>> live from pier three in san francisco, welcome to "bloomberg innovation,we cover technology and the future of business. republicans may be running out of options if they tried to block president obama's immigration order. aide tells bloomberg congress cannot use spending bills to defend the agency that will carry out the immigration order. the tactic was seen as one of the top ways congress could delay the president's plan which is set to allow 4 million to 5 million undocumented able to remain in the u.s. legally.

at the cot has apologized for those potentially faulty airbags in millions of cars. tollcomes after the death tied to the airbag's failures was raised to six will stop peers consumer advocate ralph nader. but the tragedy in this is that the auto companies themselves did not do quality control and due diligence. the government and department of transportation was in the watchdog it was supposed to be. >> to cut and 10 other automakers are under pressure to expand the airbag recall. there is huge interest in alibaba's bond sale. they received $87 billion worth of orders in its debut bond offering, more than seven times what it was thinking and it will allow underwriters to reduce proposed yields according to people with knowledge of the deal. the founder says the company is facing its most dangerous

moment, warning people think alibaba is too good and can do anything. google takes a step toward doing more business in china, opening up its google play stores to developers in china. developers will now be able to make money selling apps to foreign customers instead of having to sell them on a third party app store. now to our lead. it has been a rough ride for uber this week after in the old michael made proposed snooping on unfriendly journalists and reports another executive track a buzz seed reporter. now it has caught the eye of lawmakers. senator al franken and a letter to the ceo asking the company to ask lane its privacy practices. he also wrote that he is concerned with their technology which reportedly allows employees to track the location of riders.

it would respond to senator franken in the coming weeks. they have also hired one of the respected data-- privacy experts. we spoke with senator al franken and i asked him how uber should discipline emile michael. >> i just want to know whether they have taken any action because it felt like what he was doing was trying to have a chilling effect on journalists who would write critically about uber and i don't think that's appropriate. i was wondering whether they were taking anti-disciplinary at -- any disciplinary action with him or not and i guess that is .p to uber >> it raises a number of issues. what are the other big issues

you think it raises? >> i'm chairman of the subcommittee and judiciary committee on privacy technology and the law. this is just a basic privacy issue about an individual's right to control who takes privacy information like geolocation. that information is accessed and shared. it appears they have something called god's view where can accessf uber geolocation information. it is not clear what the purpose is. they say business purposes. i ask them to define that but they had an incident where an executive had a journalist some

to interview him at his office and he told her he had been tracking her there and evidently that speaks -- >> and he did not seem to think there was a problem with that? that kind of speaks to a certain cluelessness for a company that evidently stores your geolocation information and it is a little disturbing to say hey, journalists who have come to my office, i have tracked you here. that suggests a little tone deafness. is a private company. how much authority do they have here? what can you really do? we have been exploring

writing laws about what companies can do with geolocation information, whether they have to seek permission to take it or store it. oncan write legislation whether people can opt in or opt out. there is legislation you can write to cover this whole area. we are not going to talk about uber specifically, but we can shine a light on them. within the be done propriety of our role in congress. handles user uber information anymore critical than new gold -- we are talking about real people getting into real cars with real drivers in the real world. hashis specifically

different implications and certain other kinds of information, but all geolocation information we think is a special problem and that is very important information. who goes to the doctor and where they go to the doctor and where you go to the church and where you pick up your kid at school, that is all private information. >> do you feel like the senate will have privacy roles as they have the ability to track both location and behavior in so many ways that weren't possible just a couple of years ago? >> my subcommittee has been shining light on that. the whole purpose of the subcommittee is to look at that have technical

acceleration and at some point, someone has to decide whether tapping a phone was a violation of the fourth amendment. the founding fathers did not foresee that telephone and as exist andtechnologies accelerate, we have a role in determining what is appropriate and what is protecting people's privacy. or have youe uber ever used it? >> i have all stopped >> will you continue to use it? >> i am going to wait for the answers. when i use it, it's because my wife uses it. light how are we getting there? >> if you don't get the answers

