tv Bloomberg Technology Bloomberg June 3, 2019 11:00pm-12:01am EDT
♪[music] >> i'm emily chang in san francisco. this is bloomberg technology. tech in the firing line of the u.s. government. andabet, facebook, apple amazon may be set to face anti-trust probes. apple as itny over rolled out its new software and hardware plan. key takeng you the takeaways. and the u.k. may not agree with everything president trump says, but could the two sides find common grounds when it comes to
huawei? to our top story here. alphabet, facebook, apple and amazon tumbled on monday. they could be the target of u.s. probes.st in google's case, the department anjustice is mulling investigation into potentially anti-competitive tactics. meantime, the federal trade commission would oversee a look facebook'sr practices harm competition in the digital market. and facebook make up more than half of digital ad revenue in the united states. amazon doesn't dominate the digit ad market but it does own, up to half of the e-commerce market. potential amazon probe would fall under the oversight of the f.t.c. got sally, with the open markets institute. to that, she was assistant attorney general in new york
state. also, executive editor for global tech, brad stone. wow. lot.unds like a but none of this means any of these branches of government are actually investigating any of companies on anti-trust. just that they are now sharing responsibilities. correct? >> that's right. i think what we have here is a kind of political reality. not necessarily or not yet a legal one. i think the tech environment now to some,d complex and intimidating. so our two anti-trust agencies have met to kind of divvy up the playing speak.so to >> sally, does this mean they will, or that an investigation into any of these companies could be imminent? >> i'm cautiously optimistic that there will be investigations, because the f.t.c. and the d.o.j. don't divvyingy talk about up matters unless they plan on doing an investigation. the process is called clearance. they don't normally have clearance discussions unless they plan on doing something.
clear, you're optimistic because you are in favor of breaking up all of companies or believe there's a case that they should be broken up? in favor because i think they need to be, at a minimum investigated. all of theow, once different anti-competitive conduct is unearthed, i think the besten you decide remedy, whether it's breaking a, whether it's bringing microsoft case. i wouldn't take breaking up or acquisitionlegal off of the table. the first step is to investigate. optimistic that they're investigating. >> brad, is there any difference in the way any of these companyare being explored? >> there has to be. completelyould be different. they're all different companies, different market strategies, domination.vels of but, you know, i think what we're seeing here is a kind of a ine political consensus washington. you know, not just among folks
like sally at the open markets on the left and right, on capitol hill. i mean, you have senators like missouri, kind of talking in a way about how tech is bad. innovation source of but a source of peril. of course, there are sources on think that social media companies are unfairly biased. folks on the left who worry about foreign companies have companies to manipulate elections. f.t.c.'re seeing is the and d.o.j. reacting to that. >> how much of that is a result the white house wants to happen and how much is it the result of some sort of consensus that something needs to happen? >> i think it's more a result of pressure --ing mounting pressure around the globe. we're talking about matters that started investigating 10 years ago. the u.s. is really late to the game. there are jurisdictions around the world who have been investigating these companies. so i think it's just mounting
pressure from consumers, from the left and right side of the political spectrum. the political will to enforce our anti-trust laws. >> is there any difference in how the d.o.j. and f.t.c. might investigate? into theshould we read fact that the d.o.j. got apple and google, the f.t.c. got facebook? >> well, the f.t.c. has been looking at facebook regarding privacy. privacy and anti-trust can converge because of the competitive implications of data. so right now, the f.t.c. is probably the resident expert on facebook because its into the consent decree potential violation has been going on for over a year. lookst.c. traditionally at retail. so it makes sense for it to have jurisdiction over amazon. now, previously it was the f.t.c. that had investigated google. little bit strange that now we're having the d.o.j. look again at the same conduct passed on years ago. but, you know, i think it makes each -- in each --
that each agency would take two companies. really too much for own.to habitua handle on their >> brad, what does this mean for investors? these shares of all companies take a beating. there's somerly macro things happening around the world and in the economy that's weighing on all these stocks. it's not good. two agencies with subpoena power theseill be crawling over very secretive operations. nothing good can come of it for these tech companies. think there are varying levels of exposure. i think the case is harder for you mentionede as before, it's not clearly monopolistic in at least many or the markets where it operates. but look, part of what is lots of little celcellars, limits voices that - have beences that making complaints for years.
