>> welcome to "bloomberg businessweek." we are coming to you from inside the magazine's headquarters in new york. the satirical newspaper striking fear into the hearts of french politicians. and what the maker of post-its is doing in the market for government issued ankle bracelets. and finally, what could be the most expensive mistake for the u.s. military. ♪ anchor: we are here with the editor and chief. so many stories this week. we want to talk about something in technology. stints can be so crucial for

stroke recovery but not everybody has access. this is a story that looks at how these stints, relatively $8,000.round in terms of the medical field, this isn't a huge amount of money. when you have a stroke, the speed at which they can alleviate the pressure and bleeding on the brain is crucial to recovery. what the article talks about is how the injection of these metal stents that are used to take the clock out, they are not common. there are only 115 stroke care -- stroke specific care centers in the u.s. first responders will make a decision, if it is minor, we will take them to a hospital. if it is more major, maybe i will escalate to one of the specialist centers. if you don't go to one of the centers, you are more likely to get a drug. let it is showing is that the stents, if you can get there quickly, are more effective.

they do lead to better recovery than the drug. even with our aging population, the demographics, we simply don't have enough of these stroke specific centers to get this stent recovery. >> let's go to the global economics section. is it really interesting story here which i think a lot of asricans don't really know the implications of this. this publication in france and the impact on the elections. >> use your french here. >> we will just call it "the duck." this is a fascinating story. this is fascinating for two reasons. it has proven to be such a huge effect in this french presidential election. which is super topsy-turvy. the favorite is moving down, public scandals uncovered. the left making a sudden surge.

center-right candidates, it is fascinating. also, the other thing that is fascinating, it is a print publication with a minimal digital presence and still makes about 25 million. solely from a print publication. it dates back to 1915 and has a long tradition. it is similar to private eye, a u.k. publication, which traffics in tidbits about the elite whether that is the rich, , politicians. they uncovered a person paying his wife. he was the leader in polling at the time. they have gone in and taking down power. they say they are there to serve neither left nor the right, they are there to be the truth and have certainly proven that. >> there is an article about the f-35 program. eight years or 10 years and there are still questions about it. >> this is the latest in the long line of pieces exposing

inefficiencies, let's say, in the pentagon process. this is one that has gone through so many iterations. the issue when you are redesigning the large -- whether it is aircraft carriers or the f-35 even air force one. , so many people want different demands for what the product is. the f-35, there are basically four service divisions. each of them wanted different capabilities. i cannot believe it when i read this claim can land like a hovercraft. it can come down like a helicopter so it can land in a hotspot or a ship in the middle of the indian ocean. the technical requirements will be price up so much, prolonged of the contract. no one can essentially make this decision. you get to a point where you design seven years ago does not work in the kind of warfare we are seeing now. >> there are a lot of cool

, and then the tech economic implications. we spoke to reporter paul barrett. >> the f-35 is perpetually in focus because it is the single largest procurement ever. an expenditure that once you fold in upkeep of the plaintiffs in the future, will approach and possibly exceed $1 trillion. president trump has been focusing on it. downplaying it and insulting it. and then, in his fashion, declaring he is involved, it is a fantastic fighter jet and we took a look at whether it is an discovered it has performance problems. >> tell me about those problems. tell me about the costs and how long this has been going on. >> this contract began with a

competition between boeing and lucky to in the late 1990's. boeing was declared the winner. the idea was it was a three in one bargain. one common plane that could be tweaked to be suitable for the air force, the marine corps, and the navy. >> one plane fits all with minor changes. >> exactly. that was the way the pentagon could afford a massive replacement of cold war era planes. the original plan was for 2400 planes to be built for the three services that fly fighter jets. almost inevitably in the 2000's, as a plan that large without much play in it in terms of money, it ran into problems. the degree to what the designers call commonality among the variance of the planes turned

out to be something approaching 25 percent, as opposed to 70%-80%. the economies of scale went out the window quickly. costs began to overrun their targets by billions of dollars. the latest set in, now amounting to something like seven years. >> it was let's build one model that can between. it ended up essentially making three different planes. and that contributed to the price, you have to have all the different changes for each plane. where did that bring the total cost to? where is it right now, in terms of what was supposed to be and how much it actually is? >> original estimates were something like $200 billion. that figure is closer to $380 billion. you have to factor inflation in there. that is about a 38% increase when you adjust for inflation.

