Skip to main content

tv   Best of Bloomberg Technology  Bloomberg  December 8, 2019 12:00pm-1:00pm EST

12:00 pm
taylor: i'm taylor riggs in for emily chang, and this is the "best of bloomberg technology." where we bring you all of our top interviews from this week. coming up, dramatic exit. expedia joins the list of companies losing executives. its ceo and cfo are out, following google's larry page and sergei brin announcing they are leaving alphabet. the tech sector saying a lot of goodbyes. plus, clouds gather.
12:01 pm
sources say the ftc is widening its investigation of amazon to include its massive cloud business. we will have details. and national security risk. u.s. senator marsha blackburn on the social media app tiktok. she has called it "china's best detective." we will hear from her after they say they have made changes. but we begin with major changes happening in alphabet. larry page and sergey brin announced they are stepping down from the tech giant. the google ceo will now be the ceo of both google and alphabet. page and brin will remain active as cofounders and remain on the board. i spoke to guests on tuesday. >> it was a pretty big surprise. there had been questions about how much longer sundar might want to be ceo of google. those questions have been
12:02 pm
bubbling up a little bit. google is under a massive amount of scrutiny. he has a lot of things to juggle. there have been internal protests. this really was a surprise where basically he has had to deal with all these things and he will be back dealing with all of the other things happening under the alphabet umbrella which includes self driving cars and other things. taylor: with larry and sergey as visionaries and sundar is a good executioner, where do they fit in as leaders? >> larry was the main visionary when people think of google. larry and sergey together, they obviously founded the search engine more than 15 years ago and built that into what it is today. larry was the driving force behind the idea that maybe about seven or eight years ago, google
12:03 pm
is going to have to do something else. to keep growing, he really pushed them into things like self driving cars and other things. sundar, his background came from a very core google background where he ran the chrome web browser and operating system, which runs chrome book and things like that. he can be seen as more of an operations guide. he worked his way up through the company. certainly, since alphabet happened in 2015, sundar has been the one to deal with everyday things. taylor: stay with us, because joining us on the phone is gene munster. what is your initial reaction to this? gene: i was not expecting this, but in some ways i was not surprised, in part just because of the tenure, how long both of them had been there. separately, the concept that the
12:04 pm
company is moving into a different chapter. google proper, the next chapter, will be a lot around policy, data privacy, and regulation. if you think about the founders and what they have accomplished, and what the next couple of years would look like, going through some of the minutia, i'm not surprised to ultimately see this. there is another part of me that is kind of sad because it had such a profound impact on our lives, just a reminder that the greats move on. taylor: how much can this be -- how much of this can be seen as a vote of confidence in sundar pichai? gene: undoubtedly a vote of confidence. i think it is more related to what sergey and larry ultimately
12:05 pm
want to do than it is a vote of confidence. but it is a vote of confidence nonetheless. if they did not have that, he would not have been the one tapped for the broader role. taylor: we talked a few weeks ago when you had apple ceo tim cook really work the politics. in this day and age, you are not just running a company. you have to be working the politics, working the regulatory issues. is sundar pichai ready and able to do that? alistair: i think he is from a technology point of view. if someone asks sundar pichai a super complicated question about what data google uses, how is it protected, he will know all of that stuff. he was partly behind building all of that stuff. especially on the website. technically, he is great. on the showing up for congressional hearings, that is not something he really loves to do. he's quite a quiet and
12:06 pm
thoughtful person. i don't think he enjoys being asked things live when the whole world is watching in a sort of contentious situation. but he certainly can do it. when you compare it to larry page, who really does not want to do any of that stuff, that is really the comparison to make. earlier this year, as scrutiny ramped up on google, larry page, everyone said, where is larry? and i think this decision today addresses that, larry does not have to be there anymore. taylor: as you take a look at the company, he is running both google and alphabet, what could be some of the challenges now of running both of those while the other two are still on the board but still controlling most of the shares? gene: the obvious challenges the one recovered around policy.