>> sally, what could be the impact on the 2020 u.s. election? >> yes. think this could have a major impact in terms of the loebing that we're going to see, because anti-trust investigations take time. so we're not going to see the investigationany probably before the presidential election. the current leadership at d.o.j. and f.t.c., they're quite conservative. veryhave not been aggressive in anti-trust enforcement. ofif you have a change administration, it could be a big deal for whoever ultimately how these investigations are resolved. >> and some experts are saying on for five-plus years. all right, sally and brad, thank you both. president trump is in the u.k. fora state visit. but he's -- for a state visit. he's got another item on the agenda, trying to convince the government to ban huawei from the 5g network.
filed this report and talked about what huawei means for the next british prime minister. >> it is what ironic, that with president here to commemorate 75 years since the cooperation between the british states, thatd huawei is such a divisive issue. the president is pushing hard u.k. to ban huawei from the 5g buildup. a difficultes decision. it may be possible to build the huawei butwithout it's certainly going to be difficult. an in a post-brexit world, the u.k. may need china, and china may push back against the u.k. from thiss out huawei project. however, the president is indicating that there will be significant security implications if huawei participates. front-runners who may succeed theresa may as prime minister are indicating that a u-turn may be possible, including the home sector and
the -- secretary and the foreign secretary. it will certainly feature a significant portion of conference with many asking questions about which way the u.k. is ultimately going to turn. point, theresa may is backing huawei's participation. notafter friday, she will be prime minister. buckingham palace. >> coming up, the next generation of software and features. announcements were overshadowed by the threat of government scrutiny. discuss. check us out on the radio, .isten on the bloomberg app this is bloomberg. ♪
>> apple unveiled a new era for at its annualare worldwide developers conference siri and the mac pro, even in breaking up itunes. here's apple senior vice president of software engineering talking about the new version of ios. a huge release, packed with lots of capabilities. moree know that nothing is important to our iphone users than performance. top to year, we worked bottom on the system, making everything faster, that you do most, things like unlocking with face i.d., now 30% faster. [cheering] >> but on one of its most important days of the year, the upstaged byas also a report of a possible u.s.trust probe led by the department of justice. i want to bring in mark and technology research president attended the event. so bob, talk to us about the scene on the inside.
was there any sense of what was happening on the outside? >> no, not at all. government scrutiny could now be looming? >> no. there was nothing about it. developers. they're the most enthusiastic fan boys and girls that there are. event.e there was a lot of noise and clapping for just about everything that apple showed, mode.ularly for dark let's be honest, it's not that big of a deal. it looks cool and that is great. it was interesting, because it classic case of apple showing, you know, the glitzy do so well,ngs they yet also playing some serious catch-up on some other areas. at things like apple apps and you're like, didn't i see that in android three years ago? all in all, i think there's enthusiasm there. mistakes.nize some they're actually pulling apart big products like itunes and ios. now that's ios for the phone. so, you know, i think they're kind of resetting themselves in
couple different areas. all in all, it was a reasonable event. me, i thought mac pro was really cool. stand? about the 1,000 there were comments about that. >> yes. that's the talk of bloomberg today. pro is based 6,000, this new display, 5,499.s but the display doesn't come with a stand. maybe you want to come to my house and hold it up for me while i work. you buy this stand, an extra to put it together. >> i cost more than 1,000, just so you know. >> i know. about what the -- you know, the significant software changes as you this new going into era for the way we access itunes sort of going its own way essentially. >> so a few of the highlight things. os.is ipad so to date, you had ios on the iphone, the ipad and the ipod
touch. what apple did, they decided to rebrand the version that runs on frame it as sort of its own os. it's the same ios as before. they're just changing the name and adding new features for ipad like ao make it more computer. that's great. but it's to be seen if people to start ditching their p.c.'s because of these changes. >> how significant is this? >> mark brings up a great point. it was the same question that i have, is like, you know, they advancements to make the ipad much more computer-like, although missing the mouse still, which is critical. but so it does become this interesting gray area that between ipads and mac os. obviously on the high end, mac can push the mac pros for people who really want it. mainstream middle ground, they're creating more question marks. the there are all developments around project catalysts to enable ipad apps to macs. the
