♪ caroline i am caroline hyde. : this is the "best of bloomberg technology," where we bring you all our top interviews from this week in tech. the reviews are in, the galaxy s8 hits the market. but will the demand be there? how it stacks up against competition. facebook's f8 congress and mark zuckerberg's plan for augmented reality. and the bloomberg scoop that has twitter buzzing, a $400 juicer feeling the squeeze.

first to our lead. anticipation has been growing around the release of samsung's galaxy s8 smartphone, with more than one million advanced orders for the device in south korea, a new record for samsung's home market. but will the demand be there? growth is expected to slow down this year. we caught up with an analyst and cory johnson. >> there is a lot riding on it. samsung has a reputation to repair. as we were talking about, we did some research. we collaborated with them to do this quick study to see. the note 7 issues did not seem to be a barrier. 60% of consumers said that was not a deterrent for them to consider. with existing owners, it was

65%, so i don't think that is in the mind of a consumer as big of a deal as people made it out to be. i think the media is being more cautious in their review to say, this happened. i think they are playing the cards, but the reviews have been good, and people have been raving about the screen. so, i don't think the note issues are as bad as people think, but now samsung needs to ramp up their marketing to continue to increase demand. caroline: you have been cautious to get to excited about s8. cory: i don't think i have been excited about a device ever. certainly not a samsung phone. google needs this to work, android needs this to work.

the problem with the note 7, we see the refresh cycle is lengthening. samsung got a little past because the consumer dynamics have changed, so they were able to skip a cycle or half a cycle and have a shot to maintain their leadership. caroline: ahead of the game when it comes to the iphone 8, we were discussing, and he was saying what we were expecting, and a lot of it was in the s8. and xiaomi as well, the chinese manufacturer which has also come out with curved screens. >> within this research, we look at what drives things consumers are most interested in, and

screen and camera were still the highest purchase drivers. we will see a move to bevel design, then that trickles down to the low end. the value is there for consumers who will want as big a screen as possible in the smallest form. this would continue. caroline: sticking with smartphones, the man who founded the world's most valuable company is confident apple will remain on top of the game. we sat down with steve wozniak and asked about disruption technology, and where he is in the midst of it. >> disruption does not mean a big, wide scale, all jobs. this means the company comes across with a new idea, a new approach, and everybody says

that is the way of the future, and a lot of companies get disrupted, put out of business. that is what disruption means to me. you are talking about, when human life gets disrupted, every change in technology has changed how we live life. it has been dramatic from personal computers, smartphones, high-bandwidth mobile. how we live, how we get the same things done has changed so much. you could say that disrupted the ways of the old. some people grew up with the old. we lament using some of the things that were so precious to us, but the way i always look to change is we create a new world that is different, we lose some things of the past, but it is good. with humans being replaced, it is way too early to come to that sort of horrible, overall assessment. i think we have a pretty good employment level right now.

caroline: what about apple's role in the future, and what products they will unveil? what kind of features do you think will need to come from the smartphone to remain a dominant force? >> i don't speak for apple. i read as much as you. i've probably read less than you about what the possibilities might be. a huge company has to look to stay huge, keep alive, and keep going. apple has done it by spotting new trends, making changes, going in new directions. i would like to see apple in a huge market, like self driving cars. what is apple going to offer that is different from everyone else that will put it in a leadership position? the iphone said a phone did not

need to have buttons, it can be entirely screen. it took a while for the world to catch on, but walk into any phone store and that's what you see on all the smartphones, so maybe apple will take the lead on self driving cars, and that will be the way for everyone. caroline: fascinating. apple has clearance for trials for autonomous technology. are you an optimist about where indeed apple and the big tech players will remain? you talk about where humanity will be in 60 years. will we see facebook, google, and apple still the top most viable companies in the world in that time, do you think? >> you know, there are always new things that become these huge entities that take our life sometimes in a new direction. apple, google, facebook will still be huge and large. the trouble is you get to a certain point of wealth that 60 years is too soon a time to disappear and go out of business.