you like, will you continue to use them? i won't rule out ever using it. it is an interesting thing because they are becoming a dominant business. >> yes. this might be a wake-up call for them. told -- toldcutive the journalists i have been tracking you on the way over here, it a wake them up a little bit and understand what the proper use of the geolocation is and how it is an issue to people. ?> what is your advice for uber >> respond to my letter, put in place policies that will give

people confidence that their geolocation information will not or lookedrly shared at for the wrong reason. >> will have more from al franken later in the show. go proshows you -- shares tanked after a deep operating discount. he asked about what this means for everyone's they've are camera on a stick, next. ♪

>> i'm emily chang and this is "bloomberg west." go pro had a wildly successful ipo in june with aspirations of becoming much more than a camera maker, evening pitching itself as a media company. but after last night discounted

secondary offering, we are left to wonder if they can successfully build a media empire. cory johnson is back with more. what is going on here? >> go pro does an ipo about 140 days ago. they put and a limited amount of stock, but they only have 10 million shares in the offering. all the analysts are talking about how it's not just a camera on a stick. everybody loves these idiots. everyone loves the shot on someone's chest or the tight warding or surfing -- i love these videos. the stock those crazy and the stock has had a terrific run and has more than doubled since the ipo. this company is having great success but there's a limited number of shares and the trading of shares was for neck. was trading, it nearly half the shares traded

every single day which is rare. they price the secondary and it's at a significant discount. if you are going to sell more stock, you want to have the stock high and higher and you don't do the offering. the stock opened at 85. they did it at $75 and the market sees that as a sign of weakness. >> is it really a sign of weakness? >> it is a sign of weakness they are desperate to take this money. it's a sign they were desperate to get the sales done to take this money. >> what do you think when you look at the prospects for go pro right now? ceo has been compared to steve jobs. loves go pro alex and owns it.

it's worth noting that alex owns the stock. this is an interesting and profitable company, but it's just a camera on a stick. >> what is the likelihood it can expand to becoming a media company? >> olympus does not own the pictures i take with my olympus camera. >> but you buy an olympus -- >> it's a different business that they are not in yet. if you look at the quarterly report, they don't have a separate line item. >> maybe the numbers aren't there, but what strategically have they done? channel -- it is interesting stuff to watch, but it is not a significant source of revenue. today,condary offering only about 12% of the shares were sold by the company.

the ceo sold 4 million shares today. and it's before the 180 day lockup. lockup, soanother the people who worked with the company and to build this thing up with the ceo were not able to sell shares, but the ceo took a lot of money off the table and was willing to do so. >> what is next for go pro? >> they are trying to make it a real business but are going to do without a full stake the founder had in the company just yesterday because he's taken a lot of money off the table. >> we will keep watching. and go pro -- where does it go? we could have so much fun. >> we will do some more brainstorming after the show. box has been stuck in the ipo pipeline for months -- when will

the company go public, if ever? ♪

>> welcome back. i'm emily chang and this is "bloomberg west. at $2.4 billion, still, the company's ipo has been stuck in limbo since filing to go public in march. will box ever take the plunge? on $150ecently took

million of funding -- the company is valued at $2.4 billion will stop why did you take the money? >> we filed to go public in arch of this year and about week after we filed to go public, there was a bit of a so you sawection, quite a bit of volatility and a lot of high volatility companies. we thought it wasn't the best time to bring a new company to market and we had amazing support from private market growth and late stage investors. they were interested in supporting the company as a private company, so we took that money on to allow us to continue to invest in growth and building out walks without necessarily going public. status of the

ipo? >> we are still on file, so there's a lot i can't share. definitely be one of the first people to hear about it once we share and he at a. >> how much did you wonder if we made a mistake or filed too soon? >> what is obvious as we should not have filed when we did because we dealt with a lot of distractions because of the filing. the news reports and the cycle that had to happen around the business, we brought it on because of a filing and that was a distraction to what are focus is, which is execution and building up the business. so we have short, been and remain in full execution mode. >> i'm curious what that was your-- everybody can see

finance. competing against the biggest companies on the planet in the technology industry. to do that, you have to make a significant investment. in research, development, our sales team and our ability to go to market and reach these customers. >> the criticism as you are spending more than you are making -- how does that change? in revenue isr recurring annually. our job is to keep customers happy and compound that dollar over time. the new investments have outpaced revenue scale, so we are at the stage where we are focused on growing that ended is compounding all stop we've done a lot of international

expansions and built out the enterprise sales force, so you are starting to see that efficiency play out over time. >> how much have you thought versus stayingox independent? >> we spend about 0% of our time thinking about that over the >> ifew years will stop would say it is pretty likely. but she would not say yes? >> i would say that is the path we are on. >> so yes. don't miss the full edition of studio 1.0 tonight. ofn we returned, the rest our interview with minnesota senator al franken. he has been more outspoken on net neutrality than any other senator. he will tell us why, next.

>> it is 26 minutes at -- after the hour, that means it is time to go on the markets. we do have a little bit of a rally today. investors weighing better than estimated economic data and worse than echoes -- worse than estimated economic data abroad. not a lot of movement, except on the nasdaq, which is up .4%. green mountain stock is punching, having its worst day in more than five months. they posted fourth-quarter earnings and revenue that beat estimates but its outlook fell well short of consensus. shares of habit or are fizzling in their trading debut after the fast food chain price 5 million shares at $18 apiece, above the expected range. pimm fox will talk to the company's ceo about the success of the ipo and how he plans to keep the momentum going.

that's right here on bloomberg television. says theireports" burger is the best in the nation. "bloomberg west" will be right back. ♪

>> you are watching "bloomberg west" where we focus on innovation, technology, and the future of is us. president obama's proposal to extend net neutrality has been met with republican scorn. senator ted cruz has called it obamacare for the internet. is he right? al franken has been one of the most outspoken supporters of net neutrality. we asked him how he responded to senator cruz's claims. >> i think he said that neutrality is obamacare for the internet.

be more 180ld not degrees wrong. that neutrality is all content and treated the same and that has been the architecture of the internet from the beginning as you know and as many of your viewers know. this would not represent a change, representing that neutrality. what he is referring to is reclassifying the internet as a telecommunications service or utility. but that is for the purposes of maintaining net neutrality. that would be the purpose of that. basically, what net neutrality allowingabout is everyone's content to flow essentially to the consumer at

the same speed. now, the big internet service providers like comcast, like time warner cable and verizon have talked about charging extra for a fast lane so there would be a two-tiered system or multi tiered system where content provider would have to pay more for fast speed and that would affect every business, it will cost consumers more because that will be passed on to you. all of the innovation that has taken place on the internet has happened not just while we have had net neutrality but because we have that neutrality. was googleube, there video which was not very good. three guys started youtube over a pizzeria in san mateo, california. because it float

at the same speed and everyone was able to sample youtube and see it was better, so they chose that. google and upter, buying youtube for $1.6 billion. facebook was started in a dorm room. all of this innovation has happened because of net neutrality and we don't want to put everything in the hands of the pocketed corporations who pay out for the fast lane and stifle all the innovation that would happen from the startups and from people in dorm rooms. also, businesses operating will have a website, this affects the entire economy and it is a bad idea. has first amendment implications as well. >> let's talk about those companies.

do they have a moral responsibility in the net neutrality debate? >> i think they do. by theernet was created defense department, the united states government. act as gatekeepers. they don't own it. that the point of the internet is not for comcast and cable tond time warner make as much money as possible. it has other purposes. >> what you are talking about here is called title ii of the telecommunications act. i talked to michael powell, the -- he said asked senator franken about which public utility it should emulate -- should be the power grid or

-- the power grid, the public sewers? -- national highway system which of those should the internet look like? >> i think it should look like the internet. it should look like the internet has always looked. we have had net neutrality for the whole history of the internet will stop i would ask does he know the difference between the internet and those things? expansion ofthe broadband, we have seen all of this with net neutrality. the courts have said to preserve net neutrality, this is the only way to do it, invoke title ii. to creates tried rules to preserve net neutrality and has twice been struck down by the courts to say the way to

do this is to invoke title ii. but this is not all comparable to -- that is a false embarrass him. and ik he knows that think we have seen since the fcc under his leadership made it an information service as opposed to a telecommunications service, the nature of the internet has changed stop people rely on it for television, for phone calls, is arely on it for -- it telecommunications technology service stop there is no question. mentionresident did not title ii specifically. should he have gone further? i believe from his statement he was essentially saying to make it a tell a communication service and define it that way. to reclassify it.

do you think the chances are the three democrats on the commission actually vote against the president? think probably it is in the chairman's hands is what i think. i don't know. the lobbying dollars spent on this are enormous stop comcast has and more than any other business except northrop grumman last year. if net neutrality is positioned on title ii, would you say that's a victory against lobbyists in washington? >> i think there's a difference in the two issues will stop comcast obviously would benefit lane and profit from that, but that's not really what they have been lobbying on. what they have been lobbying on

his their acquisition of time warner cable, which is problematic and a bunch of different ways. that's what they have been spending their money on. byy have been disingenuous advertising that acquisition would be pro-net neutrality because they were required when they bought nbc to observe net neutrality until 2018, i believe. sayinge doing these ads if we take that, it will extend net neutrality and i we are pro-net neutrality. will they extend past the time they are required to and they have not responded. al franken there. how would you like to feel you are in the middle of a movie or

a location on the other side of the world? we will check out the latest in virtual reality technology, next. ♪

>> i'm emily chang and this is "bloomberg west." sam grobart got an exclusive preview at the technology and innovations set to disrupt our lives next year. today, we are talking about virtual reality. it's usually associated with videogames, but now one company is expanding into movies. ahead." >> weear have had the pc, the web and mobile as a platform and we believe virtual reality is the everyone ism >> going to be having vr experiences as a natural thing in their daily life will stop >> in this small dark room,

visitors are invited to try on a headset and experience the company's big ovation -- cinematic virtual reality. >> it is essentially a branch of virtual reality not focused on video games, but focused on video. watch a giant cinematic video experience, you feel like you have been transported somewhere. you can look in any direction, to the right, to the left, anywhere behind you. also hear sounds in spatially correct locations. if you're a phone ringing to the right and you look to the reich him he will see a phone ringing and the sound will come straight ahead. >> he had to come up with a new kind of video camera. consists of arig

sphere of lenses, each lens pointing in a for direction, capturing a different part of the space. traditionalm from cameras in that it is a very autonomous system. you don't really have a cameraman anymore. did, the cameraman would be in the shot himself. >> the camera is basically the motion picture version of the google maps street view camera that creates immersive still images. what makes it unique is what they want to do with the technology. they want to put you inside a hollywood style movie. in order to make it happen, he has established a partnership with new deal cinema. it's creative director is making a virtual reality godzilla complete with a miniature city.

shooting in virtual reality is different than shooting a normal film. in this case, the camera sees everything. set, so youeave the have to wear a ski mask with tiny eyeballs so i can hide in the shadows and still be able to direct. experience is a whole new way of experiencing a different narrative that has not been explored yet. genre, we can apply this to in a completely different way. this is a bloomberg colleague. cinematic movie in the horror genre. >> that was terrifying.