the biggest cost, and the figure taxpayers should be paying attention to, is how much it will cost to sustain the plane. to actually keep in shape, keep it well-maintained and flying. that amount could easily exceed $600 billion over time. >> up next, who is really to blame for sluggish u.s. car plans, and h&m chasing it shoppers' parents. this is "bloomberg businessweek." ♪

oliver: welcome to "bloomberg businessweek." in the companies and industries section how changing taste is , affecting u.s. car plants. >> it is always a supply and demand issue. it takes years to build these factories. then they tried to produce hundreds of thousands of vehicles all the same, and they have to project those years out.

and yet, consumer taste can swing dramatically from month to month or year to year. we are seeing sales past the peak, and all of the decline has come from cars. the toyota camry, although court. -- or the honda accord. compact cars are kind of large. civics and corollas. ford focuses. those cars are not telling like they had been for years. they have been displaced by suv's. it has the market out of whack. like the lead of your story, very direct. ford fusion, down 37%. chevrolet malibu, down 36%. prius, down 29%. give us perspective on those numbers. that is the sedan market. >> mainstream family cars. the malibu and fusion or midsized family sedans. the prius is smaller but has a large interior. it has become, for the handful

of year truly motivated car buyers, it provides, it is very often used as a family car. these are mainstream family sedans. they are being replaced by the compact crossovers. whether it is a honda crv or toyota rav4. something more like an old station wagon used to be. oliver: if you are donald trump or looking at the industry as an belyst, or whoever it may what does it tell you when the , demand shifts? the demand is there for vehicles, it is just going to be different types? what does it mean for american manufacturing, which is the talking point of the trump administration? are those cars people want now, coming from somewhere else? break that down. >> the big issue and debate investors have with the market

is whether this is a bit of a softening and a plateau, where we are going to say, we have had record sales in the u.s.. an unprecedented streak of sales growth. is it going to be our traditional cyclical contraction? were is it going to bump along around 17 million for another three years or so? a lot of the folks in the industry are feeling confident things are going to stay where they are volume basis. maybe eat into some of those profits. we have seen warnings about how much tougher the competition is getting. maybe the volume stays high. but the profitability's shrinks, which is less good for investors. oliver: the supply side of the equation, how does that actor into this?

whether or not the supply is there? whether or not to meat that volume? they need to the old and new plants, hire new people? are they sat on the supply side right now? >> because we have seen sales have stopped growing, people are putting the brakes on manufacturing plan. a lot of the expansions are going forward. they are executing with the announced but no one is announcing new plans to build a $1 billion plant. oliver: h&m made a name for itself in teen fashion. now the company is going after a slightly more mature audience. we spoke to reporter robert williams. world's: h&m is the second biggest retailers by sales. they are a big fast fashion brand. they became known over the past few decades for being able to

quickly copy runway trends and sell them in their stores in a cheaper version. they also have been known as a value retailer with a low price point where a lot of young consumers go to shop. oliver: there is one below are building. it is a great place to grab a quick shirt. that has been their market. find what is popular, make it accessible. especially to mostly younger people. as you point out that is , changing right now. >> right now, they are working on developing other brands with a more premium positioning. they are able to attract older customers. people with a bit more purchasing power. that can be really interesting. the value space has a lot of competition in it. oliver: these new stores, the new products they are moving into, this is going to be under

a different branch. this isn't necessarily going to be d h and m that you see. -- the h&m the ac. tell us how it breaks down in their organizational structure. >> i would say most people won't be able to tell the secondary brands owned by h&m are a part of h&m. most people are not aware of this in terms of consumers. this new one, certainly not either. the new store is going to have a higher price positioning. it will have clothes for men, women, and children. kind of simple essential clothing, versus fashion and trend driven items. they are also going to sell iconic products let -- from other brands like home goods, like pepper grinders. oliver: i like that you go into the etymology which means, sheet , of paper in swedish.

speaks to the essential nature of the clothes. one thing we have heard about retail, companies like michael kors thought of as being luxury and high end. as they expand to broader markets, they lose the appeal. is the opposite the case here? it doesn't seem like they have to worry about that because they are starting off on the other end of the spectrum. >> i don't think so. i think what we are seeing is that premium niche brands, as lands, --festyle brands, instead, like a total package for certain aesthetic. everything somebody is interested in the outdoors needs. everything a young family in the city that likes things that are clean and minimalist, which is maybe the concept of the new concept. that is a space where i think you have a lot more power to create something new. oliver: how to hack your way out of a full-time job. plus, taser changing its name and a lot more. we take a look at the company's next act. ♪

oliver: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek." you can also catch us on the radio. 30ius xm channel 119, and 11 in new york, 99.1 fm in washington dc. in london, and in asia on the bloomberg radio plus app. in the technology section, some of the country's top coders have found a way to avoid the nine to five. meanckathon does not breaking into somebody's email. hacking literally means to put something together out of existing pieces to create something new. hackathon is like a marathon building session. they last from 24-48 hours. not . >> that's a key distinction.

