WEBVTT - Potential Twitter Changes Under Musk and Starlink's Launch 0:00:03.520 --> 0:00:06.880 From the heart of where innovation, money and power collive 0:00:07.640 --> 0:00:12.159 in Silicon Valley and beyond. This is Bloomberg Technology with 0:00:12.240 --> 0:00:28.240 Emily Jay. I'm Emily checking San Francisco, and this is 0:00:28.240 --> 0:00:31.840 Bloomberg Technology coming up the next hour, Tech stops plunge, 0:00:32.000 --> 0:00:35.800 Amazon shares having their worst day since two thousand and six, 0:00:35.960 --> 0:00:39.560 the nasdack sinking. We will point pinpoint the biggest pain 0:00:39.640 --> 0:00:43.280 points for big tech going forward. Plus e Lad Musk 0:00:43.360 --> 0:00:45.560 sells eight and a half billion dollars worth of Tesla 0:00:45.640 --> 0:00:47.519 shares to pay for Twitter, but he's still got to 0:00:47.560 --> 0:00:51.840 come up with billions more. Tesla shares are down since 0:00:51.840 --> 0:00:55.200 he disclosed his Twitter steak, and Twitter shares are trading 0:00:55.280 --> 0:00:58.440 lower than is offered price. Can Musk make the tricky 0:00:58.520 --> 0:01:02.520 math add up? And over to Musk's other company. We 0:01:02.560 --> 0:01:05.479 are watching this SpaceX rocket about to take off from 0:01:05.760 --> 0:01:09.200 Cape Canaveral. It is poised to make history, marking the 0:01:09.240 --> 0:01:13.240 fastest turnaround time for a refurbished rocket ever. We will 0:01:13.240 --> 0:01:16.800 bring it all to you live meantime for tech investors, 0:01:16.920 --> 0:01:19.480 worst start to the year in two decades. If you 0:01:19.520 --> 0:01:21.160 take a look at the bigger picture, As Taylor mentioned, 0:01:21.200 --> 0:01:24.600 the NAZAC one hundred hammered this year, wiping out more 0:01:24.600 --> 0:01:28.600 than one point eight trillion dollars in value in April alone. 0:01:29.000 --> 0:01:31.600 How much more volatility will the tech sector? See Mark 0:01:31.680 --> 0:01:34.560 Mheney of ever Core with us now to discuss Mark, 0:01:34.600 --> 0:01:38.200 how much more? How much more are we going to see? Well, 0:01:38.240 --> 0:01:41.199 we still have FED decisions coming up this next week week, 0:01:41.400 --> 0:01:43.480 and then one shoot that has not yet Followen and 0:01:43.560 --> 0:01:46.440 Taylor just started to tease this out, is whether the 0:01:46.480 --> 0:01:50.600 consumer really weakens. Look, everything's been thrown against UH tech 0:01:50.640 --> 0:01:53.600 stocks so far except for a global recession. But we 0:01:53.640 --> 0:01:57.000 know we've had decades high inflation rates, we've got surgy 0:01:57.240 --> 0:02:02.000 interest rates, we've had um We've had a war breakout 0:02:02.040 --> 0:02:05.200 in Europe that has dampened at least some demand so far, 0:02:05.520 --> 0:02:08.200 just dampen. It hasn't crusted yet, has dampened it. And 0:02:08.200 --> 0:02:11.040 then you've got supply chain issues out of out of China, 0:02:11.080 --> 0:02:14.640 and so it's hit Apple, it's hit Amazon, it's at Google, Facebook, 0:02:14.720 --> 0:02:17.400 you know, Microsoft, even all of the major tech stocks. 0:02:17.520 --> 0:02:20.960 I don't think it abates quickly. It does abate unless 0:02:21.040 --> 0:02:23.320 we get another shoot to drop with the consumer really 0:02:23.400 --> 0:02:25.200 falling off a clip. We haven't seen evidence of that 0:02:25.320 --> 0:02:28.079 yet I hope it doesn't happen. Now. You cover so 0:02:28.120 --> 0:02:32.320 many big tech companies, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Twitter, Netflix, when 0:02:32.320 --> 0:02:34.440 you look at the broader landscape, what are the most 0:02:34.480 --> 0:02:40.680 alarming pain points that you see? Well, I also when 0:02:40.720 --> 0:02:42.400 I want to put this in context, Look, this is 0:02:42.440 --> 0:02:44.639 the third bear market that you and I've gone through 0:02:44.680 --> 0:02:46.679 just in the last five years. We had one in 0:02:46.760 --> 0:02:49.120 eighteen of course during COVID the beginning of COVID, and 0:02:49.160 --> 0:02:51.000 we have one now. But you know we've had I 0:02:51.000 --> 0:02:52.720 don't know, I've lived through seven or eight of these. 