12:07 pm
i think beyond that, it will be how much oxygen to give the other bets. as we think about what has changed in sort of late state investing over the last six months with wework, uber, and lyft, past profitability questions, even corporate sponsors of these are asking more difficult questions. that, to me, would be where i would love to be in the room and hear the conversation about how much funding to give some of these other bets. specifically, the easy one to talk about is waymo, a radical view to autonomy, basically launching an entire wrapped up and tidy product. very different than tesla's evolutionary approach. this is revolutionary and a huge amount of spending would have to be behind that. that, to me, would be one of the key issues. more broadly, how they want to continue to foster other bets in
12:08 pm
got 20% other time that google has been a foundation of working at google. taylor: do you think this can be seen as a good thing, bringing this under one person, bringing both companies together, having him run both divisions, trying to simplify under a big umbrella? gene: i can see that. google is definitely the powerhouse of the portfolio companies. that makes a ton of sense. i would not be surprised if, in the next year or two, sundar stays at the top and there is new leadership brought in for google. taylor: that was bloomberg technology's alistair barr and gene munster of loup ventures. as for how the shakeup will affect alphabet as well as the sheer number of ceos who stepped down in the tech sector, i got insight from andrew challenger. he is vice president at
12:09 pm
challenger grayin. he was joined by bloomberg technology's tom giles. >> we are going through the m one by one, the biggest companies, making that transformation. it has been happening for a long time. steve jobs passed away a decade ago. it has been one big company after another. we have a couple left -- couple major ones, facebook and amazon. what i think is happening is as these companies mature, they no longer have the need for the same visionary founder, the engineer who came up with these whizbang products. you need someone who is a solid manager, someone who can manage the supply chain, someone like tim cook at apple, someone who's got management chops, who's got the sensibilities kind of run a company. larry and sergey not known for their management skills. you need someone who can run all the operations of the company.
12:10 pm
taylor: andrew, what do you make of the cultural shift that is under way as we transition from the first generation to the second generation of these leaders? andrew: yeah, well, we have seen a lot of changes in the ceo position in the tech sector. throughout this year, we have tracked 180 departures, the most we've recorded since we started tracking this number in 2002. a lot of those departures are these founders and ceos that created a company out of nothing, but the company has grown into a new, mature phase. we saw with uber, juul labs, wework. under armour. a lot of the ceos, and i think a lot of it has been caused by this 10-year expanding cycle in the economy where companies have been able to grow to a new maturity. hopefully we are seeing -- and i think we are at google -- a solid handoff to the next generation of business leader as opposed to really a shakeup.
12:11 pm
taylor: tom, we have talked a lot about diversity as well. you have a lot of good number two females, but not yet a number one female. when you think we might see that? tom: i think it is indicative of the larger malaise when it comes to diversity. to their credit, these companies have been more transparent about the numbers. the problem is what those numbers show is a real lack of progress over the last several years. google was one of the first, talking about, here is how many women we have in senior management. here's how many women we have across the board. all the big companies are doing it now -- great. what is terrible is they are showing so little progress, and these are big companies. it's hard to move the ship, and it's really time for these companies to bring more women and people of color into their board, into their senior management. it's well overdue.
12:12 pm
taylor: that was andrew challenger of challenger gray and christmas and bloomberg's tom giles. and it was not just google announcing departures. the expedia ceo and cfo announced their resignations this week, effective immediately. they clashed with the board's direction. the chairman and vice chairman will take over while the directors look for long-term leadership. and coming up, u.s. antitrust officials broaden their scrutiny of amazon to include its massive cloud computing business. we will have details. and if you like bloomberg news, check us out on the radio, on the bloomberg app, on, and in the u.s. on sirius xm. this is bloomberg. ♪
12:13 pm
12:14 pm
12:15 pm
12:16 pm
12:17 pm
taylor: amazon is dealing with a widening antitrust probe. sources indicate federal officials are looking beyond
12:18 pm
retail operations to include its massive cloud computing business. we explored the issue and potential consequences bloomberg's naomi next and an analyst. >> i think this is a surprise. complaints about amazon's retail business are well known. independent sellers have been talking about ways they think the company is not treating them fairly on this platform, but complaints about amazon web services have been quieter, so the fact that the ftc sees this as an area of concern is significant, especially because amazon web services is such a strong part of the overall business. taylor: as you take a look at the company, respond to what naomi was saying, the retail concerns had been highlighted here. what about that cloud computing business? did it feel anticompetitive? >> the cloud computing business,
12:19 pm
overall, is a multitrillion dollar business. i was at the reinvent conference , which is still going on, and the ceo said that aws' cloud penetration is still 3%. on premises is 97%, of the are whichpremise, it is 97%, is huge. the market share he called out is something publicly released, that is infrastructure as a service market. but as we look at the overall tech market, it is still a several trillion dollar opportunity that aws is a small portion of. i will just say we had the assistant attorney general at the department of justice for antitrust at the meeting and one thing he said was that being big is not bad, but big acting badly is bad, so i will talk about it a little bit more, but that was a very fascinating statement.