not all hacking is bad. these are basically engineers building projects. they are doing it as part of sort of a tournament. tell us where these began. >> anyplace with a large area like an auditorium, any type of conference hall, and he plays with screaming fast wi-fi and bathrooms are fair game. oliver: and a steady supply of doritos and red bull. what's really cool if you are talking about how it has essentially become a replacement for full-time jobs. tell us about the crux of the story here who is going to these , hackathon, how they are making money whether or not it is a , replacement to a career. reporter: that's true. for some people i wouldn't say , it is super widespread, but there have been a dozen or more people who have been able to

hack together a full-time living out of this. supplementing their start of dreams or contract works. typically what will happen is they will go online or they will hear from friends a hackathon is occurring. based on how close it is to them, whether they have to pay for airfare or not, they will get together a team, bring sleeping bags usually not their , toothbrushes, bring their laptops and a ton of power cords. and show up and start hacking for bragging rights. to your point, for prices. some of the prizes can get pretty big. oliver: are we talking students currently enrolled? engineers that have graduated? this is their sort of full-time gig? who are the participants? reporter: i watched both. there are two different types. there are academic hack of funds. that is sponsored through something called major league hacking.

think of it like varsity sports for programmers. i think there were 170 of them scheduled for 2017. that happens at universities all around the u.s. and even in the world. 170 of them in north america alone. there are more. that is the academic type. typically, those are more for bragging rights and also to look appealing to recruiters. large tech companies like facebook, google, google, microsoft, ibm and the like all go to these hackathons to keep their eyes on the up and rising talent. and also to promote their technology. that is the academic type. there is another type where large prizes are at stake. salesforce famously through one one with a $1 million

first prize. they discontinued that because they didn't get quite what they wanted. other ones have continued. hasbro. let's see, what else, procter and gamble threw one. prize, ahe watson ai $5 million prize over a three-year period. oliver: also in the technology section, taser wants to change its name and what it is known for. we spoke to karen wise. reporter: taser has been around for 20 years. everyone knows it for the stun gun. don't tase me, bro. exactly. a have been trying to come up with a second revenue stream. they finally hit their stride with police body cameras. particularly since the shootings in ferguson and other places. there has been much more public demand for a police body camera.

they were one of the first to have a viable product that could be rolled out at scale. the department of justice put money behind it. they have a division that makes police body cameras and all of the associated cloud computing software to manage the digital footage people have. that has been the fastest-growing part of the company. they see it as a way to expand. they have changed the company name. they changed the ticker. now they see the future of the company still committed to this taser weapon, but they see a lot of their growth potential to be from the body cameras. all of this digital management of evidence and digital life of a police officer. oliver: this is very interesting. there are very few instances of

a company with a product everybody knows. it is a fairly ubiquitous idea. what was it along the way that made them change? i remember watching their stock jumped after ferguson as they started talking about body cameras. where's the impetus for the change? reporter: interestingly don't , tase me, bro, is how they got into the body cameras three they fashion line anyways. they were facing a lot of lawsuits and public scrutiny for injuries, and in some cases, deaths after people were tased. there is a lot of debate about the cause and effect or not. they were facing scrutiny regardless. they developed what was called a taser cam. a little camera that popped onto the gun in itself. it only capture the moment they were tasing someone.

a ceo captured the moment of it last summer. it was essentially a highlight reel of people getting tased , which is not what they were looking for. they wanted to capture what led up to an incident and what happens after. they developed a standalone body camera. the first one was super clunky. it had three big components to it. it took a while to get what is now the line may have. they have two versions. a body camera that mounts in the middle of the chest and one that mounts on essentially oakley glasses. trying to protect themselves and their customers from lawsuits is what first got them into the body camera line. the just finally got the product but they were just finally getting the product in good shape when ferguson happened, and all the greater scrutiny on policing nationwide exploded. it was good timing for them in that sense. oliver: up next, the state of

carolina says no thanks to fancy money managers. and 3m struggles in the high-stakes market for ankle bracelets. this is "bloomberg businessweek." ♪