0:02:52.960 --> 0:02:55.680 Uh So they almost all are fundamentally driven and there 0:02:55.720 --> 0:02:58.400 are these confluence of events coming up. I think of 0:02:58.400 --> 0:03:00.240 all those stocks that you mentioned, probably the one that 0:03:00.320 --> 0:03:03.680 most fundamentally surprised me was Netflix that just hit a wall. 0:03:03.720 --> 0:03:06.080 And I think that was because they just didn't have 0:03:06.160 --> 0:03:08.320 a plan B or a plan C at least not 0:03:08.800 --> 0:03:11.160 ready to go and uh and they sort of hit 0:03:11.160 --> 0:03:13.839 a little bit of market maturation and lots of competition. 0:03:14.080 --> 0:03:16.079 I don't think that's the case actually with Facebook or 0:03:16.400 --> 0:03:19.200 Google or Amazon. I think these are dips that you 0:03:19.400 --> 0:03:21.400 as a growth investor. Me as a growth investor, I 0:03:21.440 --> 0:03:23.000 want to be buying. I call these d h q 0:03:23.160 --> 0:03:26.280 s dislocated high quality opportunities. I know everything is being 0:03:26.320 --> 0:03:29.480 thrown against Amazon now. I mean this is This is 0:03:29.520 --> 0:03:31.399 about as big of a macro place you can find. 0:03:31.400 --> 0:03:33.840 They got one point six million employees. So if wage 0:03:33.880 --> 0:03:36.400 inflation is going up and shipping inflation is going up 0:03:36.400 --> 0:03:38.760 and fuel inflation is going up, if all that happens, 0:03:38.840 --> 0:03:42.240 Amazon is definitely negatively impacted. I just don't think this 0:03:42.320 --> 0:03:44.760 is a structural change in Amazon's business model, and I 0:03:44.760 --> 0:03:46.760 think they'll start scaling through it, and you want to 0:03:46.800 --> 0:03:48.520 be buying them when this is. I mean, this is 0:03:48.520 --> 0:03:50.680 about as bad as it gets, and all of the 0:03:50.680 --> 0:03:53.120 stock is gonna work as things get less less worse 0:03:53.200 --> 0:03:56.200 going forwards, and I think they will barring the global recession. 0:03:56.960 --> 0:03:59.480 Is Netflix going to be able to peel itself off 0:03:59.520 --> 0:04:04.800 the wall and get some momentum back. Yes, at some 0:04:04.840 --> 0:04:06.760 point I'm sure they will be able to. To me, 0:04:06.840 --> 0:04:09.560 this is like if you remember Emily price Line, which 0:04:09.600 --> 0:04:12.280 turned into Booking dot Com. There was a wonderful stock 0:04:12.400 --> 0:04:14.640 for a decade like Netflix was, and then it went 0:04:14.840 --> 0:04:18.279 x premium growth. They stopped growing above and they just 0:04:18.360 --> 0:04:20.600 kind of did this ten percent revenue growth, and they 0:04:20.640 --> 0:04:23.760 traded fine in line with the market, but they didn't outperform. 0:04:23.839 --> 0:04:25.719 And I sort of think the same thing happens here 0:04:25.760 --> 0:04:29.080 with Netflix. And the challenge with Netflix is it went 0:04:29.120 --> 0:04:32.160 into its kind of an exited, you know, premium growth 0:04:32.480 --> 0:04:34.679 from a very high multiple, so you had this wicked 0:04:34.680 --> 0:04:37.279 correction down. Now you've got this thing trading at like 0:04:37.400 --> 0:04:40.720 fifteen sixteen seventeen times earnings. That's about right for an 0:04:40.720 --> 0:04:42.640 asset like this, So I think it kind of hugs 0:04:42.640 --> 0:04:45.200 the market for the foreseeable future. I you know, I 0:04:45.480 --> 0:04:48.520 downgrade the stock earlier this year, and uh, this is 0:04:49.080 --> 0:04:51.279 my history tells me this stays that you stand on 0:04:51.279 --> 0:04:53.120 the sidelines on the name like this for at least 0:04:53.120 --> 0:04:57.200 a year. Meantime, got to talk about Twitter Musk trying 0:04:57.200 --> 0:05:00.360 to buy to sell more shares to get the money 0:05:00.360 --> 0:05:04.520 he needs to do this deal. Twitter earnings, though, you know, 0:05:04.640 --> 0:05:06.839 didn't look great. Do you think he's really committed to 0:05:07.640 --> 0:05:11.840 owning and running a money losing asset or or does 0:05:11.880 --> 0:05:14.200 he want to turn this into a profitable business? And 0:05:14.240 --> 0:05:17.200 can he get the deal done even as Tesla shares 