♪ announcer: from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: we begin this evening with the 2016 presidential race. speculation growing around the potential candidacy of vice president joe biden. in an emotional interview on " late night with stephen colbert", he questioned whether he has the energy to run. vice president biden: i do not think any man or woman should run for president unless number one, they know exactly why they would want to be president. and two, they can look folks out there and say, i promise you you

have my whole soul, my energy , and my passion to do this. and i'd be lying if i said that i knew i was there. charlie: joining me now is john heilemann, host of "with all due respect." he reported today that the vice president met with a major campaign financier. joining us is cohost mark halperin. john dickerson a host of "face the nation." i am pleased to have all of them here on this program. we begin with joe biden. the significance of the fact that you reported that he met with a well-known bundler for barack obama who is supporting hillary clinton. john h.: robert wolf, a huge bundler for obama. someone who decided not to go

with heller clinton in 2008. he raised a lot of money and became very personally close to obama in a way that no one else in the business committee has. and a golfing buddy. he has not raised any money for hillary clinton. he has not written her a check. if you're thinking about possible defectors from the clinton donor world, he would be someone you might want to talk to. the vice president met with him in secret on friday. for 90 minutes. the way i would describe it, is the beginning of a courtship. vice president biden is not asking donors to sign up because he does not know if he is going to run yet, but he is starting to laying the groundwork for that conversation. and this is an audacious move by biden. he has not been out publicly , himself. he, himself, has done a little bit of that.

they wanted to keep it quiet and that did not happen because of me. for him to go -- he has also been careful about not riling up the clintons. for him to go and meet with a goldplated donor. charlie: been unsuccessful. john h.: a move to a different kind of posture, more audacity on his part, and shows you that although he has not yet decided he is moving in the direction of yes and not in the direction of no. right now the momentum is for yes. charlie: mark, do you agree with that? mark: i agree he is doing a lot of things because he has his eye on the clock. while i think this is a personal and not a political decision, i don't think he needs to do nearly as much to raise money and build an organization as a normal candidate, there is no doubt the people around joe biden have said to him there are certain things we need to do, you need to do, if this is going to be plausible, and he's moved

in that direction. charlie: where is the clock? mark: it is later than some people think. there is a debate in the middle of next month. i do not think he needs to be in that. this is a campaign about saying, i need to be ready if the democratic party needs me. if i can prove to people i am a better alternative than hillary clinton and bernie sanders, the party can turn to me even though i have gotten in late. even though i have not spent as many hours and days and i'll in -- in iowa or new hampshire. think about joe biden when he first got elected to the senate. he faced a similar decision -- can i be a freshman united states senator after having dealt with a horrible tragedy of losing loved ones in a way that's wrenching? he faces the same decision now. then he'd been elected but he , thought about not taking office. >> one thing i have been told is his sense of identity going back to what mark said about after his wife and daughter died. his sense of identity is built

, in part, on what he said is getting up, which he talked about with stephen colbert. the fact that when you're in such a state of grief that his mother and father, he gave two different expressions they both had about the duty to soldier on. that is a part of the biden identity, a part of what beau biden was about. and it is what beau biden was asking him to do when he said, when i am gone, i want to make sure you are ok. it is been described to me away in which beau biden and the sadness of his death are holding him back but they are also compelling him. and that is a part of this emotional picture. if you were trying to keep the flame alive of beau biden, you would soldier on in the face of that grief. so, i think there is a push on a pull on the emotional side. john h: there are two things to build on what mark and john said. what the vice president believes now -- he talked about in the colbert thing -- they see he has

a rationale that he can explain for why he wants to be president and why we he would be a better president than hillary clinton in a way she can never do. he thinks he would be better at the job and that he would explain it in a way that people will find real and that people understand she is incapable of doing. he thinks he's still joe biden, the fire for the middle class and the working class in america, rebuilding the american middle class and economy and that he can talk about it in an authentic way that she cannot. he thinks that his moment is unique in that the craving for authenticity is particularly acute. both he and the people around him look at the donald trump phenomena, and they say donald trump has gotten this far by basically telling it like it is. that not only speaks to the way one of biden's strength, but the fact that trump can get away

