the president said the group's leaders cannot hide. president obama: we are going after isil from their stronghold from downtown to libya. the point is issa leaders cannot hide at our next message to them is simple, you are next. ted cruz is leading by double digits in iowa 49 days before the caucuses. cruise is backed by 31% of republicans in the new poll. donald trump has 21%. ben carson, 13%. democrats, hillary clinton has a nine-point lead over bernie sanders in iowa. the jury has started deliberations in the trial of the first six baltimore officers accused in the death of freddie gray. officer william porter is charged with manslaughter, assault, reckless endangerment, and misconduct. he faces a maximum penalty of 25 years behind bars. tomorrow is the deadline for

millions of uninsured procrastinators to sign up for health coverage to begin january 1. officials say a surge of younger customers could hold down premiums in a market struggling to grow. more than half of the 23 insurance cooperatives have folded. emily: i am emily chang and this is "bloomberg west." somence is not a very for other shareholders. activist investors pressuring the company for immediate and dramatic changes. survival of the fittest in the semiconductor industry. we will take a closer look at why so many chip companies have the urge to merge. taking a plunge in a high-tech treasure hunt. a new competition to map the ocean floor. first prize, $7 million.

first to our lead. the hits keep coming at yahoo! c.e.o. marissa mayer. less than a week after she laid out her plans to turn around the struggling giant, activist investors are turning up the heat. over the weekend, one of yahoo!'s largest shareholders urged the board to begin selling assets immediately saying we believe the company should prioritize the sale of the core business, a portion of assets, or the entire company. another investor says -- he says yahoo! needs to cut 900 jobs, replace marissa mayer, and focus the core business on finance and sports sites. joining me to discuss from toronto, managing director and author of this, eric jackson. also with me for the hour, david kirkpatrick. eric, i will start with you. he does have a small stake in yahoo!.

what is your motivation here? is tol motivation increase the value dramatically of the company. i have been a shareholder often on but mostly on for almost 10 years since late 2006. i have seen a lot of c.e.o.'s come and go. i have seen a lot of promises go yahoo!.led at i sat by and watched what has gone on for almost four years now with the current management team. it has been tremendously disappointing. and yet there is still incredible value in the company. i would like to see that extracted. i don't want to see it sold off or parts at a cheap valuation. that is not serve the long-term shareholders well. has $300ring out million under management. you have a small stake you acquired recently though you will not disclose the size of your holdings. why not? wewith the size of our firm,

are clear about how big we are. we are not the size of starboard. our stake is not the same as theirs. and yet i think my views on yahoo! have been on the money for a number of years. we have spoken to a lot of the largest shareholders in yahoo! over the last few weeks and have their support for what we are offering. a thirdutting forward alternate plan for the company. there is the border view we heard last week that everything is fine and we are going to go ahead with this plan and spin off the court. then you have the starboard planned to sell now at any price to get rid of it and be done with it. we think there is a better path forward for shareholders. emily: you do make an interesting point that they could look into this issue for a year and decide they cannot spin off the core business. david, what is your take on eric's proposal? thoroughness is

impressive and the commitment to thinking through some problems i admire. the thing i strongly agree with is the core of yahoo! has committed value. this company still has a extraordinary brand. by some measures, upwards of one billion users. i am often made fun of on this program and elsewhere for still using yahoo! mail. for my personal mail, young male works find. 80 million other people like me seem to like it as well. companies that well-established with suchched contemporary products, even if they don't have brilliant management, can move forward from here. i'm eager to hear his ideas in more detail. but i think yahoo! hastert mentis opportunity in its core still. that is what i like about the plan. emily: there it will opportunity -- we are equal opportunity e-mail users so i appreciate your continued use of yahoo! mail.

let's dig into what you think they should do. you say they might get $6 million for the core business now. if they do what you suggest, they could get $24 billion. if you who does everything you are suggesting, what does yahoo! look like in two years, five years? world, in two or three years, there would be a different management team in charge, a dramatically smaller yahoo!. we would not have 12,000 plus employees. there would be more on the order of 3000, but they would be amazing employees. morale would be through the use -- roof because there would be clear leadership. the best and brightest a working at the company going after the opportunity in front of them. i think the company would be milking the core revenues they still get. 80% of revenues come from desktops, things like homepage

and mail. while this revenues are declining, they can probably last longer than people expect the way a.o.l. dallas revenue has done that. they will be focused on new opportunities in finance and sports. yahoo! has got to have best in class mobile apps in those areas. there are opportunities still in things like over-the-top for yahoo!. they missed on version one under the current management team. but i think they could have another go at it and be successful. cherry on top would be i would like to see a partner like liberty media involved as an investor, around the board table at yahoo!, because i think someone like that can add tremendous value guiding on the restructuring that has to happen . there is a tremendous amount of alibaba and yahoo!