still ahead, the state of north carolina is eyeing $100 million in savings. then, 3m decides what is at stake in the market for ankle monitors. and we'll piece together the senate's investigation into central ties between the white house and russia. all that ahead on "bloomberg businessweek". oliver: we are back with megan murphy to talk about some must reads. let's go to the market section. going on with the topic you have been exploring. this is specifically about one

treasurer taking a more passive approach to a pension fund. megan: he is taking an active approach to making his approach passive. this is a really interesting character. the treasurer of north carolina. we have some great images of him on his harley-davidson. his view is, we are being ripped off by these heavy fees we paid for active management funds. we want to take that number down to a maximum of $100 million. we want to shift our management to passive management. we think it is a better trategy. we have talked a lot about this. we have warren buffett been one of the most public champions of this shift and it is something we have seen in pension funds. funds have shifting this way. this is just a microcosm of a larger shift in the fund management industry. >> there are long-term contracts hat have locked them in.

megan: he sees they have investments that do higher returns. his is a bad move. long-term contracts that are difficult to unwind. i do think when we look at this trend, and we see even the markets doing what they are doing, continuing to be on a pretty good tear. people talking about whether we are going to see the end of the bull market. more than eight years and counting. this debate about what you are actually paying for. it is something that roils the huge funds we know about. it is also on a state by state and municipality by municipality now. oliver: we always talk about a macro, top-down conversation about active versus passive. let's talk about a story in the feature section. 3m and the role that will surprise a lot of people, the industry for ankle bracelets.

megan: this is a company that we snow for the post-it note, for scotch tape. innovation, engineering wonders. they pioneered the concept of giving employees time off to hink about new things. one of the markets they moved into, in the middle part of this decade, security monitoring. ankle bracelets that inmates are wearing. this is a growing market as prisons try to move the population out. there is a shortage of prison cells in america. the issue is, the technology they were using simply did not synch up, particularly in the tate of massachusetts. they had a large contractor supply these ankle bracelets. they had two g model which was not compatible with some

providers. also with a 3g system. offenders would not be registered on the network. when they were not registered, alerts would be sent out they were in violation. because they couldn't be found in the network. many times, law enforcement would be so inundated, it led to even more confusion, more arrest warrants. people being put behind bars because of this wrong technology. >> we caught up with more on the story. >> the company is a very vast, multinational industrial company. most people know about the post-it notes and scotch tape. they make several industrial products, from oil and gas mining to medical devices. one of the industries they have gotten into is the safety and security business. as art of that, they have recently over the past 6.5 years

been involved in the electronic monitoring device business which is essentially the ankle monitors used to monitor prisoners, parolees, that type of thing. oliver: as it turns out, maybe they are not as good at making and maintaining ankle bracelets as post-it notes. there is a serious consequence when these do not work. >> it has been an uphill battle for them. this is a business that is maybe a little bit far afield from their core competency. it has been a little bit of a struggle. the technology has evolved over the years. they may be did not adopt the newest technology at the quickest pace, which has put them in a couple of difficult situations. >> it is a huge business.

i think you talk about it being a $6 billion business. take a step back. 3m worked to fix the situation, if you will. take us back to clinton, massachusetts, where there were overwhelmed for years with problems with these bracelets. it was kind of staggering and unfortunately, it seems to have led to people out on parole, maybe alerts going off when they should not have an being put back in prison. >> that's right. this is kind of the pinnacle of the problem may have experienced. right after they acquired the business, the technology they had was an older technology. only compatible on certain cellular networks. the way the device works is essentially collects satellite signals and stores the data and sends it to the offender monitoring center via the cellular network.

it is almost like placing a phone call to transmit the data from the device to the authorities monitoring the offenders. at the time, 3m's device really was functional or compatible with the at&t network and the t-mobile network. the problem was, there were rapid upgrades in the cellular network system. they were upgrading to 3g. also, the 3m product was not compatible with verizon, which was rapidly becoming one of the largest if not the largest service provider in the state of massachusetts. these offenders were wearing that ankle monitors and not able to connect over the sillier network. or they were not able to obtain a gps satellite signal. it would generate an alert that would be sent to the monitoring

center. they were not necessarily due to the fact the offender was doing something wrong, violating terms of their parole. they were trying to mask the cellular network. what happened was as they were trying to figure out how to handle this, a lot of people ended up being arrested. they would issue arrest warrants because the authorities could not figure out if it was a technical glitch, or because the offender was trying to do something that required them to be in violation of their parole. oliver: there has got to be some serious legal investigation happening here. in your story, you mentioned some of the lawyers representing offenders who have been subject to a return to jail or a parole violation because of this technical glitch.