with making mistakes, that there is so much craving for authenticity that there is a greater tolerance for screw ups. as we know the vice president sometimes put his foot in his mouth. they see that as also a sign of the moment and the opening. on the emotional side, it is a push and a pull. and i actually think at this point the part that is pulling him towards it it, the fact beau wanted him to run all along. the fact that getting back up off the mat and soothing yourself through work and through a mission those are very , strong in him. the place that is pulling him back is the family. and he is an old school, a friend of his for many years said to me, said he is an old school, old fashion patriarch. he believes his fundamental duty is to take care of his family . he looks at his wife, he looks at his sister, he looks at his now widowed daughter-in-law. he looks at his graduation.

him though they will say to it is ok if you run, he is not , sure they are actually ready to go through what it would mean to go through, and i think if he ends up saying no, the main reason will be because he felt that his main duty was to take care of them rather than pursue his political ambitions. charlie: i want to talk about two things. what is the risk if he goes and loses? mark: he would have run three times and lost. and he is a proud guy. i do not think is an incumbent -- as an incumbent vice president, you want to find yourself in that position. he does not know what he is going to do. it is hard for us to know, impossible for us to know. i think the reality is none of us would be surprised if he ran. i do not think any of us would be surprised if he did not run. if he runs, he's an underdog. there is no doubt about it. he is in a better position than he was in 1988. and a better position than he was in 2008. so, his best chance to be president of united states. and i think that his vision of

how to do it is not normal. in the past, it was how much can i raise? he does not have to think of those terms. i think he is confident on the debate stage based on his performancein 2008. if he can get on the stage and get up enough of an organization to take advantage of the doubts about hillary clinton that he -- then he can win. i don't know how much this is a calculation of his, but i know a lot of people who care about him do not want him to run halfheartedly in a distracted way and lose. and there are a lot of people that care about him in the white house who feel that for all of hillary clinton's vulnerabilities, she is still significantly stronger than he would be and are worried about the trauma of soldiering on, standing up, fighting, running, and then potentially not doing well at all. charlie: john dickerson -- john d.: to pick up on what mark was saying, i heard a version of the same thing.

biden is very well aware of this. the old line, about the best day is the day before you announce. there another kind of sharper, painful part of the conversation that could take place if this became a campaign in earnest which is right now he is at the top of his game, if he were to not run for all of the reasons outlined, he leaves the field everybody wants more from joe biden and he ends on a high note. what i've heard from people inside the white house who really like him is that once you get into a conversation about whether he would be a great president, it starts to get ugly and hard pretty fast. that if the campaign does not go as he would like, then it ends on a sour note. and because they have his interest at heart, as they explained to me, that is why they worry about him launching into a full-fledged campaign. charlie: is it a doable deal? can joe biden -- and what are the odds that joe biden if he is all in, can win the nomination?

john h.: there is a little bit of a bank -- beg shot prelature this. if mark and i and john, we all accept the notion he gets in late. maybe he waits to november. he will not build an iowa operation. he is not going to be able to build a new hampshire operation. what they are focused on his -- is south carolina. and they are focused on a scenario that looks like bernie sanders beats hillary clinton in iowa or new hampshire both. he wounds her sufficiently and those first two contest. then you come to south carolina and biden is waiting. a wounded clinton and a sanders who is not cut out or well-suited to south carolina, they roll down -- and biden is the waiting alternative. a scenario where she lost or was severely wounded in the first three contests now you have --

really have a path for joe biden to win the nomination. but there is a bank shot quality. if she wins iowa, the whole thing is out of the window. charlie: what has happened to hillary clinton? mark: she chose to get into the race as the e-mail scandal was mushrooming. she could have put things off and try to deal with the scandal in a more effective way. that has dogged her. even though the polls are kind of mixed on whether voters think that should be an issue, she has got herself so yoked up in that and raising questions about her electability, her authenticity, her truthfulness and the two other things that are happening concurrent with that. one is none of us expected bernie sanders to be the performer he has been. i mean that in the best of ways. his connection to voters, his