japan. i think the current idea of spinning off the core is not going to be the best course of action. bettert think of anyone than liberty to be part of the discussions to figure out the best steps forward and how to maximize value of the stakes. >> david here. one thing that has been said is this is a hard company to turn around. marissa took it on at a time when this was a real challenge. i personally think she has made good moves. what do you think is the biggest mistake she has made? >> no question the biggest mistake is she did not cut headcount. she increased headcount after she came in, much to the surprise of everyone. one of the slides in the deck has a quote from mark andreessen in the days after marissa mayer was appointed. one thing he said at that time was he expected there should be

something like a 10,000 person headcount reduction at the time. we have seen some cuts more recently. but we did not get that out of the gates. some speculate that is the reason why dan logue left the board. it has been a backtrack for the management team. headcount,upped the they realized they were too fat given the revenues for a copy that had to backtrack recently. but it is still not enough. have continuedou to express sympathy for marissa mayer's position. do you maintain that today? i feel i have to mention the women what -- woman had twins just days ago, should we give her a break, just for a week? david: i am not an investor. i am a bigger picture guy. i do give her a break in one respect. but if you look at the performance of the stock, it has been poor compared to assets

comparable. i would not necessarily say i think she has done a great job. when i look at this presentation, tumbler spent all that money. what did they do with it? that is a legitimate question. alibaba is the asset that has defined this company's history in the last couple of years. for whatever reason, marissa is not allowed the story to move beyond that. that is unfortunate. i think it has been a tremendously difficult task or anybody, and i sympathize with the challenges she has faced. maybe she should have cut more people. emily: what is your response? i talk to who work in san francisco in silicon valley, some of these people used to work at yahoo! years ago. the talent that has gone from yahoo! to other companies is staggering. when i talk to those people,

folks with god ties and also don't, -- yahoo! ties and those who don't, 95% of people are saying clearly is something wrong with leadership at yahoo!. it is not working. they are never going to say that publicly because what is in it for them to be critical? maybe the person they are going to say it too is a fan, a friend. this is real. i think these are legitimate concerns raised. most people familiar with the company feel it is legitimate. i hope the board takes them seriously. emily: eric jackson on what yahoo! should do. has yahoo! responded to you? >> they have only responded to say they are in receipt of the presentation. emily: we will see if they do. let us know. david kirkpatrick staying with us throughout the show. coming up, i mentored -- another

twist in a tumultuous year in the semiconductor industry. we will walk through the millions of dollars that have changed hands and focus on what could be the next major plot twist. ♪

emily: it has been a busy year for the chip industry. him and they has reached a 10-year high with newly 100 deals in 2015 valuing 110 billion dollars. some of the biggest deals of , intel buying altera for $14.4 billion in june. rush ofthe consolidation now? we checked in with our team of analysts.

one reason, with hundreds of chip companies, the sector was fragmented and companies have been looking for balanced exposure. another reason, rising r&d costs. in 2014, intel spent $11 billion in research and development. spent $1.4 billion in 2014. is it really cheaper to buy a company than it is to spend on its own r&d? joining us to discuss is ian king who covers the chip industry for us. i would like you to give us more color in terms of what kinds of chips are doing well. what kinds of chips are not? how is that driving consolidation? >> the semiconductor space is probably broken into three major areas. , dealing with real-world signals, audio,

video, power. the other is logic, processing and computing. the third is memory, which as the name would imply is processing memory as well as storage. in memory, we have seen an incredible amount of pricing pressure. an incredible amount of weakness from a supply and demand balance perspective. there has been some consolidation potential driven by consolidation of factories and reducing r&d. whatgic, it is all about products i want to be in and consolidation driven along those lines. networking.pand to that was the predominant rationale for one deal. analog, which is a terribly fragmented market where the number one market share player which is texas instruments only has a 20%

share. it is the smaller ones getting together to compete with the big ones or the big ones starting to say i do not have that particular niche area and i want it, so i am buying a smaller one. for a host of reasons, the area continues to be right for consent -- ripe for consolidation. emily: ian king has been reporting on qualcomm contemplating a split. what is the latest and why would this make sense? >> it depends on who you speak to. i latest reporting is they are going to against the pressure they have been under and not doing the split. those that have argued it makes sense have said they are under tremendous regulatory pressure around the world, get the chip business away from the license and business -- licensing business and the regulators will leave them alone. those that don't like the idea are saying you need a lot of money to invest in chips.