0:05:17.480 --> 0:05:22.040 continue to decline? Well, um, I think he can get 0:05:22.040 --> 0:05:24.280 the deal done. I think he's got enough personal wealth 0:05:24.320 --> 0:05:25.960 that he can he can get the deal done. It 0:05:26.000 --> 0:05:28.039 may not be as attractive as he first thought. The 0:05:28.080 --> 0:05:29.799 second thing is, I don't know whether he early wants 0:05:29.960 --> 0:05:32.719 wants to run it as a profitable enterprise. Is public 0:05:32.800 --> 0:05:35.760 statements indicate that he hasn't. That said that this person 0:05:35.920 --> 0:05:40.400 is an enormously successful entrepreneur. The difference here, however, Emily, 0:05:40.480 --> 0:05:43.360 is that he didn't build this company from the ground up. 0:05:43.400 --> 0:05:46.520 He's acquiring an asset and so then you go through it. 0:05:46.600 --> 0:05:48.440 I mean, you do in that big M and a deal, 0:05:48.520 --> 0:05:51.000 you're going to have to figure out cultures. Uh. You know, 0:05:51.080 --> 0:05:53.520 this is a very different business model than he's run before. 0:05:53.800 --> 0:05:57.880 I know he's extremely intimately knowledgeable about how Twitter works 0:05:57.920 --> 0:06:00.479 as a user, but you know, there's a side of 0:06:00.480 --> 0:06:02.120 the business here. I mean, the people who pay the 0:06:02.120 --> 0:06:06.080 bills to Twitter are advertisers, and that's a very different mindset, 0:06:06.400 --> 0:06:08.120 very different set of skills. And I don't know what 0:06:08.440 --> 0:06:10.880 Musk wants to do about that. If he doesn't care 0:06:10.920 --> 0:06:13.080 about the advertisers, they're they're not gonna care about him, 0:06:13.400 --> 0:06:15.800 and you're gonna have ad dollars decline. And by the way, 0:06:15.839 --> 0:06:18.640 that that's your cash flow. So I I think the 0:06:18.680 --> 0:06:20.800 operational challenge here is gonna be greater. And I don't 0:06:20.800 --> 0:06:23.039 know whether that bother bothers must or not, but it's 0:06:23.200 --> 0:06:25.920 it's gonna if it's if it's a financial imparative for 0:06:25.960 --> 0:06:27.799 him to get the this is gonna be a bigger 0:06:27.839 --> 0:06:29.480 challenge for him. If he really wants to run the 0:06:29.520 --> 0:06:31.280 business properly, this is gonna be this is gonna be 0:06:31.279 --> 0:06:34.400 a challenge for him. And quickly twitters are still trading 0:06:34.440 --> 0:06:37.479 below his offer price. Do you think investors don't think 0:06:37.520 --> 0:06:40.279 he can get the deal done? I think there's always 0:06:40.279 --> 0:06:41.640 a little bit of a gap in these M and 0:06:41.680 --> 0:06:43.600 A deals. You know, this deal is not going to 0:06:43.680 --> 0:06:46.080 probably close for a couple of months. Something could still 0:06:46.120 --> 0:06:49.320 come up regulatory wise. Uh, so there's always gonna be 0:06:49.360 --> 0:06:50.919 a little bit of a discount. I don't see it 0:06:50.960 --> 0:06:54.800 as that glaring the gap here. So yeah, I'm not 0:06:54.839 --> 0:06:56.560 surprised that there's a gap. I would expect it to 0:06:56.680 --> 0:06:58.600 narrow as you get closer to whenever this thing is 0:06:58.640 --> 0:07:00.280 supposed to close. I think the thing is going to 0:07:00.320 --> 0:07:02.080 close pretty quickly in the next couple of months, though 0:07:02.160 --> 0:07:06.200 next month or two. Interesting why quickly. I don't know 0:07:06.200 --> 0:07:08.040 what stops it. I mean, there's no other bidder here, 0:07:08.080 --> 0:07:11.080 so it's only regulatory approval. The board has agreed to this. 0:07:11.440 --> 0:07:13.960 I think the largest shareholders have signed up. I don't 0:07:13.960 --> 0:07:16.160 know that for a fact, but I'm guessing that that's 0:07:16.200 --> 0:07:18.200 the last series of events that caused the board to 0:07:18.240 --> 0:07:21.119 say okay. Deals done because they heard from their largest 0:07:21.120 --> 0:07:24.800 shareholders that they want this. This deal completed, so there's 0:07:24.800 --> 0:07:28.920 nothing to really stop it except for the regulatory approval process. Interesting. 