to speak in an honest way, in a heartfelt way. then the mood of the country. where whatever your views of the clintons and bushes or any individual members, a real disdain for the notion that the country would be left with a bush and a clinton as the major nominees in a time when people want fundamental change. so, i think she's still the most likely next president of the united states because the republican race is so unsettled and we do not know who will emerge there, but her connection to this notion of, that she is a historic figure, qualified figure, an exciting figure has all been overwhelmed by the other factors. john d.: and e-mail scandal, managing it as poorly it's been managed -- has forced her to on an almost daily basis, or at least her campaign, to engage in a series of inauthentic acts. a variety of explanations that do not feel like you're getting

the whole story. as peter baker said on "face the nation." the most authentic thing is she did not want to answer why she had the separate e-mail system. that is her authentic view, it was just that her authentic view was not sustainable. so, she has the actual problem with the e-mail and what people have decided to think about that. then she has the fact that everything that is done outside of that looks like a stratagem to distract from the e-mail story, even if it is not. finally, there is no breathing room for her to launch a big speech about college affordability that might get people excited in a way that speech or a speech on that topic is getting excited with bernie sanders. charlie: is it possible the e-mail scandal will get worse? or likely? if it is true that the server has not been wiped, that there is more recoverable on that server then at first seen, she said basically we got the impression it had been completely almost destroyed.

if, in fact all of those 30,000 , e-mails that were deleted are accessible in some way by investigators, i think that is an avenue. charlie: this is an important question, does anybody who knows the answer as to whether, who has possession of the server and whether the server has been a, wiped or b, simply deleted? mark: the fbi has it. they are doing a security investigation. they're interested in the question of whether classified or secret information got into the wrong hands. it's possible that congress will come after the server if it turns out they learn that there is data on there. that could be a big problem for her. if the fbi determines that there was a breach on her system, i think that potentially makes it worse. i think some of the issues involving her staff could potentially make it worse. the release of more these e-mails month my month. and finally, this congressional testimony.

her history has been, when she's gone up to capitol hill, republicans have misplayed their hands in the moment and in the aftermath and she's come away victorious. her team is confident she will do that again. i am not so sure this time. if i understand the way the committee is preparing, if i understand the way they are going to try to stage manage this, that may be a bad day for her rather than what her campaign hopes, which is a climactic day where she stops them and ends their ability to continue to ask her questions. john h.: the big question we had around this table months ago what's different from the race in 2008? how different will the race be in 2015? unfortunately for her, many of the things that were bad about her campaign in 2007 have replayed themselves in 2015. charlie: even though it is a different team. john h.: the strength of your

campaign always comes back to the strength of the candidate. the strengths and weaknesses of the candidate are reflected in the organization around them. you think back to that campaign and how she ran 2007. the problems the democratic voters have with her. the passion she did not inspire. the sense that she was always calculating and triangulating. the way she was operating as if she were the inevitable nominee and not someone having to work for every vote. many of the things of replay -- are replaying themselves now. last week, when you stories about people at a campaign saying she will now project humor and authenticity. and stories about her campaign talked about focus groups that convinced her she had to apologize for the e-mail. those were reminiscent to me of the end of 2007 which went out and announced her campaign to reporters she was going on a likability tour of iowa. who announces they are going on a likability tour? that rings of hollowness. again, she may turn out to be a

great candidate to she was a -- and she was a great candidate in the spring of 2008. she may get there now, but there are so many things redolent of that campaign last time. this goes to the point mark made. there are a lot of democratic voters who worry in various ways about the e-mail thing, whether it will hurt her and the general -- in the general election, may be questions of her honesty. but there are a lot of them who are not worried about that at all but still are worried about-- are not feeling the enthusiasm that you see on the sanders side for hillary clinton. i will say one last thing. in this washington post poll that came out today, a few months ago, 71% of democratic leading female voters in july said they expected to vote for clinton. that number is now down to 42% . that is 30 points among democratic leaning women. that is the core of her constituency and that is an alarm bell for her. charlie: that was the theme of her campaign. thank you, john. thank you, john.