there's a lot of crossover. some say it's good. some say it's confusing. now i've got to develop for five i really want if to support all of apple. make it the idea to easier for developers? >> exactly. thank you. is that there is this -- what they're calling project catalyst. name. the public we first reported on this two years ago. can develop an ipad application and now run it on the mac as well by clicking a in the developer kit. so that should mitigate that a little bit. mouse, soabout the apparently you can connect the mouse as an accessibility most users. more but the thing i want to know, if watching this keynote, some of are actuallytures kind of confusing. i feel like i'll be able to get the hang of it pretty quickly, the people at apple who are developing these things obviously know what they're doing. mainstream users,
people coming to the ipad for the first time, ditching max and for these devices? i think it's going to be difficult to get a hang of all gestures. >> i wonder if it will be a generational behavioral shift. think there's some of that. even the demo didn't work once twice. so clearly i think there are -- and then apple used to talk about you'd shake your device. you get these weird changes over that are alltions efforts to overcome the fact that certain pieces of it aren't there on some devices. some devices, you have a of interaction. they're trying to figure out ways to move forward. is quite goodpple at coming up with these things but it is still hard to make these changes. privacy, theirup evolving offerings. there's a new more natural, completely computer-generated siri, right? but mark, what do you think this anti-trust issue?
we don't know a lot about it. probet know, if the happened, it would be the d.o.j. >> i was thinking about this earlier. i think apple, even though crosshairs, it's because they are a big tech company. but one of the things they say stage, and this is one of the things i happen to believe, they're not a tech company like the others. the iphone market share, it's way less than 50% globally, right? you look at ipad market share, that has come down. market share, if you just looked at it from a pure market share standpoint, is flop, right? you look at the apple tv, that market share. in terms of the general anti-trust behaviors that you at, appleally look doesn't hit a lot of those check boxes. >> even though they are the gatekeeper for a lot of the apps used on any apple device? thinkt is true, but i they do make a good argument given that it is their store. somedid try to put in
places to make it a little bit more open. they came up with a lot of new developer tools. they could easily say we're any othere and beyond platform in order to be inclusive to developers. see why on the surface it could be an issue. if you really look at it, i one, just onn this this one maybe, has a good argument. >> all right. in beta right now. most of it will roll out in the fall and we'll be watching. ok. mark for bloomberg, bob o'donnell, thank you both, as always. up, turning the screws on big tech. a former washington insider how the government might be planning to scrutinize. next. this is bloomberg. ♪
currently the distinguished fellow at georgetown institute. counselort, she was a for the federal trade commission. so gigi, what is your reading on this? it's not necessarily breaking news but it certainly seems like the tides are turning. >> it isn't breaking news but it's significant. look, i think the important thing to know is this is very, very early in the process. f.t.c.,fact that the the federal trade commission, the department of justice, have techivvied up the companies among themselves, the fact that i just heard that the anti-trust subcommittee is going to hold a bipartisan investigation, including a series of hearings on digital platforms and competition, it government is getting serious. is the earlyt days, it certainly is an indication that this that bothtion and democrats and republicans want to look at the size of these and also at their
power. >> we just actually got the the house judiciary on this bipartisan investigation ato digital markets, just quick headline here. they say a small number of platformsnregulated have extraordinary power over commerce communication and information online. where could all this lead? could all oflong this attack? >> well, let me answer your second question first. it can take many, many years. let me give you an example. of at&t took eight years. so this is not something that is easily orappen quickly. ok? and that was the breakup and it mean that's what's gonna happen here, although folks are calling for possibly breaking up companies.se so it starts with investigations. it starts with enormous amount of fact finding. i mean, this takes a long time. now, the federal trade 2011 did ann
investigation on facebook, apple and google to see if they were acting competitively. they determined that indeed they not. but even that took two years. so this is a long process. and it starts with a lot of fact-finding. it starts with talking to an of people, competitors, you know, other community andech io's, nonprofits like the one used to work for. so it really takes a long time. this is law enforcement. processnot a regulatory like, you know, i participated in at the f.t.c. this is actually a law enforcement proceedings and they engage in an awful lot of process before they decide, can we bring a case in court? it?ld we drop and congress, of course, can consider doing it own thing. it could pass legislation. are certain areas, particularly in privacy, portabilitydata
where i wish they really would act. >> right. president trump and perhaps even next president could be long gone by the time some of these investigations, if they happen, concluded. of course this is all happening in the milligrams of a trade -- in the middle of a trade war china. there's been much talk about some of the tactics or the trump chinastration tactics on could be more focused on slowing china down than speeding the u.s. up. in an interview, made the case that breaking up much lessould make it competitive and perhaps at a techvantage to chinese companies, which aren't facing potential breakup. here?t a consideration competitiveness, not just within but withd states china? >> that doesn't concern me. iread that statement and thought -- i frankly had to scratch my head. i didn't understand that at all. matter is,t of the we have anti-trust laws. are there to protect
consumers and competition. and there is bipartisan agreement, and there is great concern in the consumer companiesthat these have gotten too big and powerful. now, again, i think talking about breaking up the companies at this juncture is a little bit premature. investigations have to happen first. now, that may be a solution. solutions. be other there could be regulatory solutions. i think, you know, sheryl is jumping the gun a little bit, where there are investigations to be had and determinations to be made as to whether breaking up the orpanies will actually help maybe hurt. >> right. certainly making an argument help herbelieves will case, or facebook's case. so much foryou joining us. scrutiny is-trust weighing on the markets. later we'll here from marriott
isn't just a store. it's a save more with a new kind of wireless network store. it's a look what your wifi can do now store. a get your questions answered by awesome experts store. it's a now there's one store that connects your life like never before store. the xfinity store is here. and it's simple, easy, awesome.
emily: this is "bloomberg technology." i'm emily chang in san francisco. a selloff in big tech dragged down u.s. stocks on monday on a report that the government is considering antitrust investigations into facebook, google, apple and amazon. the nasdaq at one point plunged more than 2%. the faang stocks marking the ninth largest drop on record. joining us to discuss is neuberger berman senior research analyst daniel flax. no official antitrust probe happening. just the doj and ftc dividing up responsibility for potential antitrust probes should they happen, but investors should not -- investors did not take this
lightly. what does this mean for the markets? daniel: i think it means these companies are potentially going to have to adjust their business models. what is important to these companies and the societies that these companies operate in is to bring a level of transparency to everything. if we think about their platforms, the need to demonstrate that people or other companies that might participate are able to do so in a fair way. i think the other piece of this is around user data. the companies need to do a better job explaining to their users how the data is being used and obviously the business models of these companies which make money off of that data. i think if we step back, this is a necessary part of how these companies need to evolve over the next few years. we do see opportunities in these names like alphabet, like facebook. we also see opportunities in apple and amazon. each of these companies have
different complexities, but ultimately, we see good growth opportunities for them over the next few years. emily: we have been talking to our guests throughout the day about this antitrust issue, these antitrust issues and the threat of pending tech regulation. take a listen to what some of these other voices had to say. >> there is a growing recognition that kind of wild, wild west days of social media platform companies is coming to an end. >> we need to make it -- make certain that they are responsible to the americans using their platform. >> when you look at the big picture in the digital advertising space, the question i would pose is, would the ftc allow chase or goldman sachs to own the nasdaq? the answer is absolutely not. >> when you start regulating, a lot of bad things can happen. emily: comments from lawmakers and the president over the last
several months. do you think one particular company, that there is a better case for one particular company than the others? an aggressive antitrust investigation? daniel: we will have to see the data that comes out and how each one of these companies and the cases on their own merit. when we look at facebook, we need to get more insight on how core facebook is operating versus instagram versus the newer platforms like messenger and whatsapp. google, we need more insight in core search, youtube. each of these companies have different businesses and different ramifications for each. without getting further details, we will have to wait and try to better understand how this will evolve. however from an investment standpoint, this uncertainty and the risks associated with it are very much -- a big chunk of it is being captured in the price today. obviously, you saw the shares