12:20 pm
that makes sense why they are looking at practices at aws. taylor: just to follow up on that, when you look at the cloud space from what i can hear on earnings calls, it seems like a competitive business. you have microsoft azure, amazon's cloud business, google is trailing, but they are number we hear it is a competitive three. business. does that raise the bar? >> absolutely. it is becoming increasingly competitive. we talk about the third quarter results where the growth rate decelerated, primarily because aws is seeing pressure from azure. aws until now has had a head start of seven years, but now that is an increasingly competitive market. taylor: naomi, you talk about how early interviews have gone on with clients, customers,
12:21 pm
competitors. what are investigators hoping to glean from those interviews? naomi: we don't know exactly the area of focus, but they will be looking at whether there are specific market practices that amazon is taking that could be deemed anti-competitive. they want to look at whether amazon might be unfairly excluding its rivals, whether amazon is treating independent software service providers differently if they also use other cloud providers like microsoft or google. those are the sort of market practices that the ftc will likely be looking into, and we will see if they find anything. taylor: any sense on how amazon has been responding to this? naomi: amazon has not publicly commented, but we do see them talking more publicly about their cloud business. they have shown no signs that they are worried about this at
12:22 pm
all. so it seems to be at least publicly business as usual for amazon. taylor: does any of this have a real impact on the fundamentals of the business? how are these headlines impacting earnings or the share price? >> i think that the antitrust risk at this point is priced into amazon shares, which have pulled back year to date compared to the overall market. or the retail performance year-to-date, amazon has not done as well, and it is because of this overhang. one of the risks amazon has faced is the overhang from antitrust. in terms of the stock price, it is sort of priced in because it is an overhang on the stock, but in terms of the overall operations of the company, i don't think it is material to the overall business. retail business is very strong, aws is very strong. taylor: that was bloomberg's naomi nix and an rbc analyst.
12:23 pm
khajuria. google is facing an inquiry in the u.k. over its billion-dollar deal to acquire a data company. the competition and markets authority issued an order barring google and looker from integrating services while officials studied the acquisition. google wants looker for its cloud unit. coming up, we hear it over and over, the future is 5g. we find out how qualcomm plans to integrated from qualcomm's ceo. later, one of tiktok's harshest critics, senator marsha blackburn, with her takes on the steps they are taking to address her biggest concerns. this is bloomberg. ♪
12:24 pm
taylor: 5g is a fundamental technology change that will affect the way people do
12:25 pm
business, according to qualcomm's ceo. he sat down with caroline hyde to discuss the importance of 5g and the role qualcomm plays in this technological transition. take a listen. steve: i see it in the same way, you should think of it like electricity or water. these fundamental technology changes that change the way people do business, for example. that is really how people in the industry are thinking about 5g. clearly, it will impact the cellular industry. you will see a lot of benefits to the consumer and operators. you will also see when you have the ability to connect everything in the world, it is going to change the way people do business.
