WEBVTT - Private Markets' Appetite for Tech and Tough Big Tech Layoffs in Europe

0:00:01.320 --> 0:00:04.720
<v Speaker 1>From the heart of where Innovation, money and power Collie

0:00:04.880 --> 0:00:09.600
<v Speaker 1>in Silicon Valley, NBR. This is Bloomberg Technology with Caroline

0:00:09.680 --> 0:00:26.720
<v Speaker 1>Hyde and Ed Ludlow. I'm Caroline Hyde of Bloomberg's World

0:00:26.760 --> 0:00:29.680
<v Speaker 1>headquarters in New York, and I'med Ludlow in San Francisco.

0:00:29.760 --> 0:00:32.040
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloomberg Technology. Coming up, we'll get a look

0:00:32.040 --> 0:00:36.159
<v Speaker 1>at investing in private versus public markets. Karen Fronsky's with us,

0:00:36.240 --> 0:00:39.840
<v Speaker 1>head of private Equity Investing over at Fidelity, and after

0:00:39.880 --> 0:00:42.520
<v Speaker 1>planning the largest round of layoffs in big tech history,

0:00:42.560 --> 0:00:45.280
<v Speaker 1>Amazon and Google are now learning how difficult it is

0:00:45.440 --> 0:00:48.120
<v Speaker 1>to card jobs in Europe. We'll tell you why and

0:00:48.200 --> 0:00:50.360
<v Speaker 1>how do you get your news We'll speak to the

0:00:50.400 --> 0:00:53.840
<v Speaker 1>CEO of Substack as a newsletter publisher. There's a continuous

0:00:53.880 --> 0:00:57.520
<v Speaker 1>growth in a tough market for fundraising. But first let's

0:00:57.520 --> 0:01:00.480
<v Speaker 1>talk about money markets in the public to Maine. We're

0:01:00.480 --> 0:01:02.720
<v Speaker 1>looking at the NASDAK currently up four ten percent. It

0:01:02.720 --> 0:01:04.880
<v Speaker 1>was underwater earlier. We're seeing a bit of a mood

0:01:04.880 --> 0:01:06.679
<v Speaker 1>shift as we entered towards the latter half of the

0:01:06.680 --> 0:01:09.920
<v Speaker 1>trading day. Remember shortened trading week for many. In terms

0:01:09.959 --> 0:01:12.720
<v Speaker 1>of the equity markets, the FX markets remain open tomorrow

0:01:12.720 --> 0:01:14.240
<v Speaker 1>on what is known as Good Friday, we take a

0:01:14.319 --> 0:01:16.640
<v Speaker 1>day off. We see the NASDAK push higher as people

0:01:16.640 --> 0:01:18.360
<v Speaker 1>just start to get to grips of where the job's

0:01:18.400 --> 0:01:20.039
<v Speaker 1>data is going to be. I'm also looking at what's

0:01:20.040 --> 0:01:22.160
<v Speaker 1>happening with the SOX currently up just about a tenth

0:01:22.200 --> 0:01:24.040
<v Speaker 1>of a percent at the moment, ship markets managing to

0:01:24.800 --> 0:01:27.000
<v Speaker 1>come away from some of their lows yesterday, the ten

0:01:27.080 --> 0:01:29.240
<v Speaker 1>year yield, though still lower, seventh straight day that we're

0:01:29.240 --> 0:01:31.640
<v Speaker 1>seeing broncos falling for the ten year debt. Let's look

0:01:31.640 --> 0:01:33.360
<v Speaker 1>at on let's look of what's happening in crypto markets,

0:01:33.400 --> 0:01:36.039
<v Speaker 1>because we're basically still holding near that all important twenty

0:01:36.080 --> 0:01:38.120
<v Speaker 1>eight thousand a level end. We just don't seem to

0:01:38.120 --> 0:01:40.440
<v Speaker 1>be able to break through it as the dollar waivers

0:01:40.480 --> 0:01:42.000
<v Speaker 1>on the day as we look towards that all important

0:01:42.080 --> 0:01:44.560
<v Speaker 1>jobs data tomorrow. But dig in on the micro moves

0:01:44.600 --> 0:01:47.200
<v Speaker 1>at the moment. Yeah, two moves that caught my eye.

0:01:47.240 --> 0:01:49.920
<v Speaker 1>Alphabet parent company Google up two and a half percent.

0:01:50.000 --> 0:01:52.840
<v Speaker 1>The Wall Street Journal reporting that Google is going to

0:01:52.880 --> 0:01:57.120
<v Speaker 1>implement an integrate generative AI and conversational functionality into search.

0:01:57.200 --> 0:01:59.279
<v Speaker 1>I think we thought that was coming, but the market.

0:01:59.360 --> 0:02:01.160
<v Speaker 1>Moving on that, and Ali Barber up three and a

0:02:01.200 --> 0:02:03.840
<v Speaker 1>half percent. A report out of China overnight that Ali

0:02:03.920 --> 0:02:08.880
<v Speaker 1>Barber itself is working on a chat GPT style generative

0:02:08.919 --> 0:02:12.160
<v Speaker 1>AI tool. Also had really key data in the private markets,

0:02:12.160 --> 0:02:15.280
<v Speaker 1>this coming from Pitchbook and the Venture Capital Association that

0:02:15.400 --> 0:02:18.120
<v Speaker 1>in the first quarter of this year thirty seven billion

0:02:18.160 --> 0:02:21.280
<v Speaker 1>dollars worth of venture back deals. But that's the lowest

0:02:21.400 --> 0:02:25.600
<v Speaker 1>level going back thirteen quarters. I think that's fascinating, Caroline.

0:02:25.639 --> 0:02:29.760
<v Speaker 1>It's backward looking data, right, but you compare where we

0:02:29.800 --> 0:02:32.120
<v Speaker 1>are in the private markets right now with how then

0:02:32.120 --> 0:02:34.600
<v Speaker 1>as that one hundred has started this year the public markets,

0:02:34.639 --> 0:02:36.800
<v Speaker 1>And then we think about the performance of some of

0:02:36.800 --> 0:02:40.239
<v Speaker 1>those funds like Tiger, who are so sort of focused

0:02:40.320 --> 0:02:42.919
<v Speaker 1>right now on the tech sector and it's helping them. Finally,

0:02:43.000 --> 0:02:44.880
<v Speaker 1>I mean, when we're in a ball market for the

0:02:45.000 --> 0:02:47.160
<v Speaker 1>NATZAC one hundred, it's going to help a certain number

0:02:47.160 --> 0:02:49.440
<v Speaker 1>of companies that are committed to the tech space. And

0:02:49.520 --> 0:02:52.440
<v Speaker 1>let's talk about just that, Ed Chase Coleman, Tiger Global

0:02:52.560 --> 0:02:54.919
<v Speaker 1>staging that come back in the first quarter is well,

0:02:54.960 --> 0:02:56.960
<v Speaker 1>there has been this rallyan tech shares. Let's helped the

0:02:57.000 --> 0:03:00.840
<v Speaker 1>firm recoup from last year's pretty mega record for more,

0:03:00.919 --> 0:03:04.920
<v Speaker 1>Let's bring in Hemma Harmer set the scene, because what

0:03:05.120 --> 0:03:07.639
<v Speaker 1>they started off twenty twenty three with half the amount

0:03:07.639 --> 0:03:09.680
<v Speaker 1>of money that they did in twenty twenty one. Yes,

0:03:09.720 --> 0:03:11.839
<v Speaker 1>it's been a very difficult year for them. Last year

0:03:11.880 --> 0:03:15.000
<v Speaker 1>they assets fell a ton They lost fifty six percent

0:03:15.040 --> 0:03:17.160
<v Speaker 1>in their hedge funds. Last year. The long only was

0:03:17.200 --> 0:03:19.760
<v Speaker 1>even worse. So their focus right now for them is

0:03:20.000 --> 0:03:22.920
<v Speaker 1>how do they make back investor losses? And so the

0:03:22.960 --> 0:03:24.880
<v Speaker 1>gain that we've seen in the first quarter up about

0:03:24.919 --> 0:03:27.840
<v Speaker 1>seven percent, you know, not bad. They do have a

0:03:27.880 --> 0:03:30.160
<v Speaker 1>ways to go, but I think investors are happy with

0:03:30.400 --> 0:03:34.040
<v Speaker 1>any recovery and any gain. They will have to make

0:03:34.080 --> 0:03:35.880
<v Speaker 1>more than one hundred percent to gain in order to

0:03:35.920 --> 0:03:39.160
<v Speaker 1>make investors hold again. And Hemma, what's their track record

0:03:39.200 --> 0:03:41.120
<v Speaker 1>on that? Right? Tiger's been in this game a long time.

0:03:41.120 --> 0:03:43.760
<v Speaker 1>They've had bad years before. Will they come back? How

0:03:43.760 --> 0:03:45.520
<v Speaker 1>long is it going to take them? Yeah, So in

0:03:45.560 --> 0:03:47.000
<v Speaker 1>the past, if we look at you know, one of

0:03:47.000 --> 0:03:49.240
<v Speaker 1>their worst years, they were down twenty six percent back

0:03:49.280 --> 0:03:51.440
<v Speaker 1>in two thousand and eight. It took them about three

0:03:51.520 --> 0:03:54.240
<v Speaker 1>years before they were able to make investors hole again.

0:03:54.560 --> 0:03:57.320
<v Speaker 1>And then about in twenty sixteen, they were down again

0:03:57.360 --> 0:03:59.520
<v Speaker 1>and they took them just a year to make investors whole.

0:03:59.600 --> 0:04:01.520
<v Speaker 1>So that's pretty good if you look at, you know,

0:04:01.640 --> 0:04:04.560
<v Speaker 1>being able to rebound, in being able to recoup those losses.

0:04:04.840 --> 0:04:07.120
<v Speaker 1>I think the question is, now, you know, the fifty

0:04:07.160 --> 0:04:09.360
<v Speaker 1>six percent loss from last year is far worse than

0:04:09.440 --> 0:04:12.440
<v Speaker 1>both of those two previous years, So how long will

0:04:12.440 --> 0:04:16.320
<v Speaker 1>it take for them to do that again? And talk

0:04:16.360 --> 0:04:18.599
<v Speaker 1>to us About Chase Coleman himself, I mean, he doesn't

0:04:18.600 --> 0:04:21.760
<v Speaker 1>speak off of publicly, does very little media, but he

0:04:22.000 --> 0:04:23.960
<v Speaker 1>was hosting an event and it seems as though he

0:04:24.000 --> 0:04:26.880
<v Speaker 1>was pretty bullish still on buying big tech right now. Yes,

0:04:27.000 --> 0:04:28.960
<v Speaker 1>So he was speaking at a luncheon for the Boys

0:04:29.000 --> 0:04:32.039
<v Speaker 1>Club in New York and he was talking about he

0:04:32.080 --> 0:04:34.680
<v Speaker 1>was asked about where he sees opportunity right now, and

0:04:34.760 --> 0:04:37.440
<v Speaker 1>he says that tech, you know, has been in something

0:04:37.440 --> 0:04:40.839
<v Speaker 1>of a recession lately, but it looks interesting again that

0:04:41.960 --> 0:04:45.440
<v Speaker 1>companies are using and incorporating more technology into their businesses,

0:04:45.800 --> 0:04:49.240
<v Speaker 1>like Amazon, you know, using chat, GPT, and that he

0:04:49.279 --> 0:04:52.200
<v Speaker 1>thinks he's bullish on fangs and would suggest buying fangs.

