 1: these rules are going to be enforced when more than
Speaker 1: a million fans descend on the country before the World Cup.
Speaker 1: But this is the way people dressing flat And we
Speaker 1: thank some own foxman for that report. And meanwhile, and
Speaker 1: Qatari officials, did you see that it is all over
Speaker 1: social media because they're set to ban the sale of
Speaker 1: alcohol within the World Cup stadiums. It's a dramatic reversal
Speaker 1: for an earlier decision, of course, that Anheuser Busch InBev
Speaker 1: was going to be selling bud Wiser bit there rum
Speaker 1: Bug's learning that well, it's likely going to result in
Speaker 1: moving concession stands serving the booze further away from the stadiums,
Speaker 1: and those have shelled up thousands of dollars of private
Speaker 1: hospitality suite apparently they're unaffected. We understand. Look the World
Speaker 1: Cup being hold, it held in Qatar has been controversial.
Speaker 1: I look across Instagram and look across Twitter. You've got
Speaker 1: to lean in on the positive and football or soccer
Speaker 1: wherever you are in the world, it brings the world together.
Speaker 1: Beer is a key part of football culture in Europe
Speaker 1: for example, not everywhere. But how amazing is it that
Speaker 1: the whole world is talking about football war soccer right now?
Speaker 1: So key game for you? What we obviously got the
Speaker 1: kickoff on Sunday? What does the Ecuador versus Kata? But
Speaker 1: then when when we up next bed I'm a proud Welshman,
Speaker 1: damnline country. I cannot wait for Wales USA on Monday,
Speaker 1: and I hope honestly that Wales be England the day
Speaker 1: after Thanksgiving. I mean, there's a song. Who is it?
Speaker 1: Is it Nicki Minaj performing it the official anthem? Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's quite as I'm interested in. She's going to have
Speaker 1: to be by some luxury hotels, by something not as
Speaker 1: good as Shakira. Is not as good as Shakira is
Speaker 1: no way. Well, it's a football we hope is coming
Speaker 1: home to whomever ends up winning it. I'm pretty sure
Speaker 1: we'll be supporting England and Wales, but support us. Next
Speaker 1: week we got Cracken's chief legal officer joining the show.
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg.