♪ >> from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> sam mendes is here. he is featured in a documentary about the 10 month international

tour of his production of richard iii. his productions include king lear and the 24th bond film he is directing due in 2015. he is very busy man, and why not? welcome back. >> thank you, charlie. >> let me talk about the projects. first, broadway, "cabaret." why are you hell-bent on giving us one production after another of "cabaret"? >> this production has been part of my life for nearly 21 years. i did it at the dunmore and we -- it was 1992. 22 years ago.

when we turned the theater into a cabaret or club. >> that was your big idea. >> that was my only idea. i started with that idea. we went on a kind of journey of discovery like you doing any play. it was a very useful and very thrown together, almost a sketch. if i had known it would have led to this relationship i have had with the piece that has lasted two decades i would have been frozen. it is a good example of how when you're working in that freedom and there is no pressure that something interesting happens and it has developed. it came to new york in the late 1990's. natasha richardson played sally bowles. it is not on for me. the last time i saw it was not on broadway when it closed but

at the follies begere. it is an incredible place under the lobby of which is the private cabaret that was created for the nazis during the occupation. >> what is it, opportunity presents incentive. what is it about this play, is it special, is it that special that it is redone? >> it is special. i am not a huge fan of musicals in the sense i have -- love all musicals. all are classics, worthy of holding up against the great classic plays of the 20th century and i have said this on

this show before. "death of aual to salesman." i think i believe ultimately it is one of the great explorations of nazi-ism and the rise of not see is nazi-ism. we could say we have grown up under the shadow of nazis and that is one generation further away from the holocaust. the only important question of the 20th century, how could have happened and it does it in a way that is breathtakingly theatrical. it is the only show that when it closed i missed it and i wanted it to come back. i said i would love to do it

again. >> did you say one caveat, it has -- i have to find the right sally bowles. >> absolutely. that is a given. they were very -- a small list of people i was interested in and one of them said yes. michelle williams. >> what were you looking for in sally bowles? rex she is a confounding creature and difficult to cast. you want someone who is fundamentally a great actress and is very vulnerable but who has the strength and the courage to sing and dance. but is not a trained singer-dancer. because you are playing a character who is not a professional, who is not perfect, whose desires and wishes are above her talents. i am talking about the character. balance toficult

strike. i think she is wonderful. i have thought she is wonderful for a long time. there was she was -- she was in this film about two girls of zest with nixon. joel grey made it his role. for now it is alan. it is not just the way he handles individual numbers, it is the entire production. because we flip it and we create the nightclub at studio 54. that was once upon a time of theater turned into a nightclub. because he governs the entire show. the rhythm of the evening is dictated by him. in the original, the nightclub acts were set in the body of a more traditional broadway stage. i see this every time. this would not be possible

without him. in the mid-1960's it was the musical about the rise of naziism. two couples who fall in love and cannot be together because of the nazis and that was daring and it has come into its own as time has gone on. >> did you codirect this with rob marshall? >> rob arrived with the broadway production and it needed a healthy dose of proper choreography and showbiz. >> the man who did "chicago" does that. >> there are certain similarities as well. the sense in which the numbers in chicago occupy a territory of fantasy which is the nightclub which is not dissimilar to the nightclub in cabaret.

>> now talk about king lear. which is in production as we speak. >> there is a lot to talk about. >> i want your production and why he is right person to do king lear for you. >> the people we are talking about, alan and simon, this is the ninth play. we graduated from richard iii and right through to king lear. it was a relationship we would arrive at. which is seen currently or incorrectly as a sort of pinnacle. i am not a fan of the word pinnacle and peak. people talk about lear being this mountain to climb. it is the most extraordinary frightening and violent play. i found it incredibly wonderful to work on. i think the production, it is a