0:04:52.760 --> 0:04:56.239
<v Speaker 1>So not unsurprising for a tech focus firms big Meta

0:04:56.320 --> 0:05:00.320
<v Speaker 1>for example Meta, but interesting to see, you know how

0:05:00.360 --> 0:05:02.840
<v Speaker 1>he sees the vote ahead for the space that he

0:05:02.839 --> 0:05:06.440
<v Speaker 1>focuses on. All right, Bloomberg's hem a Palmer, thank you

0:05:06.480 --> 0:05:08.120
<v Speaker 1>with that reporting. We should point out as well that

0:05:08.160 --> 0:05:11.400
<v Speaker 1>Tiger Global declined to comment on the story. Let's turn

0:05:11.440 --> 0:05:14.840
<v Speaker 1>out to investing in private markets the difference of what's

0:05:14.839 --> 0:05:18.400
<v Speaker 1>going on in that space. With Karen Fronski, Fidelity Investments,

0:05:18.440 --> 0:05:21.479
<v Speaker 1>head of Global Private Equity Investment, we brought you the

0:05:21.560 --> 0:05:24.880
<v Speaker 1>data from what the VC landscape looks in the first

0:05:24.880 --> 0:05:27.159
<v Speaker 1>three months three months of this year. You look at

0:05:27.200 --> 0:05:29.640
<v Speaker 1>what's happening with the naz at one hundred and private markets.

0:05:30.360 --> 0:05:32.840
<v Speaker 1>Where's your focus right now? What's your read on the

0:05:32.839 --> 0:05:36.760
<v Speaker 1>macro picture? Well, we actually see the macro picture as

0:05:36.760 --> 0:05:40.800
<v Speaker 1>being something really exciting and opportunistic for Fidelity. I'll echo

0:05:40.880 --> 0:05:42.880
<v Speaker 1>some of what it sounds like Chase Common was saying,

0:05:42.920 --> 0:05:46.240
<v Speaker 1>which is now is a time for investors to really

0:05:46.240 --> 0:05:50.520
<v Speaker 1>be opportunistic and find great investment opportunities. The reality is

0:05:50.640 --> 0:05:54.920
<v Speaker 1>there are fourteen hundred unicorns globally worth about five trillion dollars.

0:05:55.320 --> 0:05:58.960
<v Speaker 1>There's a lot of great businesses out there for investors

0:05:58.960 --> 0:06:02.400
<v Speaker 1>to come in and asked, and unlike twenty twenty one,

0:06:02.440 --> 0:06:06.400
<v Speaker 1>we're starting to see a real rationalization in valuations. Some

0:06:06.480 --> 0:06:09.080
<v Speaker 1>would argue there's still some room to go there, but

0:06:09.200 --> 0:06:11.039
<v Speaker 1>when you look at the peak of the market in

0:06:11.080 --> 0:06:14.600
<v Speaker 1>twenty twenty one, private market valuations were three and a

0:06:14.680 --> 0:06:17.960
<v Speaker 1>half times more expensive than the Nasdaq on average, and

0:06:18.120 --> 0:06:21.520
<v Speaker 1>you saw some companies raised and one hundred times arr

0:06:21.680 --> 0:06:25.360
<v Speaker 1>or even higher than that. And valuations have really rationalized,

0:06:25.400 --> 0:06:28.480
<v Speaker 1>so great businesses, valuations that are making a lot more sense,

0:06:28.800 --> 0:06:32.240
<v Speaker 1>and we see a lot of opportunity. Caroline, I think

0:06:32.240 --> 0:06:33.799
<v Speaker 1>you and I are trying to get a real global

0:06:33.839 --> 0:06:36.760
<v Speaker 1>perspective as well, not just which sectors are sort of

0:06:36.800 --> 0:06:40.520
<v Speaker 1>most interesting right now, but also geographically debates about China,

0:06:40.600 --> 0:06:42.920
<v Speaker 1>the Middle East where there are opportunities right. Yeah, I

0:06:42.960 --> 0:06:45.600
<v Speaker 1>think that's exactly right, and perhaps one that's garnering a

0:06:45.600 --> 0:06:48.920
<v Speaker 1>little bit of what should we say emotion on public

0:06:48.960 --> 0:06:51.680
<v Speaker 1>forums such as Twitter. Karen, I'm interested in your perspective

0:06:51.720 --> 0:06:54.040
<v Speaker 1>of global allocation of money right now. Where are the

0:06:54.120 --> 0:06:57.839
<v Speaker 1>valuations in the best? Yeah, it's a great question. The

0:06:57.920 --> 0:07:01.799
<v Speaker 1>reality is, you know, I think there are great opportunities globally,

0:07:01.800 --> 0:07:04.560
<v Speaker 1>and it doesn't always come down to just valuation. Well,

0:07:04.560 --> 0:07:06.960
<v Speaker 1>a lot of what we're really focused on is what's

0:07:07.000 --> 0:07:10.240
<v Speaker 1>the TAM, what's the total addressable market for a business

0:07:10.720 --> 0:07:13.320
<v Speaker 1>and what type of problem is that business solving and

0:07:13.400 --> 0:07:18.080
<v Speaker 1>do they have a real durable competitive moat that's durable

0:07:18.200 --> 0:07:20.120
<v Speaker 1>over time, And of course we want to make sure

0:07:20.160 --> 0:07:23.560
<v Speaker 1>the valuation is right and appropriate for that business. But

0:07:23.640 --> 0:07:27.720
<v Speaker 1>when we look geographically, we see really large addressable markets

0:07:27.960 --> 0:07:30.480
<v Speaker 1>in regions like India for example, where we've made some

0:07:30.520 --> 0:07:33.920
<v Speaker 1>private investments for the last couple of years. China obviously

0:07:34.640 --> 0:07:38.640
<v Speaker 1>we obviously take into account the geopolitical background of China

0:07:38.720 --> 0:07:41.320
<v Speaker 1>as well, but Europe as well. So we are a

0:07:41.320 --> 0:07:44.680
<v Speaker 1>global investor, both publicly but also privately, and those are

0:07:44.680 --> 0:07:46.840
<v Speaker 1>a couple of the regions that we're most excited about.

0:07:46.840 --> 0:07:50.560
<v Speaker 1>It comes down to the addressable markets that account in China.

0:07:50.680 --> 0:07:53.880
<v Speaker 1>Because you say you take into consideration geopolitics, how is

0:07:53.880 --> 0:07:57.440
<v Speaker 1>it affecting the way in which you allocate. Yeah, I

0:07:57.440 --> 0:08:02.040
<v Speaker 1>mean the reality is, you know risk return, right, and

0:08:02.120 --> 0:08:05.600
<v Speaker 1>we can't always prognosticate what governments are going to do,

0:08:05.760 --> 0:08:09.480
<v Speaker 1>especially governments internationally, and so we just take a little

0:08:09.480 --> 0:08:12.640
<v Speaker 1>bit more of a risk premium when thinking about allocating

0:08:12.880 --> 0:08:14.760
<v Speaker 1>to regions where there might be a little bit more

0:08:14.800 --> 0:08:17.720
<v Speaker 1>geopolitical risk that we can't otherwise account for, and ED

0:08:17.720 --> 0:08:19.520
<v Speaker 1>we're going to have that conversation in depth a little

0:08:19.520 --> 0:08:22.360
<v Speaker 1>bit later with a QVC. But ED, what's also interesting

0:08:22.360 --> 0:08:24.600
<v Speaker 1>in anything we're always talking about is, Okay, we talk

0:08:24.600 --> 0:08:27.400
<v Speaker 1>about countries, what about sectors? And boy do we talk

0:08:27.440 --> 0:08:30.240
<v Speaker 1>about AI a lot right now? Yeah. I think what's

0:08:30.280 --> 0:08:33.440
<v Speaker 1>interesting for me, Karen in particular, is that lots of

0:08:33.440 --> 0:08:37.720
<v Speaker 1>the most exciting companies are private, and they're staying private

0:08:37.760 --> 0:08:40.080
<v Speaker 1>for longer. I think I'm right in saying that you

0:08:40.200 --> 0:08:43.040
<v Speaker 1>invested in SpaceX for the first time back in twenty fifteen.

0:08:43.280 --> 0:08:45.360
<v Speaker 1>That was a long time ago. Now, how do you

0:08:45.360 --> 0:08:50.720
<v Speaker 1>play that field where the most attractive companies are staying private? Well, listen,

0:08:50.960 --> 0:08:54.320
<v Speaker 1>you know the beauty of our model at Fidelity is

0:08:54.400 --> 0:08:57.840
<v Speaker 1>we can invest privately, we can obviously invest publicly, that's

0:08:57.880 --> 0:09:01.240
<v Speaker 1>clearly in our DNA, and we can be opportunistic and

0:09:01.320 --> 0:09:05.040
<v Speaker 1>investing in just the absolute best companies out there. I

0:09:05.080 --> 0:09:07.360
<v Speaker 1>think it's not any secret that we all think the

0:09:07.400 --> 0:09:09.680
<v Speaker 1>ipel market has been has been shut, has been frozen

0:09:09.720 --> 0:09:12.120
<v Speaker 1>shut for over a year at this point in time.

0:09:12.720 --> 0:09:16.560
<v Speaker 1>And the private markets have such a strong depth at

0:09:16.559 --> 0:09:19.880
<v Speaker 1>this point in time, not only in capital but also

0:09:20.040 --> 0:09:23.640
<v Speaker 1>quality of investors. That the beauty is that all of

0:09:23.640 --> 0:09:26.440
<v Speaker 1>these companies can go public when the timing is really

0:09:26.520 --> 0:09:29.320
<v Speaker 1>right and when the stars align, as opposed to being

0:09:29.360 --> 0:09:32.200
<v Speaker 1>forced to go public. The other reason why we do

0:09:32.280 --> 0:09:35.240
<v Speaker 1>this at Fidelity is, as you mentioned, you know about

0:09:36.320 --> 0:09:37.960
<v Speaker 1>the number of public companies that are out there have

0:09:38.040 --> 0:09:41.040
<v Speaker 1>basically halved in the last twenty five years, and there

0:09:41.040 --> 0:09:43.520
<v Speaker 1>are a lot of companies that only exist privately. We

0:09:43.559 --> 0:09:46.480
<v Speaker 1>don't have access to them publicly, and so it's really

0:09:46.520 --> 0:09:50.480
<v Speaker 1>strategically important for us to start investing well ahead of

0:09:50.480 --> 0:09:53.520
<v Speaker 1>their public event. You've had a lot of great exits,

0:09:53.840 --> 0:09:57.920
<v Speaker 1>right I think Facebook, Uber, but less focus on SpaceX.

