emily: he has been dubbed the venture cowboy. for his brash and freewheeling way of doing business. ago, he wrote a of,000 check to buy a piece twitter and amassed so many shares, he was the biggest outside investor by the time of the ipo. he recently made news by outlining his vision for the future of twitter, even addressing the possibility that twitter sell to a bigger company like google or facebook. chris just days

before twitter's ceo announced he was stepping down. thank you so much for being here. i hope you don't mind me calling you brash. chris: that is accurate. released ajust missive about what twitter can be. what is twitter prosecutor? chris: 8500 words for like a term paper. theve been invested since first time anybody could be invested in twitter. i have been a user since 2006. it's a huge part of my business. there's more than one million people who have tried it and not stuck around. it needs to be easier and work citing a less intimidating for all those people. emily: what has been the reaction from twitter? chris: i have not heard from dick. i don't talk to him that freaked me, anyway.

i have talked to a bunch of other people at the company. it was a really well received that done right, sets them up for success. a directiontreet in of this is how you should be evaluating the company. be headbutting the ceo, you should be focusing on these things. if they focus on the stock i laid out there, no one will be asking the question about whether he should be ceo anymore. emily: what should twitter do? chris: it's scary to go out there and tweet your it feels kind of lonely. the need to do a better job of making at the place where you will find the tweets you want. you can follow the once related to the debate, the game, the election, the protest. emily: you want a heart instead of a star? drew: the endless string of hearts is an amazing feature. it makes you feel acknowledged, heard, valued.

is this really one of my favorite posts? for most people, they don't do it. emily: they cost low said twitter is the best way to connect with what's happening in your world. i'm confident that is what twitter is an everybody at the company is confident that is what twitter is. is that enough for you? chris: mission statements and taglines leave most people feeling empty-handed and directionless. duct thatmplex pro has to appeal to a myriad of audiences. i don't think a single tagline will do it. emily: he has been waiting the pom-poms for nine years. chris: we have a twitter blue room in our house. emily: why now? i think we have the team that is ready to execute. dick finally has his squad. emily: why didn't you just pick up the phone and call him?

chris: i have. i wanted to tell it externally. audience was the people working at the company, not just senior management people who have been there a long time. if the company starts delivering on it, everybody wins. emily: you are not a product guy. why should they listen to you? chris: good question. i don't know. i have a track record that has worked out pretty well. kickstarter,am, all things that i would like to think one or two of them might be lucky, but it's not a next and. -- an accident. you have to trust your own intuition as a person. one of the most interesting challenges is the people who are not your users don't have any voice. these companies have to start incorporating -- this company has the potential to be bigger and more meaningful than a facebook. if he executes on this stuff,

that is the ceo of this company. emily: have you talked to the founders? chris: i have not talked to jack recently. were thingse things that are not necessarily my original ideas but we have discussed over the years, things that we believe are worth doing. it's where twitter should be now. they have had so much turnover, infrastructure that could not support rolling this stuff out. they're just lost years. emily: google buying twitter, is that realistic? chris: it's really realistic. emily: speculation about this has been going on for years. chris: if google were to buy twitter, it would instantly fit. there is nobody there who was like we have to be independent forever. we own 50% of the stock. emily: do you think twitter can realistically sell to google? chris: i think google would love to buy twitter.

social -- not gotten they have not nailed any of that. zuckerberg would not let twitter go to google without putting in a bid. emily: you think he would bid? chris: he looks at twitter and sees so much potential. that has not changed. his perception that twitter is not doing everything they could has not changed. he would love the opportunity to own it and improve it. at microsoft.ya he is a user. when twitter first started selling its search data, it was satya who negotiated the deal. those are the three people -- alibaba might be interested, to make.

emily: facebook, microsoft, alibaba. chris: all of those companies benefit strategically. it would fit into each of those companies without competing with something else they have. emily: what about apple? chris: i don't think apple cares. i don't think they care enough. tim cook goes in a different direction. i don't think they care as much about the social elements. i don't think twitter should sell to them. there is a limited potential in what they're continuing to build to get to a few hundred million more people. if they do that, the stock is trading in the 70's, 80's, 90's. that's why i'm not campaigning for it to be sold. --the board stops believing i don't see anybody who would block that sale. run ahe founders

company, people defer to their judgment. you were allowed to be weirder and more eccentric. doesn't have the benefit of being a founder, people don't give him the benefit of the doubt by default. emily: what if these don't happen? chris: somebody will go sideways. the stock will go sideways, or distraction, people calling for management's heads. it will be hard to land the talented people. if user growth is not accelerating and revenue is not accelerating, they should give the company to someone who could do better with it. emily: do you have a partner? when facebook tried to went to aitter, jack meeting with zuckerberg and when they came out, they called dick and die for it buys and we happened to be in hawaii. i.dick and