very coherent vision but it is the vision of the play. very unsentimental and paints a picture of a lear. a bad man. thou dost evil. this is a society that has been dominated by a man who has not heard no for many years and finally hears it from his daughter when he will hand over the country. >> he does not like the sound of it. >> he does not like it at all. at that point you see just the collapse of a family which happened a lot but the collapse of the nation at the same time. they run concurrently and i felt like i had seen a lot of productions when i watch the family collapse. the national theater on the

largest stage and in the west as it were, enables one to paint a picture of a nation in crisis. a nation splitting apart. and national play for the national theater and the politics of the play have always fascinated me. it was those two things that led me into the play. the relationship with simon who was interested in those areas and then i had -- as i get older there is no point in doing shakespeare or classical theater unless you feel you can add to the debate. you have to -- >> by arguing in your production that lear was an evil man. >> it asks an audience whether they can be moved by the downfall of someone who has caused immense destruction. on the one hand, the great plan about homelessness and losing everything. if you take away your job and home and family, what is your essence, who are you and how do you define yourself within that. the nature of your being and it is a stripping away of the layers of the onion. and through acts of terrible

violence. i did not at the fact that someone is blinded live on stage or the full mysteriously disappears and dies or the fact that all three of his daughters are savagely murdered. one of the brothers is also killed and his father. i did not create the play in which seven people are lying dead on the stage at the end. it is a very bleak and nihilistic play. >> what sort of acting does it require? >> quite a fearless actor. >> fearless. >> actors who are seeking to be viewed as the wronged party. when he says i am a man more sinned against than sinning, a lot of the time the actor in the production starts in the position that he is right. what if he is not right, what if

he is absolutely causing the downfall. it moves me, the play. not always in the area is expected. >> is this a director's decision? >> not at all. for me, i go in with very large thoughts, suggestions, images. i have made the decision that we were going to play in contemporary costumes. the way i work is relatively democratic. the actors never leave the room. the cast is there all day every day and a circle for the first two weeks. we experiment with scene after scene and we turn it and do it different ways. we will talk about it all the time as we go. of all the productions i have done i feel this is the most comprehensive in terms of including everyone in the company's point of view.

i did not feel i was pushing any scene against it -- what anyone on stage was wanting to do. once you unlock it in a particular way, they were aware of what i was looking to explore. they went with it and i feel like everyone believes in the production. you get a very different kind of energy. sometimes that can mean that it becomes over-emphatic. you can eliminate one aspect and cut out the other. it is -- there is no such thing as the king lear, it is a king lear. >> there is no definitive lear. >> there are some characters that morph themselves around the capabilities of an actor. hamlet is always satisfying in some way because hamlet seems to be able to shape shift. there is a sort of fluidity to

his thought. there is a kind of direct connection between him and the audience. that always satisfied. lear never talks to the audience. he only -- he is trapped within the mechanism of the play. if the production is off for the things that support him are not quite right, the performer is very affected and you -- i have seen some pretty dull performances of king lear. you do not create the context. >> while we are talking about shakespeare, richard iii. >> i did the production. it was kevin's idea. we did the last production, the bridge project. it is an experiment, exploration we did over the course of three years between old vic and the

brooklyn academy. the last was my reduction of richard iii. that toured the world but ended here. >> this is the story of that to her. >> exactly. and the story of the whole project. the absurd, utopian ideal of traveling -- a traveling global theater company that can mount reductions on huge scale to tour the world and what it means in different cultures. it means when people cannot understand the language but can understand the polity of the play. from istanbul to sydney to greece. from outside to inside. >> to see the epidaurus in greece must have been amazing. if you have some magical experiences in them.

i was slightly trepidatious about going there. we went there and it was a completely different thing. it is truly magical. i always sound like a terrible theater person when i talk about it. unless you have been there, we have spent a long time feeling like second-class citizens. we are artists and we are constantly going to fundraising galas. there is a sense in which the begging bowl is always slightly out. and the effect of that is to make you feel a thing quite a lot here in america, slightly peripheral. to argue that you are more important than the arts, that is difficult. so -- it is the thing that makes

life worth living. the more i go i feel that. going makes you feel central. that experience of listening to stories is absolutely timeless. when kevin played there in richard iii, that was 14,000 over three performances. only one performance has done that, the three tenors. pavarotti said it was like hearing the heartbeat of the world. it feels special. >> the heartbeat of the world, yeah. that brings me to james bond. i thought you would not do it again.

