>> welcome to "bloomberg west." cory: federal reserve stress test shows the biggest banks are adequately capitalized to survive a sharp and prolonged economic downturn. it's the first time since the stress test began in 2009 that no firm fell below the mean capital threshold. the annual test posed hypothetical scenarios and are a key part of the fed's effort to prevent a repeat of the 2008 financial cry sills. a delta flight skids off the runway after landing at new

york's laguardia airport. flight 10 6 from atlanta skidded into a fence during a snowstorm back east. the number of passengers suffered high more injuries. a team of investigators is being sent there. the airport was shut down for a few hours but has since reopened. silicon valley drug maker has s is scooped up by another company. $21 billion. outbidding johnson and johnson. homeland security secretary michael chertoff calls for an electronic security privacy act which governs surveillance of electronic communications. under that law the government can access cloud-stored emails older than 180 days with a simple subpoena. he says times have changed. >> wherever the data is located, what matters is who owns the

data, who generated the data? that's the law that ought to apply. otherwise what you do is fragment the internet. you basically encourage every country to say, all of our data should be kept in our -- within our own borders and that defeats the purpose of a globalized internet. cory: chertoff's not alone. bills recently filed in both the u.s. house and senate to amend that law. google has just launched an auto insurance comparison site. the service offers quotes from 14 different carriers available in california today, going something hoping to expand the service nationwide next year. google's been operating a similar site in great britain for a few years. hillary clinton tries to cool the growing controversy over her private email use while serving as secretary of state. she tweeted, quote, i want the public to see my email, i asked the state to release them. they said they'll review them for release as soon as possible. but clinton's turned over 55,000 pages of emails to the state

department so reviewing that could take several months. it was traced back to her home address in new york. while it gave her a high level of control security experts say it may have been more vulnerable to hacking. joining us now via skype is one of those security experts, who heads threat intelligence at immunity. talk to me about this private email system. is this kind of thing common among executives? guest: well, i think it does have a history of being common amongst the executive level of government. but it really shouldn't be. if you look at people like mitt romney, he was dinged for doing this, sarah palin was dinged for doing this. you'll remember that created some issues when she was involved with a state trooper some dispute thereof. she was using yahoo. it really shouldn't be allowed. quite simply because of the security risk. you can't say that someone on your staff, managing a server from your home, can provide the

same level of security as security from the state department. it's just nonsensical. cory: you mentioned mitt romney, sarah palin, colin powell, when he was secretary of the state, did the same thing. explain to me why this is a concern greater than that of a cranky i.t. guy. i'm not saying you're a cranky i.t. guy. i'm just saying, you know, why is this more of a risk other than it's nonstandard? guest: sure. if you consider that hillary clinton was secretary of state, right, which by definition means she's facing threats from other states, other nation states, with big budgets if you asked me, ok could russia or somebody else who maybe isn't totally in favor of us in the world spend $10 million to compromise an email server that lives in someone's home i would say, certainly. they probably wouldn't even have to spend that much money. that's really what i'm talking about. the threat is that even if there want classified information on this system, and no one is saying there is or was, is still

incredible boone to anyone who is interested in international politics or espionage, to have access to even the unclassified email of the united states secretary of state. cory: is there any suggestion that this was compromised? we know sarah palin's account was hacked. but these other accounts were compromised in any way? or is this just sort of risky? guest: it's risky. no one has put forth any real evidence to say or any really conclusive evidence to say that these accounts were compromised but part of the issue is, we wouldn't necessarily know because to our knowledge now, nobody was monitoring this server to determine if it ever was compromised. sarah palin and mitt romney are a little bit different in that they were using services managed by yahoo and msn. misclinton decided she was going to do her own email system from the ground up, presumably through a contractor. and that affords her greater control, but also, again, none of the protections that come with commercial email.

the google and the yahoo! and m.s.n. have really good defense teams, they're able to monitor for account compromise. that just wasn't available to her. so even if she used a free one, it still would not be a good decision. cory: what kind of hardware or software is necessary to operate something from what we understand she was doing? guest: sure. you need a high speed internet connection which is really common across the united states at this point. you would need a standard desk top p.c. would be certainly able to handle the amount of mail that she would be receiving. and then we also discovered, when we started looking around, that she was using something called an sslbpn which is a virtual private network device that provides encryption between a device, like your laptop, your cell phone and that particular server. so all told, you know, she probably had a router a very standard desk top p.c., maybe

something a little bit beefier, but not by merchandize -- by much. and at least v.p.n. device that we know about. but we haven't been able to confirm that that device was in existence when she was secretary of state although it certainly seems so. cory: this sounds like some really low-level junk sitting on somebody's desk. it's kind of amazing. when covering the story, i'm concerned about being part of this sort of political football where the right gets highly critical and groups hired by hillary clinton's people are instantly defensive without examining it. is this more than just politics? guest: i think it is. honestly, if this was -- if we were talking about speaker boehner, or we were talking about rand paul, you know the basic message here is the same. it was a poor security decision. whether it was consciously made or not, we don't know. but at some point a compromise was reached. and it just can't stand. you were going to say to me, there are other people in the

cabinet or even members of the senate who do this same thing, i would be equally as upset and i think there's probably a pretty good likelihood that they do use their own email and aren't operating with security in mind. because that's not how they think. they're politicses and they're maybe very good at their job and very intelligent in their way. but security is a tough game and the little stuff can really come back to bite you. cory: i guess that's maybe why the law -- last question, why the law is catching up, right? why this was legal when she was doing it, it's illegal now. or at least against policy for executives to do this now in the state department and beyond. guest: yeah. i absolutely agree. usually we're pretty critical of the law's ability to keep up with technology. but i think this is a good decision. i think it can go even further. from my perspective, there needs to be someone like a single person who has a team, who's in charge of the security, the cybersecurity of our top executives in government.

if you're a member of the cabinet, if you're on a very select senate or congressional committees, if you work in the white house, then guess what? you're under their purr view and there's no way to escape it and they're going to be looking to make sure that you don't make these little mistakes that give adversaries a big advantage. cory: thank you very much. we appreciate it. "bloomberg west" will be right back. ♪

coich here are some top headlines. u.s. ambassador to south korea is recovering after getting

slashed in the face. he received 80 stitches after being attacked by a north korean sympathizer while at a breakfast in seoul. here's secretary of state john kerry. >> [inaudible] cory: doctors say it could take a full year for him to recover. the attacker's in custody. he was protesting a joint u.s.-south korean military drill. russian president vladimir pute season hailing cooperation with itsly after meeting with italian prime minister in moscow. the two countries agreed to set up ads 1 billion investment fund and work together on possible action against terrorists in libya. the first formal state visit to the kremlin by a major european leader since the outbreak of violence in ukraine. hbo is in talks to start an allah cart version of its premium channel. they're talking with five companies about carrying the web channel including apple, google and tivo. people say the new service would

let consumers watch the channel without paying for a prescription at all. speaking of apple we expect people familiar with the matter say apple is facing delays of its supply of display panels. that's pushing production to september. which is about six months after march, i believe. 12.9-inch ipad was part of apple's plans to reboot the ipad line, sales have fallen. this is a big deal. because this was the major product for at least the first half of the year to come from apple, next to the watch. guest: yeah, analysts see the potential for growth, in the corporate buying area, so this larger screen was seen as maybe appealing more to corporate buyers who could use it perhaps instead of a laptop. cory: what is fundamentally different, i understand the difference between eight and 10 inches and 12 inches is two inches but what's the fundamental difference about

these panels that makes them so much harder to acquire compared to the plentiful ipad panels that they've had before? guest: it's a little bit bigger. it's different. any time there's difference in manufacturing, you run into other challenges. you're hearing issues about yields and that sort of thing from our sources. really -- cory: the yield. so it's not the ability to make it but the ability to make it successfully and when it's bigger, or you can run into more problems? guest: all the details aren't there but all of the issues is it's going to delay it until september at this point. that's a stumble out of the gate on this whole strategy of really trying to appeal toward corporate buyers. cory: when we look at apple's results anded numbers they put up is very positive and kind of amazing. but the ipad growth is falling now i think four quarters in a row. the average selling price for the ipad is falling as well. there are a lot of numbers that don't look so good when it comes to the apple ipad.

guest: some of the issue is smart phones are getting bigger. the fablet is out there. it's eating into the tablet market and making the case, if you're going to buy -- cory: my iphone 6-plus. i find myself using this to read s.e.c. filings, stuff i used to do on my ipad. guest: the idea that the tablet's future is in the corporate worpped, starts to play into that strategy. you start to see why perhaps this is going to be more important for apple. cory: when we look at this, and i wonder what this means for their partners, specifically for i.b.m. i.b.m. is a company that apple was looking to to help both grow sales and i.b.m. was hoping apple would help them with their problem of so many years of falling sales. guest: they launched together several apps that are targeted at specific businesses such as an airline industry and telecom and that sort of thing. i.b.m. is part of the deal out there, trying to sell apple products along with it. it's definitely perhaps a year

ago when they were inking the deal, things looked a little different. cory: i think we talked about this last night. there was even a quarter where the mac book outsold in terms of the ipad. the ipad had been the second most important product of apple. guest: yeah. it still. is but the mac definitely had a resurgence last year. cory: is there a notion within apple that it doesn't matter what device you buy? guest: there's a long held apple belief that they don't mind cannibalizing their other products as long as they're heading toward the bigger goal of sellinging apple items. cory: thank you. appreciate it. "bloomberg west" will be right back. ♪

cory: this is "bloomberg west." the future of policing in america may start to look like a tom cruise thriller. >> precrime division. i'm placing you under arrest for the future murder of sara marks that would take place today, april 22, at 0804. >> i didn't do anything. cory: future crime. that's right. "minority report." police use psychics to stop crimes before they happen.

a company has a same goal in mind. but instead of psychics, they're using big data. what crime am i about to commit? instead of a lousy interview? no i'm going to do my very best. tell me about your business because it's fascinating. guest: we are a big data company focused on law enforcement. what we use is we use kind of the information that's in your daily newspaper the what, what kind of crime, where it happened and when it happened and we use a large amount of that data, so up to 10 years worth of it, with a little bit of wading toward the more recent events, to be able to predict crimes. cory: so police have pretty consistently databases all across all levels of law enforcement to do the same thing. what can you do now that you couldn't do before? guest: police have databases and something called heat mapping and crime history what they don't do is they don't take advantage of computing power in order to be able to project where crime is likely to happen, with a highly attenuated focus, so we can predict down to the

single block level where a crime is more likely to happen than other spaces, within a given -- cory: so yesterday i was walking down the road right there behind you and i saw glass, as i see almost every day, glass. clearly people are breaking into cars there. just about every other day. i didn't need any software to figure that out. what is it that is more than a heat map or observation? guest: you know where crimes are likely to happen in your given area. you know the first or second most likely places. police probably know three through six, three through seven in addition. but then once you get into locations seven through 10 or 10 through 15 or 15 through 20, it's very unlikely that those are going to be top of mind and therefore very unlikely that they're going to be part of a general assigned b. we give people a highly attenuated area. we give them a time frame when crime is likely to happen and it

works. cory: does crime change? guest: crime changes but crime doesn't necessarily move. the vast majority of crime is opportunistic. so those kind of phenomenon means that most crimes for a given perpetrator take place close to where they live, close to where they work, where their girlfriend or boyfriend works. their schools. their drinking places. their eating places. and then in that case it doesn't move as much as we think it does. that's called the theory of displacement and it's been largely debunked within criminal law circles. cory: what do you mean? how so? guest: there's been a lot of research to see whether in fact, if you suppress in a given area crime moves to an adjacent area. for the most part it does not. cory: interesting. talk to me about sort of the sales process for this. what do you do to prove to skeptical communities and police departments how do you prove to them that this is going to work better than what they're doing? guest: they've all been -- we

don't have to do that because we're fortunate enough to have customers that are very vocal about the performance. so customers like l.a. and atlanta talk publicly about double-digit crime decreases upon 60 to 90 days of deployinging this technology. cory: how do you charge for the service? guest: at the depends. most of it on an annual licensing spree. cory: you don't charge for each bust? guest:, no but i like that idea. keep in mind that arrest is not necessarily the goal here. what the goal is to eliminate crime. so if there's no crime, there's no arrest. if you reduce crime 20%, you're not arresting 20% more people. you're actually reducing the number of events. cory: talk to me about this algorithm and how you came about creating this, what was the notion of it did you find the solution before you found the right problem? guest: actually the problem was posited by ucla and lapd.

they were trying to come up with a way to lack at this crime history and use it in order to deter a crime. in cast being for something that followed a model of, say, a given event -- so, let me give you brounled. if your home is broken into, the likelihood that it will be broken into again goes up exponentially. the likelihood that your neighbor's home will be broken into also goes up. so you're looking for something that you have a given event with a secondary event that follows it, with some level of proximity. we live in earthquake country. that sounds like earthquake after shock, second earthquake, after shock. that was the core idea behind our approach. is actually a seismic model approach to the algorithm. cory: what kind of problems are you best at predicting? guest: a whole variety actually. the only thing we're not fabulous at is homicide. but gun-related violence all the way down to home invasion to home burglary to car theft to breaking into automobiles, basically what you saw recently.

cory: really appreciate it. thank you very much. "bloomberg west" will be right back. ♪

cory: you're watching "bloomberg west." where we focus on innovation, technology and the future of business. let's bring you up to speed with bloomberg top headlines. the harsh winter weather in the east and middle west may be hurting the labor market. unemployment benefits rose last week. that's the highest level in more than nine months. the government's job report for the entire month of february. china's just lowered its economic growth target to 7%. the lowest in 15 years. here's china's premier leader, the number two leader in the country, speak something at the national people's congress. >> we need to develop twin engines to drive development.

popular entrepreneurship and innovation paired with increasing supplies of public goods and services. this will ensure that our growth rate is adjusted without weakening momentum and that growth in quantities is underpinned by greater quality, thereby achieving a greater quality, more efficient, upgraded economy. cory: china's battling significant headwinds, including a property slump corruption and disinflation. citigroup is ending its investment in turkey's second largest bank with a loss of money. citi sold all of its stake in the bank for just over $1 billion. the c.e.o. is divesting minority stakes to focus on citi's core bills. call it aididas either way, the shares are at a seven-month high today after forecasting a rebound in earnings and maintaining dividends. they say profit will increase to 7% to 10%, including some items later this month.

they're going to make a long-term strategy announcement to share how they're going to catch up to nike in the u.s. emirates' c.e.o. says he'll ralph to washington to defend his airline -- says he'll travel to washington to defend his airline. the subsidy would allow golf carriers to undercut competitors' fares. here's his reaction. >> it's grossly unfair. it's discourteous. and it's very serious. so they must be prepared for a very robust response from us. when and if we get the report. cory: clark calls the complaint by u.s. carriers bluster and flim-flam. i like that. bluster and flim-flam. all right. auction day today. bit coins seized by the grund ground drug and murder puddling website. 50,000 bitcoins are on the block. venture capitalist got 32,000.

barry got 48,000. they might be winners. except they paid a much higher price in the current trading price of bitcoin. are they winners? are they not winners? guest: well, the bitcoin market is liquid. so in the short run, i think they're kind of losers. you could go out and buy at a cheaper price today. if they hold it long enough, you know, we're a believer in bitcoin. they should hopefully do well on that investment. but right now it will be interesting to see how this auction goes. i think they'll definitely be -- there will definitely be an inclination to bit at discount to market which is what we did in the first auction. cory: so you did bid in the first auction? congratulations for not winning. i wonder if you know, i think about this a lot i'm so interested in block chain and

not bit coin. but i wonder if the excitement that people sort of catch on to sometimes, with the possibilities of the block chain, fool them into buying bitcoin. guest: i think what we have now anded ecosystem is it's effectively the internet in 1995. division exists and it's gotten to a size and scale where i think everyone collectively believes it's not going anywhere. so right now bitcoins are primarily used for speculation, especially in the u.s. all the technology is being built today. for anyone i think bidding in the auction, they're probably learned their lesson the first two times and will likely bid low rather than pay a premium. cory: when you think about the future of these technologies and

-- is there ones, i'm sure you get into conversations with friends and families, is there one application that just kind of grabs them by the la pells and makes them believe? guest: there's a lot of applications where i think you can get people to buy into the vision. getting someone to believe you need to seay doppings and that's equivalent to -- see adoption and that's equivalent if you go back when edison commercialized the light bulb. no one believes. the guy was a quack. and the wright brothers thought could you fly. no one believed. when bill gates started microsoft, well, i don't understand the internet, so i think the key case the case right now is currency. it makes a lot of sense, it's a good transfer of value. there are other amazing things you can do with block chain technologies. you can take all the housing records and pet them on a block chain so you don't have counties and states keeping track of who owns a deed to a house. things like that are very far out in the future in terms of

adoption. i think now we're just scratching the surface. cory: do you think that the volatility of the currency has hurt the development of these technologies surrounding bitcoin? >> i think -- guest: i think it's hurt a lot of the companies. the internet in 1995. i was actually a startup. there were a lot of companies that were going to go bankrupt. it's made venture capitalists wary. there are few public companies, i'm probably one of a handful, so i think right now companies need to focus on growing their businesses and it's a tough environment out there. this technology is -- one of the things it does is eliminate middlemen and lower fees. it's very competitive. the cases aren't there to support meavent companies from a revenue standpoint. cory: the price bouncing around is one thing but the value of bitcoin were to really get wiped out, do you think we would see company goes away just because, you know, they might have great ideas, the technology could be

there, but the psychic pain of a wiped-out currency would keep it from happening? guest: i don't think you're going to see bitcoin get wiped out. because what would -- you need to shut the power down in the world and turn off the internet. because companies that are providing transaction verification services such as us, they all need to turn off. they all need to turn off at once. if that happens we have a much bigger problem -- problem. i'm going to my farm and i'm worried about, you know, food water, i probably need to buy a gun. it's a much different problem. cory: good to know. we'll keep an eye out for the end of this. should civilization end, we'll look for you. we can't call you, because the phones will be out. charles, thank you very much. "bloomberg west" will be right back. ♪

cory: i'm cory johnson. this is "bloomberg west." space is full of mysteries, including this one. the defense satellite miss tearsiously exploding in orbit last month. what happened? investigators aren't telling us. another mystery. a patch worn by the crew of a secret government space mission depicting an octopus smothering north america. i spoke to the author of the blank spots on the map. he's an expert on all things secretive and space, including the national reconnaissance center. guest: it is like the secret version of nasa. so the u.s. actually has two space programs. there's the public one nasa, the space shuttle, apollo, all that kind of stuff. there's another space agency that builds secret sat satellites. -- satellites.

they build classified reconnaissance satellites for themselves and they serve the d.i.a., the c.i.a., the national geospatial intelligence. cory: so the satellite that blew up a few weeks ago big secret nerds with telescopes saw it. guest: what happened in early february is that a military weather satellite, this is actually an air force satellite, called dmsp-13 the satellite that was launched in 1995, in early february something happened to it. and it looks like it exploded. this was seen by an amateur astronomer in the u.k. basically with a pair of binoculars. i think this thing blew up. about 20 days later, i think the air force finally fessed up and confirmed that this thing had indeed exploded. not really sure why. nobody's really saying, if anybody knows at all.