0:07:29.000 --> 0:07:31.320 Mark Mhoney of aver Cores always going to have you 0:07:31.320 --> 0:07:43.440 happy Friday, Mark, thanks for joining us. Elon Mosk sold 0:07:43.440 --> 0:07:45.840 an additional four and a half billion dollars worth of 0:07:45.880 --> 0:07:49.000 Tesla stock, according to new regulatory filings. That makes his 0:07:49.160 --> 0:07:52.160 total sales this week eight and a half billion dollars, 0:07:52.200 --> 0:07:55.040 bringing him one step closer to making his deal to 0:07:55.080 --> 0:07:58.080 buy Twitter a reality. Mosque has already discussed some of 0:07:58.120 --> 0:08:01.360 the changes he'd make to Twitter on Twitter, most notably 0:08:01.520 --> 0:08:05.040 his now pin tweet about free speech and censorship. There's 0:08:05.040 --> 0:08:07.200 been some excitement and a lot of concerns about what 0:08:07.240 --> 0:08:10.080 Twitter might look like under Musk, especially when it comes 0:08:10.080 --> 0:08:14.080 to changing Twitter's moderation policies. My next guest actually helped 0:08:14.120 --> 0:08:16.720 Twitter's Trust and Safety Council shape those policies. And I'm 0:08:16.800 --> 0:08:21.200 joined now by Brianna Wou, executive director Rebellion Pack, one 0:08:21.360 --> 0:08:24.280 time congressional candidate and a woman who unfortunately knows a 0:08:24.320 --> 0:08:27.520 thing or two about harassment. And Brianna, I just want 0:08:27.560 --> 0:08:30.200 to remind our viewers that not only did you become 0:08:30.200 --> 0:08:33.880 a target of vicious trolls on Twitter as a result 0:08:34.080 --> 0:08:37.360 of gamer Gate, your harassers came after you in person 0:08:37.400 --> 0:08:41.160 and tried to, you know, physically harm you. In the 0:08:41.200 --> 0:08:44.199 wake of that, you help Twitter shape its moderation policies. 0:08:44.400 --> 0:08:46.599 How do you feel about handing that over now to 0:08:46.760 --> 0:08:51.640 Elon Musk Well, I'm obviously very very concerned. Um, you know, 0:08:51.760 --> 0:08:54.920 something I talked about two NBC News this week was 0:08:55.440 --> 0:08:59.280 kind of history of Twitter's moderation policies improving in the 0:08:59.280 --> 0:09:02.559 wake of gamer Game. I talked to Del Harvey and 0:09:02.600 --> 0:09:06.040 a lot of other people at Twitter from really extensively 0:09:06.120 --> 0:09:11.800 from about until about eighteen trying to basically fix some 0:09:11.880 --> 0:09:14.800 of the things that went wrong at Twitter, and something 0:09:14.840 --> 0:09:18.520 I really was stressed everyone watching you on Bloomberg is 0:09:18.880 --> 0:09:21.920 ultimately this was a u X problem. We were trying 0:09:21.920 --> 0:09:25.479 to solve a user experience problem. This was not political, 0:09:25.640 --> 0:09:29.040 It was not a left versus right screaming match. This 0:09:29.240 --> 0:09:32.360 was people on Twitter are having a bad user experience 0:09:32.360 --> 0:09:35.840 and we need to fix it. So I'm really worried 0:09:35.920 --> 0:09:39.600 that all the progress we made to basically let a 0:09:39.600 --> 0:09:43.040 lot of people use this service and not get death threats, 0:09:43.240 --> 0:09:47.800 rape threats, you know, their their personal information published. I'm 0:09:47.880 --> 0:09:50.800 extremely concerned that's going to take a step backwards. And 0:09:50.880 --> 0:09:54.160 because this is Bloomberg, I think ultimately that's going to 0:09:54.440 --> 0:09:59.240 really affect Twitter's stock price, in their profitability. If you 0:09:59.320 --> 0:10:03.760 could give Unmusk some advice, what would it be. I 0:10:03.840 --> 0:10:06.200 think the main thing I would say is listen to 0:10:06.240 --> 0:10:09.480 the professionals on the trust and Safety team. I cannot 0:10:09.559 --> 0:10:13.440 emphasize to you enough. These are data driven professionals. They're 0:10:13.440 --> 0:10:17.680 not ideologues. They sit there and they comb through literally 0:10:17.960 --> 0:10:20.640 large freams of data every single day trying to figure 0:10:20.640 --> 0:10:24.360 out how to make the product better, what the shortcomings are. 0:10:24.600 --> 0:10:27.520 It's almost like cyber warfare in a sense, you know, 0:10:27.920 --> 0:10:31.400 where you've trolls poking at the defenses of