just think, is one of the largest grossing movies of all time, $1 billion plus and counting. it was a spectacular film. dan craig was great in the movie. what are you doing? >> it is interesting, i did not want to do it again initially. i felt like first up i did not have time to work out. >> you have proven your bond. >> i started a number of stories that were incomplete. acast a new money penny, and new q and daniel, there was a missing piece. i felt like there was a way to create a second part of a two-part story. and then i started to get re-interested. when they agreed to wait longer

and not go immediately and not go with two movies but one which i felt very strongly about. >> this is a continuation of the story. i would not say it is the actual narrative. >> in terms of the evolution of the characters in part. >> what we tried to do in "skyfall," is characters were allowed to age and allowed to acknowledge the history and a kind of sly and mischievous way. the history of the franchise they had been part of. the air of nostalgia when i sat with them was enough. that was my 12-year-old self that loved that moment in that car. >> which brings me to this story which i promised myself i would tell. i am reading about you and judi dench and you are a whippersnapper director of 23 and she is cast in whatever you were doing. >> "the cherry orchard." >> and she says do you mind if i tried this way and you said try if you wish but it will not work. >> that is a true story. >> you are telling the great

dame, judi dench. and fast-forward to bond. you say to her, you think i could try it this way or you could try this way and she says -- >> she said you could try it but it is not going to work. and then looks at me like the most triumphant, she had waited 25 years to get me back. and that was worth are doing the job just so she could get me back. but no, the thing about judy is she was very important in my career. that taught me an enormous amount in my early 20's. she was a way to do shakespeare

and i asked a lot of questions and she was very generous. one of those rare people who, when you act with them, makes you better. in her presence. >> also aren't you doing something with "charlie and the chocolate factory." >> that was like bond, a lot to do with wanting to do it for my children. >> how long did it take you to do this? >> a long time. longer than i would have liked. it was the longest technical rehearsal in history. i have done a lot of different within the field of film and theater, done a lot of different things but i can honestly say that between movies and new plays and running a theater and classical theater and what have you, the most difficult thing is new musicals. nothing to touch

it. the most difficult. i hope people in new york realize this sort of insane game of russian roulette those being played all the time, putting huge new shows in front of a broadway audience with little preparation. there are so many creative voices that have an equal status. you have the director, composer, the writer, sometimes the designer who is responsible for the way the show moves. all those people have to be in sync. it is not a pure hierarchy like a movie where the director calls the shots. if the movie fails you generally blame the director or the theater which is a writer's medium and actor's medium. it is a total -- >> theater is a writer's and actor's medium. >> i love working with writers. live performance keeps you totally present.

there's a danger in movies, you can retreat behind a kind of wall. it is not scary. at a certain point, it is quite safe, take a long time over things and prepare it created never get that jolt of adrenaline as you get on a first review. >> you're not teaching a master class of directing, you are teaching a coaches class. hearing it, doesn't make sense to you? >> what rings a bell is the idea of i am not a teacher and i do not relish the act of teaching. there are many good teachers and i do not think i am one of them, necessarily but i'd you think -- i do think, maybe there are some things. i am a better teacher of directors than i am of actors. for example, a football coach, right, provides a structure within which footballers can perform to the very best of

their ability. he does not teach a football how to play football. talent is involved with it. however, he can teach another coach how to get the best out of his players so i do think directors teaching directing is useful and something that should happen. >> this is fascinating to me. you work honored at the roundabout theatre spring gala and you shared with the audience what you learned during your career path you set up their, anyone who is interested in directing, i have written 25 steps toward becoming a happier director. always choose good collaborators. try to learn how to make the familiar strange and the strange familiar. see it with fresh new eyes. work with dame judy dench. learn to say, "i do not have the

answer." your hero can blow away 500 bad guys but if he smokes one cigarette you are in bad trouble. it is great to see you. good luck on all those things. >> thank you. >> see you at the theater. >> and look forward to it. ♪