the only way apple could go out of business is to merge with google and changed its name. just a joke. caroline: that was steve wozniak. moving on to tablets, apple controls 25% of the market share with its ipad, but can it keep up? this week, mark gurman got his hands on the latest ipad and new red iphone, and took a closer look. >> this is the cheaper ipad, it is $329, the cheapest apple has come out with. you will want this ipad if you are buying in bulk. maybe for corporate uses or education. in addition, if you're looking to save until an ipad pro model comes out, it is good especially if you don't need support for the smart keypad or stylus. the new ipad is faster than old ipad air models. it also adds live photo support.

for investors, it reinvigorates the ipad line at a time when tablets' successes are in question. if you are a pro user, you might like the option to look at two windows side-by-side. it makes it easy to search for things then view them. you can also copy text between the two sides. in the notes app, you can use two fingers like a cursor. i can highlight a paragraph, tap it, cut and paste. it makes it really easy to manipulate a few characters to make sure you are highlighting what you want. the new ipad is now on sale. but you might want to look if you can get an ipad air for cheaper from clearance or refurbished websites. you can find us each week on

facebook, twitter, and the bloomberg technology homepage. we are live wednesdays at 3:30. thank you. caroline: that was bloomberg technology reporter mark gurman. coming up, we head to facebook's f8 conference. if you like bloomberg news, check us out on the radio. you can listen on the bloomberg radio app, bloomberg.com, and in the u.s. on sirius xm. this is bloomberg. ♪

caroline: now to facebook's annual developer conference this week. in his keynote address, mark zuckerberg signaled a major focus going forward will be augmented reality. >> even if we were a little slow to add cameras to all of our apps, i am confident we can push this augmented reality platform. long-term, all the work we are doing here will go into glasses.

it is all the same technology, and this is another step on the path. caroline: we went live to the f8 developer conference with sarah frier. >> snapchat announced they will start doing this 3-d overlay on the real world. just in time because facebook comes out at their big developer conference and basically says this strategy that snapchat has, we are going to win at it, so zuckerberg is confident that despite the slow start, they are going to be the ones that are going to get people used to augmented reality, first through their phones, then through some sort of device. caroline: they made a big push into virtual reality with the purchase of oculus, many questioning the price they paid, but they are not giving up on vr. there is a focus on the space they launched today. >> vr has become this incredibly

crowded market. it is the social communication, social software that helps people build their relationships like they do on the main app, so what they introduced was faces where you can hang out with your friends and family in this avatar world. caroline: plenty of energy from the speakers and developers and the crowd, but there was an awareness and note made by mark zuckerberg, noting this tragic occurrence over the easter weekend in cleveland, a murder taking place and sadly broadcast on facebook. we can just have a listen to what mark zuckerberg said earlier. >> our hearts go out to the families and friends of robert godwin senior, and we have a lot

of work and will keep doing all we can to prevent tragedies like this from happening. caroline: are you surprised he took to the floor and mentioned this? >> i think his word choice is very interesting. "prevent tragedies like this from occurring." what is the tragedy? is it that this murder went viral? this will be tricky for facebook to navigate in the future. they rely so heavily on humans to flag stuff when it needs to be taken down. when it was flagged, it took 28 minutes to take it down, but the internet moved faster. what they need to do, and others have echoed this, is to use artificial intelligence to determine if these videos are inappropriate for the platform much earlier on.

caroline: plenty of challenges but still opportunities as well it would seem. , sarah frier, fantastic reporting from f8. sticking with facebook, there was also news on the company's messenger platform. facebook announced new features to make it its primary app. i asked about his goals to make messenger a one-stop shop for users. >> it depends on what you are trying to do, but there are lots of things that belong in a conversational context. and when you think about the messenger app, it is the place you go to coordinate plans of making reservations, building a playlist with friends, or many other things that require some form of conversation and coordination. so, instead of switching to other apps, you can do it right there and then inside of

messenger natively, so it is easier to do the things they were already doing. caroline: therefore, no app switching, keeping within messenger, and using bots. this is a way you want to see companies interacting with people, people interacting with companies more. there was a lot of hype in 2016. can it live up to the hype in 2017? >> every new technology has a hype cycle when it lives on a platform as large as ours. i feel like we have made a ton of progress, up to 100,000 bots, 65 million businesses, of which 20 million respond to messages on messenger every month. things are happening, and they are happening because we have learned a lot, and because we have built a successful developer ecosystem around the product.