what is happening on the legal attle? >> really, it is on a case by case basis at this time. you need to keep in mind who the audience is. a lot of the people, they are criminals. these are not the most savory bunch of people. they have, a lot of them have committed serious crimes including murder, sex offenses. they are not the most sympathetic crowd. they often don't have the resources to follow through on these types of things. but there are several people, several people who have looked into lawsuits or challenged the accuracy of the monitor in court. honestly, there have not been a lot of victories. i think it is too soon to say how this is going to evolve.

there are criminal defense attorneys who have represented these cases. primarily, they just try to get them off rather than trying to challenge the accuracy of the evice. they have been trying to challenge the accuracy of the device saying my guy does not deserve to be in violation of parole. he should not have spent the night in jail. i think that's where it is at that the point. oliver: up next, the complex and multipronged investigation into the trump administration's ties with russia. this is "bloomberg businessweek." ♪

oliver: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek." i'm oliver renick. in the politics and policy section, the investigation into russia's interference in the election has become the main act.

>> here is what we know. in january, the intelligence community, by order of the obama administration, concluded russia did attempt to interfere with the election and did so to benefit president trump. it is the job of -- now we have two congressional investigations orange going, the senate and the house. it is job of the f.b.i., that we know very little about actually. it is the job of these investigators to answer the question whether there is any evidence that suggests trump associates, either affiliated with the campaign or the administration, had anything to do with these facts that yes, russia willfully interfered with our election. the real dynamite will be whether they find any evidence that ties this directly back to the president. there are a lot of questions

that exist beneath that about whether any of his associates, the campaign or the administration, had any knowledge of or dealings with these russian hacks. oliver: i think part of the general confusion in the public, trying to suss out what is happening, is as you mentioned, these parallel investigations hat are happening. one in congress. another in the f.b.i.. what doing all about the differences between the two? >> we have two congressional investigations, both armed with subpoena power. which gives people authority to bring people into the public hearing. we have the house and the senate. the house has lost a lot of credibility because of the committee chairman, devin nunes, who was a member of the trump transition and has been trying to, it seems, pull this investigation away from the questions about russia and trump associates into the realm of

looking at the allegations trump ade about president obama will -- wiretapped him. he is trying to pull this into that direction, having to do with unmasking perhaps done by -- >> it is unusual for the head of a committee to go to the white house and brief the president and not leave members of the committee. >> it raises all kinds of questions about who he is serving. is he serving as a member of congress? or is he serving executives? it is entire premise of the separation of powers. >> this makes the senate committee investigation that much more important. >> that's the main act. there are two chairmen there, the chairman is richard burr, of north carolina. the democratic cochairman is mark warner. they have a pretty good relationship. they have been out front saying they want to be as transparent as possible. they thought this was going to

wrap up by summer or so, long gone. this is going to take months and months. we are not going to have any report before the end of the year. if that. what is interesting, their ability to access this raw intelligence that exists within the cia is very limited. every day, the senate investigators, we have about seven staffers that work for this committee, by our reporting suggests they are going to the cia to a secure room and they go through binders. very thick binders of what is probably some of the most secret information that exists within the intelligence community. a lot of this intelligence is probably transcripts intercepted by the nsa. they can bring no electronic devices into this room. they are literally going through by hand, hard documents, reading them. this takes months. they are negotiating with the cia to try to get a computer put into the room.

that is the level of low-tech analysis the senate is having to rely on. liver: you have a story that goes with this that talks about the details of the investigation. those folks in that room, pouring over binders and folders, what are they looking for? goes with this that talks about the details of the investigation. how do they know when they find it? >> those are questions i don't to. they are looking for evidence that suggests -- they are trying to wrap their heads around what the intelligence says. some of this is raw intelligence that is actually intercepted. transcripts of phone calls. some of it is analysis. they are trying to get their heads around the totality of it. what they are probably also looking for is incidental names popping up. people who are associated with trump who happen to be on the phone with say targets of the surveillance, which typically

were russian agents. oliver: up next, the sometimes gray area between lenders and loan sharks. designer behind the nd nest thermostat, and big ideas for cameras. this is "bloomberg businessweek." ♪

oliver: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek.â i'm oliver renick. you can also catch us on the radio. and 1200 in boston. am 960 in the bay area. mux 3.on on d.a.b. in asia on the bloomberg radio plus app. we review the new book, "loan sharks."