♪ >> robert greifeld is here. in 2013 it had record-setting earnings and profit. last year, the ipo got off to a rocky start. there are other things that are going on and i'm pleased to have robert greifeld at this table for the first time. welcome. is it true that you wrote your graduate thesis on nasdaq? >> yes, i did. i wrote it -- it was on the fact

the first wave of technology was coming into the marketplace and how that was going to change the relationship and the operations of the market. i had a good time writing it. i interviewed people for the basis but he did not see it. that was part of the qualifications for getting the job. >> what was nasdaq like in 2003? >> it was a different place and when i think back to that time, every time -- every day we were losing money. it was a situation where we had been part of the regulator, we had become for profit and moved along with the mission. we did not have the tools in

place. we had to hoard cash and watch what were doing. we were a single focus u.s. equity exchange and fighting for market share. certainly amazed at the product -- progress we made in 11 years and it is greater progress than i would have thought. we are $6 billion in market cap, $2 billion year revenue. when i got here we were about $500 million in revenue. we have grown that quite nicely. operating profit $800 million. >> how would you characterize your brand compared to the new york stock exchange? >> we have a great brand in it resonates in many ways around the world, stronger in the u.s. we represent american growth innovation entrepreneurship. when you see our successes in other parts of the world you realize how strong the brand is. we are proud of our heritage. in 1971 when we were founded we were the only electronic market on the planet. since that time, everyone has followed our lead. >> what diversification to have paid off the most?

>> that is a great question. i hate to rank the children that we have but clearly our focus is a technology company is the underpinning of everything we do. we have 80 exchanges running our technology and 10,000 corporations use our technology solutions to help them be a company, be an effective public company. in addition to that, when you look at our index business, you know us most famously for the nasdaq 100. the biotech indices, that has grown to be a $100 billion asset so we are happy with that. >> the muster medic change from the power of technology is what

-- most dramatic change from the power of technology is what? >> when i look at the stats from 1995, the cost to come in out of the market is about 140 asus points. right now it is about 10. you had a 14 fold decrease. you have to attribute that to the power of technology and a lot of that to the power of effective regulation in the marketplace. >> did you read luce's book? what did you think? the market is rigged. if he did say that and i think it was irresponsible and let me tell you why. >> we do not disagree with what he says is going on. you disagree with characterize it as rigged. or both. >> a little bit of both but primarily what you said. his description of how dark pools work is not inaccurate that i would say this.

i feel poorly for the academics. our markets are researched more than any other market out there. we have 100 academic tapers written -- papers written about how the u.s. markets operate. they have a similar number overseas. when you see the sack of papers, it is about yea high, you have people come out in favor of hft's. >> high-frequency trading. >> this is with academics who spend their life's work studying this. this does not allow itself to devolve itself into a story. it is a -- the dense academic papers. >> they have an advantage because of their speed and their technology. >> i want to make it clear that with the analysis of the market has to be data-driven. it is not story telling. i come from at the sec for the rules they made and when you talk about that 14 fold decrease

in the cost of trading in the markets over the last 19 years, you have to take credit for that. it is interesting. when you look at this, it is two ways. we have to make sure that we give equal access to all investors in our marketplace. that is our primary responsibility. >> proprietary. >> completely. >> we make sure that if you are 10 feet from the automatic, the electronic exchange, we have a longer coil. we have been doing this since 2008. if you are further away we give you a shorter coil. we have been doing it for a long time. it makes for a good cover. and it is good for the coil business. we are fair down to one

billionth of a second. what happens on the other side with respect to our customers where they invest to make their systems faster, there are differentials. some people put more capital energy into that other than others. it is faster. i have to give an equal platform to all. once they come there they come with certain different weapons. what is interesting -- >> they'll have a chance to create different weapons. >> what is interesting is five years ago there was more first mover advantage where people spend more time, effort, and their capital to be better and you have seen in the last five years more of a commoditization of that capability. you see the people come to the market are close together with respect to speed. the difference was higher. people have been able to buy commercially available tools. speed differentials declined.