0:09:59.200 --> 0:10:01.679
<v Speaker 1>How do you stay focused on the opportunity for them

0:10:01.720 --> 0:10:04.319
<v Speaker 1>long term? Do you come back in and do later

0:10:04.440 --> 0:10:07.840
<v Speaker 1>rounds for fear of missing out? Do you worry about

0:10:07.880 --> 0:10:10.160
<v Speaker 1>the partners that are touted to be going into a

0:10:10.240 --> 0:10:13.199
<v Speaker 1>name by SpaceX? Saudi is a name that's been discussed.

0:10:13.280 --> 0:10:15.680
<v Speaker 1>It's a really interesting mindset you have to go into

0:10:15.720 --> 0:10:19.679
<v Speaker 1>in an investment like that. Yeah, you know, listen, SpaceX

0:10:19.679 --> 0:10:23.679
<v Speaker 1>has continued to execute extremely well when we look at

0:10:23.679 --> 0:10:28.480
<v Speaker 1>their Starlink constellation that's up there right now, the focus

0:10:28.520 --> 0:10:32.280
<v Speaker 1>on Starship coming out hopefully soon. It's a company that's

0:10:32.320 --> 0:10:38.920
<v Speaker 1>executed incredibly well. And no, we never invest for fear

0:10:38.960 --> 0:10:41.760
<v Speaker 1>of missing out. We invest when we continue to think

0:10:41.800 --> 0:10:45.439
<v Speaker 1>there's value for our shareholders in investing more. And those

0:10:45.480 --> 0:10:47.440
<v Speaker 1>are the underlying core principles that we try to stick to.

0:10:47.920 --> 0:10:50.079
<v Speaker 1>We know that there are other areas than space that

0:10:50.120 --> 0:10:53.920
<v Speaker 1>you're already interested in data, social, climate, tech, but also

0:10:53.960 --> 0:10:57.360
<v Speaker 1>of course AI machine learning. That's what everyone is seeming

0:10:57.360 --> 0:11:00.400
<v Speaker 1>to be excited about. But where in the apple location

0:11:00.440 --> 0:11:02.480
<v Speaker 1>of AI are you excited about? Have you come to

0:11:02.520 --> 0:11:04.440
<v Speaker 1>grips with so why the money is going to be made?

0:11:05.520 --> 0:11:07.960
<v Speaker 1>It's a great question. We are still doing a lot

0:11:08.000 --> 0:11:11.960
<v Speaker 1>of work on that question specifically. You know, AI has

0:11:12.000 --> 0:11:15.360
<v Speaker 1>obviously been around for decades, but needless to say, open

0:11:15.400 --> 0:11:17.839
<v Speaker 1>AI and chat GPT have brought it to the forefront

0:11:18.200 --> 0:11:21.439
<v Speaker 1>and it certainly captured the imaginations and the excitement of

0:11:21.480 --> 0:11:23.920
<v Speaker 1>all of us. And that's a question that we're spending

0:11:23.920 --> 0:11:26.040
<v Speaker 1>a lot of time and doing a lot of research on,

0:11:26.120 --> 0:11:29.040
<v Speaker 1>meeting with a lot of companies to understand where does

0:11:29.080 --> 0:11:31.560
<v Speaker 1>the value accrete. Is it at the app layer, is

0:11:31.559 --> 0:11:33.880
<v Speaker 1>it at the foundational layer, or is it at the

0:11:33.920 --> 0:11:37.400
<v Speaker 1>infrastructure layer, or is it some combination of the three?

0:11:38.080 --> 0:11:40.920
<v Speaker 1>Right You certainly don't have the final answer there yet.

0:11:40.960 --> 0:11:43.440
<v Speaker 1>I don't think many people do. But it's an area

0:11:43.440 --> 0:11:45.040
<v Speaker 1>where we're spending a lot of time and doing a

0:11:45.080 --> 0:11:48.920
<v Speaker 1>lot of research. Karen Quickly twenty twenty two, really hard

0:11:48.960 --> 0:11:51.560
<v Speaker 1>you thought about Chase Coleman Tiger. Did you have to

0:11:51.640 --> 0:11:56.280
<v Speaker 1>change strategy? In reactions twenty twenty two, You know, listen

0:11:56.280 --> 0:11:59.720
<v Speaker 1>to Our strategy has always had core underpinnings of looking

0:11:59.760 --> 0:12:04.080
<v Speaker 1>for or great companies with a large addressable market that

0:12:04.160 --> 0:12:08.199
<v Speaker 1>are disrupting something out there in the market, phenomenal management teams.

0:12:08.559 --> 0:12:12.880
<v Speaker 1>I think what's changed for everybody is the concept of

0:12:12.920 --> 0:12:17.160
<v Speaker 1>growth at any cost, and not just us. Every investor

0:12:17.240 --> 0:12:21.079
<v Speaker 1>is very, very focused on the ROI on every dollar

0:12:21.200 --> 0:12:25.559
<v Speaker 1>spent profitability or a clear and convincing path to profitability

0:12:25.840 --> 0:12:29.000
<v Speaker 1>and really maximizing margins. But our core underlying principles have

0:12:29.080 --> 0:12:31.480
<v Speaker 1>stayed the same throughout. Great to have some time in

0:12:31.480 --> 0:12:43.240
<v Speaker 1>the kour and thank you Karen Fronsky, Fidelity Investments. After

0:12:43.280 --> 0:12:45.959
<v Speaker 1>announcing some of the largest rounds of layoffs in their history.

0:12:46.040 --> 0:12:49.160
<v Speaker 1>US big tech companies now being reminded how difficult it

0:12:49.240 --> 0:12:52.480
<v Speaker 1>is to reduce headcount in Europe, largely due to labor

0:12:52.520 --> 0:12:55.920
<v Speaker 1>laws in countries like France and Germany. Bloomberg, Zaggy Cantrill

0:12:56.040 --> 0:12:58.680
<v Speaker 1>joins US from Germany. You were part of the reporting

0:12:58.720 --> 0:13:03.319
<v Speaker 1>team on this. What it comes down to is labor protections. Right.

0:13:03.400 --> 0:13:06.560
<v Speaker 1>Why are Amazon and Alphabet in particular finding this so

0:13:06.600 --> 0:13:12.000
<v Speaker 1>hard to enact? Exactly? It's incredibly challenging in several European

0:13:12.000 --> 0:13:15.000
<v Speaker 1>countries to do the sort of sweeping layoffs that we've

0:13:15.000 --> 0:13:17.800
<v Speaker 1>seen in Silicon Valley, where we've seen people have to

0:13:17.800 --> 0:13:22.400
<v Speaker 1>pack up their boxes within weeks or months of these announcements.

0:13:22.679 --> 0:13:25.480
<v Speaker 1>That's not the case in Germany, where I said, we're

0:13:25.520 --> 0:13:28.080
<v Speaker 1>in France, and to look at Germany for a second.

0:13:28.080 --> 0:13:31.120
<v Speaker 1>The reason is essentially there needs to be negotiations with

0:13:31.160 --> 0:13:34.960
<v Speaker 1>works councils, with employee representatives from within the company to

0:13:35.160 --> 0:13:39.480
<v Speaker 1>create a negotiation and create a settlement for the amount

0:13:39.520 --> 0:13:42.160
<v Speaker 1>of employees than leaving the extent of the cuts, and

0:13:42.200 --> 0:13:44.840
<v Speaker 1>also what sort of settlement they're likely to get. And

0:13:44.880 --> 0:13:48.520
<v Speaker 1>in France it's perhaps even more stringent than is in Germany,

0:13:48.640 --> 0:13:52.520
<v Speaker 1>and there we're seeing companies like Google offering voluntary departure

0:13:52.520 --> 0:13:57.160
<v Speaker 1>schemes and they're discussing essentially how to get people to

0:13:57.320 --> 0:14:00.199
<v Speaker 1>leave by essentially buying them out of their jobs to

0:14:00.240 --> 0:14:02.120
<v Speaker 1>get really generous, right, can you talk us through some

0:14:02.160 --> 0:14:06.200
<v Speaker 1>of the changes they make to entire senior managers to leave, Yes,

0:14:06.280 --> 0:14:10.800
<v Speaker 1>So essentially there are these discussions about giving senior managers

0:14:10.960 --> 0:14:15.240
<v Speaker 1>very large packages in order to leave the company, which actually, noticeably,

0:14:15.600 --> 0:14:18.040
<v Speaker 1>while not part of the same layoffs package, is also

0:14:18.080 --> 0:14:21.479
<v Speaker 1>something we've heard at Meta with this idea of flattening

0:14:21.480 --> 0:14:24.840
<v Speaker 1>their workforce, and that's something that Matter is proposing across

0:14:24.880 --> 0:14:28.160
<v Speaker 1>the board. But what we're seeing in France is also

0:14:28.240 --> 0:14:30.600
<v Speaker 1>based on an issue in France where it's not so

0:14:30.640 --> 0:14:34.760
<v Speaker 1>easy to just let people go without cause, without them

0:14:34.800 --> 0:14:37.040
<v Speaker 1>doing something that means that they should be fired from

0:14:37.080 --> 0:14:39.800
<v Speaker 1>their job. It's not so simple just to let people

0:14:39.840 --> 0:14:43.560
<v Speaker 1>go from these roles, and so these layols will come

0:14:43.600 --> 0:14:46.080
<v Speaker 1>with a huge price tag for these companies. We've heard

0:14:46.760 --> 0:14:49.960
<v Speaker 1>Alphabet already indicate that these layoffs could cost up to

0:14:50.080 --> 0:14:54.400
<v Speaker 1>two point three billion dollars globally. And while they've said

0:14:54.440 --> 0:14:57.640
<v Speaker 1>that in the US, the Brunt of those costs will

0:14:57.640 --> 0:15:00.280
<v Speaker 1>be felt in Q one. And of course let's remember

0:15:00.280 --> 0:15:03.120
<v Speaker 1>this is all about efficiency and being able to tighten

0:15:03.160 --> 0:15:06.080
<v Speaker 1>the belt. While those class have felt in Q one

0:15:06.200 --> 0:15:08.600
<v Speaker 1>this year in the US, that's not the case with

0:15:08.680 --> 0:15:13.840
<v Speaker 1>places like France and Germany where these negotiations going Aggie.