but she is betting we are going to get hooked on that kind of that'snce, experience about to become accessible to everyone. >> there are a lot of exciting things that will be happening soon in the vr space. one is mobile vr, being able to ask. sit on your smart phone. broaderaches a audience, there are opportunities to build delivering content to consumers. >> it still has a way to go but it has technology go advances. storyds a virtual reality telling, a spielberg of immersive cinema that can turn it into the next blockbuster entertainment. in -- tune inturn

saturday and sunday morning. we will be looking at 10 innovations that change everything you know about food and medicine. >> home sales rose in october. mean for this first-time homebuyers and institution investors? fell,ear when home sales a wells fargo senior economist will help us examine the data. back to you in san francisco. >> see you soon. first, christian bale and now sony pictures -- another surprising turn for the high-profile film about the life of steve jobs. what will aaron sorkin do now? ♪

>> welcome back. i'm emily chang. sony pictures is dropping plans to produce a film about steve jobs after a series of casting miscues will stop scheduling issues also led to the decision. reports now that universal pictures is in talks to acquire the movie which is based on walter isaacson's biography. joining us now is the bloomberg intelligence director, paul sweeney. get made?vie going to >> i think this movie will definitely get made. movies getting put on the shelf happens quite frequently in hollywood. he had to have all the movie to get made. the studio and actors all have to come together at the right time.

it's probably going to be on the shelf for a little bit but it too big of a story and steve jobs is too big of a name and you have alan sorkin associated with the script. >> all the stars aligning. there was a great interview where he was talking about this is a movie unlike any other where the lead actor has to carry such a heavy load. is that the kind of thing that might make the studios -- all of their chips- all of are on one number. >> that is true. seen in hollywood over the last five or six years is that the a list stars are less likely to carry a movie than they did in the past. it used to be that you could just sign up tom cruise the movie would be a guaranteed hit. lesse are seeing less and of that.

when it comes to the new movie a new concept, as opposed to the tried and true franchise movies, whether it is the marvel movies, getting an independent story out there is tougher than it has ever been. >> i do have a clip where aaron sorkin talks about how proud he is of this script. he says he thinks it is his best ever. . time i havehe first felt that the end of the script exactly what i wanted to write. it managed to get from my head to the piece of paper intact. nowirst leonardo dicaprio, christian bale, now sony -- how

long will it take before we see the movie in theaters? >> there's a lot going for this movie and it just takes the right studio to put the right pieces together. probably not something that will be on the shelf for too long. >> has the movie industry changed so much that these kinds of movies, less action movies are having a tougher time? or is it easier from certain studios? >> it's much tougher to get something made these days it is not part of an existing franchise, such as a marvel franchise. these movies have to play globally, they don't just have play in they -- u.s. whatever you are going to green

light and hollywood has to play not only in middle america but around the world, and that makes it tougher. >> paul sweeney, thanks so much. we focus byte is where on one number that tells a whole lot. the byte is zero. when president obama talks about executive action tonight, not one of the big three networks is going to carry the speech will stop it is sweeps for the network, so they are taking shark attacks and unwilling to break from the regular programming, compare this to the announcement when they were sending national guard troops to the border -- president bush's speech was carried by all the networks will stop >> immigration is a hugely important issue for the tech industry in particular. beenzuckerberg has

lobbying congress for more focus on immigration and especially what it means for skilled workers. >> there was a time when the networks would never do this and the white house had command of this, but their business model under new threats from the -- theyof the world want to land those advertising dollars and are willing to buck the white house to do it. >> should the networks be beholden to the president's schedule? >> to senator franken's remarks, the networks to not create the networks. the federal government gave them the right to do this as a part of public service. clearly, they don't want to put that on the air this week. >> you can see the president's on bloomberg later today. thank you all for watching this edition of "bloomberg west." we

will see later. -- we will see you later. ♪ . .

>> from bloomberg world headquarters in new york, i am mark crumpton. this is "bottom line," the intersection of business and economics with a main street perspective. to our viewers here in the united states and those of you joining us from around the world, welcome. we have full coverage of the stocks and headlines making news on this thursday. hans nichols reports from the global entrepreneurship summit in marrakesh, morocco.