and thank you, mark. we will be right back. stay with us. ♪ ♪

charlie: when "fortune magazine" first published it possible list of the most part for women in -- most powerful women in business in 1998 there were only two female ceo's in the fortune 500 or the women on this year's list range from captains of

industry to pioneers like angela aarons, apple's new head of retail. joining me for a closer look at the issue is pattie sellers, assistant managing editor of "fortune magazine" and the executive director of live content with time. she has been involved in the project since the beginning. i'm pleased to have her here. welcome. pattie: thanks charlie. charlie: this has become a kind of institution, has in it? this is like what we used to think of as the fortune 500. pattie: it is now fortune's biggest brand. the most powerful women is. the reason it is is because we produce this special issue each year. we have a lot of digital content and we have six events each year. and at a time when print is , declining, events are a very good thing for media companies to be in. we do six events a year. we do our big most powerful , women summit which you came to

with warren buffett a few years ago. that is in the fall. he does come every year. he will be with us in october but we have most powerful women international in london, and hong kong to we have the most powerful women next gen because there were so much demand among younger women to try and get into the summit. we started that last year. it was a huge hit. so, it's become, little to be -- little did we realize when we started this in 1998 that we were beginning of movement, but we were the first to market. now everyone is copying us. charlie: other than the list any -- the list and events, what is it about? pattie: well, it is about celebrating women leaders. it's about informing the business community about women leaders who they might want to recruit, put on their boards. and, to me, it is also very much about humanizing these women who are not born leaders.

they had to make their way up and they have their insecurities and their vulnerabilities and we like to show that. we like them to be role models for young woman on the way up, because we hear from young women that they are very confused about how to navigate their careers. charlie: is there a consensus, or is it too broad a brush, to say here are the ways in which women ceo's are different than male ceo's? pattie: it is a broad brush but there is a lot of truth to that. women do tend to be more collaborative. women's brains are structured differently. charlie: how is their brain structure different? pattie: i am not a neuroscientist but there is a connector between the hemispheres of the brain. you're going to get me in trouble here, that is different in men and women. it allows women to both think of

multiple things and have multiple concerns at the same time. and it allows, it encourages women to be more both empathetic and collaborative. it's nature and nurture. charlie: that is why sometimes men, they will say about men, i'd like to see their female side, whatever that means. pattie: that's true. a ceo that we were just talking about, tim cook, is very, one of the reasons at apple that he is so successful is that he has a lot of empathy and he has great collaborative skills. charlie: he absolutely does. because of all the people , surrounding steve, of which he was hand-picked by steve to succeed him but all the people stayed. pattie: absolutely. charlie: and significant number

of others have stay there because of what he's been able to do. i was just out there. we were doing a piece. it is quite amazing as to how that company continues to look to the future, continues to refine its product base. pattie: it is amazing. and we have the first story here, the first exclusive interview with angela aarons. who tim cook hired. who would've imagined that the ceo of burberry would go to apple and head their retail business which is the most profitable retail business on earth. highest margin retail business, but it actually, it had a few failures of leadership and tim cook was very creative in thinking of hiring a retail luxury star to come in and

remake that, that business. charlie: it was an inspired choice. but not an obvious choice. pattie: not an obvious choice. in fact, this wonderful story that my colleague did talks about how when angela aarons met tim cook for the first time, she said to him, "i'm not a techie." he said, we have plenty of techies here. i'm a techie. what we need is a real leader. and we need a culture carrier, which is what she is really all about. charlie: i mean, the new apple watch has a fashion component to it. pattie: it does. but i think johnny ives was the orchestrator of that recent hermes deal. charlie: the watch band. um, mary barra. this is an interesting story for