0:15:13.840 --> 0:15:18.080
<v Speaker 1>Amazon did not comment on the story. Google did and

0:15:18.160 --> 0:15:22.480
<v Speaker 1>they explain to us that in some markets Romania, for example, Greece,

0:15:22.800 --> 0:15:24.800
<v Speaker 1>they won't for now be cutting jobs. This is what

0:15:24.840 --> 0:15:26.760
<v Speaker 1>they had to say. We're showing on the screen right now,

0:15:27.640 --> 0:15:30.200
<v Speaker 1>old school tech structure is what caught my eye. Right

0:15:30.440 --> 0:15:36.160
<v Speaker 1>you have compromises around stock compensation and also bonuses. There

0:15:36.240 --> 0:15:39.320
<v Speaker 1>is some clever workarounds that Google in particular and Amazon

0:15:39.320 --> 0:15:42.680
<v Speaker 1>are trying to do. What are they yes, So essentially

0:15:42.760 --> 0:15:48.040
<v Speaker 1>these companies are looking at finding different ways in which

0:15:48.120 --> 0:15:51.720
<v Speaker 1>to provide for instance, stock options is a good example

0:15:52.240 --> 0:15:56.120
<v Speaker 1>to the departing workers. But also when you look at

0:15:56.160 --> 0:15:59.760
<v Speaker 1>the broader structure around hiring in Europe, this is also

0:15:59.840 --> 0:16:02.880
<v Speaker 1>a conversation around going forward, what it will look like

0:16:03.400 --> 0:16:07.360
<v Speaker 1>to bring more people on board in these companies in

0:16:07.880 --> 0:16:10.440
<v Speaker 1>these regions. And so, as you say, in some in

0:16:10.440 --> 0:16:12.960
<v Speaker 1>some markets they're not they're not laying people off at all.

0:16:13.240 --> 0:16:15.440
<v Speaker 1>That may also be a strategic point that the offices

0:16:15.440 --> 0:16:17.920
<v Speaker 1>aren't actually that big in some of those markets. It's

0:16:17.960 --> 0:16:21.720
<v Speaker 1>also about being able to have enough people on hand

0:16:22.320 --> 0:16:25.400
<v Speaker 1>for dealing with the huge amount of content that is

0:16:25.880 --> 0:16:30.200
<v Speaker 1>in various different languages around Europe. So while going forward,

0:16:30.240 --> 0:16:33.240
<v Speaker 1>there are these question marks over the costs that this

0:16:33.840 --> 0:16:37.000
<v Speaker 1>could bear for these companies. I don't think it really

0:16:37.040 --> 0:16:38.960
<v Speaker 1>means that they're going to be pulling out of these

0:16:39.000 --> 0:16:42.840
<v Speaker 1>markets or when it comes to hiring, they're They're likely

0:16:42.920 --> 0:16:47.320
<v Speaker 1>to still be engaging with these workforces because countries like

0:16:47.560 --> 0:16:52.720
<v Speaker 1>France and Germany are hugely important for Google for instance,

0:16:53.160 --> 0:16:56.040
<v Speaker 1>Thanking Cantra, thanks so much staying late with us. We

0:16:56.080 --> 0:16:59.400
<v Speaker 1>appreciate it. Meanwhile, let's turn to a stop. We're watching

0:16:59.520 --> 0:17:02.240
<v Speaker 1>Sam heading for as low as profit, which there's a

0:17:02.240 --> 0:17:04.800
<v Speaker 1>global financial crisis, if not longer, it was due to

0:17:04.800 --> 0:17:07.760
<v Speaker 1>a sharp slowdown in Technomold. Of course, it's triggering losses

0:17:07.760 --> 0:17:11.560
<v Speaker 1>in its semiconductor division. Now, South Korean chipmaker reporting preliminary

0:17:11.800 --> 0:17:15.360
<v Speaker 1>results for the March quarter tomorrow. It's expected to say

0:17:15.400 --> 0:17:19.160
<v Speaker 1>operating profit pronominated some ninety percent. Will continue to follow

0:17:19.200 --> 0:17:22.159
<v Speaker 1>it from new York from San Francisco. This is Willimberger.

0:17:35.640 --> 0:17:38.159
<v Speaker 1>All right, time for talking tech. First up Binance. In

0:17:38.160 --> 0:17:42.680
<v Speaker 1>the CFTC lawsuit against Binance over sham compliance with US

0:17:42.720 --> 0:17:46.920
<v Speaker 1>Derivatives regulations, three unidentified training firms have been cited as

0:17:47.000 --> 0:17:50.200
<v Speaker 1>VIP clients. They've now been named Jane Street Group, Tower

0:17:50.280 --> 0:17:53.840
<v Speaker 1>Research Capital, and Raddick's Trading. That's according to sources. The

0:17:54.000 --> 0:17:57.560
<v Speaker 1>three US POMP firms were cited anonymously by the CFTC

0:17:57.760 --> 0:18:01.280
<v Speaker 1>in its lawsuit is examples of how US clients accessed

0:18:01.520 --> 0:18:06.480
<v Speaker 1>the platform. An elicit online marketplace where users sold stolen passwords,

0:18:06.520 --> 0:18:09.920
<v Speaker 1>bank account information, and other sensitive data was shut down

0:18:09.960 --> 0:18:13.399
<v Speaker 1>by the US, UK, Dutch and other law enforcement agencies

0:18:13.440 --> 0:18:17.040
<v Speaker 1>this week. Authorities seize the site, known as Genesis Market

0:18:17.080 --> 0:18:20.720
<v Speaker 1>as part of an effort dubbed Operation Cookie Monster. The

0:18:20.760 --> 0:18:23.159
<v Speaker 1>site began in twenty eighteen and has offered access to

0:18:23.240 --> 0:18:26.879
<v Speaker 1>data stolen from more than one point five million compromised computers,

0:18:27.119 --> 0:18:30.600
<v Speaker 1>accounting for more than eighty million credentials that could be

0:18:30.680 --> 0:18:33.720
<v Speaker 1>used to access accounts. That's according to the Department of Justice.

0:18:33.800 --> 0:18:37.200
<v Speaker 1>Law enforcement arrested one hundred and nineteen people in connection

0:18:37.200 --> 0:18:40.040
<v Speaker 1>with the site. That according to the European Police Agency

0:18:40.080 --> 0:18:43.280
<v Speaker 1>EUROPOLE and finally, converting the world to entirely clean energy

0:18:43.440 --> 0:18:48.080
<v Speaker 1>will require ten trillion dollars worth of investment, but continuing

0:18:48.080 --> 0:18:51.359
<v Speaker 1>to rely on fossil fuels were cost about fourteen trillion

0:18:51.600 --> 0:18:54.879
<v Speaker 1>that according to Elon Musk, a massive build out of

0:18:54.920 --> 0:18:58.199
<v Speaker 1>solar panel factories and metal refineries are required over the

0:18:58.240 --> 0:19:01.880
<v Speaker 1>next twenty years to deliver renewable power generation and electricity

0:19:01.920 --> 0:19:04.800
<v Speaker 1>storage capacity, which will then be needed to power the

0:19:04.800 --> 0:19:08.280
<v Speaker 1>global economy entirely with carbon free energy, Tessa said. And

0:19:08.320 --> 0:19:11.560
<v Speaker 1>it's master Plan Part three, which was published today. The

0:19:11.600 --> 0:19:15.080
<v Speaker 1>white paper fleshes out details a mosque's vision for a

0:19:15.119 --> 0:19:18.080
<v Speaker 1>world without fossil Field's first outlined, of course, during that

0:19:18.119 --> 0:19:23.080
<v Speaker 1>investor day last month. Next stay with EVS because STILLANTIS

0:19:23.080 --> 0:19:25.919
<v Speaker 1>plans to manufacture an all electric version of the popular

0:19:26.000 --> 0:19:29.240
<v Speaker 1>Ram truck and a factory of course in the United States.

0:19:29.280 --> 0:19:32.440
<v Speaker 1>We understand all according to its CEO and most David Welch,

0:19:32.520 --> 0:19:35.720
<v Speaker 1>and please say it's here in New York. But of

0:19:35.760 --> 0:19:37.399
<v Speaker 1>course the auto show that's going on, some of the

0:19:37.440 --> 0:19:40.680
<v Speaker 1>summits and talk to us about the Ram. The focus

0:19:40.720 --> 0:19:43.199
<v Speaker 1>basically on making sure that they can access some of

0:19:43.240 --> 0:19:47.480
<v Speaker 1>the Inflation Reduction Act offers to the consumer. Yeah, thanks Caroline.

0:19:47.520 --> 0:19:49.680
<v Speaker 1>So just to get in the game with the inflation

0:19:49.680 --> 0:19:51.760
<v Speaker 1>reduction egg, you've got to build the vehicle in the

0:19:51.880 --> 0:19:54.840
<v Speaker 1>United States and then be on net. You've got to

0:19:54.840 --> 0:19:57.639
<v Speaker 1>satisfy other requirements where the batteries are built, where the

0:19:57.840 --> 0:20:00.720
<v Speaker 1>ingredients to the batteries are mined in por to get

0:20:00.760 --> 0:20:03.040
<v Speaker 1>the full seventy five hundred dollars. But just to get

0:20:03.040 --> 0:20:05.080
<v Speaker 1>in the room, you have to build the United States.

0:20:05.119 --> 0:20:07.840
<v Speaker 1>So in that sense, I think the efflation Reduction action

0:20:07.960 --> 0:20:10.000
<v Speaker 1>was a big incentive. It was a little bit up

0:20:10.000 --> 0:20:12.119
<v Speaker 1>in the air in the sense that Carlos Tavarus, who

0:20:12.160 --> 0:20:14.560
<v Speaker 1>told us about this at the auto show yesterday, has

0:20:14.560 --> 0:20:17.280
<v Speaker 1>complained greatly about the cost of building evs, the lack

0:20:17.320 --> 0:20:19.800
<v Speaker 1>of profitability. And we thought he has a pickup truck

0:20:19.800 --> 0:20:23.080
<v Speaker 1>buyant in Mexico, he could possibly build the vehicle down

0:20:23.080 --> 0:20:25.880
<v Speaker 1>there and save on wages and that sort of thing.

0:20:26.080 --> 0:20:28.359
<v Speaker 1>But he says it's coming to the US, which plant

0:20:28.400 --> 0:20:31.440
<v Speaker 1>exactly TVD. He said, in the next week or two,

0:20:31.720 --> 0:20:35.639
<v Speaker 1>we may know that, Hey, David, in US, Let's be honest,

0:20:35.760 --> 0:20:39.400
<v Speaker 1>the Lantis is playing catch up when it comes to electrification, right,

0:20:40.400 --> 0:20:43.680
<v Speaker 1>that's right. The companies that have really made a big

0:20:43.720 --> 0:20:47.320
<v Speaker 1>commitment here, Volkswagen, General Motors obviously test us the leader.