the company gets a lot of money from the unique licensing model, $7 billion just from licensing alone. that pays for a lot of r&d. those who like the company as it is say stick together. the splituld jump in, from a qualcomm perspective was a terrible idea. our analysis has shown this is a company where one part of the company helps the other. the chip segment benefits from having intellectual property, the licensing segment. the chipmaking part shows customers how valuable it is. splitting it up would treat it like an industrial company. in the long run, the value of both segments would be lower. if whata great relief

ian is saying comes true and the company decides not to split up. emily: there are so many complex relationships in the chip business. apple and samsung arrivals and yet apple buys a lot of samsung chip. talk about the broader relationships and dynamics in place we may not be as aware of that may be driving some consolidation. >> i go back to what he said. this is getting more expensive. there are fewer companies that can build these $8 billion plans. qualcomm does a lot of business with a lot of companies and outsources manufacturing. samsung is a customer, a supplier, and a competitor, if you can imagine. emily: while still supplying chips. >> the motives. emily: thank you for giving us the lay of the land. coming up, wall street turns negative on apple.

why one analyst is protecting iphone sales will drop for the first time ever in 2016. ♪

emily: shares of apple closing down 1% after getting hit by a trifecta of iphone estimate cuts by 3 wall st firms. sales stanley predicting will drop to the first time ever in 2016. barclays cutting the price target and a warning from j.p. morgan on the apple supply chain. joining me to discuss, vice president and mobile analyst at forrester research and back with us, david kirkpatrick. it sounds a little gloom and doom. is it that gloomy? >> i don't think there is any gloom and doom in a market that will see 500 million more smartphone owners at the end of 2016 then today.

emily: do these predictions were you? >> they don't. peoplere about 7 billion on the planet, about 6 billion of us have mobile phones. 3 billion have smartphones. emily: what is your take? we read grim predictions about apple. when people talk about it, they say it will be a little less amazing than they thought it might be. david: i think it is funny and analyst firm drops their estimate of the future price target from 165 to 145 in the stock drops from 115 to 111. that does not make sense. if it is still likely to hit 145 or whatever analysts think it is going to do, you don't suddenly lose heart. i agree with julie. i think this is an incredible company that still has a unique position in the most important technology sector in the world. because they are the high-priced

and high profit player, as more people want to get the best product in the area where they care most about technology, apples opportunity remains gigantic. emily: let's dig into this, julie. morgan stanley is saying shipments will fall by 6% next year driven by higher prices in overseas markets. also talking about saturation. let's talk about the international markets. we were in beijing. they are working hard to localize products, which is something apple does not do. does apple need to be more in tune to global interest? >> possibly. when we say global interest, we are talking about china and india. those are the only continents on the world -- in the world with more than a billion consumers. those are the only markets in the world bigger than the u.s. emily: should apple be doing more to reach those users? >> there are a couple of things you have to look at. ofchina and india, the size

the middle class or upper class is larger than in the u.s., so there is a large market of consumers on both continents that can pay apple's prices. if you look forward and talk about what will differentiate a mobile phone experience going forward, it is not hardware innovation. it is in software innovation. has a better chance than apple because they own the experience. emily: what about that apple might be coming out with a smaller iphone 6c? is that smart or reactionary? is that a good move? >> it sounds like a good move. as someone middle-aged, i love plus.6s but a lot of men say it does not fit in their pocket. emily: we have heard steve jobs say you give people want before they ask for it because they

don't know what they want. what do you make of a potential move like that? david: he also said he wanted apple to be the b.m.w. of computing. b.m.w. has different product lines. if you're trying to reach billions of consumers in india and china, you want to give them a to get into the best products. the great thing about apple is it does not cost that much to have the same smartphone as elon musk or anybody at the top of the line. that is what everybody wants. that is what apple allows. that is extraordinary at whatever price. emily: david kirkpatrick with us throughout the show. julie, thank you for stopping by. the force maybe with disney's this week --we are talking star wars. ♪

♪ ♪

emily: i am emily chang, and ."is is "bloomberg west 7:30 tuesday morning in hong kong where we are joined by david ingles. david: good morning.