12:26 pm
it is going to change the way factories are structured, it will change the way we deliver health care, logistics. this whole digitization of business and the infrastructure of the world will be very significant. it is actually one of the reasons why you see so much international desire to be first in 5g. it is because everyone knows the fundamental technologies are so important to the rest of the economy, make sure you are not behind. caroline: at the moment, what is the economic impact? do you have gauges of how this will be from the u.s. perspective, global perspective? steve: we commissioned a study that tried to look at the impact of 5g in goods and services out to 2035. the number was $23.2 trillion. a tremendous amount of money. at the point of super big. if we did that same study three or four years ago, it was $12.3. it is already scaling. people are seeing this happening. the things they thought were going to happen are happening. i think it is a very positive element. when we look at the broad customer base or partner, a lot of people talk to us about, hey,
12:27 pm
i know i have to be doing something in 5g. help us figure out what that is. the number of people and the breadth of companies have increased. that is consistent with the proxy value i just gave. caroline: what are some of the more surprising industries that have walked in your door? steve: two of them. one is, i would say industrial, factories. what you want to see in factories is i want to be able to reconfigure it very quickly. and the data that comes off my machines, like a robot that is making a car for example. tremendous amount of data comes off there. it is the actual fundamental ip of the car company. how do i make the car, and how can i reconfigure the factory? what that means is they can now change how quickly they react to the market in terms of having different model year, it can be reconfigured quickly. tremendous desire to do that. the other one is logistics. if you think about a city like new york, moving things around. we have not really done dramatic changes in the technology to
12:28 pm
move things around other than to just create more streets. when you can connect everything and figure out how to optimize that, and you can do all the ai and big data on moving goods and services, people and things around a city, and as cities grow larger, that is a tremendous advantage to those cities. there's a lot of desire for people to get things connected so they can start that in a big way. caroline: do you feel a sense of responsibility that you are a driving force behind this technology, that you are in a race to win it for the u.s. to a certain extent? steve: probably broader than the u.s. our business model if you go way back to the highest level of abstraction, it is about -- it is about creating a bigger pie. you are trying to make the market grow, and particularly in areas where a market is developing that did not develop before, we do well in creating
12:29 pm
value for our shareholders. what we think about is how do we create an industry that does not exist? what are the fundamental technologies we need to create? how do we get them into the standards? how do we scale them, share them with everyone? what we don't do, because we are what we think about is how do we create an industry that does not exist? not good at doing this, is figuring out what is the end product. what we try to figure out is what is the hardest technology and what can we deliver the biggest piece so that people can innovate on top of it? from that perspective, you look and say, wow, logistics is going to be big. digital health care is going to be big. what do we need to do so that 10 years from now, some company will be, that everyone will know will develop and use these technologies? if we can do that, we can deliver for our shareholders and really deliver for this goal to grow the pie, i guess. taylor: that was qualcomm ceo steve mollenkopf. still ahead, tiktok has taken steps to reduce scrutiny but is it enough?
12:30 pm
we will hear from one of their biggest critics, tennessee senator marsha blackburn, next. and bloomberg technology's streaming live on twitter. follow our global breaking news network at quick take on twitter. this is bloomberg. ♪
12:31 pm
12:32 pm
taylor: welcome back to the "best of bloomberg technology." i am taylor riggs. u.s. lawmakers have been after the popular viral video at tiktok for a variety of reasons. the chinese company has been a target of national security and data privacy concerns. one more thing to be concerned about, the fact that it allowed children starting at the age of 13 to make in-app purchases. that is something tennessee senator marsha blackburn highlighted in a letter to thead children starting at the age of ir parent company, saying "the app is paving the way for the chinese government to gain unfettered and unsupervised
12:33 pm
access to our children's lives. -- lives." on tuesday, tiktok responded by upping the minimum age to 18. i spoke to senator marsha blackburn a few days later to find out if that is enough to appease lawmakers. senator blackburn: i'm pleased that they have changed the age. that is an important first step. having these children streaming these videos, buying these emojis that could be converted to cash by recipients, it is just inappropriate. we want to protect children online. we want to make certain that apps are age-appropriate. that was a step. you mentioned the other concerns that are there. we are going to continue to work with them. when you look at the facial recognition, the profiling, the concerns on national security, how the chinese government, beijing -- listen, you cannot
12:34 pm
tell where their commercial sector and military sector begin and end. they are all one and the same. china is determined to build a surveillance state that is not only on their people and certainly we have seen this used on the hong kong protesters and also on the uighurs, so we know what they would do to us, and when you think about the profiles they are building of these children and how they would use that 10 or 15 years down the road, it is of tremendous concern to us. taylor: now that tiktok has responded and raised that minimum age, is that enough for you to recommend it or do you have other concerns about the beijing government using that? senator blackburn: we have other concerns. we will continue to meet with them and with them, and i look