0:20:47.320 --> 0:20:50.160
<v Speaker 1>Everybody's trying to catch them. Shantis has been a little

0:20:50.200 --> 0:20:53.680
<v Speaker 1>bit more conservative with this ss Toyota. They see consumers

0:20:53.680 --> 0:20:56.520
<v Speaker 1>still buying internal combustion vehicles and huge numbers. They don't

0:20:56.520 --> 0:20:59.080
<v Speaker 1>see profits and electric vehicles yet, and they're thinking they

0:20:59.080 --> 0:21:02.639
<v Speaker 1>can be a fast follow Just remind us of the

0:21:02.680 --> 0:21:05.120
<v Speaker 1>scope of who the competition is. I'm thinking forward, I'm

0:21:05.160 --> 0:21:08.159
<v Speaker 1>thinking what even Rivian to an extent for it's a

0:21:08.200 --> 0:21:10.439
<v Speaker 1>big player. Obviously, they've got the f one, fifty, Lightning

0:21:10.440 --> 0:21:12.720
<v Speaker 1>and the Marquis out there. Rivian and some of the

0:21:12.760 --> 0:21:17.240
<v Speaker 1>startups are they're very legitimate players. However, their volumes right

0:21:17.280 --> 0:21:19.320
<v Speaker 1>now are so small. I mean, Rivian's looking to make

0:21:19.320 --> 0:21:22.200
<v Speaker 1>fifty thousand vehicles, you know. General Motors is saying they're

0:21:22.200 --> 0:21:24.600
<v Speaker 1>going to sell fifty thousand just in the first half

0:21:24.600 --> 0:21:27.040
<v Speaker 1>of this year, and they're just getting started one hundred

0:21:27.040 --> 0:21:30.399
<v Speaker 1>thousand next year. Tessa's already pushing a million globally. So

0:21:30.560 --> 0:21:33.800
<v Speaker 1>some of these startups, they have good technology and desirable vehicles,

0:21:33.840 --> 0:21:37.919
<v Speaker 1>but getting to critical mass pretty tough for them all,

0:21:38.040 --> 0:21:48.439
<v Speaker 1>I believe. Thanks David Welcha, Detroit, BRT. Thank you. Welcome

0:21:48.440 --> 0:21:50.199
<v Speaker 1>back to a new mood technology. I'm Canaine Hid in

0:21:50.200 --> 0:21:53.680
<v Speaker 1>New York and Imed Ludlow in San Francisco, and we're

0:21:53.680 --> 0:21:55.960
<v Speaker 1>about halfway through the trading day, halfway through our show.

0:21:56.040 --> 0:21:58.440
<v Speaker 1>Let's check in on basically the turnaround we've had since

0:21:58.480 --> 0:22:01.600
<v Speaker 1>about half past eleven an hour ago. Nazdac breaking into

0:22:01.640 --> 0:22:03.960
<v Speaker 1>the green as we walk towards what is going to

0:22:04.000 --> 0:22:06.360
<v Speaker 1>be a holiday shortened week, maybe a little bit more

0:22:06.440 --> 0:22:08.720
<v Speaker 1>risk appetite building into the system. We're still, of course

0:22:08.760 --> 0:22:11.639
<v Speaker 1>anticipating that one important job Stata tomorrow morning. Two year

0:22:11.720 --> 0:22:14.080
<v Speaker 1>yield basically flat on the day, having been on the

0:22:14.119 --> 0:22:17.439
<v Speaker 1>downside the last few trading days as money sought more safety.

0:22:17.520 --> 0:22:20.200
<v Speaker 1>We're seeing bitcoin again at that twenty eight thousand level.

0:22:20.240 --> 0:22:21.760
<v Speaker 1>We cannot break through it. Moving on to some of

0:22:21.800 --> 0:22:24.480
<v Speaker 1>the micro moves because basically, if you're going to see

0:22:24.520 --> 0:22:27.080
<v Speaker 1>money moving into stocks, it's going to be AI related.

0:22:27.119 --> 0:22:29.439
<v Speaker 1>On the day when you're looking at technology alphabet shares

0:22:29.440 --> 0:22:32.320
<v Speaker 1>Google up two point four percent. Interesting what we see

0:22:32.320 --> 0:22:34.400
<v Speaker 1>in terms of that reporting coming from the Wall Street

0:22:34.480 --> 0:22:37.480
<v Speaker 1>Journal that yes, we knew an AI chatbot was being

0:22:37.520 --> 0:22:40.040
<v Speaker 1>developed over at Google, but they're likely to be starting

0:22:40.080 --> 0:22:43.280
<v Speaker 1>to lace it in and maybe providing the impact within

0:22:43.400 --> 0:22:47.600
<v Speaker 1>Google relatively swiftly. Ali Baba more certainty there as soon

0:22:47.640 --> 0:22:50.080
<v Speaker 1>as next week will understand the unveiling perhaps of its

0:22:50.119 --> 0:22:53.520
<v Speaker 1>own AI generative AI chatbot and what they have on

0:22:53.520 --> 0:22:56.119
<v Speaker 1>the table in terms of China. So a lot of

0:22:56.119 --> 0:22:59.480
<v Speaker 1>this discussion is playing out on social media. Right You

0:22:59.520 --> 0:23:01.800
<v Speaker 1>and I were in a news business, and I think

0:23:01.880 --> 0:23:04.160
<v Speaker 1>right now we're really interested in knowing how our audience

0:23:04.240 --> 0:23:07.960
<v Speaker 1>is getting their news, aside from this program Bloomberg Technology,

0:23:08.000 --> 0:23:10.920
<v Speaker 1>of course. So we ask the question, do our daily poll,

0:23:11.000 --> 0:23:13.640
<v Speaker 1>and here are the results, and I find them fascinating. Yeah,

0:23:13.880 --> 0:23:17.280
<v Speaker 1>because social media Elon must wants Twitter to be the

0:23:17.280 --> 0:23:19.800
<v Speaker 1>go to source of news. Sixty three percent of respondents

0:23:19.840 --> 0:23:23.400
<v Speaker 1>as saying social media look down at substack and newsletters

0:23:23.600 --> 0:23:26.159
<v Speaker 1>twelve percent of the vote. Caroline, you know you think

0:23:26.200 --> 0:23:29.639
<v Speaker 1>about what's happened this week, chamath Pali Haatier, Social Cap

0:23:29.760 --> 0:23:33.880
<v Speaker 1>putting their performance note out there on substack. Yeah, more

0:23:33.880 --> 0:23:36.800
<v Speaker 1>and more people deciding to go direct to their audience.

0:23:36.960 --> 0:23:38.560
<v Speaker 1>I mean, let's face it, there's been a bit of

0:23:38.560 --> 0:23:42.160
<v Speaker 1>a brain drain from media, people leaving to go and

0:23:42.200 --> 0:23:45.840
<v Speaker 1>do their own direct to consumer provision through newsletters. Yes,

0:23:46.400 --> 0:23:49.040
<v Speaker 1>people are building them within media organizations, but also going

0:23:49.080 --> 0:23:51.120
<v Speaker 1>to substack to and provide them just on a one

0:23:51.119 --> 0:23:53.600
<v Speaker 1>on one basis. Yeah. I think what's interesting a well

0:23:53.640 --> 0:23:55.760
<v Speaker 1>with substack is that you know it's you, yourself putting

0:23:55.760 --> 0:23:58.520
<v Speaker 1>it out there on a platform, much like it is

0:23:58.520 --> 0:24:01.080
<v Speaker 1>on social media. So let's talk about it because substack

0:24:01.240 --> 0:24:05.080
<v Speaker 1>is actually inviting some of its contributors to become investors.

0:24:05.160 --> 0:24:09.119
<v Speaker 1>The newsletter publisher tapping more money from less wealthy investors

0:24:09.320 --> 0:24:11.760
<v Speaker 1>by letting its offers and subscribers put in as little

0:24:11.800 --> 0:24:14.480
<v Speaker 1>as one hundred dollars for shares in an effort to

0:24:14.560 --> 0:24:17.320
<v Speaker 1>keep growing. And what is a tough market for fundraising?

0:24:17.320 --> 0:24:22.639
<v Speaker 1>Delighted to say, Caroline. Substack CEO Chris Bess joins us now. Chris,

0:24:22.760 --> 0:24:25.960
<v Speaker 1>is the motivation here that you need money for substack

0:24:26.320 --> 0:24:30.840
<v Speaker 1>or you're thinking about audience development. The main motivation here

0:24:30.920 --> 0:24:34.400
<v Speaker 1>is we've been building this subscription network this year. We've

0:24:34.400 --> 0:24:36.520
<v Speaker 1>seen it really start to take off. We've seen the

0:24:36.560 --> 0:24:39.760
<v Speaker 1>power of the network kick in. We've seen people growing

0:24:39.880 --> 0:24:42.720
<v Speaker 1>from as more and more people join the platform. The

0:24:42.800 --> 0:24:45.480
<v Speaker 1>people who join are creating a lot of their value,

0:24:45.800 --> 0:24:48.199
<v Speaker 1>and we wanted to create an opportunity for them to

0:24:48.200 --> 0:24:52.960
<v Speaker 1>become investors. Caroline, I think the other thing that we're

0:24:52.960 --> 0:24:57.000
<v Speaker 1>conscious of here is the reputation of the people are

0:24:57.240 --> 0:25:00.600
<v Speaker 1>that are posting through substack. Rug I mentioned Social Capital

0:25:00.640 --> 0:25:03.879
<v Speaker 1>and Chamath Pali Hapatia. They made it an active choice

0:25:03.920 --> 0:25:07.240
<v Speaker 1>to put their annual performance of their fund on substack

0:25:07.359 --> 0:25:12.639
<v Speaker 1>rather than other methods. Yeah, Chris, clearly you're winning subscribers

0:25:13.160 --> 0:25:15.240
<v Speaker 1>writers as well. What is it thirty five million actor

0:25:15.320 --> 0:25:18.560
<v Speaker 1>subscribers I'm interested in. Therefore, what's the uptake? How many

0:25:18.640 --> 0:25:20.919
<v Speaker 1>have said, yeah, we want to not only write for

0:25:20.960 --> 0:25:25.520
<v Speaker 1>you or consume value, but invest in you two. Honestly,

0:25:25.560 --> 0:25:29.080
<v Speaker 1>we've been blown away by the response so far. I

0:25:29.119 --> 0:25:31.080
<v Speaker 1>actually can't talk about it too much here. You have

0:25:31.080 --> 0:25:32.679
<v Speaker 1>to go to the weef under page to look at

0:25:32.840 --> 0:25:37.119
<v Speaker 1>look at what's there. But we've been very pleasantly surprised

0:25:37.200 --> 0:25:39.800
<v Speaker 1>by both, you know, the sort of quantity of the

0:25:39.920 --> 0:25:42.760
<v Speaker 1>response and also just the tenor up it. We've had

0:25:42.760 --> 0:25:45.240
<v Speaker 1>a lot of people come out and talk about why

0:25:45.280 --> 0:25:47.240
<v Speaker 1>they believe in substat why they think this thing is

0:25:47.280 --> 0:25:50.719
<v Speaker 1>important for the world. I love seeing that twelve percent

0:25:51.440 --> 0:25:55.320
<v Speaker 1>graphic at the start of the thing, the twelve smartest percent.

0:25:55.960 --> 0:25:58.760
<v Speaker 1>It feels like this thing is really is really going.