Twitter's trust 0:10:31.400 --> 0:10:34.280 and safety policies all day and trying to figure out 0:10:34.360 --> 0:10:36.560 how to get around it. I would say listen to 0:10:36.600 --> 0:10:41.120 those professionals. What concerns me is, judging from miss tweets, 0:10:41.600 --> 0:10:44.640 it seems like he's coming in with basically a political, 0:10:45.120 --> 0:10:50.240 uh political crusade that he's trying to bring to the platform, 0:10:50.360 --> 0:10:53.360 rather than just trying to empower his professionals that are 0:10:53.360 --> 0:10:56.920 trying to solve this from a non political point of view. Now, 0:10:56.960 --> 0:11:03.040 Elon Musk is inarguably an innovator and has you know, 0:11:03.200 --> 0:11:07.120 brought some of the most difficult ideas in history to fruition. 0:11:07.440 --> 0:11:12.640 Why shouldn't we think he could actually make Twitter better? Well, 0:11:12.720 --> 0:11:16.480 you know, if we were talking about making a tech product, 0:11:16.520 --> 0:11:18.800 I think I would have a lot more faith in him. 0:11:19.000 --> 0:11:22.000 I think it's also worth saying Elon Musk is also 0:11:22.040 --> 0:11:24.960 someone that makes really big promises that don't seem to 0:11:25.000 --> 0:11:27.560 go anywhere if you listen to him. We're going to 0:11:27.640 --> 0:11:31.920 have uh, you know, Optimius robots, these fully autonomous robots 0:11:31.960 --> 0:11:35.800 that can act with artificial intelligence, walk around on two legs. 0:11:36.040 --> 0:11:38.720 Those will be out I believe next year. According to 0:11:38.760 --> 0:11:42.200 his public statements, uh, he said Tesla will be a 0:11:42.240 --> 0:11:45.720 fully self drivable car every single year for the last 0:11:45.760 --> 0:11:48.800 six years. I think there's a real credibility gap when 0:11:48.840 --> 0:11:53.120 it comes to his very large pronouncements on this UH 0:11:53.160 --> 0:11:56.600 in something that's I really want to stress Emily Ultimately, 0:11:56.760 --> 0:12:01.199 most of the policies that changed at Twitter happened because 0:12:01.320 --> 0:12:04.760 the Twitter leadership was invested in it. You know, from 0:12:05.679 --> 0:12:10.240 to about they were very incentivized, not just you know, 0:12:10.280 --> 0:12:14.080 from users, but from the stock price to address harassment. 0:12:14.200 --> 0:12:17.800 If you remember, they tried to sell themselves to UH 0:12:17.800 --> 0:12:20.120 I believe it was ABC and Distinc. At one point 0:12:20.160 --> 0:12:23.319 Twitter did, and the deal fell through in part because 0:12:23.320 --> 0:12:26.840 of the congeneral harassment on the platform. So you know, 0:12:27.000 --> 0:12:30.199 ultimately this isn't just a user safety issue, it's a 0:12:30.240 --> 0:12:34.640 stock price issue. Now. Jack Dorsey just posted a long 0:12:34.880 --> 0:12:39.040 Twitter thread taking responsibility for mistakes he has, you know, 0:12:39.200 --> 0:12:40.800 talked a little bit about the handling of the New 0:12:40.840 --> 0:12:44.600 York Post article mentioning Hunter Biden. But of course there 0:12:44.640 --> 0:12:48.080 are many many other issues um that Elon Musk seems 0:12:48.080 --> 0:12:51.200 to be taking issue with. Jack says a transparent system, 0:12:51.200 --> 0:12:53.480 both in policy and operations, is the right way to 0:12:53.520 --> 0:12:56.440 earn trust, whether it's owned by a company or an 0:12:56.440 --> 0:13:00.559 open protocol doesn't matter as much as deliberately deciding to 0:13:00.559 --> 0:13:02.800 be open about every decision and why it was made. 0:13:02.920 --> 0:13:06.240 It is not easy to do, but it must happen. 