12:35 pm
over to sitting down with them and learning from their leadership team in the coming days. taylor: do you believe they should be under review? senator blackburn: i think it is appropriate to sit down with him and have the discussion and decide if these companies should be under review. or tiktokaces app tikto. it is the right question to be asking. taylor: having discussions with leadership is a great way to start. how do you, though, take it to the next level and prevent data in the u.s. and tiktok to be sent to the beijing government? senator black of the things we -- senator blackburn: one of the things we discussed today in commerce committee was having privacy legislation and data security legislation here in the u.s. you have gdpr which went too far on privacy in the eu, and you have california looking at doing their own legislation, but it is
12:36 pm
time for the u.s. to put a basic federal privacy standard on the books, and this is something that online consumers want. they want the ability to protect their virtual you. they want the ability to secure their identity online. we had a tremendous hearing, great bipartisan participation, and one of the things i really liked, the entire panel of expert witnesses -- they were all female. one of the reasons for that is because women are so concerned about the privacy issue. taylor: i did listen to that, so i did see that, and i want to address that. as we move onto talking here about big tech, one of the tweets you had earlier this week was about google specifically and censoring conservative voices. what are your facts to support that? senator blackburn: when you look at the research work that has
12:37 pm
been done, and we've done a good bit of this work in our office. other groups have done this. you look at the groups that are censored, the posts that are censored that goes left of center and the posts that are censored go right of center, and you see those that go right of center are censored much more heavily than those that are left. there are plenty of numbers out there that you can look at with this. indeed, i think one of the significant things as we worked on this issue, you had a ceo of one of the tech companies say their employees are in california. they bring their personal opinions into the workplace. it is their worldview, and this is something that needs to be a neutral platform if indeed your social media and online connections are going to end up being the new public square.
12:38 pm
taylor: i would love your thoughts on political add policy. you have facebook on one side, google somewhere in the middle, twitter not allowing political ads on their platform. what do you think is the right choice? >> i have to tell you, i think that political speech is free speech. one of the things that i have said so regularly is that i may not agree with someone's opinion on something, but i'm going to defend their right to put that ad up there. of course, we all want ads to be truthful and factual, and many times you will see ads that have documented and sourced what they have actually in their political ad, and i think also we have to keep in mind that our system of governance, a democratic republic, has been well served by having robust, vigorous,
12:39 pm
respectful debate from a two-party angle, and that serves our nation in the cause of freedom well. as we make these discussions, have these discussions about what is going to transpire in the virtual space in relation to political speech, in relation to religious speech, what we want to do is make certain that it is fair and that we are protecting individuals' right to free speech. taylor: that was senator marsha blackburn of tennessee. coming up, french president emmanuel macron once had tech-friendly credentials, now he is calling for greater control over big tex. we have more on france's stance on the digital tax. and later, several states are trying to block t-mobile's takeover of sprint. we will lay out the case from t-mobile's perspective.
12:40 pm
this is bloomberg. ♪
12:41 pm
taylor: u.k. prime minister boris johnson is joining the chorus of political figures to discuss taxing big tech. in an interview with a british tv channel, he said "when it comes to taxing internet giants on revenue, i do think we should be taxing them properly. and i will be bringing forward measures to do that." earlier this week, the u.s. warned italy to not go ahead with a planned tax on u.s. tax giants -- tech giants. like amazon and google. the french president has already on global techax that collect 25 million
12:42 pm
their brick-and-mortar peers. i got more from laura davidson and washington, d.c. laura: they , monday. are looking at a tax, saying the consumers in france are not necessarily paying for the service but that the consumers are there and france should get a piece of that pie. france was the first to take that step and you are seeing a lot of other countries, the u.k., new zealand looking at passing those laws. in some cases, we have seen more of these get on the books. this is concerning because the u.s. sees this as their tax revenue. these are american-based companies, and they are saying, if anyone gets to tax facebook, google, amazon, that is us. taylor: it is interesting how the conversation started. has the conversation shifted now to an antitrust or data privacy concern? laura: that is part of the concern, but really, the big tension point is you get the
12:43 pm
u.s. saying, look, you don't get this money. all of the other countries are saying, you are operating here, you have employees here, our residents are using the service. what we have seen at the large multilateral level, you have 133 countries sitting down and trying to see if they can figure out some system of which company gets to tax which company's portion of their revenue. it is a massively complicated thing to do. you have on one side of the other, you have the u.s. and france. france is saying, we will abandon our digital tax if you can get 132 people to agree to something. taylor: how does the u.s. respond to protect our entrepreneurial spirit in the tech sector? laura: that is something we are waiting to hear about today. the u.s. trade representative has been looking at this. several months ago, they opened up this investigation to see if there should be some sort of trade reaction.