0:25:59.280 --> 0:26:02.000
<v Speaker 1>But what about that We've been blow away the questions

0:26:02.040 --> 0:26:04.560
<v Speaker 1>that are being asked of you, though, Chris, more transparency,

0:26:04.760 --> 0:26:06.680
<v Speaker 1>there's always I mean, I've been there reporting on when

0:26:06.680 --> 0:26:08.880
<v Speaker 1>the bond market started to open up to retail investors

0:26:08.920 --> 0:26:10.840
<v Speaker 1>in the UK and everyone said, well, it's because I

0:26:10.880 --> 0:26:13.520
<v Speaker 1>can get more money more cheaply. Basically, people the investor

0:26:13.960 --> 0:26:16.719
<v Speaker 1>isn't as institutionalized and therefore doesn't ask some of them

0:26:16.720 --> 0:26:19.359
<v Speaker 1>more nuanced questions. What are you saying in terms of

0:26:19.640 --> 0:26:22.080
<v Speaker 1>I want to know your costs, I want to know

0:26:22.160 --> 0:26:26.600
<v Speaker 1>your revenue as substack totally And you know, the fact

0:26:26.600 --> 0:26:29.120
<v Speaker 1>of the matter is Substack is a private company in

0:26:29.280 --> 0:26:33.200
<v Speaker 1>a very competitive market, and a lot of the writers,

0:26:33.200 --> 0:26:36.000
<v Speaker 1>the people on substack are not just members of the public,

0:26:36.040 --> 0:26:37.800
<v Speaker 1>but a lot of them are reporters themselves, a lot

0:26:37.800 --> 0:26:40.480
<v Speaker 1>of them people that cover the industry, and so we've

0:26:40.480 --> 0:26:45.080
<v Speaker 1>had to think of everything we release as becoming public.

0:26:45.760 --> 0:26:47.840
<v Speaker 1>So we've been pretty thoughtful about how we've done that.

0:26:47.880 --> 0:26:50.800
<v Speaker 1>We've been stuck at releasing everything that we need to

0:26:50.800 --> 0:26:54.280
<v Speaker 1>release as part of the REGCF. Other than that, you know,

0:26:54.320 --> 0:26:57.440
<v Speaker 1>we've been we haven't shared a time. And the pitch

0:26:57.480 --> 0:26:59.640
<v Speaker 1>that I've been making to people is really like, hey,

0:26:59.680 --> 0:27:03.680
<v Speaker 1>investing in startups in general, any startup, even a great

0:27:03.720 --> 0:27:07.440
<v Speaker 1>startup like substack, is a risky proposition. You can lose

0:27:07.440 --> 0:27:09.560
<v Speaker 1>your whole investment. It's not a thing to do sort

0:27:09.560 --> 0:27:11.520
<v Speaker 1>of lightly or with money that you don't want to

0:27:11.520 --> 0:27:13.359
<v Speaker 1>make up. I'd be giving a little bit of a

0:27:13.440 --> 0:27:15.880
<v Speaker 1>kind of an anti cell for folks on that front.

0:27:16.160 --> 0:27:18.280
<v Speaker 1>I want people to come if it's something that they

0:27:18.440 --> 0:27:20.000
<v Speaker 1>want to be a part of, if it's something that

0:27:20.000 --> 0:27:22.320
<v Speaker 1>they're seeing the benefits of and they believe in. We're

0:27:22.359 --> 0:27:25.600
<v Speaker 1>not trying to make it. It's it's not an appeal.

0:27:25.680 --> 0:27:27.639
<v Speaker 1>I'm not trying to be Bernie Standers here saying, you know,

0:27:27.720 --> 0:27:29.760
<v Speaker 1>please give us your money. This is an opportunity to

0:27:29.800 --> 0:27:32.000
<v Speaker 1>be part of this thing if you want to, well,

0:27:32.080 --> 0:27:35.520
<v Speaker 1>christ look, an investor's risk appetize is often driven by data.

0:27:35.600 --> 0:27:38.680
<v Speaker 1>There is some data out there. Reportedly, you did nine

0:27:38.720 --> 0:27:41.680
<v Speaker 1>million dollars of revenue in twenty twenty one. How did

0:27:41.680 --> 0:27:46.280
<v Speaker 1>you do in twenty twenty two? Better? But I won't

0:27:46.320 --> 0:27:49.080
<v Speaker 1>talk about it. Oh, come on, give us a sense

0:27:49.080 --> 0:27:52.480
<v Speaker 1>of size of scope. You're trying to appeal to investors here,

0:27:52.480 --> 0:27:55.639
<v Speaker 1>and you talked about the need to be transparent, have

0:27:55.840 --> 0:27:58.080
<v Speaker 1>public facing data. Just explain to us the health of

0:27:58.119 --> 0:28:00.280
<v Speaker 1>the business. How did it grow in twenty twenty too.

0:28:00.520 --> 0:28:03.359
<v Speaker 1>We've gone over the numbers about growth on the subscriber base.

0:28:03.560 --> 0:28:07.199
<v Speaker 1>How did that translate to performance for the business. So

0:28:07.240 --> 0:28:10.360
<v Speaker 1>we had about thirty five million active subscriptions, now we're

0:28:10.359 --> 0:28:14.480
<v Speaker 1>about we're about two million Paige subscriptions and the top

0:28:15.280 --> 0:28:18.680
<v Speaker 1>the top ten publishers on substat combined to make twenty

0:28:18.720 --> 0:28:21.040
<v Speaker 1>five million dollars a year. Those are the Those are

0:28:21.040 --> 0:28:24.800
<v Speaker 1>the numbers we're sharing. If you could have raised through VC, Chris,

0:28:24.800 --> 0:28:36.160
<v Speaker 1>would you have done Sorry I missed that. I think

0:28:36.160 --> 0:28:40.400
<v Speaker 1>we go ahead. Yeah. Would you have fund raised through

0:28:40.480 --> 0:28:42.680
<v Speaker 1>venture capital if it had been there last year this year?

0:28:42.720 --> 0:28:44.640
<v Speaker 1>I mean, we know, I know that you're saying this

0:28:44.720 --> 0:28:47.360
<v Speaker 1>is sort of this perfect way of building your momentum,

0:28:47.600 --> 0:28:50.320
<v Speaker 1>getting people to come on board and invest. But if

0:28:50.400 --> 0:28:52.240
<v Speaker 1>Venure Capital had been and was still awashed with cash

0:28:52.240 --> 0:28:54.800
<v Speaker 1>and we hadn't had interest rates rise, would you have

0:28:54.880 --> 0:28:56.680
<v Speaker 1>raised with VC? If the money had been there, and

0:28:56.680 --> 0:29:00.240
<v Speaker 1>the checks were easier to be written. I understand the

0:29:00.280 --> 0:29:02.440
<v Speaker 1>way that we've been thinking about this is we have

0:29:02.920 --> 0:29:06.840
<v Speaker 1>sort of tuned the business not to rely on outside

0:29:06.920 --> 0:29:08.880
<v Speaker 1>capital given the state of the market. So we're in

0:29:08.880 --> 0:29:11.720
<v Speaker 1>a place where we have a path to doing the

0:29:11.840 --> 0:29:14.800
<v Speaker 1>mission we set out to do, kind of regardless of

0:29:15.200 --> 0:29:19.080
<v Speaker 1>what's going on in the market, whether there's further outside investment,

0:29:19.160 --> 0:29:21.239
<v Speaker 1>any of those things. The way that I look at

0:29:21.280 --> 0:29:23.680
<v Speaker 1>this is we can be a little bit, you know,

0:29:25.760 --> 0:29:28.600
<v Speaker 1>work with the situation that exists in the market. You know,

0:29:28.640 --> 0:29:32.440
<v Speaker 1>if there's opportunities to get more money on favorable terms.

0:29:32.440 --> 0:29:34.719
<v Speaker 1>I think there's ways that we could use that to accelerate.

0:29:34.960 --> 0:29:36.480
<v Speaker 1>But also we don't need it. I mean, this is

0:29:36.880 --> 0:29:40.040
<v Speaker 1>a business that fundamentally works, and we have a path

0:29:40.120 --> 0:29:44.120
<v Speaker 1>to building it with what we have. Chris, we started

0:29:44.120 --> 0:29:46.840
<v Speaker 1>this segment talking about where people are going through their

0:29:46.920 --> 0:29:51.080
<v Speaker 1>news US bloom Bag technology, social media, substack. I think

0:29:51.120 --> 0:29:54.480
<v Speaker 1>you're working on substack notes, which too many seems to

0:29:54.520 --> 0:30:00.280
<v Speaker 1>be an attempt to offer something similar to Twitter. The

0:30:00.320 --> 0:30:02.240
<v Speaker 1>way I think of this is that the I think

0:30:02.280 --> 0:30:06.080
<v Speaker 1>the era of the social network as we know it

0:30:06.120 --> 0:30:08.840
<v Speaker 1>is ending. I think that a lot of the social

0:30:08.880 --> 0:30:13.800
<v Speaker 1>the online media platforms, the twitters, the facebooks, the Instagrams

0:30:14.080 --> 0:30:16.600
<v Speaker 1>are sort of pulling in this one direction, right The

0:30:16.640 --> 0:30:20.240
<v Speaker 1>ad supported business model is kind of forcing everyone to

0:30:20.280 --> 0:30:23.280
<v Speaker 1>turn into TikTok that's in that world, and I think

0:30:23.320 --> 0:30:27.640
<v Speaker 1>it creates this huge opportunity in a different direction that's

0:30:27.680 --> 0:30:30.640
<v Speaker 1>not about kind of like grabbing eyeballs and attention at

0:30:30.680 --> 0:30:33.440
<v Speaker 1>all costs, but instead is about, you know, making things

0:30:33.440 --> 0:30:36.520
<v Speaker 1>that people deeply value, letting people connect to things they trust.

0:30:36.880 --> 0:30:39.640
<v Speaker 1>So I think all of online media is basically either

0:30:39.680 --> 0:30:42.000
<v Speaker 1>going to have to turn into TikTok or is going

0:30:42.040 --> 0:30:44.360
<v Speaker 1>to have to turn into substack in the next little bit.

0:30:44.760 --> 0:30:49.959
<v Speaker 1>And substack notes is sort of our play to bring

0:30:50.040 --> 0:30:53.200
<v Speaker 1>the easy sort of sharing, the short form, the ability

0:30:53.240 --> 0:30:57.760
<v Speaker 1>to recommend anything to the subscription network that is substack,

0:30:58.120 --> 0:31:01.680
<v Speaker 1>and we're tremendously excited about it. South Tax CEO Chris Best,

0:31:01.880 --> 0:31:05.640
<v Speaker 1>thanks for joining us. Meanwhile, coming up, could some American

0:31:05.680 --> 0:31:09.280
<v Speaker 1>investors be funding China's answer to Open AI? We'll have

0:31:09.400 --> 0:31:12.120
<v Speaker 1>more on that pretty heated debate that's playing out all

0:31:12.160 --> 0:31:16.280
<v Speaker 1>over the likes of Twitter with Lightship Capital partner Brian Raquin.