it now has over 1.2 million people using it every month. caroline: of course, for those viewers out there, internet bots is a way of having applications run swiftly, therefore give us the monetization strategy. will we see adverts coming on? how will businesses be using this to pay you? >> the way we are thinking about monetization is if we create more value inside of conversations in messenger for businesses, then you want to create more of these, and a great way to do this is to buy ads in the newsfeed in the main facebook product, then open conversations inside messenger. it is creating a new demand for ads, and over time we will test ways for companies to advertise inside of messenger that does not get in the way of messaging. caroline: how big of a part of facebook's revenue do you see messenger being? do you have a target? do you have a utopia?

>> we don't break that out. it is very early. like buying ads in messenger, it is only something that any companies who have built a presence on the platform could start doing since last december, so it is very early still, still very small, but we think with a user base that is what it is and a thriving ecosystem that we will be able to build a solid business. caroline: still ahead, what bill gates says about brexit, and how it can affect scientific research in the united kingdom. that is next. plus, uber has lifted the veil on its finances. we will run through the numbers. this is bloomberg. ♪

caroline: this week, celebrations for the fifth anniversary on tropical diseases in geneva, switzerland, producing a roadmap for the control, elimination of the world's tropical diseases by the end of the decade. bill gates helped to kick off the event, and manus cranny sat down for an exclusive interview. they discussed the impact of u.s. taxes, immigration, and brexit. take a listen. >> tax structures, you can't say they are unimportant, but the basic idea of what is going on, whether it is drug companies coming up with new drugs or new software, it depends on the innovation and are you meeting the basic needs people have to

communicate, manage their business and things like that? so, california is a high tax location, and yet silicon valley remains the center of huge innovation, stronger today in terms of its share of the digital innovation than at any time in history. so, i am not downplaying tax issues, but what ceos and tech companies wake up thinking about every day is how they are going to use ai, where does their ai connect to customer problems. >> your mentioned your meeting in terms of informing the president on the world, and building his knowledge base. when you talk about companies, when you talk about a threat of an insular america and an america with immigration, how big of a threat is an immigration change in america?

>> america hasn't had an open door for immigration for a long time. we have a lot of complicated policies that have to do with bringing family members over. some skills-based programs like the h-1b, if you can fill a job that can otherwise be filled that helps the american economy, you can do that. there is this area of uncertainty. if you want to grow jobs, often bringing foreign talent in, starting to companies or filling new roles, that is a net jobs accretive. people are worried you are bringing in people and lowering wages, so having systems that differentiate between the job substitution peace versus building jobs around that unique talent, the government will probably try to do that harder.

the fact it is evaluated in the framework of jobs and economic growth, that is fine. high skill immigration can meet that test. educating somebody and having them leave the country where other jobs could be created around that person is not a great jobs move. >> as an irishman with two passports looking at brexit, but you as a global technology man, how do you look at the u.k.? do you look at it going, this is a long goodbye, or an opportunity for the u.k.? in terms of tech, we have done so much in the u.k. what is the threat from brexit, as you look at it from your vantage point? >> the u.k., whether microsoft, where they have a huge lab there that does amazing work next to cambridge, or for the foundation.