but it's actually not the first time that one of these spacecraft had blown up. there was another one, an earlier one that something similar happened to in 2004. cory: the technology's much more advanced than nasa but the size of the program is interesting. i want to read a quote from one of the generals who ran the organization up until recently. specifically what he talked about, sort of the size of this agency. he said, they're undertaking probably the most aggressive launch schedule that this organization has undertaken in the last 25 years and he went on to say, there are a number of very large and very critical reconnaissance satellites that will go into orbit in the next year. so these guys -- next year to a year and a half, i should say. these guys are not only launching satellites but they're launching at a much more aggressive pace, spending billions of dollars? guest: absolutely. historically the n.r.o.'s had the largest budget of all the intelligence agencies, a larger budget than nasa and the c.i.a. that's no longer true.

the c.i.a.'s budget has eclipsed them. part of that is because it's very, very expensive to put things into space. but it seems like there are a number of new n.r.o. programs that have been going up in the last few years and they're trying to put up, looking forward. there's a new generation of synthetic apper tour image satellites. that was the octopus patch that you showed. we're trying to build a new generation of photo imaging satellites and of course they're also building and expanding the signals intelligence satellites that they use. cory: so every google search that you do on your phone, is that the kind of stuff that the n.s.a. is sucking up using the satellites launched by the n.r.o.? guest: to a certain extent. they do a lot of their sensor collection over fiber optic cables. that's really where the bulk of the internet is. is in fiber optic cables moving across the continent and under the seas. but they have dedicated spacecrafts for doing signals intelligence satellites and

that's typically what they'll do is for satellite phones in the middle east, for example, would be a big thing they would want to collect. also military communications. so the n.s.a. doesn't just spy on normal people. they do that as well. but they obviously other foreign governments and militaries are big targets. cory: a lot of private industries probably benefiting from this spending, of these billions of dollars going into these programs? guest: absolutely. this is another thing that's odd about the n.r.o. something like 95% of the entire organization is made out of contractors. things like lockheed, boeing. that's another thing when we're talking about the idea of civilian space agencies, lockheed is boeing? cory: that was the author of "blank spots on the map." here's a check of your bloomberg top headlines. the european central bank boosts its economic forecast for the end of 2015. this is to say that e.c.b. board will start buying and start on monday.

60 billion euros a month until the end of 2016. here's the e.c.b. president on inflation. >> the inflation projection for 2015 has been revised downward mainly reflecting the falling oil prices. cory: the euro meanwhile fell to the lowest levels against the u.s. dollar since september, 2003. amazon targets ecommerce rival alibaba. they opened a store in alibaba's main website, in an attempt to gain traction with chinese shoppers. amazon struggled overseas with international sales making 38% of revenue last year, down from 48% in 2009. the elephant one of the most iconic of circus animals if not the most, is being phased out by the ringling brothers. their parent company says growing public concern about the treatment of those elephants 13 circus elephants will be sent to

the ringling elephant conservation center in florida. "bloomberg west" will be right back. ♪

cory: i'm cory johnson. this is "bloomberg west." wedding planning just got a little bit easier. the yelp for wedings an acquisition of wed planner -- wedding planner. the combined companies will reach 10 million users in 14 countries. it's a big business. maybe not for them. but they hope it will get to be a lot bigger. here's my interview with the c.e.o. guest: the rationale for the acquisition centered around the idea that we saw a lot and do see a lot of momentum in the north american vertical marketplace for wedings and we found a company based out of spain that was building a lot of traction in 12 other countries. spain, italy france, brazil, mexico a couple others. we thought it was a good time to put the companies together. cory: why not do it yourself?