me, of someone who came to power and immediately faced a crisis not of her making. almost had to deal with one shock after another, calling on every leadership skill, every capacity to communicate she has. pattie: and she has done a fantastic job at gm. and she is our new number one this year. she displaced ginni rometty, the ceo of ibm, who has been number one on the list ever since she became, ginni rometty became ceo of ibm in late 2012. she has been number one on the list for the last couple years. she is doing a big transformation of ibm that involves sacrificing some revenues. she's had many quarters of revenue declines. and mary barra has not had an easy time and not gotten the

stock up, but she has done a better job with the stock -- gm stock is doing better than ibm. we look very closely at the stock performance under these leaders. mary barra is in a way, charlie, very sort of a classic female ceo appointment, because the history of big time female ceo's is to take the job when the company is on the brink. it's happened so many times before. it happened when anne mulcahey took over xerox. when he was on the verge of that bankruptcy, and she saved that company. fiorina, who was our first number one on the list in 1998. charlie: when she was head of hewlett-packard. pattie: well, actually, when we put her on the list in 1998, she

was in charge of the biggest division at lucent technologies at a time when telecom was really hot. and lucent had just had the biggest ipo in u.s. history at the time, which was a $3 billion ipo which is small time now. but carly was this very prominent telecom executive, unknown to the world until , frankly, we put her at number one. we put her on the cover where she got recruited to be the ceo of hewlett-packard the following summer. charlie: then they had a boardroom struggle. pattie: they had a boardroom struggle, and she has taken a lot of flak for her leadership of hewlett-packard and having followed carly, i have to say i agree that she was not a successful ceo there. charlie: first of all, there is donald trump making the case and then there was a column about this. pattie: he did.

it's so interesting because i went, i remember going to lucent in the summer of 1998 when there had been one story written about carly fiorina in publication called " investors business daily." i was going out there has i heard about this woman who was supposedly very charismatic and very strong and she was 44 years old at the time. and i remember her walking in the room that day. and quite honestly, i was dazzled. i was dazzled. she had a charisma, she had a command about her, and she was, she was a very, very good marketer. and then, when she went to hewlett-packard, and she wages a very long, many month proxy fight for compac, big acquisition and she was fighting certain shareholders who did not want the deal done, she went on

a nationwide campaign, talking to investors, trying to sell them the deal. and looking back on it, it's so interesting, we saw what a good campaigner she was then. charlie: what she is doing now. what is the story on ruth? pattie: so, i did a story about google women past and present and featured ruth porat the former cfo of morgan stanley who left in may to become the new cfo of google. now she is the chief financial officer of alphabet, the parent company, too. and she spent her whole career at morgan stanley, but she wanted a change. and she is just so smart and a huge asset for google at a time

when they had lost a lot of very prominent women. i mean sheryl sandberg went to , facebook. marissa mayer left them -- to take the job at yahoo! megan smith left google to become the chief technology officer of the united states. so, in terms of female talent, ruth porat is a big win. your friend, john mack, played a role in getting ruth to google. charlie: the interesting thing, too, a whole bunch of issues involve women of which -- income disparity. pattie: the problem is, i do not know what the solution is -- the problem is greater than we thought. in this issue and online, we have a chart that shows all the bureau of labor statistics job categories. there are about, more than 100. and you know, guess how many -- i do not know if you have seen it -- but guess how many jobs

there are where women make at least as much as men out of 100? charlie: how many? pattie: two. charlie: i was thinking below five. pattie: two. so, the problem is even worse than we thought. and, you know, the counterargument to it is well women drop out, women take time off to raise their families and then they come back, but the real problem is -- and a lot of companies are working on this. google is working on this. women do tend to be judged and evaluated by the powers that be and usually the powers that be are male. they tend to be judged more harshly by a narrower band of acceptable behavior than men are.

charlie: a law schools in business schools, there is an increasing number of women. pattie: more women than men graduating. charlie: this is a quiz. one of the stars of these conferences is warren buffett. pattie: he is our highest rated speaker every year. charlie: why do you think women love him so much? pattie: you and i both know warren well. i think people love warren because he is without artifice. and he still lives in the same house that he lived in in the 1960's. and he shows the signs of a true genius, which is he explains very complicated things in the most simple understandable ways. what is your theory? charlie: women love warren so much because warren loves women so much.

pattie: that is true. touche. you have got it. charlie: pattie sellers. back in a moment. stay with us. ♪ ♪

charlie: logan green and john zimmer are the ceo and president of lyft. they founded the company in 2012 to establish a radically different concept of personal transportation. lyft is available in 65 cities

in the u.s. and has 1000 drivers -- 100,000 drivers. the on-demand transportation revolution is upending traditional views on car ownership, what it means to be an employee, and the future of cities. i am pleased to have logan green and john zimmer at this table. welcome. so, my first question is, give us a sense of why you think time-sharing and the sharing economy has taken off? >> i think it is what happens with economic activity in general. we find efficiencies and better ways of doing things. specific to our industry, we have an asset that has become the second-highest household expense in the united states for the average american household. transportation. people spend more on their car than they do on food. that is crazy. that does not seem right. and the car is utilized 4% of its life. and so, we have this incredible opportunity to get cars out of

parking spots to get empty seats filled. and that is why there is this new economic activity. charlie: and transportation needs to be more efficient, more economical and more what else? john: sustainable for the environment. logan: pwc recently did a report on the sharing economy and it showed that consumers -- charlie: price waterhouse. logan: consumers now trust peer reviewed feedback more than they trust government regulation. and that is a major shift over the last decade. so, in lyft when you get out of the ride, you rate the drive one to five stars. and driver rates the passenger. and that is the core element we use -- charlie: what happens with the drivers rating of the passenger? logan: the drivers rating of the passenger is averaged out.

when each passenger opens up the app any driver sees that passengers rating. charlie: and decides to or not to take it. what is the economic model? logan: the economic model is we charge for rides based on time and distance. and at the end of the ride the passenger pays for it -- it automatically charges their credit card. 80% of that goes to the driver and 20% goes to lyft. charlie: were you modeled after uber? logan: no. so, we started the company originally doing carpooling in 2007. and when we started lyft, we were evolving this idea into a mobile world. john z.: when we started no one else had done rides on demand of -- in personal vehicles. people have done it for limos, black cars as a car service to

, it we had to forge new ground with regulations, creating regulatory environments where you could use a personal vehicle. and we've also differed on the experience we created. the first tag line of the company was your friend with a car. part of that is creating an equality between driver and passenger, because long-term we want every driver on the road that is safe and gone through our background check, to be a lyft driver. so, when you are going somewhere you can earn money and get someone else were they need to go. charlie: was there a technology breakthrough that enable you to do this? logan: the mobile phone. the phone is what enabled this whole business. the fact that every consumer and potential passenger when they step outside on the sidewalk has a phone in their pocket to request a ride and that every driver has a phone. and that sort of pervasiveness of this mobile network made lyft possible. charlie: who are your drivers?

logan: they're all types of drivers but 80% of our drivers , drive for less than 20 hours a week. most drivers have a full-time job or are looking for a full-time job and use lyft to make ends meet or save a bit for something extra on the side. angeles, about half of our drivers work in the creative industry. you have actors, writers, musicians pursuing their dreams and fitting lyft in when it works with her schedule to pay the bills. charlie: the whole phenomenon used to be waiting on tables. logan: it's the new waiting tables. john: 25% of lyft driver's owner -- own their own business and use lyft as a way to pursue their dreams in starting a business. there are women in san

two francisco, pam and wendy, they were lyft drivers. their dream was to open a south african restaurant. they started driving and ended up opening up the restaurant and the first customers were there -- there early passengers. charlie: was this dream to create this company? john: yes. charlie: and you? logan: my dream was to create a company -- we both came at this motivated by impact and create a huge company to change the way people travel is one of the best ways to the cop was it. -- -- to accomplish that. charlie: uber's value the last time i looked was $50 billion. what does that say? john: this is a huge industry and huge opportunity. in the u.s., consumers spent -- spent over $2.25 trillion

every year, u.s. only on transportation. and the majority of that is spent on owning and operating a car. now, we are going through one of the biggest shifts in the model of ownership where today, most of that $2 trillion is spent on buying this two ton hunk of metal. it sits in the driveway under the hot sun and is not used most of the time. but we are shifting to a world of transportation as a service where you do not need to own the car to get from point a to point b. charlie: where else does the sharing economy go to? logan: it is having major impacts on quite a few industries. airbnb is having an impact on housing and travel. finance. it's having, the sharing economy is having a major impact on finance. companies like lending club are changing the way people are getting loans.

charlie: which also had a huge ipo. what else? logan: i mean, everything from dog sitters to food. the sharing economy is changing all of the major industries, and even some niche industries. charlie: where do you want to take lyft? john: our vision is to create the alternative to car ownership. in that world, in our cities, people do not own cars. there are no parking lots in the city. there are no parking spots. in the u.s. there are for -- four parking spots for every car. almost one billion. it is completely unnecessary. we want to open up our cities and at the same time bring people together. people are riding around in l.a. 1.1 people for car. people are riding around alone, angry in traffic. our ideal is that people come together, traffic goes away and

cities are better places to live. charlie: has the economic model changed since you have been in business? john: at the beginning, it has not really changed. there has always been 80%-20% split. at the beginning it was donation-based. that is the way we started the platform. charlie: how many people will be in this business? you have uber and lyft. is it going to be a two horse race? are other people going to find ease of entry? or have you both sort of on past the point, become avis and hertz? logan: in the u.s., there will be a similar to a verizon-at&t type opportunity where you have two places you can get a ride within two minutes. the way lyft is different is we focus on experience and we treat people better. and so -- charlie: how do you treat them better? john: with drivers.

what's that? charlie: the choice of drivers. john: 80% of drivers prefer to drive a lyft. drivers are getting treated better by the company and by the passengers. and how they are treated better by the company they are able to get tips in the app. our main competitors do not allow that. secondly, because a lot of passengers sit in the front seat or treat them as an equal. they much prefer being treated that way. i think a good example of this is starbucks. so, starbucks, someone is selling a commodity of coffee. but starbucks has created an experience where the company invests and treats the baristas incredibly well. in turn the baristas treat their , customers well. charlie: where does ridesharing work well overseas? logan: there are a number of

really large companies overseas in this business. there is one in china that works incredibly well. the numbers are staggering. so, lyft is doing one million rides a week in the u.s. in china, they are doing 3 million a day. the scale is out of control. and the company in china has called d.b. there -- they are very successful backed by $.10 and alibaba. each continent or large countries have their own local player. in india, there is ola. charlie: do you have your eyes on an international market? logan: lyft will go international eventually. we're looking at partnering with other international players. our real focus now and where we are spending most of our energy is going deep in the u.s. and running the -- and

broadening the use cases. charlie: what does that mean? logan: most people take their first lyft when they're going out to dinner. they had a couple of drinks or going to the airport. then what happens, particular for folks who live in cities is they realize, this is much more convenient way to get to work. instead of driving, circling, paying for parking, i am going to hop on a lyft, pay 5 bucks and get to work. it is faster and more convenient. to make lyft a better service for that commuter use case, we launched a new service called lyft line. with lyft line, you'll get mesh -- matched with other passengers taking the same trip. 50% less. charlie: how is that working? logan: working well. the majority of rides we do in san francisco and new york. charlie: what is it going to do to the taxi and limousine industry? logan: it is forcing those industries to evolve. those industries have existed in a world without competition.

the service levels have deteriorated because of that lack of competition. so it is forcing them to invest in technology and improve their level of service. charlie: can cities, can we does the parties around the country restricts what you can do? john: there have been attempts. i think these services are so popular among consumers that there's staying power. but also, we are responsible in the way we run our business. when we got started, we set up what we saw as the most strict criteria for background checks and driving record checks that we had seen in any transportation business prior. regulators said, hey, we want you to create our new rule over do not want you to operate. here is what you require for existing industries and here's what we're doing above and beyond the current requirements.