12:44 pm
they are looking at tariffs, some way to punish france to say, look, if you will do this to our tech companies, we will do something to some of your products. president trump in the past talked about tariffs on french wine, for example. we do not know exactly will be in this report. nothing will be immediate. it will be a 90 day waiting period with comments and back and forth. the u.s. is seriously looking at starting a tit-for-tat battle here. taylor: it is notable that they are not ruling out breaking up big tech. how would you do that in the eu, given that they are american companies? laura: this is really difficult, too. they are trying to figure out, where would you draw a line of what is big tech and what is a smaller startup? also, this would also affect pharma, manufacturing. it is a really big 800 pound gorilla that makes it really hard to get every side to agree
12:45 pm
to the tax. at the end of the day, this means that some countries like the u.s. could end up losing out on tax revenue while some countries like india and china could end up winning. taylor: that was bloomberg's laura davison. is among theke european perspectives we tried to capture this week. i got the unique opportunity to sit down with the french minister of digital affairs on thursday. >> i think there is a global concern within the u.s. and europe of how we set up a new regulatory framework. there is taxation, privacy, antitrust. that is adapted to the new age. even the biggest companies acknowledge the fact we need a new level playing field. the real question is the set up of that playing field. that is what we are favoring an international solution.
12:46 pm
it's true we have been introducing a national tax, the main issue we are fighting for is to find solutions at the oecd level. there were a lot of discussions with the europeans and americans. taylor: do you view your tax as a steppingstone to a broader, multilateral solution? cedric: president trump and macron have agreed to the sentiment that we need an international solution. but in the meantime, france would be introducing their own tax. but there is some difference in the amount of money the company would be paying. we refund them if the international taxes lowered. the main issue is finding an international solution. taylor: i want to talk about that. you want an international solution. you've gone the route of an a new glenn aderholt -- unilateral deal.
12:47 pm
the oecd appears to want more of a multilateral deal. those are in conflict. has that hurt progress? cedric: so far, it hasn't because there was a deal i was mentioning. we have the deal. we would rather favorite an international solution but there , would be this tax in the meantime. if there were differences, we would refund the company. now there is this announcement from the u.s. i think the main issue is that we can sign at the oecd level, and this is what is at stake. it could be agreed to by all the countries. technically, france has been making many steps forward towards the u.s. solution now that the question is raised to the u.s. administration and is agreeing to the solution on the table. taylor: what do you want the broad framework to look like?
12:48 pm
cedric: and the suggestion made, there were two pillars. the first is minimum taxation. the second pillar is we have to rethink the way we assess the value of the presence of the company. not based on physical things, but digital footprints in some countries. we have to reassess the way we assess presence and footprint. wethe digital world and also see in an international world, you don't need to rely only on physical presence in one country. taylor: how does a digital tax help us deal with data privacy? and antitrust? cedric: i think those are totally different issues. there is a broader concern about the footprint of those companies , our economies, and our democracies. there is a set of solutions and things to address them a privacy
12:49 pm
-- address, and privacy is one of them. also, taxation, regulation of hateful speech, and things like that. we have to rethink the whole tomework of our regulation adapt it to the new world. taylor: the french president has said either a unilateral deal with the u.s. will go through or he will look for a multilateral deal with oecd. which do you think is more likely to go forward at this point? cedric: i think the ball is on the u.s.' side. as soon as they are ready to agree to the oecd solution, everything would be on the table. the cash thing is if does the u.s. to agree to this solution, or should we find something more european? taylor: so if the u.s. does not go ahead some of the oecd's proposals and they instead
12:50 pm
retaliate with $2.4 billion in taxes on french products, are you prepared? are those countries prepared for retaliatory tariffs? cedric: actually, i think this would not be a good solution either for the u.s., france, or the companies. europe has also said it would favor the oecd solutions, but if it were not chosen, we would take initiative at our own level. if there is retaliation from the u.s., europe said it would be backing up france. so we still hope that there is room for discussion, and we can find a solution. taylor: you said europe is backing up france and wants a global solution, but frankly you are the only ones to go through with this unilateral tax as of yet. cedric: there are other countries that have been introducing taxes in this respect.