we have over a billion dollars of active grants to institutions in the u.k. to build new tools for us. it after the united states is by far the number two place with a huge distance to number three, so maintaining that scientific excellence, which sometimes involves foreign scientists coming in and joining teams there, having the right type of r&d collaboration, where the u.k. has been a huge net recipient of r&d dollars, i have been pleased with the chancellor and the prime minister have said scientific leadership, creating good jobs, having the strength that is fantastic in the u.k., that they will work to maintain that, because it would be a huge loss for the world and the u.k. if that was not done. it can be done. they made it a bit more complicated by not being part of

the eu, and just the uncertainty about the rules about people, r&d, some people are getting concerned about that. our foundation will be here 10 years from now, 20 years from now, so we can be calm, and i am sure we will get asked as these choices are being made, how do you keep that very strong momentum? scotland, where livestock is unbelievable, the traditional universities like imperial oxford, i think they are being careful to make sure they are not dropping off on that. caroline: coming up, the state of diversity in the workplace. our exclusive interviews with anita hill and ellen pao. that is next. and a reminder that all episodes

of bloomberg technology are live streaming on twitter. check us out at @bloombergtechtv weekdays at 5:00 p.m. in new york, 2:00 p.m. in san francisco. this is bloomberg. ♪ .

i've spent my life planting a size-six, non-slip shoe into that door. on this side, i want my customers to relax and enjoy themselves. but these days it's phones before forks. they want wifi out here. but behind that door, i need a private connection for my business. wifi pro from comcast business. public wifi for your customers. private wifi for your business. strong and secure. good for a door. and a network. comcast business. built for security. built for business. ways wins. especially in my business. with slow internet from the phone company, you can't keep up. you're stuck, watching spinning wheels and progress bars until someone else scoops your story. switch to comcast business. with high-speed internet up to 10 gigabits per second.

you wouldn't pick a slow race car. then why settle for slow internet? comcast business. built for speed. built for business. caroline: welcome back to the "best of bloomberg technology." i'm caroline hyde. in recent years, a spotlight has been placed on silicon valley's lack of diversity. in response, companies have been making efforts to become more transparent on diversity efforts by publishing diversity reports detailing gender and ethnic breakdowns of their companies, and pouring millions into initiatives with the aim of recruiting and retaining more women and minorities, but much of what they have done has only shown incremental results. we sat down with two women who have epitomized the fight against sexual harassment in the workplace. we sat down with anita hill and

ellen pao. >> 25 years ago, there was not nearly the public reaction we have today. today, specifically with the bill o'reilly situation, you have 50 corporations that have responded, and resisted, and pushed back on the idea of adding their names to this kind of behavior. you have a public that is enraged and is responding. women are protesting, telling their own stories. it is a more public conversation. 25 years ago, we had a president who supported clarence thomas, and the public went along with it. this time, with the president supporting bill o'reilly, the public is just not buying it. caroline: the public sentiment has changed. do you feel the same as in 2012 when you came up against your previous employer and took them

to court? do you feel things for the have changeds for the positive? >> i think they are believing people when they bring up their experiences. i think people are now recognizing there is a bigger problem. that there is discrimination and harassment in the workplace, and it happens to anyone, and it is no longer what did this victim did wrong. it is a problem that needs to change. so, it is a different perception than 25 years ago when people were less educated. caroline: how is technology making a difference? the tech scene is starting to show slightly better numbers when it comes to females in the workforce, but clearly there is still evidence of sexual discrimination when they are there. the presence of black and latinos in many companies seem pathetic.

>> it has been a very systemic problem that started decades ago when these companies became successful, and they were started by white men, and they made money to invest in other white men. it is an epidemic of pattern matching. the white men are successful, so i will invest in them. it is something that has happened to women. it has happened to racial and ethnic underrepresented people of color, to people who are lgbtq, every group that is not part of that core, original founding set of fathers from silicon valley. so, how do you change that culture to make sure everyone is included? not just a few more women or a few more black employees, but you are getting the best employees for the job and giving them the opportunity to do their best work? caroline: are you holding some startups or bigger technology companies in the light to show