0:13:07.040 --> 0:13:09.199 What do you what do you think he means by that? 0:13:09.320 --> 0:13:14.640 And is it really possible? I don't know how possible 0:13:14.679 --> 0:13:16.480 it is, but I think it's a good ideal to 0:13:16.600 --> 0:13:19.640 strive for. I think a lot of the misconceptions about 0:13:19.640 --> 0:13:23.600 the trust and safety policy happen because there is this, uh, 0:13:23.800 --> 0:13:27.400 this this, then this veil between what happens on that 0:13:27.440 --> 0:13:30.280 team in the public. I find it very notable of 0:13:30.400 --> 0:13:32.840 my work with them. I was really encouraged to not 0:13:32.960 --> 0:13:36.120 speak about it ever, Um. I only spoke about it 0:13:36.200 --> 0:13:38.600 this week because I felt the stakes were so high 0:13:38.720 --> 0:13:42.440 and that it was worth worth kind of talking about 0:13:42.480 --> 0:13:45.960 my experiences on that team because of these this misconception 0:13:46.120 --> 0:13:48.800 that you know, it's a bunch of democratic people behind 0:13:48.840 --> 0:13:53.479 the scenes trying to silence conservatives. Absolutely not my experience 0:13:53.480 --> 0:13:56.280 at all. Um. I think that if we had these 0:13:56.320 --> 0:14:00.679 policies applied more transparently, I think that that would be 0:14:00.720 --> 0:14:04.160 good for getting the trust of all users. You know, 0:14:04.320 --> 0:14:09.679 what if find is so interesting, Emily is from my perception. Um, 0:14:09.720 --> 0:14:13.120 if you look at Twitter and their ability to solve 0:14:14.120 --> 0:14:16.280 address things that we all agree should not be on 0:14:16.360 --> 0:14:19.960 that platform, things like death threat and rape threats, I 0:14:20.000 --> 0:14:22.280 think they do a much better job than many of 0:14:22.320 --> 0:14:25.640 their competitors. They certainly do better than Facebook and read it, 0:14:26.040 --> 0:14:29.160 but they've never really gotten the public credit. I feel 0:14:29.200 --> 0:14:31.920 that they deserved for that. I think that being more 0:14:31.920 --> 0:14:35.000 open with that would definitely help it. I would say 0:14:35.000 --> 0:14:38.000 in my own experience as a user, Twitter's moderation has 0:14:38.000 --> 0:14:40.560 gotten better, at least from my perspective and the tweets 0:14:40.560 --> 0:14:45.000 that I personally see. You know, I think the folks 0:14:45.000 --> 0:14:48.240 who are really excited about Elon's vision seem to think 0:14:48.280 --> 0:14:51.760 that Twitter has made a lot of political decisions over 0:14:51.800 --> 0:14:55.600 the last several years. Even even Jack himself says, you know, 0:14:55.720 --> 0:14:59.400 he generally isn't a fan of band banning someone, and 0:14:59.440 --> 0:15:04.920 Twitter is the platform that banned President Trump permanently. Do 0:15:04.960 --> 0:15:07.840 you think the decisions that Twitter has made are political 0:15:07.920 --> 0:15:11.960 or were politicized? You know, when I come on your show, 0:15:12.000 --> 0:15:15.760 I try not to make things partisan. But since you asked, 0:15:15.800 --> 0:15:19.560 I'll tell you my honest impression. In gamer Gate, I 0:15:19.680 --> 0:15:25.360 felt that these policies were the all right versus normal people. Right, 0:15:25.600 --> 0:15:28.800 it was the trolls versus just professionals trying to get 0:15:28.840 --> 0:15:34.960 their job done. I think unfortunately, since we have seen 0:15:36.080 --> 0:15:40.320 these issues become partisan, as some people are kind of 0:15:41.440 --> 0:15:45.120 becoming their worst selves online, so I think unfortunately this 0:15:45.200 --> 0:15:48.720 has become another left versus right screaming match. I can't 0:15:48.720 --> 0:15:51.920 think of any problem in America that's gotten better on 0:15:52.040 --> 0:15:54.960 its become a partisan screaming match rather than a problem 0:15:55.040 --> 0:16:01.840 to solve. Brianna Wu Rebellion Pack executive director, UM, longtime 0:16:01.880 --> 0:16:14.280 crusader for better moderation policies. Thank you Apple warning it 0:16:14.320 --> 0:16:17.520 could lose billions this quarter due to supply shortages, specifically 0:16:17.600 --> 0:16:21.480 tied to China and it's strict lockdown policy. I'm joined 0:16:21.480 --> 0:16:24.000 now by Bloomberg's Mark German, who of course covers all 0:16:24.040 --> 0:16:27.720 things Apple for us. So Mark, just exactly how bad 0:16:27.760 --> 0:16:31.120 did Apple say these supply chain issues are going to 0:16:31.200 --> 0:16:35.960 get and is it all because of COVID in China? Well? 0:16:36.000 --> 0:16:39.080 Pretty bad, right, They're guiding between four billion and eight billion. 