everything we do has to be approved by the sec. >> do you think because of this book and all the talk that it will change anything? >> i would say this. the markets have always been evolving, right, and you do not go with of or teen fold decrease. not too many industries can say that without changing. nasdaq was the first exchange to ignite that change in how markets were looked at. i think the markets will continue to evolve, they will continue to get better, and we embrace this change and to the extent the book helps accelerate change and evolution of the market, i think that would be a good thing. >> and the flash crash, what did that do? >> that built the infrastructure to live in a competitive world. we were a monopoly in the stocks that listed with us. the sec changed the rules and said we will have all this

competition and trading and that was a legal structure we followed but the infrastructure, the technical infrastructure was not billed at the time of the flash crash. we had all these different execution venues. since that time we have seen great progress making sure the infrastructure is there to support a competitive world. >> what we're going through when you realize that was happening? >> we had to figure out what was happening. we did not have the ability to halt trading in stocks that listed on our markets so we knew there was a problem. we could not stop any other venues from trading it so we had to let it run its course and the market came back and we started to figure out what to do right. we have been on a march with the other exchanges to make sure that we are able to call halt if there is a technical issue in the stock. we have certain rules called limit up, limit down, circuit breakers, all these

infrastructure that it not exist before. >> are we looking at a time because of shadow banking and everything else, if this is a moment -- is this a moment of great change for financial markets? >> change has been a constant. you will see things change for the better i think but it is part of a long-term trend line that we see. what is interesting to me is one of the growth areas we have is international companies choosing to come to the list with nasdaq and they recognize in all the swirl of activity going on, all the change, that's -- that we still represent the best markets. we had to reflect and we had to build in more resiliency into the culture. i think we have been very successful with that since the time of the facebook ipo. we have had 200 ipos that traded successfully. we have over 50. this is the high water mark

since pre-the credit crisis. we have a lot of experience and we put process and procedure in and we feel good about where we are standing. >> why did you agree to the $10 million fine? >> that is a detailed topic. we want to be very constructive. we certainly learned a lot from it. it was our best interest to put that behind us and to move forward. >> for long time there was this great discussion as to whether -- it does not seem to be as apparent today. that london was going to become the financial capital for the world. what happened to that? >> i think that was more publicity than reality. that came about primarily post-sarbanes-oxley so we had that regulation and people said why would people come here? what you see with the benefit of hindsight now is every developed market has adopted all the sarbanes-oxley principles with the exception of section 404. that is still uniquely american

and something we should still work on. even through that time, our international listing franchise has been the envy of the world. and with the exception of the russian ipo's we are the place where international companies come to list. >> what is happening in china? >> they will come public. to companies are listing that day. that is the chinese twitter. we have a strong franchise and a strong pipeline of first rate chinese companies. >> why did alibaba decide not to go public in china? >> i cannot comment but we will see how things proceed. >> cyber security is an issue. >> it has been for a long time

and obviously represents a tax on our business and other businesses. it is important we excel at it and the last thing you can do is get relaxed and all. we built up our capabilities and we have got to stay away -- one step ahead of the risk. >> this is today's "financial times." >> i have not read it. a setback tests investor patience. his patience being tested? >> i do not think they are. we had a brief run-up and we had a strong what he 14. the controversy with respect to the book is the headwind on the stock. it is a temporary blip and it will perform quarter after quarter and year after year. the last couple of weeks have