just a few things we are watching. a look ahead to the tuesday equity session in asia, futures, not very convincing, although there are signs today will be better than monday. some markets have started trading. we are seeing decent gains in australia, flat so far in new zealand. ,hat late rally in the u.s. likely to spread the risk taking in asia. most fronts are still very much on hold or holding back ahead of the fed decision. the founder of the world's biggest solar maker has launched a buyout bid to take the company private. the deal would value the new york-listed company at $1.1 billion. premium. is a 21.5% scherzer taken a big hit over the past few months. we have cheap oil that has dented the a lower of

renewables. let's go to japan. toshiba may be about to cut 7000 jobs. the nikkei news says the cuts will be in the consumer division. offer early retirement or relocate some employees. toshiba has been struggling under the weight of one of japan's biggest accounting scandals recently. let's stay in japan. the country's second-largest trading company, mitsubishi corp., has teamed up with dutch companies -- on on a picks.r the 2020: the idea is to make bottles at a plant-based substances. emily: what is the point of a bottle being made out of sugar? this is primarily alcohol, right? david: it is. when you use plant-based sugars instead of fossil fuels come it

keeps oxygen out, and it actually keeps carbon dioxide in at a more efficient rate. supplying japan beer makers in time for the olympics. in most cases, canned beverages are not allowed into stadiums for safety reasons, but plastic ones are. hopefully, instead of having canned beer, you will have a cold plastic bottle brew while enjoying the game. the plan is to get that in pace -- in place for years from now. emily: as long as it's easier for me to drink. thank you so much for that update. now to the week ahead, and here on "bloomberg west," we will take a look at how israel he tech companies are making their mark in silicon valley.

we will speak with bloomberg television's middle east editor elliott gotkine. first, we want to talk about some of the earnings we are expecting, oracle coming out on wednesday with its earnings, and friday, we get numbers from blackberry. what can we expect the echo joining me now, cory johnson. also, david kirkpatrick. what are you watching with oracle? this oracle, it's part of giant transformation to cloud-based software. the problem is they pay in tiny increments. the sale of new licenses has been challenged. the thing that they are not going to focus on is what is happening in licenses. if you look at the numbers for oracle, yous ford see what they are having to fight off with the cloud, and you see those numbers going down over time. they will talk about the smaller business of selling in the cloud. it's smaller, yes, but it's

growing. the shrinking licensing business is a problem. that's the main business at oracle but not the only business. you might see strength in the cloud business. we will see if indeed that shows a lot of hope for the future, as oracle would like us all to think that it does. what about blackberry? i know you have been speaking with john chan, the ceo. they made a big move, coming out with their very first android-based blackberry. is it a good one? think the phone is impressive. blackberry has a black eye in the sense that it's going to be hard to get over, but the company is trying to transition to be a security software company. that has always been the single biggest reason why blackberrys were popular aside from the keyboards. the keyboard differentiation is pretty much lost. they still have an infrastructure, a network that allows them to do things with security that no one else can, and when you layer the most onular os for mobile

android, i think it's an impressive possibility. john chan is a creative and resourceful ceo. he's got a really tough job, and it's never going to be the blackberry we used all use. emily: what is blackberry's greatest hope? do you see any? cory: the best thing they've got going is the cash they built up earlier this year, and it gives them such a long runway. one of the things john chen has been trying to do is making software a more important of the business. the main business is continuing to collapse. software as a percentage of revenue is increasing. software should be more profitable, although the truth is, they ran their hardware business wonderfully profitablely. growing because the rest of it just continues to face plant quarter after quarter, year after year. emily: he is so kind, david,

isn't he? i know you will be watching oracle for us this week. we will check back in with you on that. we will be joined by elliott gotkine who is normally based in israel. he is the middle east editor in tel aviv. elliott is here in studio. you are going to be doing more reporting for us on european technology companies, covering a big slice of what is happening out there that we don't normally talk about, but this week, we are focused on israel. techis a big israeli company that google bought. talk about the tech industry in israel. elliott: depending on who you talk to, more than 1000 israeli startups in the u.s., the majority of them in silicon valley. about 350, and then you got 300 in new york, about 100 or so in boston, med tech and biotech.

