emily: drama in the cease week. done as ay is not deal. what does it mean. c-suite.in the jack dorsey is not a done deal. what does it mean? i am emily chang. this is "bloomberg west." amazon takes a swing at apple and google. plus, google and microsoft declare a truce in a five-year battle over smartphones.

a huge payday coming up for the executives at first data. getting ready for the biggest ipo of the year. first, to our lead. yesterday, twitter interim ceo jack dorsey back for good. saying itode updated is not a done deal. twitter shares closed down slightly today. dorsey seems to be the topic for the job. he is the only picked for the job right now. what does it mean for twitter and square? , theng me from new york david austin professor of management with m.i.t., bloomberg news reporter covering ideas -- from yourou hearing sources today about what this means and what it does not mean? reported that

according to our sources that they were planning on moving forward with the ipo with or without jack dorsey. bankers think the company is healthy enough to go on. one thing to keep in mind is this ipo process includes a roadshow out marketing and pitching the company. it does raise questions for investors, are they comfortable buying into new public shares at a company where it is not certain at this time whether or not jack dorsey will be there? those will be the big things we are paying attention to when it comes to whether or not square becomes a public company in the fourth quarter, which they were planning on doing as of three weeks ago. emily: james, let's say he is doing both jobs. steve jobs did it. elon musk did it. is that make it ok? >> absolutely not. those justifications by pointing to steve jobs and elon musk are

not warranted. this is an entirely different set marry up -- scenario. these are companies facing fierce competition and in a do or die situation right now. working offperating of two companies is not the right thing to do. you have the right guy at the home, but diluting his time is something that we need to monitor. it is concerning now. emily: it's interesting you say that. last week, i spoke with a partner at sequoia on the square board. i ask him what he would say to jack if he told you that he wanted to do both of these jobs. i don't think it is for me to judge, tell him that he can't do that. emily: there you have a square board member saying he does not

have a problem with this. what do you make of those remarks? soft pedaled like a to me. dorsey is an, jack credible ceo. he has a lot of talent and skill and leadership ability. i think that will be a benefit to twitter. twitter is right now in a position where they need to focus on product, and that is his strength. as i have said before, i think that being distracted by another full-time job, let alone one at a company that is about to ipo is an important concern that he should think about and that square investors and the square board should also think about. emily: let's talk about that. on the one hand, there is talk that could delay the ipo or put some pressure on the ipo. on the other hand, if something

is announced before the square ipo goes on the road that as some clarity to a very confusing goingion, jack dorsey was to be peppered with questions anyway. it twitter makes a decision before the show goes on the road, that could be beneficial, right? it seems like a clarity will be key here. it looks like uncertainty may have unsettled investors. you would think then that they might be able to figure out how ducks inhere docs in -- dicks a row. that uncertainty could be a problem. >> you have upgraded twitter recently. the ceo situation has not changed. jack dorsey has been the front runner, and there has not been in obvious outside candidate. it seems clear that someone else

was not going to get this job. why are you optimistic about the long-term future? >> we see twitter as one of the only companies optimized for mobile. you have that advantage for the next stage, but you also have limited downside for now. the big thing is that what we think we will see coming out of twitter is they will change the conversation from talking about the subscribed monthly active users and making us about the total on teens -- total audience as they curate the content. you can have a presidential debate and curate that stream and have a total audience approach. confidence will come back into the story as they change that conversation. jack dorsey is the kind of guy who can make that happen. on that risk-reward huawei the benefits with 15% downside risk, limited at that time, and that's

why we decided to upgrade the stock. emily: you say this could make or break twitter. that sounds obvious, but on the one hand, as you say, it could be so wonderful for twitter, just like steve jobs coming back to apple, or it could go in the opposite direction if it does not work out given the position that twitter is in. expand on that for me. >> i think this is a high-pressure situation for jack dorsey, because this is certainly the hallmark of his career. if he can pull this off successfully, being the head of both of these companies, he will join a very short list of greats, but he is not in that position currently. he has not demonstrated yet the success that he has the potential to demonstrate with these two companies. for twitter, it is a crossroads. stock price has tanked in the last several months. everybody has questions about

user growth and user engagement, and there is a tongue of attention with this product that it requires a lot of long timeframe hard work to change the product into something that is useful for everyday users and is usable. i think that jack dorsey is the right person for that job. they need to have some shuffling both in terms of who is in charge of product and on down the line, they have made some of those changes recently, as well as you could see some boarded changes and then your future that might be very beneficial for the company as well. . twitter and jack dorsey are at a watershed moment. m.i.t. management professor there. analyst, ipo reporter, speaking with you later in the show.

to another story we are watching. amazon will stop selling the main competition to its tv product, apple tv, and google chrome cask, but not broken -- chrome cast. tom joins us now for more. amazon says it wants to avoid customer confusion. is it putting the customer first? a good question. it gives the appearance of being less than friendly to consumers who want to get on amazon and buy whatever product they want. in particular, it is something that could be more damaging to google than apple. remember, we can buy all of the apple gadgets we want by walking down to an apple store and get it online from the apple store online. google is a little bit harder. google doesn't have the retail presence. if you are a consumer that once chrome cast and go to amazon to buy it, you will be stymied.

emily: what do you make of this. on the one hand, we are seeing google and microsoft strike a deal over patents. shote other hand amazon across the bow to google and apple. customers are the minority of its business. the vast majority don't have amazon prime and don't want amazon video on demand, right? >> exactly. there are a lot of people --king for ways to it download streaming video onto your tv, use a device, bypass cable operators. we have been talking about this for a long time now. the kids are not subscribing to comcast, going to dish. they want something easily accessible, easy to stream. these are not cord cutters. these are cord nevers. devices like apple tv and chrome

for morey make it easy and more people to get their tv easily. the competition between apple and amazon and google is intensifying in so many areas, including this one. it does have the feel of being slightly anticompetitive. emily: could there be an anti-trust issue here? >> that is where regulators will come and say there are other opportunities to buy your things. amazon does not have a monopoly on this. we don't think you will see regulators get up in their grill. emily: interesting. tom giles in new york. thank you. it couldad, first data become the biggest you -- biggest u.s. ipo this year. we will tell you why investors think they're worth over $17 billion. ♪

emily: first data seeking to thee 3.2 alien dollars in biggest u.s. ipo of the year. according to regulatory filings, first data selling 160 million shares priced at $18 to $20 apiece, meaning it could be worth as much as $17.6 billion. first data was taken private eight years ago. they handle debit transactions, security technology for apple pay. set the stage for us here.

why is first data so important? why is it worth so much? biggest equitys bet ever. it was taken private in that era of big ldo's. they replaced the ceo several times. person who has a been in control since 2013. kkr is looking to make money back on their investment. right now, as of the price range they came out this morning at the high end of the range, their stake is looking to be $5.3 billion. on the surface, it looks like they are winning on this one, but that is the stage here for krw big of a bet this is for k r and how much is riding on this epo -- ipo and trading going forward. emily: companies are still going

public this year. what other companies out there are at this level that have been going public this year? are a number of big deals in the pipeline with some well-known brand names, ferrari, , --rtsons, and human marcus neiman marcus, as well as companies such as pierce storage. inare seeing a slowdown biotech activity with a decrease in prices. energy offerings have dried up. emily: i know you have been crunching the numbers. flesh that out for me in terms of the ipo this year when it comes to general and tech focus. >> the biggest is looking to be first data if they price at the highest and of the range. that will top the charts in a

stellar year for ipos. -- digicell, looking to be about 2 billion. companiessome other in the mix, fitbit, blue buffalo , but as you can tell, not as big of as a year as last year. that $25 billion offering from hard comp.e it a emily: talk about what is coming up for the rest of the year. it all depends upon what .appens with the stock market as many people have noted, a lot of technology companies have been finding it easy to get a lot of private funding, not only

venture capital, but also mutual funds that are willing to invest in private companies. i think they will be very sensitive to public market valuations if the stock market goes up, public equity markets and if not, a lot of them will weight. emily: thank you. back againsting a proposals in london. the car service has gotten more than 100 18,000 signatures on a petition against the regulation. among the proposals, requirement private cars wait five minutes before picking up a customer. another would prevent mobile apps and showing available cars on a map. the proposal came after london black cap drivers claimed the lack of regulation was hurting

the bottom line. isadds to problems that uber facing in europe. tuesday, police raided uber's european headquarters in amsterdam. two tech giants area the hatchet, microsoft and google on patent lawsuits, but why? we will tell you, next. ♪

emily: a three-year old fight escalates. todayuit in london seeking $160 million from hp. a significant amount of damage to his reputation and unable to pursue business opportunities, lynch said. they agreed to a $10 billion

hpger in 2011, but wrote it down and accused of accounting fraud. lynch, a piece of him for more than $5 billion. him for more than $5 billion. microsoft and google have been clashing over rosie's related to -- over royalties related to patents. they expect to work in other areas in the future to benefit customers. joining me now is susan and david. susan, you have been reporting on this today. is significant for what it does cover and what does it not cover. they are dropping 20 lawsuits

in germany and the u.s., a limiting all of the suits that google had inherited when it brought -- what motorola mobility. they will also cooperate on patent issues. not include the android licensing program. microsoft will still be collecting royalties on android. david, how significant is this for both of these companies in terms of how much they spent on litigation over these patents and what potential deals it could open the door for? it gives them certainty as far as resolving the dispute between them. when you look at it, google aherited this case, which was , so of motorola mobility the business justifications for bringing the lawsuit when it was

first brought changed after google acquired them. , google sold the motorola mobility hardware to lenovo. it allows them to focus on things that their interests are aligned in. seeing deals happen outside the u.s.. is this a trend? it marks the end of the smartphone wars. we still have samsung and apple fighting, but there is some maturation in the smartphone market. there is not a need for a lawsuit. david, if this is the end

of the smartphone patent wars, what is the next phase in technology patents? case, it is a good example of the ab and flow we see in patent law. when ever there is a new technology, mobile phones, see a lot ofes, we these patent battles. the next thing we will look for is what is the next frontier for innovation, and then we will see patent wars come up again. at the end of the day, the consumer benefits because of all the innovations that come about during that process. emily: susan, what are you watching for? what is the next big trend? >> we are seeing a number of fights over the fundamental technologies, old-school copies like erickson and gnocchi a no

longer in the business of making phones, but they have fundamental technology and are fighting to get money. in terms of new technology, internet of things, entertainment systems on automobiles, and keeping an eye out for fracking lawsuits. look at what is happening in different energies -- industries, knowing if the market is going up or down, companies will start fighting. emily: thank you. oft does it for this edition "bloomberg west." tomorrow, you do not want to miss those conversations. ♪

mark: "with all due respect" to the house of representatives, anybody seen it kevin mccarthy? ♪ mark: on the show tonight, jeb, marco , and putin, but first, lots of lots of hillary and a touch of bernie. starting with a surprising announcement that an old socialist from vermont is giving hillary clinton a run for her money when it comes to money, as in fundraising. bernie sanders announced that he raised $26 million over the last three months, most of it from