been not the best. >> what is this between you and turtles? >> i heard you would ask that question. i do have turtles. i have a dog as a pet also. turtles are walking dinosaurs, right? they have survived so many things so in some ways i have to identify with survival of the fittest over a long time. >> if you see a turtle on offense posted did not get there by itself. >> not the most athletic creatures on the planet. >> thank you for coming. >> it was my pleasure. good to see you. >> howard schultz is here. ceo of starbucks. he purchased the company in 1987 and turned it into the world's largest coffee shop chain. it serves 70 million customers per week. after an eight-year hiatus he

returned as ceo in 2008. he expanded the brand to include much more than coffee. they bought a special tea retailer. in 1987, having worked earlier and then you wanted to go out on your own they said not here, baby, and then to be successful and buy it, what did that say to you, what was the lesson of that? >> i knew early on that i needed to work for myself. i knew early on that i had too much creativity and energy bottled up that i was going to be very unhappy. i had nothing to lose. i had no money. i came from nothing.

this was an adventure. all of it could only happen in america. people have said that many times. i am the quintessential entrepreneurial story, growing up on the other side of the tracks and here i am. it is almost hard to believe. it says is i was willing to take some risks and put myself out there. i also learned early on that success would be best if it was shared. and the values of the company shape it success and its brand. the first company to get -- give health insurance to for the affordable care act. the first two give equity and stock options. we built the kind of company that was steeped in humanity and the customers responded. it has always been much more than coffee. >> you believe that starbucks can be $100 billion market cap. >> we are at 60 or so now. this is what i believe. i believe that the relevancy of what we build is not steeped in americana anymore. in fact, it is as relevant in

china as it is in madrid. the relevancy is the sense of community. bringing people together in a place where they feel comfortable and celebrating coffee and conversation. >> the venue is as important -- >> venue, design, the relationship we have with our customers, but it all starts with the culture and values of the company and what we said many years ago and it is more true today, we cannot exceed the expectations of our customers if we as leaders are not exceeding the expectations of our people. we did $50 million in revenue this year. at five dollars an average sale. we are totally dependent on human behavior and people. the equity of the brand is how people act and the experience they create. people think we are a great marketing company but we -- it is the minimum we spend on

marketing. >> you think people in china will respond to starbucks? >> we have been there 15 years with 1000 stores. they are responding in large numbers. the chinese have embraced it as their own because they see something in it that is as relevant to them as it is here. >> same thing -- or different. >> we are educating them on coffee. they did not understand that at first. >> how do you educate them question mark >> sample, try it, educate them, and now they are drinking as much coffee as we are. what they see in it, this is a great story and i hope i have time to share with you. a year and a half ago we did something that no other -- i do not think any american western company has done before. we had an annual meeting in china of parents of our employees.

that was in beijing and shanghai. people said what are you doing, why? the relationship that the parents have to the children is so paramount to our success and we had to tell the story and have them understand who we are as people and what we are going to try and do. that was the turning point in china. since then, everyone has come to me and said tommy about this meeting that you had with parents. -- tell me about this meeting that you had with parents. they came with their grandparents. it was incredible and emotional. if we had that in america we would have 10%. >> understanding culture is important. >> a thing respecting culture and respecting differences but what i have learned over the years is that the similarities are much greater than the differences. >> this deal with oprah, what is that about? >> we were sitting at a friends wedding. we have always dreamed about doing something together, never really could find it. i think her values match ours. we want to do something to

elevate tea but do something to help people get access to education and oprah chai will be available mother's day. only she could raise the tent on this. tea is a $90 billion global, more than coffee. i came back. the company was in deep trouble and i came back. your question about, i am deeply involved in the company. i have shifted my focus to innovation, specifically, what we are going to do on mobile platforms. we have got an opportunity to do something significant. >> you want to be a forerunner of mobile pay. >> everyone in the world is chasing mobile payment. the question is who is going to become the visa of digital payment.