we are talking about companies do, and also companies like we work. you could class that as an israeli startup. are to open in san francisco. emily: why is it that there is such a concentration of startups and hot up-and-coming tech companies in israel? what is it about the ecosystem? elliott: i don't want to go with the usual cliches. a lot of tech comes out of the military. a lot of them are from the elite units, and they go on and use a lot of data analysis. big data is a very big thing. software, data crunching, they are hot on that, but you also have a lot of other startups. "thehave led -- read

startup nation" book. whether it's the military, whether it's the culture, whether it's the risk-taking attitude or saying they like to think out of the box and not follow orders -- even the army, they are shown to take initial initiative -- an initiative. as things have developed, you've also got vc culture. instead of kids wanting their doctors -- their kids to be doctors or lawyers, they want them to be startup founders. emily: you recently talked to start a fire. elliott: they've got big-name clients such as kraft, and what they are trying to do is to help brands who might, for example, recommend third-party content. it could be from a newspaper. it could be from bloomberg.com. they want those brands to not lose those viewers but see them on their facebook or twitter page when they send them to look at something else.

when i spoke with the founder morning, he explained how it works. >> start of fire works with brands to get them to share great content. emily: what else are you going to be doing while you are here? who else are you talking to iago elliott: tomorrow, i'm going to be running a story on a startup called nanodimension. they've created a 3-d printer to create pcb's. we are running that tomorrow. we will also be looking at robo team, which has got some funky teamshat help swat fight terror. they've been deployed in iraq, afghanistan.

we've got a roundtable debate thursday. we've got david bloomberg, a founding editor at bloomberg. we'll talk about silicon valley, the pros and cons. emily: great to have you in the studio this week. elliott gotkine, thank you. finally, after nine months of nonstop publicity, fan conventions, 500 storm troopers on the great wall of china, and theme park tie-ins, "bloomberg west" arrives friday. wars"weeney -- "star arrives friday. paul sweeney is with us. is it going to be as big as everyone thinks it will be? : the numbers out there are just extraordinary. for an opening weekend, for a movie to get $50 million, it's a great opening weekend. this is going to be north of

$200 million for a u.s. opening weekend. the expectations have been building. nobody markets films more than disney. demand across the platform as well as disney. this is set up for not only a good opening weekend, a record setter, but on the path to become the all-time top grossing film. emily: how has disney tried to manage expectations here? good point. there is so much press and so much undercurrent from the blogs and internet about how big this could be. one of the challenges for disney and its investors is to manage expectations. don't let the enthusiasts get too far over their skis. what disney wants to avoid is any kind of sense of disappointment. they've been very reasonable in their commentary about what they expect from this film. they are pointing out that it's opening in december, not the

summer. that tends to lead to lower openings then you would see from a blockbuster in the summertime. i think expectations remain extremely high here. emily: i will be seeing it this friday. paul sweeney, our editor at large cory, and middle east editor elliott gotkine. also coming up, with the ink barely dry on a landmark climate change agreement, the u.n. is hoping to broker another major consensus on worldwide internet regulation. we will discuss. ♪

emily: this week, government officials from more than 190 countries gathered at the united nations in new york.

the topic on the table, how to govern the internet for the next 10 years. the meeting could have a profound impact on issues like how governments track suspected terrorists online, overseas, and whether companies like google and facebook can take it upon .hemselves to spread the web catherine brown is ceo of an international nonprofit known as the internet society dedicated to pushing an open internet agenda. she is set to speak at the u.n. later this week and joins us now. still with us, david kirkpatrick, our bloomberg contributing editor. this is the first time in 10 years this meeting is happening. the first time was in 2005, and they talked about bridging the digital divide. we are going to get a report card on that, but i want to start with this issue of regulation. there's a debate right now happening as to whether governments should have more sector. the private

where do you weigh in? catherine: let me give you a little context first. 10 years ago, of course, the same governments came together to take a look at this thing called the internet, and at that time, decided it would not be regulated the way traditional telephone systems were regulated across the world. in fact, they said that the institution in the u.n. that regulated telephone networks was not to do that but rather that we would together develop what we call a multi-stakeholder approach to the governance of the internet. what that really meant was the private sector was leading. the private sector was innovating, building. academia was very much thinking what are the uses for this thing called the internet? the technologists were writing code. this thing was moving along quite well. 10 years later, the governments ed their proposition

in 2005 that this global internet could not, should not be regulated by nationstates. that is the question that was on the table. the status quo, if you will, where we actually are is, in fact, this multi-stakeholder innovation has worked. we know in the developing to 9% of gdp is based on the use and the innovation on the internet. , this isveloping world 25% a year in growth we are seeing because of this internet economy. emily: david, in 10 years, the landscape has changed dramatically by someone named edward snowden, but this could be quite a momentous meeting simply because of that. what is your take? snowden,en before