>> loansharking is charging high interest rates on loans. charles geist, a professor at anhattan college looks at it from the civil war up through the depression. he calls it the birth of predatory lending. this period taking us from the industrializeation of america on up through the great depression. oliver: to what degree does that get mixed in with a capacity for risk-taking? you are going to want a higher interest rate if you are going to take on more risk? >> that gets to my take on the books which is he does not quite nail it. maybe because i look at economics, i look at supply and demand to be the key determinants of price. of course an interest rate is a price. a price of money. i tend to think what is causing the rates to be this high on loans? there is the demand, and borrowers who are in some cases desperate. and then the supply from lenders

who may or may not have enough money to supply. why would rates the high? you can think of two reasons. there is not enough money around, which is usually not the case. because we see banks lending. the other is the person who is borrowing is a risky prospect. or may be impaired in some way so they are not able to get a better deal. maybe they are an alcoholic. that was a huge problem that he writes about. or maybe there is a new immigrant that doesn't speak the language. don't know what the terms mean. >> i want to take you back to the birth of predatory lending. how did it come about? >> as america moved west, the settlers preceded the banks. there were no organized banks out west of the ohio, all the way out to california.

people got money wherever they could. loan sharks sprang up to supply leans where conventional banks would not lend or had not yet gotten to. oliver: you have lenders and sharks. there is a gray area in between. it in the book, how do css at what point you become a shark? >> one problem that abetted the loan sharks is states set a ceiling on lending rates, 6% or 7%. you have to take inflation into account. a high inflation rate, 6% or 7% is nothing, especially for a small loan. the carrying costs, the processing. it was not high enough for the standard lenders to make any

money, so they kind of left the field open. the loan sharks were the only nes supplying money. the marshall sage foundation, which still exists today, shortly after that, they came up with a uniform small lending law which tried to deal with that. it said, states, we are not going to tell you to abolish these laws you have on the books. give sort of a waiver in certain cases that would allow the rate to go up as high as 40%, which is pretty high. it was enough so the conventional, established enders with good lending practices, they were able to supply the market. ace out the loan sharks who were charging hundreds of percent. oliver: also, a superstar tech designer was inspired by

smartphones when he designed a camera. >> the company we are talking about is called light. you may never have heard of them. what they are trying to do is revolutionize the way we think about sophisticated camera echnology. most of us use our phones. those are kind of limiting if you actually care about photography in terms of zooming or low light. what they have to do was have you take the dslr and put it into more of a smartphone or smart tablet format. oliver: i think the concept is really interesting. essentially what happened, we took photos in a certain way with cameras. point and shoot. and the advent of the smartphone came along. is this about the pendulum -- we swung to where people were taking photos with their phones. now it is swinging back to the middle somewhere.

>> that is the way they are hoping people will interpret this. if you think about our ability to share digital imagery, there were something like 1.3 trillion digital images produced recently. it is like a four-fold increase in the last five years. most of the images, as you know from your instagram feed, are pretty bad. if you care about photography, the idea they had is we can do better. the problem is the packaging. f you think about a dslr camera compared to your phone, you have to strap it over your shoulder. you have these additional lenses and a bag. with they are trying to figure out how to do is how do we liminate that? oliver: these guys, let's talk about who they are. they are sweeney pendulum the other way. who is in charge of this company? it is a breakdown between engineering and design.

>> they are guys in their 50's. photo enthusiasts. they sort of came up with the idea. what happened is anyone with an idea, they said, we have a great idea, how are we going to make this thing into a product people want to buy? ind of a big question. they recruited a guy, he is a industrial designer. probably best known for doing the nest thermostat in 2011. he has worked on a lot of other products including letter stages of gopro. they said, figure out how to package it. oliver: what is his background? you mentioned nest. is that where he built the name for himself? >> if you know nest, he is very much the person associated with that. he designed gopro cameras, mp3 players. nest was his breakthrough.

he has a small team working in silicon valley. oliver: "bloomberg businessweek" is available on newsstands and also online. ♪

♪ jason the world sports has been evolving. athletes have become stronger, faster, more talented. competition has grown, stakes have risen, and at money behind the business is skyrocketing. some franchises to game changing criticaly, we are in point in the industry. is this sustainable? we gathered the leaders of the industry to find out at the bloomberg sports business summit. there seems to be a huge appetite for assets any