guest: that's a great thing. the weddings market is a very, very fun one to be in. obviously weddings are global. there's 40 million we had thags happen every single year -- weddings that happen every single year. they're also very local. every country has its own culture and way they go about them. there's a lot of nuance in how weddings get executed. so having that on the ground is very important. cory: i should back up. how do you describe your company? guest: we describe ourselves as an online vertical marketplace for the wedding industry. we service both sides of the value chain. we help engaged couples find all the services and goods they need to execute on their big day and we also help all of the hundreds of thousands of small businesses that wedding professionals find engaged couples online. cory: who are your competitors? how do you evaluate what kind of market share you have? guest: i typically look at market share in two views. one, you certainly have the endemic, anyone that is trying to reach the bridal audience is a very high-value customer

segment. on the other hands, if you look at the local business, 8 a% of revenue comes from -- 85% of revenue comes from local businesses. cory: americans spend vast fortunes on weddings, it seems. and it seems that number's going up at a much faster rate than the pace of inflation. talk to me about that. guest: $27 billion is spent annual abouty by u.s. engaged couples -- annually by u.s. engaged couples and that only counts local services up to the day of the wedding. that will balloon up to $100 billion every single year if you consider all the engaged couple direct and spend. all of the guests coming in and all of the travel and hotel rooms and registry purchases that are affected. so -- cory: talk to me about how that's changed over time. guest: we like to say that the wedding industry is relatively recession-resistance -- resistant -- recession-resistant. what we saw in late 2008-2009, budgets didn't really move off

of where they are. people may have redirected here and there. but the big ticket items, where you're going to spend on your venue, your photographer, anything that the bride and groom deem really important -- cory: is that different overseas? some of those markets are going into, are they also looking at, you know, seven bridesmaids all with -- guest: the countries week of expanded into are very similar. i think there's a tailwind behind this. one interesting fact i know in india right now, the average wedding spend is actually the same as the u.s. which is an amazing stat if you think about it. cory: in terms of how you gather customers, is marketing your biggest expense? guest: it used to be. certainly as we were building a brand in the u.s. here, we spent a lot of time thinking about local rollouts and building up marketplace liquidity in the different cities that we roll out in. but now as we moved into a leadership position in north america, the brand really does

carry. one of the big things about weddings is whenever someone gets married is they talk to their friends about what they used. big word of mouth component and reputation is very important. cory: how do you target those people? aren't there new ways mobile things? guest: certainly. it's a very -- it would be a very similar algorithm or thought process around people that are like you, takes profile-driven matching, right, people tends to like these things. one nuance here with weddings is there's two million of them in the u.s. every single year. and the process is kind of the same but everybody wants their weddinging to be a little bit different. cory: weddingwire c.e.o. now it's time for the number that tells us a whole lot. we have more from los angeles. what do you got? guest: 3. that is the number of -- 38. that isment in of days until the premier of the new season of "game of thrones" which is also the point at which hbo would

like to offer its new internet video subscription service, kind of its version of netflix, if will you. cory: interesting. so that's april 28. and so this isn't just happening way off in the future. they're pretty much ready to launch this thing. anchor: yeah. the supposition has been they wanted to peg it with "game of thrones." "game of thrones" is far and away their biggest show. so if they want to lure some of the people who aren't paying for cable to buy this other product, why not do it with your big hit? cory: "game of thrones", nerdses around the world rejoice you don't need an hbo subscription, or do you? can they affect the change to get away from the requirement for subscriptions that quickly? anchor: they say that they can. they've partnered with mlb advanced media which is really a strong kind of side of major league baseball. they're planning to offer this just like dish offers fling

outside of a cable bundle. the big question is whether the cable providers are going to help them. there seems to be some disagreement as to whether they want to help hbo market it because they might not be getting the same revenue share that they do from regular hbo. cory: yeah. this is the golden egg. interesting stuff. thank you very much. we appreciate it. always get the latest headlines at the top of the hour at bloomberg radio and all the time at bloomberg.com/technology. we'll see you with more "bloomberg west" tomorrow. ♪