there was a lot of scary talk coming from countries. once they started to understand how powerful the internet was, their country's government started to want to take control of it. in 2012, there was a meeting of where thereubai were scary things said by a lot of country, and i think we dodged a bullet at that meeting. fuel on thatiled fire by making it appear that the u.s., which is the long-term defender of internet freedom, seems like a hypocrite. we didn't really seem to be quite as honest as we pretended to be about wanting internet freedom because we were looking at all kinds of stuff. that has made it harder for the u.s. to defend its traditional values where it should be a multi-stakeholder model, not a multilateral model, which is governmental control. i worried tremendously that we still don't have the consensus we want. it's great if the u.n. it wants

to talk about getting access to more people, but it may want to talk about it in control of it. that talk has not ended. emily: a huge difference between multi-stakeholder control and multilateral control. i want to talk about these f -- atorts by mark zuckerberg facebook and google to bridge the digital divide. how much success are they seeing so far, and where do you stand on these efforts? kathryn: let's look at the numbers again. , 40%illion people online of the worlds population. that means 60% are still not yet online. what is happening in the developing world? the internet -- we've seen the curve on the internet -- is .tarting to take hold the networks are being built. the broadband networks are out there. wireless networks are now being built, and those devices we all

know our small computers are starting to be in the hands of folks in a way that is becoming meaningful. in africa, for instance, on the continent, we see 20% penetration. this is kind of a tipping point. it's very uneven across the continent, but in some places in west africa and south africa, we are seeing an uptick. the companies that are coming in, both american, european, , seean, chinese companies an emerging market, and they see there are different ways of serving that market. we see satellite. we see wireless. on allundersea cables the posts of africa, for instance, and we see the possibility for growth. emily:emily: we are going to be watching to see what outcome comes out of the meeting. we will be right back, david. you are sticking with us. ♪

emily: space may be known as the final frontier, but is it really the last place for exploration? one foundation still believes we have a lot more to learn about what lies under the sea, so much so that they've put up $7 million in prize money for a team to come up with the best way to come up with the deepest, darkest corners of the ocean. paul bungee, principal and senior scientist with the x prize, and david kirkpatrick, still with us. you guys were here launching the very first x prize. what kind of break through technologies are you looking for? paul: not only can you explore thee, but what might be most interesting and unexplored part of our own solar system is here on earth. we've mapped more of the surface of mars or the moon then we have our own ocean floor. that is what we are putting up $7 million to do. the show ocean discovery x prize

is how you get -- is all about how you get to the deep part of our see and send back photographs of the weird and wonderful things here on our planet. emily: it's pretty risky, isn't it? emily:paul: there's a reason nobody has done this. we are talking about invisible, dark places of the earth under crushing pressures and crazy temperatures, and we need radical breakthroughs in order to explode our own planet. david: i think this is such a wonderful thing. ze -- z prize -- x prize foundation is one of my favorites. you are talking about building a bunch of undersea robots that are going to be super expensive that have all kinds of power and innovation and lighting that will allow them to go places we couldn't go before. to think of this as a further extension of the internet of things?

paul: you are precisely on to something about exploration generally, which is that the technologies used to discover new things are really the core of new dividends. think about the space dividend and the like where you get all of these new technologies, be they sensors, new opportunities to connect in the deep sea, and the robotics, the autonomy, the ai going into exploring this, and when you do it in an extreme environment like the deepest parts of our ocean, that is going to force people to think in really novel ways. what we are excited to see is, how do we connect the planet, the internet of things of our own planet into the new opportunities that might arise for new businesses, new technologies, new innovations? shell, it's interesting you are partnering with them. this is a company that might be accused of exploiting natural resources. paul: one of the challenges we have with the ocean is it is totally unexplored.

it's basically invisible to everyone. with shell, we have a partner in wanting to illuminate the deepest depths, to start to democratize science, give the data an opportunity to live so it's not just in one group or the other. that's the core opportunity for innovation, and that's why we are excited to be working with people who see an opportunity for change through incentivizing real breakthroughs. bunje, thank you so much for saving -- sharing that with us. david kirkpatrick, always great to have you with us, founder of techonomy. tomorrow, we will be focused on green energy initiatives. we will be speaking with the ceo of sun power. ♪

announcer: from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: the syrian war is injured fifth-year. journalists remain a key source of information from the battle yield. 54 journalists were killed in 2015 joining me now are for senior interactive respondents for cnn. i will introduce them to you and then following this introduction of by each of them. this award is based in london