the way things can be done? >> i think there are some companies that are thinking about it in a helpful way where they are starting to experiment. i don't think there are three things to focus on and solve all of your problems. i do think you need to think about inclusivity of all people, not just certain groups. you have to think about it comprehensively across your company, so it is not just hiring people and making sure they succeed, that it is about making sure they are onboarded, have mentors and sponsors, promoted equally, given the same opportunities across the board, and the third is measuring. so, the companies taking the time and effort to see what levels of diversity they have, what the sentiment of the different groups inside those companies are, will have the data to help them succeed. the question is, are you going to take that data, share it across your team, and focus on these problems? >> for me, one of the clear pieces of information that we

should draw about the bill o'reilly problem is about changing the culture and environment to make sure that when you put all these things in place that you actually follow through with an idea of increasing and maintaining increased diversity. caroline: that was anita hill and ellen pao. now still ahead, this week kicks off with netflix earnings and subscriber gains in the first quarter fell short. we will explain what is behind the slip. bloomberg got its hands on a $400 juicer that has raised millions from vc firms. but it now seems to be juiced. squeeze.feeling a we will explain next. this is bloomberg. ♪

caroline: netflix released earnings at the beginning of the week.

investors focused on customer additions, and the numbers were below what analysts were expecting. they were more than half a million behind consensus estimates. we dug into the numbers with a company that collects data on streaming viewership. and a lead partner at the research center. >> by missing estimates for the first quarter, they are going to have to come through with a strong addition in the second quarter, but the market and challenges they face around subscriber churn will not subside anytime soon. so, the pressure will get real in the second quarter. caroline: the pressure getting real in the second quarter. what about the content? we are expecting the content to be thicker and faster in the second quarter. the next steps in series, "house of cards" in particular. are they lining up the comment -- content to draw in these new subscribers? >> obviously netflix has made

, substantial investments in terms of developing their own, original content. in general, investors looking up the value of netflix just based on what the previous quarter subscriber acquisition was is a missed opportunity. if we look at the ways they can still monetize the audience, regardless of if they get new subscribers things like branded , content, merchandise off of new original content they own, i think there is more diversification and opportunity to monetize audience for netflix other than whether they get 5 million or 4.5 million subscribers. caroline: that is interesting. greg, should we be shifting our attention away from subscriber growth and looking at other numbers? before i ask you to dig into expenses, should we be looking at areas of opportunity to grow? >> that's one thing i expect to hear more of going forward, what their innovation platform is. because the concept of taking a

-- let's make a couple of tv shows and selling to subscribers is getting more competitive and well-worn. they need some sort of innovation platform to bring the competitive edge up in the second quarter so i would expect , to see something there. caroline: andre, dig into these innovation platforms we might see. who would you see them selling the homegrown content onto? what sort of areas of opportunity are there? they are saying no to sports. and spending being on marketing. >> and i agree. they know that live sports is out of their specialty and a very expensive arena for them to challenge other people in. when we look at the branded content, across the over the top ecosystem, most of the growth over the past year has been in ad-supported content. i don't see netflix, at least domestically, that they will start showing 15-second or 30-second ads, but having an advertisement shown in "luke

cage" and showing that household went and bought a hyundai, those are significant dollars, so a lot of the innovation may be in ways they can get brand engagement, brand sponsorship, and merchandising in particular. caroline: an interesting area. maybe a little bit more product placement going forward. greg what about the ongoing , splash of cash we continue to see? they say $1 billion is how much they will spend on marketing in 2017, add that to making the content and at what point do we see a reigning in of this spending? or do we not? >> the revenue growth numbers clearly support a company still in growth mode. at some point, they are going to need to figure out how to make the adjustment into more of a mature, going forward business. they need to figure out a way to manage subscriber churn in a more cost-effective way, and

obviously avoiding mistakes on long-term content costs. all three of those are going to be important cost management tools as they evolve from a growth company to a more steady state profitable company. caroline: now to a bloomberg story that has taken the internet by storm. u.s. based juice machine maker juicero raised $120 million. they convinced investors they could create the tesla of juicers. bloomberg got its hands on the machine to see if the $400 price tag was really worth it. ♪ >> this is the juicero, a coldpressed juicer made by a startup in san francisco. when the machine first launched, it cost $699. in january, it cost $399. it makes juice by squeezing these packs of cut up fruits and vegetables. they say you need this presser to get the juice out of its packs, but we decided to give them a squeeze test of our own.