sell off. if one were to take a longer-term perspective, we think this presents opportunities for some of these companies. emily: that is an interesting argument. other experts have said today that perhaps a long-term antitrust investigation, not knowing what the results might be, could actually increase alphabet's value over the long-term or be better for alphabet's market cap and valuation. explain that argument to me. daniel: it would really depend at its core if the company is able to continue to innovate. for example, if the core search business, if they continue to innovate and drive value for users, that can still grow at very good outsized clips. youtube, the asset is continuing to seek terrific growth. the google cloud platform which is more aimed at enterprise users beginning to shift more their businesses to the cloud --
when we speak to customers, that is in the very early stages. i think if the regulatory framework comes onto the core search business, assuming google in that case is able to manage and demonstrate they are doing -- that they are fair and just in terms of companies using their platform, that can ultimately strengthen it over the medium to long-term. to be clear, there are going to be competitive risks. all of these companies face challenges every which way. we have to look beyond the u.s. market where, globally, it remains a very competitive landscape. if these companies are able to innovate while managing through these complexities and putting in place remedies that are appropriate, there is opportunity to create additional value, in our view. but, at the end of the day, if their business practices get
severely impaired, you would see the revenue growth rates potentially slow. larger investments could pressure margins. i think that is what the market is busy pricing right now. when we look at the innovation piece, we see a lot that we like. emily: we heard some of the executives of these companies say, we welcome regulation. mark zuckerberg has said i welcome the right regulation. i wonder if there is an argument to be made that some sort of regulation, rules of the road could be good for these companies because many of the problems they have run into is a result of this sort of lack of transparency. the confusion of misinformation, in the case of facebook, the content. could rules create clarity or certainty among these companies? daniel: i think regulatory framework could begin to bring a little bit of clarity.
these markets, technologies are changing very quickly. the framework needs to be a living, breathing organism. it might be different in different countries. so, we need to start, we need to do more to bring a little bit of oversight. but if we look at other industries such as health care, utilities, financial services, there are a lot of other industries that are being regulated which ultimately is, i think for the participants, beneficial. technology has a lot of the same elements. what these companies are bringing, products and services, are adding a lot of value. i think when we add more and more rules, these rules need to adapt as these technology environments change. there is no silver bullet in my view. we need to take a thoughtful approach and be willing to change as the technologies evolve.
emily: daniel flax, lots of different forces at play here. we will be following them all. u.s. businesses are coming to terms with the new tariffs and trade war. marriott international has big expansion plans for china and throughout the asia-pacific region. arne sorenson, the company 's president and ceo, joined bloomberg television earlier to talk about trade and how the company is stepping up competition with airbnb. arne: we started our pilot there last year so we have about 2000 units when we launched a month ago. a big part of that is in europe. you watch the footage of president from visiting the u.k. there is nothing like the pageantry which is rolled out for something like this. it tells you a little bit about how attractive europe is as a destination, particularly for tourism. american travelers are heading into high season. that business will be strong this year for hotels.
>> this home rental business is perceived as a direct charge into airbnb territory. is that fair? arne: we are not ignoring airbnb, but it is a different focus. we watched this business evolve over the course of this last decade. a big chunk of it has been the cheaper stay. the extra bedroom or studio apartment. the focus of our business is to deliver something we can stand behind so that people can feel like the experience they are getting is not risky. they have services standing by. they have key rental. they have a clean apartment. we are going into the whole home space which you can say is the upper end of the market in terms of square footage. >> you also have your loyalty program. you have infrastructure. does that give you a leg up?
arne: absolutely. the general thesis is the bonvoy loyalty program, which envelops all 30 of our brands will be the connection. you can earn points staying in homes and villas, redeem points. you end up with connectivity our competitors do not have. >> moving to your ambitious plans in china. on your last earnings call, i want to read what you set about china. china and the u.s. seemed to have stepped away of the brink of the looming trade war. while we are a bit more cautious, we remain optimistic china will be a positive market for us and present exciting growth opportunities. two months later, what would that sentence be? arne: another reminder not to climb up the pole of production. >> but march 1, it was a very different world. arne: it was a different sensibility. today, the trade conversations
were much more apprehensive, business conditions on the ground in china sort of reflect the chinese economy which is diverse. it's big. we see markets like beijing and shanghai that are stronger than some others. one thing we forget as americans is our business in china is really about the chinese economy. the majority of our guests are chinese. even in markets like shanghai. the question becomes not what is happening with trade narrowly, but instead what is the impact of trade conversation on the way chinese gdp is growing? one of the reasons for a bit of optimism even in the midst of all of this is the chinese are transitioning to a consumer economy. they know that is important for domestic political reasons. that tends to be a driver of demand. while we will be a little less optimistic about the tone, i think we stay quite optimistic about china long-term. >> you say it is the chinese economy. we heard over the weekend that
perhaps china might be looking into fedex. there is this list of unreliable entities they have. have you seen any evidence they might take action against your interest in china because you could become an innocent bystander that is really injured in this trade war? arne: we have not seen that yet. we don't know the direction things are going. we do know the 360 open hotels we have in china, 100% are owned by chinese real estate. we manage the business for chinese real estate investors. our economics are not simple american economics. yes, we are an american company. we are in management fees. but the bulk of the profits go to chinese investors. how you play that politically, we will have to see. emily: arne sorenson, marriott international president and ceo. coming up, boingo shares under pressure this year, but could a slew of new satellites usher in a new era for wi-fi?
emily: wi-fi technology has been around for two decades. while it has certainly transformed consumer technology, it still has drawbacks. costs, the unreliability, the service that a lot of us like to hate. boingo is selling access to a global network of 600,000 hotspots. how will the next 20 years of wi-fi be different? ceo mike finley joins me know from new york. let's start with earnings. you reported results and shares are under pressure. what is your response to some of the skepticism from the market? mike: we have had 18 consecutive quarters of revenue growth. we have exceeded our guidance for 20 quarters in a row.
we have met the guidance that we have for the first quarter and that we are claiming for the rest of this year. we are performing according to our plan. we continue to invest. we have lots of opportunity in our cellular business. our wi-fi business continues to grow. the combination of those two together is what separates us. we have a new opportunity in multifamily apartment buildings and student housing we are developing as we speak. emily: let's talk about the future of wi-fi. what was once new and innovative now can sometimes seem old and expensive. what do you think the next 20 years of wi-fi will look like with elon musk sending satellites into space? jeff bezos trying to become a provider of space internet. how will that change the business or will it? mike: i think wi-fi in and of itself continues to evolve.