they've always been a couple steps ahead of us. emily: do you want something more here? do you want to be a board member or ceo? chris: i don't want a job job. i like what i do for a living. we have over 100 investments right now. k capital consists of three people. we are one of the biggest funds in the country. -- lowercase capital consists of three people. l.a.artner is in no we do it all ourselves and i don't even have an assistant. emily: how big do you think uber can be? chris: that is truly limitless. ♪

emily: what is the myth of chris sacca and what is the reality? chris: i never followed the

step-by-step path you're supposed to do to do this. i had no business being a venture investor. i had no business quitting my job at google. they were getting pretty big. it was becoming bureaucratic. i am not good at playing company politics. you know who was was sundar, i knew that this guy was going places. emily: he has obviously done well. chris: yes. he will be the ceo of google someday. it was just obvious back in the day that he would do that. emily: what do you think of how he is leading google now? chris: sundar is an incredible compliment to larry. out use as a foil in meetings. we both have good ideas, but he can actually navigate a big company, and i can't. i have sharp elbows, i have opinions, i'm impatient in ways that i think are more similar to elon than sundar. emily: in what way? chris: tough to work with. i demand everything to be exactly right. i grew up with just my parents'

excellence where it was expected. it was not even demanded. we had to do everything right the first time. emily: at google, you were described as this guy who maybe would go to meetings and get stuff done and might have rubbed people wrong way. how do you feel about that? chris: it was accurate. i was projected on high as the guy who got [beep] done. that said, it did not fit into the hierarchy. i totally know why it rubbed some people the wrong way, but i stand by the stuff i did to get stuff done. emily: what do you think about the moon shot? is that what they should be concentrating on right now? chris: yeah, i do. there's nobody here who would tell you that self driving cars is a small idea and it will not pan out. that could be worth more than all of google is today. the stuff they are doing in health to change the world forever. the stuff they are doing in robotics could change everything. where they have dropped the ball

are things that are incremental where they are right now. it is a bummer that youtube is not more social. the comments there are a disaster. emily: what about facebook? chris: i've no doubt about facebook's ability to maintain its relevancy and reinvent itself. they have used their market capital to buy the coolest stuff. zuckerberg knows what he's doing. he was on top of instagram and he knows how to close out that deal. emily: do you think kevin sold too early? chris: kevin walked away from that deal. at the time it was signed was about $300 million to $400 million which is somewhere around $600 million to $800 million now. if you would tell me you wouldn't treat everything you have right now for $300 million. emily: could he have more? chris: i am sure he could have had more. but he could have zero, too. i do not think it is any of our place to question a guy like that. he has the best of all worlds. he sold the company, made a ton of money, and now he has been left alone to continue to execute on what he's wanted to do.

kevin has had an amazing life. he is dj-ing in vegas. i've never seen anyone dress better than that guy. he has his finger on the pulse. he drinks the best bourbon. he goes to fashion week in paris and everybody falls all over him for how he has changed the world of fashion. i don't feel bad for kevin one bit. emily: what about snapchat? here to stay, or just a fad? chris: snapchat is very real. those guys came up to me after an event i did once and they said they were big fans, we would like to sit down. at first, i did not get it. i was like, is this a [beep] pic thing? i passed on job books, airbnb. at google, i told eric not to invest in go pro. each of these times, i focused so much on the negative case that i missed all of the positive case. airbnb founders, i said guys, this is dangerous. i think somebody might get raped or murdered while they are staying at someone's house and the blood will be on your hands,

and i said this out loud to the guys. emily: you didn't pass on uber. you own 4% of the of the company. chris: i was lucky to be one of the very first investors. i had deep convictions about what could be. emily: you don't think uber has used any dirty tactics? chris: i don't. i think they have used aggressive tactics. emily: how big do you think uber can be? chris: that is truly limitless. i do not think it is worth less than $200 billion by the time it goes public. they are nailing down the food business. emily: taking on fedex, is that something they would do? chris: they are delivering packages to hong kong now. there is a cool company shipped. i did not invest in it because i think it is likely that is something uber will likely do. i don't own instacart stock because i think it is something uber will do. i think travis's ambition is boundless and his ability to execute on that is unlimited.