no doubt the phone will become -- your digital wallet. >> who are the competitive -- the competitors? >> it is everybody. we are already processing over 5 million mobile transactions week on your phone. >> give me a sense of how fast the velocity of mobile payments, and at what time will they be the large majority of the way people pay in contrast to credit cards and cash? >> first off, i think there is no question that the phone is displacing at a very rapid rate everyone's desktop. the phone and other countries, take south korea, for example, is the primary way because people have we robbed from a regular phone to a mobile phone. they never had a regular phone. what will happen in america quickly as two or three years, i would say 50% of what you do every day is going to be done on

your phone in terms of payment. and eventually we will have a cashless society. >> eventually means when? >> people a lot smarter than me have answered that question. 5, 10 years. >> minimum wage. >> i would love to talk about minimum wage and veterans of i can. i read today that connecticut is the first state that is going to $10.10 an hour. they're not doing it until 2017. >> which is what the president recommended for people who have federal contracts. >> the inequality in america, the gap between the haves and have-nots is very significant. the question is, do people have as much access to the american dream as they did for our parents and grandparents, probably not. raising the minimum wage is a good idea. i'm on the wrong side of that

debate for most people. >> because of two things. they say will mean it will cost jobs and number two they say you will have to increase the price of the product. >> we will have to see about that. there will be unintended consequences if we go to $15 an hour which i think is not the right number. at starbucks we have always looked at total pay. we pay above the minimum wage in every market. and health care, 401(k), we are way above that. i think there will be unintended consequences if it goes above $10. >> you gave $50 million -- >> $30 million. >> what do you hope that leads to? >> this has become a very personal issue for me. two years ago, secretary gates came on the starbucks board. >> bob gates. a seattle man. >> yeah. he really sensitized me to a number of issues. for the last 10 years, 2.5 million men and women have been

at war. the country though is somewhat oblivious to the fact that these 2.5 million people have risk their lives for us and oblivious because it is mostly -- it is an all volunteer service. they are coming back not to a parade, not to celebration and a million plus our entering civilian life. there are 20 suicide today -- suicides a day. when percent to 40%, coming back with some form of brain trauma. no access to jobs. >> so many of them survived that they might not have survived an early war. >> that is correct. i feel of all the things going on in our society, and everything that has left -- happened in the last 10 years, we need to so brady's people. we need to be responsible for them. my wife and i are giving $30 million away in three buckets. job training, trying to help the

unsung heroes of the families who have lost fallen warriors, and the issue of research around brain trauma. >> there does not seem to be any coordination among all the corporations that have begun to make a commitment so that there might be some way to coordinate, organize, and have a multiplying effect. >> i think you have hit a very key nerve here. not only is there not a coordinated effort, but there is government agencies in which there has been so much waste. the amount of money that the va has gone through is just beyond belief. so, i think the efforts we are trying to do is we are trying to coordinate our efforts and i guess the question is, if that is true, fine, but we're not going to be a bystander. we're going to make a difference. we had a significant fundraiser, we have had corporations there, we have private citizens, and we're going to make the difference. >> what is the metric for making a difference?

>> i would like to see -- we have got double-digit unemployment among veterans. very high around african-americans and latinos. let's get that down. let's start to try and find the marker on brain trauma. let's help those families who really are in deep trouble, given the fact that they lost their husband or wife. >> what happened when you made the announcement you do not bring guns to starbucks? >> i think that was a very good example of the fact that starbucks is a respected place in many communities and when we ask respectfully not to bring your guns, that we are not pro- or against guns, people did abide by that. we had a problem leading to it. that was because of the open carry law. our customers were very uncomfortable. >> and make them reconsider -- making them reconsider coming to starbucks. you did that for the well-being of the company. >> that was our responsibility. >> thanks for coming. >> thanks for very much.

♪

♪ >> live from pier three in san francisco, welcome to "bloomberg west," where we cover technology in the future of business. i am emily chang. google is adding solar powered drones to their arsenal of self driving cars. we will play what they plan to do with titan aerospace. first, a check of the top tech headlines. it is taking longer than expected for many websites