0:16:39.080 --> 0:16:41.320 And if you listen to the call, it seemed like 0:16:41.360 --> 0:16:43.680 Tim Cook and look at my Austry the CFO, they 0:16:43.720 --> 0:16:46.520 really weren't sure how big of an impact it really 0:16:46.520 --> 0:16:49.040 would be, right, That's why they gave that big four 0:16:49.080 --> 0:16:51.680 to eight billion range. Now. They've been giving these ranges 0:16:51.680 --> 0:16:54.080 of supply chain impact now for a few quarters, but 0:16:54.240 --> 0:16:57.280 this up to eight billion dollar marker, that's the biggest one. 0:16:57.280 --> 0:17:00.080 Now analysts still think that Apple could beat in terms 0:17:00.080 --> 0:17:03.680 of year over year, right, But we'll see how ultimately 0:17:03.720 --> 0:17:06.720 Apple shakes out. I think it's a combination of the 0:17:06.760 --> 0:17:10.000 supply chain in China, which definitely has a long way 0:17:10.040 --> 0:17:13.000 to go in terms of the overall strategy final assembly. 0:17:13.040 --> 0:17:16.440 There's obviously a bottleneck in recent years. I'm sure we'll 0:17:16.440 --> 0:17:19.199 get more into that. I also think it has to 0:17:19.240 --> 0:17:23.080 do with global economic conditions, the war Ukraine, inflation, people 0:17:23.080 --> 0:17:25.600 trying to hold onto their money, and also in terms 0:17:25.600 --> 0:17:28.280 of you know, products in some sense, right, like people 0:17:28.320 --> 0:17:32.000 are anticipating big iPhone, fourteen, big iPad and Apple Watch 0:17:32.080 --> 0:17:34.800 changes later in the year, as Apple always does, so 0:17:34.840 --> 0:17:37.240 people could be holding onto that too as well. Q 0:17:37.480 --> 0:17:41.239 three is traditionally one of Apple's more soft quarters. How 0:17:41.280 --> 0:17:43.240 do you think investors are going to handle this given that, 0:17:43.320 --> 0:17:46.359 you know, Apple's learnings generally were pretty good if you 0:17:46.400 --> 0:17:50.040 look at how dismally bad the results have been from 0:17:50.080 --> 0:17:53.720 other tech companies like Amazon. Yeah, I think investors are 0:17:53.720 --> 0:17:56.280 probably going to wait to really, you know, make their 0:17:56.320 --> 0:17:59.840 long term decisions on Apple until the Q three results, right. 0:17:59.880 --> 0:18:01.639 I think they want to see how things shake out. 0:18:01.920 --> 0:18:04.200 You know, Tim Cook and Luca were they were vague 0:18:04.320 --> 0:18:06.240 enough to indicate, you know what, maybe it won't be 0:18:06.280 --> 0:18:08.959 eight billion, maybe less than four billion, Right, That's why 0:18:09.000 --> 0:18:11.080 they give that being ranged. They didn't really seem sure. 0:18:11.400 --> 0:18:13.480 So if Apple is not entirely sure, I'm not sure 0:18:13.480 --> 0:18:16.159 investors and analysts can be entirely sure too. So I 0:18:16.160 --> 0:18:18.199 think they're gonna wait until late July to see how 0:18:18.240 --> 0:18:20.760 things really shake out. Obviously, there is a lot of 0:18:20.760 --> 0:18:23.520 reason to be optimistic about Apple, but an eight billion 0:18:23.560 --> 0:18:27.000 dollar hit yet again on the supply chain indicates that 0:18:27.040 --> 0:18:29.119 Apple really needs to be making some tweaks to that 0:18:29.160 --> 0:18:32.439 overall strategy. There and Tim Cook, the architect of the 0:18:32.440 --> 0:18:35.320 Apple supply chain over the last twenty years and change, 0:18:35.640 --> 0:18:39.080 he was again defensive about the supply chain strategy. And 0:18:39.119 --> 0:18:41.160 so we'll see, you know, if Apple does make those 0:18:41.240 --> 0:18:44.200 changes that they clearly need to make, And what are 0:18:44.240 --> 0:18:47.520 the products that you are most excited about coming year 0:18:47.760 --> 0:18:51.879 September quickly, Yeah, I'm particularly excited about the Apple Watch, right. 0:18:51.920 --> 0:18:53.840 I think there's gonna be three new models this year, 0:18:54.080 --> 0:18:57.200 including a new ruggedized model maybe with some satellite connectivity 0:18:57.200 --> 0:18:59.880 features so that will be pretty nifty, and new iPad 0:19:00.000 --> 0:19:02.560 pro and also the a R headset at some point. 0:19:03.320 --> 0:19:06.439 All right, Mark German, who of course covers Apple for US, 0:19:06.440 --> 0:19:08.480 will be on the lookout for all of those things. 