12:51 pm
italy and spain have passed it and austria has passed it. it is not only a french thing, and the european commission has been saying that it wants a tax that is adapted to that new framework. the oed seevering solution, and adapted for a european solution they need to create that level playing field . the best level is at the international level. but if the americans do not want to go forward, then we would go for european. taylor: you really feel like it is behind you? cedric: that was voiced by the european commissioner on trade, that europe would back up france but favors an international solution. if, at the end of the day we have to go into that discussion, then europe will be backing france. taylor: i want to go back to the retaliatory tariffs we were
12:52 pm
talking about. about 2.4 billion dollars in goods. cedric: it opens the period of discussion of 30 days, and it could be not as broad. there are still discussions. of ifnot know the set up there would be a retaliation if it were to exist. taylor: that was french minister of digital affairs, cedric o. still ahead, t-mobile and sprint will face fewer opponents after antitrust trial at a cost. we will explore next. this is bloomberg. ♪
12:53 pm
taylor: three states have agreed to drop their challenge to the merger of t-mobile and sprint.
12:54 pm
t-mobile brokered settlements with nevada, texas, and colorado in a multistate, antitrust suit. the case is scheduled to go to trial december 9 in manhattan. on tuesday, jennifer reid provided legal analysis of the case. jennifer: it is actually no four states. we had another one recently, so mississippi is in that group, too. i think it is not surprising, to be honest, that some states have settled with the companies. i think initially, when the lawsuit was filed in june, you may have had different reasons. some may have been just concerned about making sure they negotiated a remedy beyond what they negotiated with the doj and fcc, to ensure that some of those promises about 5g buildout would go to their state. and go to the populations of their state. if you look at the four settlements, they are similar. they all involve promises to build out 5g to certain portions
12:55 pm
of the population within three years, then more within six years. some include payments. and some include guaranteed employment levels. taylor: do we have any sense if this will go to trial december 9, or do we think we could see a more broad-based settlement before then? jennifer: we could see more settlements, but i am very certain it will go to trial. it starts monday. i don't think new york and california are interested in settling the suit. i think something else will have to give to break that logjam. the parties are gearing up. they just filed pretrial briefs. the states that are still in , which are 13 states, plus the district of columbia, look pretty dug-in still. taylor: i want to show you a chart on my terminal at ,utonomous -- at gtv basically tracking t-mobile in blue and sprint's share price in white. sprint pretty much unchanged going back to last year or so. analysts are a little worried. a lot of analysts are hoping for
12:56 pm
a deal because they think states have a really good argument as they headed to trial. how much pressure is this putting really on sprint and t-mobile to make a deal? jennifer: i think it is putting a lot of pressure on them. this has been a really extended interim period. since the announced merger until now. it really puts a strain on -- companies' business, particularly the seller's business. they have a lot riding on it and sprint did not negotiate an antitrust breakup fee. that means however they were hurt during the interim period, they will not get recompense for it after the trial if it is blocked. i think there is a lot riding on it, and i think they are working hard to settle with the rest of the states. taylor: any sense what the competitors' feelings are? t-mobile's coming out and saying they are first to get 5g and they are going to be a real threat if this merger goes through. have we heard anything from the competitors about this?
12:57 pm
jennifer: they have been quiet for a reason. when a competitor can complain about a deal, it can have a strange effect on how the doj looks at the deal. a competitor complaining could suggest that the deal is actually competitive and force them to lower prices and compete more strongly. verizon and at&t have been quiet about it. i think they are just watching because i think there is a good argument here for the states in trial, and i think it is hard to predict what will happen and whether this deal will be able to get closed in 2020. taylor: that doesn't this edition of "the best of bloomberg technology." we will bring you the latest in tech through the week. in new each day, 5:00 york and 2:00 p.m. in san francisco. bloomberg technology is livestreaming on twitter.
12:58 pm
and be sure to follow our global breaking news network at quicktake. this is bloomberg. ♪
12:59 pm
1:00 pm
[chanting] stephen: beijing calls it hong kong's worst crisis in the more than two decades since the 1997 handover. >> hong kong's protesters have repeatedly used dangerous tools to attack police, these actions constitute seriously violent crimes and are starting to show signs of terrorism. stephen: the protesters would probably agree, the city is in crisis, but for a different -- for very different reason. >> they are using emergency ordinance which is not the way out.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on