wi-fi 6 is starting to come out now. we have recently done a trial at john wayne airport in orange county. higher-speed, lower latency. many more devices can be used at the same speed. better security. that is what wi-fi continues to evolve and you will continue to see devices and capabilities come with that. the second piece of it is, we are a connectivity company. we offer the combination of cellular and wi-fi together. as new technologies come out, that is -- come out, if that is satellite, those types of capabilities will be enabled in devices. when you have a company like boingo that is a neutral host company in large airports and multifamily housing and military bases, in stadiums, we will be able to enable all that technology so the end-user can benefit from all the
capabilities in front of them. emily: let's talk about 5g. there is a lot of excitement around it. some say a lot of hype and challenges given what is happening with huawei and the fact that huawei is really the leader in 5g networking equipment. but the united states has blacklisted huawei from u.s. suppliers and is trying to convince other governments not to use their products. where does this leave the future of 5g? mike: 5g is here. it has been launched in the u.s. there is infrastructure companies outside of huawei that have been in front of that. the networks that the u.s. operators are launching with. devices are coming in rapid fashion. the chips that companies like qualcomm not only developed but now have in the marketplace. there was a laptop that lenovo and qualcomm announced that has 5g in it. it is not really hype, it is here. it will emerge over time. i think it will come faster than
4g did. part of that is because you have infrastructure vendors and device makers are seeing it is going to scale quickly. you have operators all over the world that are launching and want to launch 5g products. i think that is being worked on a long time. boingo will take the 5g capabilities and implement them into all the venues we have. you mix that with wi-fi that is coming and it is really in incredible offering that comes to end-users. emily: how are the u.s.-china trade tensions impacting your business? go go, the in-flight wi-fi company, has said the trump administration's concerns about zte slowed some of their plan to switch to a faster network. mike: that was a completely separate thing because they had -- zteing cte equipment
equipment. i don't see it impacting us at all. we don't have any of that equipment in any of our products and facilities. like i said, we work in the u.s. with all the u.s. operators. when we deploy our networks, we are deploying it with the equipment they are using. when we combine that with wi-fi, it is a significant offering to our end-users. emily: all right, very curious to see what the next 20 years of wi-fi looks like. mike finley, thank you. we are continuing our conversation on big tech regulation. we will hear from jeffrey solomon. his thoughts on potential probes facing apple, facebook, google, and amazon. this is bloomberg. ♪
jeffrey: for the last 10 years, it has been bad to be big. it started after the financial crisis. you look at dodd-frank and the regulations that came out for the big banks. i think big tech is suffering from the same. it is not a republican or democrat thing. it is a thing the american population is looking at. a lot of skepticism of bigger companies. i think seizing on those same populist concerns from both parties, the doj and ftc will look at big companies to see what they are doing. >> why now though? this has been a problem since the financial crisis but why go after these companies at this point when the economy is doing well and we have an election coming up? or maybe it is because the election is coming up. jeffrey: you do it when you can. i think big tech has largely sidestepped a lot of the issues financial firms have been accused of. this is not the first time it has happened. the clinton administration went after microsoft so we have seen this before.
prior to that, a lot of people went after ibm in the late 1980's. this kind of thing ebbs and flows. it is not great to be big. >> europe has been looking at it and whacking out the fines. >> the u.s. antitrust versus microsoft for how this should unfold, or should we look to the european fines against google? jeffrey: i am not sure there are precedents. we never really had this many big tech companies look at at one time. in the case of microsoft, it was an antitrust situation. here, it is not clear to me it is antitrust. a lot of concern about security, breaches and what the companies are doing with people's personal information. i think it is an excuse for the government to muck around and take a look at what is going on under the covers of these companies. again, i think it is bad to be big right now.
in a populist environment both from democrats and republicans, it is tough to be big. >> keeping your research analysts busy. talk about what else cowen seeing the effects of your business. investment banking, capital markets. it has been a rough ride looking at the effect of what has happened in terms of uber's ipo, lyft. what ipos from your perspective in the tech area? jeffrey: we have spent a lot of our time in biotech and health care. since the jobs act, which is really what unleashed the latest wave of ipos, there have been 1000 companies that have gone public in the united states. almost 70% are sub-$1 billion market cap companies. 300 are biotech companies alone. only 4600 companies in the u.s. listed today. when you talk about 25% of the companies listed in the united states today going public in the
last six or seven years, a great story about how small companies have dominated the investment landscape. what we do is try to identify those emerging growth companies or disruptive companies that are , not quite at the big size of the tech companies. a lot of press and discussion around the unicorns and how big tech stays private longer. the reality is capital-intensive companies like biotech companies need to have access to capital. leadersify those great in that space so we can help them get access to public capital. i would take a contrarian view and say small-company ipos and small-company financing has not seen a decade like this probably since the 1990's. emily: cowen ceo jeffrey solomon. we will continue to cover all the headlines on these potential antitrust probes as we have them. that does it for this edition of "bloomberg technology." we are livestreaming on twitter. check us out, @technology. follow our global breaking news network, tictoc, on twitter.
IN COLLECTIONSBloomberg TV Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service
Uploaded by TV Archive on