emily: you mentioned the hearts of it truckee. travis is the unofficial mayor there. you were closed that you do not -- close but you do not talk anymore. why not? chris: i think travis has a personality like mine. we have strong opinions. if i am involved in your business, i will share my opinions about how aspects are going. they will be very strong opinions, likely in your face. we have a different way of doing it. i think i can rub people the wrong way. it can be pretty mutual. in particular, i wanted to own more uber stock. so at the time, i was trying to buy it from more people, and travis didn't like that. i think that scratches the surface of more tension that was between us already. emily: have you tried to mend the fence? chris: working together professionally for now is kind of the best way for us to get along. what can i do for uber, that is a good way for us to collaborate for now. emily: what is the craziest thing that has happened in the jam tub? chris: the only thing travis can

spend seven to eight hours. normal people cannot do that. emily: you think lyft is gone? ♪

emily: what do you think is going on right now in silicon valley? we are seeing unicorn valuations. chris: decacorn. emily: decacorn. chris: you know the culture of secrecy we have here in silicon valley where you don't tell people your numbers or business model, you don't tell them about the future. emily: isn't that dangerous? chris: it is really dangerous. the story of founders living lavish lives and investors doing super well is attracting more attention and more posers, and with that attention comes sloppy discipline and a ton of money. think about the early days at y combinator. 12 companies, demo day lasted all day. everyone ran live code. we could ask questions, walk up

and try it during demo day. if the deal didn't get done that day, we could work on it. demo day today, what is it, 80 companies a class? 450 investors. 3 minutes, no live code, and those deals, half of them are done before they even present it at demo day. i think it speaks to a desperation on behalf of investors to be a part of this game. some are taking money away from companies that should probably use that money. they are taking talent away from companies that could use that talent. they are taking investor and advisor attention away. i think there is a lot of waste happening in the valley right now. some of these valuations and the accessibility of capital is just bananas. it is an amazingly rigged game, the investing game. where it all comes together is i don't think the public market will hold up forever. i do not think the global economy will support the market being open. by the end of this year, the public market basically closes

down for anything with quality lower than an uber, frankly. emily: what do you mean by that? chris: you have a bunch of companies sitting around with no exit path. there will be down rounds. emily: you think by the end of the year, the tide will turn? chris: yes. i think there will be some pain out here for the companies themselves. emily: what happens to all of these unicorns and decacorns? how many of these are horses masquerading? chris: i think there are naive investors with no discipline throwing out term sheets with nine figures with no diligence. icon investing in lyft is publicly stated rationale. if you really look at this thing, it will not be a tourist race. lyft will not survive and travis will never buy it. lyft goes away. emily: you think lyft is gone? chris: lyft doesn't survive this. uber is a better company with better math, lower pickup times,

better brand, higher quality of service. emily: you are an uber investor. chris: i am a huge one and i would be a bigger investor on that thesis alone. i just don't think lyft are going to compete. emily: so icahn made a big mistake. chris: he made a big mistake. this is a win or take all game. and travis will take all. emily: will there be a downturn? chris: yes. it is inevitable that the funders putting this money to work will not see it all back. emily: are we in a bubble? is the bubble going to pop? chris: there are multiple ways to define that. emily: yes or no? chris: yes, some companies are going to go away. there will be impact for real estate and stuff like that. it will be like the year 2000 where you can't get a u-haul because they are gone all one way out of town, no, i don't think so because this is the epicenter of innovation, just out of whack right now. emily: what you think is the

biggest problem in silicon valley that is not being talked about now? chris: there is nobody normal left here anymore. all of the normal, regular people have been priced out. the artists cannot live here anymore. the musicians cannot live here anymore. you don't even meet nurses, or doctors, frankly, who can afford this city. that is messed up. i think the biggest problem here is computer science programs are so lucrative now the kids do not need to pay money to get to them. they do not need to get jobs. they never waited tables. they never parked cars. we have a generation of software engineers working at these companies who have very little compassion. we have an increasingly limited worldview that is really out of touch with how the rest of the world lives. i would like to see more people get the hell out of here and be around real people every now and then. we do not have anyone here who represents the voice of the normals and they are not even our neighbors anyone.

emily: chris sacca, thanks so much for joining us. it is been great to have you. chris: right on. ♪

erik: from west texas shale to drilling rigs far offshore -- >> we need a hand on the handrail. erik: from angola to australia -- >> you're looking at the inside of an lng tank. erik: a thirst for energy has pushed chevron to almost every corner of the globe. >> we believe there's opportunity to progress. >> good job, erik. erik: the giant company is active in 180 countries. >> it is the largest resource project in australia. erik: pumping almost 2.6 million barrels every day. these are challenging times for big oil. fracking has upended the global market. renewables likla