charlie: so, that would settle right? john: in the long run. there is some back and forth along the way. charlie: have you had issues in new york? john: recently, the mayor tried to put a cap on the number of vehicles with the rationale that it would reduce traffic. charlie: he was committed to the taxi industry because if they -- they had supported him. john: the interesting thing is that everything logan and i have been working since 2007 with lyft on is to eliminate and reduce traffic. so that is actually what we are fighting for. and we're excited about demonstrating that to people like the mayor of new york. charlie: do you want to be in any other businesses, because of what you have learned here? logan: so, we want to expand, we want to make transportation less and less expensive so that people can afford to use lyft for every trip imaginable. so with lyft line it is now

cheaper to take lyft line for every single trip in san francisco or new york than owning a car. and that is a huge, huge change. so, people who are signing up for lyft, we recently did a survey. and about 45% of lyft users say they got rid of their car or are thinking of getting rid of their car because of lyft. charlie: how often do you have a relationship in which somebody is a commuter to new york and they say, i want a car to take me to my office everyone at 7:00 -- every morning at 7:00 and for me back every night at 7:00? is that a typical customer. logan: that is extremely common. and one of the sort of core pieces of our technology is understanding exactly when and where each request is going to come from so there is a car positioned and available so when you wake up in the morning--

charlie: but that is what your software gives you? logan: exactly. charlie: did the notion, it's clear, that the international market is so huge. obviously, a lot of the expansion of uber has come overseas, and it was very aggressive by travis. is that, is there a negative to that? logan: i think when you look at the market share uber has internationally -- it is very small. usually single digits in most of these countries. there is, or there are two much larger domestic companies in this business. uber's actually not doing very well internationally. charlie: demographics. who takes you? who uses lyft? john: the millenial optimist . -- so that has extended to a pretty broad --

excuse slightly female on the passenger side. on the driver side, over 30% of drivers are women. and in a traditional driving industry that number has been historically 1%. charlie: a driver makes how much a week? john: depends on the city. charlie: take new york. john: it is about $1000 a week. charlie: san francisco is different, more or less? john: san francisco and new york are high compared to the average. charlie: and you see that, what do you see changing about the user experience? john: i think, again, to logan's point about use cases. you mentioned taxis before. our sites are changing car culture. logan just had a kid. i'm about to have my first daughter. i do not think they will drive. i do not think they will own a car.

so, the experience will evolve as you add one use case after another to the point where it is strange to own a car and strange to park. charlie: what is the partnership with starbucks? john: one around providing transportation to their partners which are their baristas. we also have a presence in their app and potentially in their store going forward. charlie: so you can do what? the app and the store will allow you to be connected to their website or connected to the app? john: as you take lyft, you earn stars. and you get coffee. and howard schultz cares so much about how he treats, how starbucks treats the baristas. one of the big problems they are trying to solve is how you get into open up a starbucks at 4:00

a.m. in public transit is not running? lyft can be the solution to that. lyft is like an express bus from door-to-door that can help get the priestess into every starbucks every morning. charlie: thanks for coming. thank you for joining us. see you next time. ♪

rishaad: it's wednesday, the 16th of september. i am rishaad salamat and this is "trending business." we are headed like to tokyo. biggest rocahina's ridge is under investigation for insider trading along with two senior colleagues. swept up in beijing's bid to delay the $5 billion stock route. sony shares soaring in tokyo.

the price of playstation's cut. the war with xbox. sony sees it as a centerpiece of its profit revival plan. isking smoker, thick haze illegalng caused by burning in indonesia. it has prompted help alerts. -- health alerts. the grand prix is still set to go ahead. follow me on twitter. the #as well. way-pacific stocks on the down with crude futures moving to the outsiders, investors awaiting the fed decision. >> asian markets follow the u.s. ahead of the fed decision. we have seen positive momentum in the region this morning, although the shanghai market