0:31:17.040 --> 0:31:20.240
<v Speaker 1>And we're also talking about Savvy Games Group, part of

0:31:20.240 --> 0:31:22.760
<v Speaker 1>the Saudi government's public investment funds. It's agreed to acquire

0:31:22.800 --> 0:31:25.520
<v Speaker 1>game publishers Scope Plea for almost five billion dollars, the

0:31:25.560 --> 0:31:28.360
<v Speaker 1>company has said yesterday in a statement. California based Scope Plea,

0:31:28.440 --> 0:31:31.880
<v Speaker 1>publishers free to play social games, has raised money multiple

0:31:31.920 --> 0:31:35.840
<v Speaker 1>times over the years, actually often grown through acquisitions from

0:31:35.840 --> 0:31:44.600
<v Speaker 1>New York, from San Franciscosi Bloomberg some breaking news. President

0:31:44.600 --> 0:31:48.360
<v Speaker 1>Biden administration is going to propose the toughest ever auto

0:31:48.360 --> 0:31:52.160
<v Speaker 1>emissions rules, basically to spare demand for electric vehicles. This

0:31:52.280 --> 0:31:54.800
<v Speaker 1>has been something that the pressure was on, not only

0:31:54.840 --> 0:31:58.560
<v Speaker 1>from the US but geopolitically. Ed, you are our EV expert,

0:31:58.680 --> 0:32:01.480
<v Speaker 1>certainly on this show, if not the entire network. Talk

0:32:01.520 --> 0:32:04.520
<v Speaker 1>to us a little bit about why wissing this sudden

0:32:04.640 --> 0:32:07.840
<v Speaker 1>focus on evs in particular. Yeah, the reporting here is

0:32:07.840 --> 0:32:11.040
<v Speaker 1>really important. Biden is stopping short of an outright ban

0:32:11.400 --> 0:32:15.080
<v Speaker 1>on production of gas powered vehicles, but toughening the mandates.

0:32:15.080 --> 0:32:17.840
<v Speaker 1>You have to remember that under the Paris Climate Agreement,

0:32:17.840 --> 0:32:21.680
<v Speaker 1>the United States has to cut its greenhouse gas emissions

0:32:21.680 --> 0:32:24.160
<v Speaker 1>from two thousand and five levels by fifty percent from

0:32:24.160 --> 0:32:26.480
<v Speaker 1>the end of the decade. Joe Biden also has a

0:32:26.560 --> 0:32:29.440
<v Speaker 1>personal goal to have fifty percent of all new cars

0:32:29.480 --> 0:32:32.960
<v Speaker 1>b electric by twenty thirty, so this is him acting

0:32:33.000 --> 0:32:35.560
<v Speaker 1>on We believe from sources that the announcement will come

0:32:35.600 --> 0:32:39.320
<v Speaker 1>formally next Wednesday, after the long weekend, but clearly some

0:32:39.400 --> 0:32:42.320
<v Speaker 1>action here and coming from Detroit. Meanwhile, all the automakers

0:32:42.320 --> 0:32:44.360
<v Speaker 1>are basically here in New York, and we've heard of

0:32:44.480 --> 0:32:47.960
<v Speaker 1>all the supply coming in terms of evs. But it's difficult,

0:32:47.960 --> 0:32:49.960
<v Speaker 1>this isn't it. Basically Test is already there in terms

0:32:49.960 --> 0:32:51.720
<v Speaker 1>of production, but it's taken some time for some of

0:32:51.760 --> 0:32:54.600
<v Speaker 1>the legacy in to makers. Yeah, competing forces depending on

0:32:54.640 --> 0:32:56.600
<v Speaker 1>who you are, Right, if you're a legacy automaker in

0:32:56.640 --> 0:33:00.840
<v Speaker 1>Detroit and you're transitioning from combustion engine to what we

0:33:00.920 --> 0:33:03.720
<v Speaker 1>know is those OEMs have asked the administration for more time,

0:33:04.000 --> 0:33:07.640
<v Speaker 1>an extension of the requirement deadlines. Your tesla, it's the opposite.

0:33:07.640 --> 0:33:10.440
<v Speaker 1>You're like, hey, we're already in the game. Here be tougher.

0:33:10.600 --> 0:33:13.080
<v Speaker 1>And that's what Tesla I'm sure in the corridors of

0:33:13.440 --> 0:33:16.640
<v Speaker 1>the White House has been calling for. Suddenly, some geopolitics

0:33:16.680 --> 0:33:18.960
<v Speaker 1>at play when it comes to the Binder administration. In fact,

0:33:18.960 --> 0:33:21.560
<v Speaker 1>there's geopolitics at play in general when it comes to

0:33:21.640 --> 0:33:23.280
<v Speaker 1>AI as well, and we're going to dig into that

0:33:23.320 --> 0:33:25.120
<v Speaker 1>now because there's mostly a bit of an arms race

0:33:25.160 --> 0:33:26.840
<v Speaker 1>going on, isn't there between the US and China? And

0:33:26.880 --> 0:33:29.240
<v Speaker 1>it seems to be gaining a momentum as after open

0:33:29.280 --> 0:33:31.920
<v Speaker 1>ais chat GPTEAM really has taken the world by storm

0:33:32.040 --> 0:33:35.360
<v Speaker 1>last year. Now venture capitalists are starting to raise some

0:33:35.400 --> 0:33:40.240
<v Speaker 1>concerns that US investors, US money and venture capital could

0:33:40.240 --> 0:33:42.680
<v Speaker 1>be back in China's best hopes in the field in

0:33:42.760 --> 0:33:44.880
<v Speaker 1>terms of a competitor. Now the debate is playing out

0:33:44.920 --> 0:33:48.600
<v Speaker 1>all over Twitter after The Information reported yesterday that institution

0:33:48.680 --> 0:33:52.120
<v Speaker 1>investors from America are backing Chinese based venture firms with

0:33:52.240 --> 0:33:55.720
<v Speaker 1>dollars to put into China's top AI startups. Brian Broquin's

0:33:55.760 --> 0:33:58.720
<v Speaker 1>general partners over at Lightship Capital, it's one of the

0:33:58.760 --> 0:34:01.000
<v Speaker 1>vcs that's been taking part in that very debate. You're

0:34:01.040 --> 0:34:03.480
<v Speaker 1>joining us now, Brian, great to have you, and so

0:34:03.520 --> 0:34:05.480
<v Speaker 1>tell us you're concerned or not concerned by some of

0:34:05.480 --> 0:34:11.680
<v Speaker 1>this hyperboly. I am ringing the alarm overright. AI requires

0:34:11.920 --> 0:34:15.040
<v Speaker 1>the AI arms ratio, as you describe, it, requires capital.

0:34:15.280 --> 0:34:17.880
<v Speaker 1>It's a very expensive endeavor. And so for the idea

0:34:17.960 --> 0:34:20.960
<v Speaker 1>that a venture capital firm would take money from investors

0:34:20.960 --> 0:34:24.240
<v Speaker 1>in the US send into China to build a product

0:34:24.239 --> 0:34:28.560
<v Speaker 1>that could be used against US interests makes zerial sense. Okay,

0:34:29.760 --> 0:34:34.239
<v Speaker 1>demystify from that perspective therefore, whether the money should be

0:34:34.239 --> 0:34:38.080
<v Speaker 1>being pulled back from privately positioned businesses. But also we

0:34:38.080 --> 0:34:40.840
<v Speaker 1>were just talking about how Ali Barber, for example, is

0:34:41.080 --> 0:34:43.680
<v Speaker 1>set to as soon as next week unveil its own

0:34:43.840 --> 0:34:46.800
<v Speaker 1>competitor to chat GPT. I look at who the biggest

0:34:46.800 --> 0:34:50.320
<v Speaker 1>shareholders are of Vali Barber and well on the American

0:34:50.320 --> 0:34:54.160
<v Speaker 1>Depository received perspective, it's Goldman, there's Morgan Stanley in there.

0:34:54.160 --> 0:34:56.360
<v Speaker 1>Should they all be giving up on backing some of

0:34:56.360 --> 0:35:00.439
<v Speaker 1>these public companies? I think in general there's opportunity other

0:35:00.520 --> 0:35:04.319
<v Speaker 1>markets understood its capitalism. We agree with that. But there

0:35:04.320 --> 0:35:07.600
<v Speaker 1>are certain technologies. For instance, Intel makes chips that can

0:35:07.680 --> 0:35:10.720
<v Speaker 1>be used in North Korean missiles. No, we don't allow

0:35:10.760 --> 0:35:14.200
<v Speaker 1>that in the US. This is exactly the same US

0:35:14.320 --> 0:35:17.719
<v Speaker 1>capital and also US no, how shouldn't be used in

0:35:17.800 --> 0:35:20.040
<v Speaker 1>creating these a actuals because how do you make an investment?

0:35:20.200 --> 0:35:22.640
<v Speaker 1>You actually have a responsibility to make sure that company

0:35:22.680 --> 0:35:25.480
<v Speaker 1>is successful, and therefore you're helping to make sure the

0:35:25.600 --> 0:35:29.239
<v Speaker 1>China successful. And it's interesting that certain names within the

0:35:29.320 --> 0:35:32.640
<v Speaker 1>VC community were highlighted by this information piece, in particular

0:35:33.120 --> 0:35:36.239
<v Speaker 1>because they have venture arms in China. One of them

0:35:36.239 --> 0:35:39.600
<v Speaker 1>really spoke out on Twitter. Yeah. And the idea here

0:35:39.680 --> 0:35:41.720
<v Speaker 1>is that Sequoire has come out one of their partners

0:35:41.719 --> 0:35:43.200
<v Speaker 1>on Twitter. I think we'll show out on the screen

0:35:43.239 --> 0:35:47.760
<v Speaker 1>now instead, Sequoire China and Sequoire are different. The headline

0:35:47.840 --> 0:35:50.960
<v Speaker 1>is misleading, Brian. Let's go back to the point. Investors

0:35:51.000 --> 0:35:53.240
<v Speaker 1>have been going to China tech for a long time.

0:35:53.920 --> 0:35:58.000
<v Speaker 1>This is specifically an anxiety coming around artificial intelligence, right,

0:35:58.360 --> 0:36:04.520
<v Speaker 1>Why why is AI so problematic? Well, I enter both

0:36:04.520 --> 0:36:08.120
<v Speaker 1>things on the different arms piece. When Sequoia is out

0:36:08.200 --> 0:36:11.640
<v Speaker 1>raising money in China, saying where Sequoia where the brand?

0:36:11.719 --> 0:36:14.239
<v Speaker 1>We know what we're doing. We can build the best companies.

0:36:14.440 --> 0:36:16.960
<v Speaker 1>That's why you're going to give money to either arm.

0:36:17.280 --> 0:36:21.040
<v Speaker 1>So though they may be legally separate entities, it is

0:36:21.120 --> 0:36:24.920
<v Speaker 1>literally one strategy to create the world's most successful companies.

0:36:24.920 --> 0:36:29.080
<v Speaker 1>In this case, that's an issue. And to the second point,

0:36:29.120 --> 0:36:33.120
<v Speaker 1>like why is this so dangerous? I often describe AI

0:36:33.160 --> 0:36:36.719
<v Speaker 1>as like dog years, right, So it's not aging year

0:36:36.800 --> 0:36:40.240
<v Speaker 1>by year. Every year's three or five or seven years,

0:36:40.239 --> 0:36:43.040
<v Speaker 1>and so only a couple of years from now what

0:36:43.040 --> 0:36:45.520
<v Speaker 1>they're creating could be used to create a surveillance state,

0:36:45.840 --> 0:36:51.040
<v Speaker 1>not just there but also here. Brian, you are an AIX,

0:36:51.080 --> 0:36:53.160
<v Speaker 1>but you can sider yourself an AIX. But I think

0:36:53.239 --> 0:36:56.640
<v Speaker 1>your prior successes include the sale of an AI company

0:36:56.719 --> 0:37:01.160
<v Speaker 1>you founded. Are you worried that this is just the

0:37:01.360 --> 0:37:04.640
<v Speaker 1>threat of competition from China outdoing what's happening in the

0:37:04.680 --> 0:37:10.479
<v Speaker 1>United States. There's certainly that's certainly true. But the way

0:37:10.520 --> 0:37:13.280
<v Speaker 1>the Chinese companies go about the AI space is different.