0:19:08.560 --> 0:19:10.560 And now we're about a minute and a half to 0:19:10.760 --> 0:19:15.320 launch of that SpaceX Falcon nine rocket carrying fifty three 0:19:15.359 --> 0:19:18.440 Starlink satellites. We're looking at a live look there of 0:19:19.200 --> 0:19:25.080 Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida taking off as 0:19:25.160 --> 0:19:31.800 planned at this point at five twenty seven pm Eastern time. 0:19:31.840 --> 0:19:34.919 I want to bring in Bloomberg's Justin Bachman, who covers 0:19:34.920 --> 0:19:38.159 the space industry for us. This would be a history 0:19:38.200 --> 0:19:41.040 making mission, justin correct, and that this would be the 0:19:41.080 --> 0:19:46.160 fastest turnaround time for a refurbished rocket ever. That's true. Yeah, 0:19:46.240 --> 0:19:49.800 they have shaved their previous record of twenty seven days 0:19:49.800 --> 0:19:52.040 down in twenty one days. So it is a record. 0:19:52.040 --> 0:19:55.560 When you put it like that, it sounds pretty well, um, 0:19:55.600 --> 0:19:57.520 you know, what's curious is we don't know what their 0:19:57.840 --> 0:20:01.719 what their target is. It's it's interesting to see if 0:20:02.560 --> 0:20:04.960 you know, this becomes more of a two week or 0:20:05.000 --> 0:20:08.480 even a one week turnaround. Um for when they you know, 0:20:08.560 --> 0:20:11.160 land these rockets and they're ready to fly them again. Um, 0:20:11.200 --> 0:20:13.040 and I think they're learning. It's it's one of those 0:20:13.080 --> 0:20:16.800 open questions. How many times can I falcondine fly? And 0:20:17.119 --> 0:20:20.159 how quickly can you can you get the refurbishment? How 0:20:20.240 --> 0:20:22.199 much do you need to do versus what you can? 0:20:23.840 --> 0:20:28.840 Justin here we go five seconds to go two one 0:20:29.320 --> 0:20:44.240 pigniction on sorry pie vehicles catching count range and when 0:20:44.280 --> 0:21:03.560 D chamber pressure is nominal. Yes, Falcon nine has successfully 0:21:03.640 --> 0:21:07.240 lifted off from Space Launch Complex Party carrying our fifty 0:21:07.320 --> 0:21:11.560 three Sterlink satellites. Now although a liftoff, gravity is pulling 0:21:11.760 --> 0:21:16.160 the vehicle straight right, the rocket is on its way 0:21:16.640 --> 0:21:20.359 twenty seven days after its last trip. This is the 0:21:20.520 --> 0:21:26.360 sixth flight ever for this particular rocket, now carrying fifty 0:21:26.480 --> 0:21:31.879 three satellites. Starlink satellites into orbit. Are Justin Bachman, who 0:21:31.960 --> 0:21:36.000 covers the space industry for US now justin how significant 0:21:36.320 --> 0:21:41.560 is this milestone? I think it's fairly significant because you're 0:21:41.560 --> 0:21:45.160 seeing SpaceX learning. They fly a lot, and they learn 0:21:45.160 --> 0:21:47.399 a lot, and you know, one of the questions that 0:21:47.480 --> 0:21:49.879 the company has got to be, what is what is 0:21:49.920 --> 0:21:52.560 the minimal amount that's required to have a safe flight 0:21:52.800 --> 0:21:56.000 for not only our payloads but for customer payloads. UH. 0:21:56.160 --> 0:21:59.159 And the faster you can do that, it's you know, 0:21:59.200 --> 0:22:03.320 a lower's cost. And this is really a business more 0:22:03.440 --> 0:22:06.159 than a novelty. And when you make it a business, 0:22:06.200 --> 0:22:08.560 you're always looking to lower costs and this is an 0:22:08.560 --> 0:22:10.760 important part of it. How quickly can you refurbish it? 0:22:10.840 --> 0:22:13.920 What's the minimum how quickly can you fly? Um? And 0:22:14.040 --> 0:22:15.840 today they're you know, they're taking out pay load that's 0:22:15.840 --> 0:22:18.680 going to contribute to their their constellation and that's more money. 0:22:18.760 --> 0:22:21.200 So it's it's a business that works. And I think 0:22:21.240 --> 0:22:23.600 we're seeing a lot of the on the cost side 0:22:23.760 --> 0:22:28.240 with with these kind of refurbishments. So we're about thirty 0:22:28.320 --> 0:22:33.240 seconds away from the first stage main engine getting cut 0:22:33.280 --> 0:22:36.199