0:37:13.280 --> 0:37:15.920
<v Speaker 1>I remember when I started my company in Cairos, we

0:37:16.040 --> 0:37:19.080
<v Speaker 1>had the number one source of attacks were from China.

0:37:19.280 --> 0:37:22.480
<v Speaker 1>Number two sorts the attacks were from Russia, constantly trying

0:37:22.480 --> 0:37:24.799
<v Speaker 1>to get access to the data so they could then

0:37:24.960 --> 0:37:29.000
<v Speaker 1>use that in their own uses. They do not have

0:37:29.080 --> 0:37:33.440
<v Speaker 1>the same approach toward the morality around these technologies that

0:37:33.520 --> 0:37:36.799
<v Speaker 1>we do in the US. In fact, we've seen some

0:37:37.080 --> 0:37:40.080
<v Speaker 1>issues with the morality, the ethics, the speed of development

0:37:40.080 --> 0:37:42.439
<v Speaker 1>here in the US itself as well. That open letter

0:37:42.520 --> 0:37:45.720
<v Speaker 1>coming from hundreds of signatories wanting a pause on AI

0:37:45.800 --> 0:37:50.640
<v Speaker 1>development here in the United States, Brian. From your perspective, therefore,

0:37:51.200 --> 0:37:55.120
<v Speaker 1>is the US at risk of losing this battle versus

0:37:55.120 --> 0:37:57.239
<v Speaker 1>the Chinese? And what more do you want put in

0:37:57.280 --> 0:38:01.000
<v Speaker 1>place from a federal level, even I think it's a

0:38:01.040 --> 0:38:03.080
<v Speaker 1>good point there. You know, our house and our hands

0:38:03.120 --> 0:38:06.000
<v Speaker 1>are our clean either in the world of AI, we

0:38:06.080 --> 0:38:08.480
<v Speaker 1>can do better, we can be better, but there is

0:38:08.520 --> 0:38:12.200
<v Speaker 1>a process in a system that can allow for an

0:38:12.280 --> 0:38:16.560
<v Speaker 1>improved AI. We're having those conversations now with morality leading

0:38:16.719 --> 0:38:20.399
<v Speaker 1>leading the goal. Oftentimes in China these are not conversations

0:38:20.480 --> 0:38:23.440
<v Speaker 1>or their conversations held in back rooms. And I think that's,

0:38:23.480 --> 0:38:26.840
<v Speaker 1>you know, one of the challenges. What about the reverse.

0:38:27.160 --> 0:38:29.960
<v Speaker 1>I know that we have Syphius in this country, But

0:38:31.680 --> 0:38:35.560
<v Speaker 1>are you against say Saudi money or Chinese money coming

0:38:35.600 --> 0:38:40.799
<v Speaker 1>in and investing in the AI field for US based startups. No,

0:38:40.880 --> 0:38:44.280
<v Speaker 1>I'm completely inconsistent on this matter. I would I'm happy

0:38:44.320 --> 0:38:47.640
<v Speaker 1>to take those dollars here and to use those you know,

0:38:48.200 --> 0:38:52.239
<v Speaker 1>and into our framework. That said, I wouldn't want those

0:38:52.280 --> 0:38:55.560
<v Speaker 1>technologies to be exported back to Saudi or back to

0:38:55.719 --> 0:39:02.800
<v Speaker 1>China and used for human rights violations. From your perspective, Brian,

0:39:03.800 --> 0:39:08.120
<v Speaker 1>what stops this because in many ways. If you're seeing

0:39:08.120 --> 0:39:11.520
<v Speaker 1>it from a negative perspective, US money going to China,

0:39:11.760 --> 0:39:14.600
<v Speaker 1>you're already saying, Look, Pandora's box has been opened. People

0:39:14.640 --> 0:39:17.520
<v Speaker 1>went out there did joint ventures with China because at

0:39:17.560 --> 0:39:20.799
<v Speaker 1>that point everyone was trying to build a more global

0:39:21.440 --> 0:39:26.640
<v Speaker 1>and globalized state of capitalism. How do you unwind that? Yeah,

0:39:26.640 --> 0:39:30.680
<v Speaker 1>I think China's evolved over time, as has the American position.

0:39:30.760 --> 0:39:32.680
<v Speaker 1>I think you're seeing both on the right and the left,

0:39:32.760 --> 0:39:37.560
<v Speaker 1>real concerns around TikTok and other platforms. The genie is

0:39:37.600 --> 0:39:40.759
<v Speaker 1>out of the bottle, certainly, but in this case it's

0:39:40.800 --> 0:39:43.919
<v Speaker 1>not too late to put it back in. Regulation can

0:39:44.000 --> 0:39:46.160
<v Speaker 1>put us where we need to be if we have

0:39:46.280 --> 0:39:50.160
<v Speaker 1>the strength to put it in place. Lightship Capital partner

0:39:50.160 --> 0:40:01.359
<v Speaker 1>Brian Rocquin, thanks for joining us. Impact on jobs is real,

0:40:01.800 --> 0:40:04.680
<v Speaker 1>but it doesn't have a super intelligence that will have

0:40:04.760 --> 0:40:07.400
<v Speaker 1>a mind of its own. It really just it's the

0:40:07.480 --> 0:40:10.520
<v Speaker 1>next word, because that's what you're asking it to do,

0:40:11.680 --> 0:40:14.000
<v Speaker 1>you dot Com ceo Rich As such, they're talking about

0:40:14.000 --> 0:40:18.239
<v Speaker 1>how basically apopalyptic scenarios around AI pretty unlikely, which is

0:40:18.280 --> 0:40:20.800
<v Speaker 1>just the subject of my Business Weeks piece today about

0:40:20.840 --> 0:40:23.520
<v Speaker 1>how the real risk of AI development might be more

0:40:23.680 --> 0:40:27.279
<v Speaker 1>well closely into disinformation. Brobot Business Weeks, Max Chaffkin, I'm

0:40:27.320 --> 0:40:30.200
<v Speaker 1>pieces say, is joining us to run through this hype

0:40:30.200 --> 0:40:33.440
<v Speaker 1>around the intelligence part of artificial intelligence seems to be

0:40:33.800 --> 0:40:36.560
<v Speaker 1>a little bit making it more of the hype cycle.

0:40:36.719 --> 0:40:38.640
<v Speaker 1>What are the real issues? Do you think? Yeah, so

0:40:38.960 --> 0:40:41.239
<v Speaker 1>it's kind of telling that the people that many of

0:40:41.239 --> 0:40:44.319
<v Speaker 1>the people who are most worried about these technologies are

0:40:44.360 --> 0:40:46.840
<v Speaker 1>also the people who are selling these technologies. And you

0:40:46.840 --> 0:40:49.400
<v Speaker 1>can kind of see why, because if you're trying to

0:40:49.400 --> 0:40:51.319
<v Speaker 1>sell something, it's very useful to say this might be

0:40:51.360 --> 0:40:54.480
<v Speaker 1>too powerful, might be too scary. Now, that's maybe a

0:40:54.480 --> 0:40:56.759
<v Speaker 1>cynical way to look at it, but as this piece

0:40:56.800 --> 0:40:59.960
<v Speaker 1>points out, I think the kind of conversation around AI

0:41:00.120 --> 0:41:02.920
<v Speaker 1>overlooks the issue of misinformation, which I would argue and

0:41:02.960 --> 0:41:05.840
<v Speaker 1>I think many others argue, is the real concern. So

0:41:06.080 --> 0:41:09.560
<v Speaker 1>we're not talking about superintelligence taking over turning us all

0:41:09.560 --> 0:41:13.040
<v Speaker 1>into paper clips. We're talking about our social media, our

0:41:13.080 --> 0:41:17.160
<v Speaker 1>search engines, basically all of our information consumption being flooded

0:41:17.200 --> 0:41:20.600
<v Speaker 1>with garbage or stuff that kind of looks real but

0:41:20.680 --> 0:41:24.120
<v Speaker 1>not real. So you think about junkie search results, junk

0:41:24.160 --> 0:41:27.640
<v Speaker 1>fake stuff on social media. That's the sort of thing. Max,

0:41:27.840 --> 0:41:30.480
<v Speaker 1>Caroline and I have had signatories to the petition on

0:41:30.520 --> 0:41:32.919
<v Speaker 1>the show, and they don't even agree that a six

0:41:33.000 --> 0:41:35.640
<v Speaker 1>month pause would work. Is there anything that they do

0:41:35.680 --> 0:41:39.279
<v Speaker 1>agree on, whether they were a signatory or not. No,

0:41:39.400 --> 0:41:41.960
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I think that what's interesting about the petition

0:41:42.040 --> 0:41:44.120
<v Speaker 1>is it brings together a lot of different voices, some

0:41:44.160 --> 0:41:48.279
<v Speaker 1>of whom are would more express the critique that I'm expressing,

0:41:48.440 --> 0:41:52.120
<v Speaker 1>and others who are expressing this apocalyptic thing. And that's

0:41:52.160 --> 0:41:54.240
<v Speaker 1>one of the reasons why I'm not sure this letter

0:41:54.360 --> 0:41:57.240
<v Speaker 1>has been particularly useful or will change a whole lot.

0:41:57.440 --> 0:42:00.200
<v Speaker 1>That said, you know, there is a possibility of regulation.

0:42:00.200 --> 0:42:01.919
<v Speaker 1>I mean there are hints of that, you know, coming

0:42:01.960 --> 0:42:04.879
<v Speaker 1>from the US government. You could imagine a situation right

0:42:04.920 --> 0:42:07.120
<v Speaker 1>now where the US government is worried about takeover, but

0:42:07.280 --> 0:42:10.239
<v Speaker 1>something smaller. It's got us all talking about it either way.

0:42:10.280 --> 0:42:13.279
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Business Week's Matt Chafkin, thank you. That does it

0:42:13.400 --> 0:42:16.319
<v Speaker 1>for this edition of Bloomberg Technology. Caroline, Yeah, short and week.

0:42:16.320 --> 0:42:19.080
<v Speaker 1>We're off tomorrow. Go have a relaxing time. If you're

0:42:19.120 --> 0:42:21.239
<v Speaker 1>not working too, don't forget to check out our podcast though.

0:42:21.280 --> 0:42:23.040
<v Speaker 1>We've got a few minutes to spare. Find it on

0:42:23.080 --> 0:42:25.799
<v Speaker 1>the terminal as well as online on Apple, Spotify, and

0:42:25.920 --> 0:42:29.480
<v Speaker 1>iHeart from New York. From San Francisco, this is Blomberg