after two minutes of squeezing, no expensive juice machine needed. ♪ caroline: that was the voice of bloomberg's ellen huet who wrote the story, which is gaining major traction online and on the bloomberg. here to dig in it is the co-author of the piece with ellen. joining us live from new york fantastic piece, fantastic , reaction. this is really backed by some stand out vc's that are perhaps a little bit embarrassed. >> huge venture funds invested in this company. we have thrive, jared kushner's company. we have kleiner perkins. google ventures all putting in about $120 million into juicero. caroline: has there been any response in terms of how juicero

is reacting to this? it is such a punchy price tag. does it admit that you don't really need this machine? >> one investor went on the record in dese he actually figured out on his own that the bags could be squeezed, but our understanding from sources in the company and investors is that it is an issue that has not been broached or discussed. perhaps the company does not see it as an issue. they would not go on the record with us. caroline: the company has a significant background in terms of design. it was meant to be a tesla of juicers. >> they said this machine has four underparts, several gears, , several gears a , scanner, a microprocessor giving it this high price tag. originally, the machine cost $700. the price dropped to about $400 in january. the company wants to be considered an innovative tech leader.

food tech is a huge topic in silicon valley. a lot of venture capital funds are pouring in money into companies like impossible foods, hampton creek, and juicero has caught the eye of a lot of firms in san francisco. caroline: coming up, the inside track on uber. why the privately held company has decided to unveil its financials, next. plus, former microsoft ceo steve ballmer gives us details on his new venture aiming to make government data more accessible, next. this is bloomberg. ♪

caroline: former microsoft ceo steve ballmer believes in data. he believes in it so much that he has launched a comprehensive data-driven look at government spending. it is called u.s. a fact. david gura asked him if it has gotten any easier. take a listen. >> measuring productivity is a weird concept to me.

measuring how people live, how they eat, what their housing looks like, how much money they have to spend on those things, that looks clear to me. obviously, we all like having cell phones. it has changed lives and made things very different, and yet it does not show up in a particular way in some of the gdp and productivity numbers. to me, that may not be the most important point relative to what we are trying to do with usafacts. we have gdp, all the numbers out there, but i'm not sure it captures the citizens' experience, and never will capture the citizens' experience. david: when you look at tech or the sharing economy, it is hugely popular, more and more people are becoming part of it. yet, it is not making a ton of money. when you're looking at data, what do you make of that? is that something we have to take as it is for the time being? >> we don't have data that

relates specifically to the topic. my own sense is that tech is enabling people to do new things in cheaper ways. that is all positive for quality of life. whether we can capture that precisely in our data, who knows? but i am a big fan of tech. i was in the tech industry for a long time, and i see a lot of potential for tech to transform people's lives. let me ask you about the news of the day. president trump traveling to wisconsin. what is your message to president trump over how immigration has fueled the tech sector and affected innovation? >> as a ceo at microsoft, i appreciated the value of people who were not u.s. citizens and the impact they could make it, particularly in these high skilled engineering jobs. so i will stand by what i said. when i look at the broader set of numbers, the total number of people who come to the united

states under h-1b visas is about 165,000 people a year. relative to all people coming under visas to the u.s., it is a relatively small number by percentage per i think 2.5 plus million come over all, 165,000 come on deck. if you look at where the visas are used, some of it is going into companies like google and microsoft, but some is going to outsourcing jobs. people who are on the front end of outsourcers, for example in , india. so, i think it is a complicated, broader question, but based on a relatively small base of numbers. if you add all the new visas, it is not a dramatically high percentage of the workforce. david: i have read that you have an amazon echo. you are a fan of the device. amazon is a hugely successful company. what does an upstart tech company do in the face of a behemoth like that one?

or against microsoft a few years back? what is the best route to compete with a company like that? >> the key is to find a place where you have a unique concept, product concept, and understand how it will fit the user, and try not to be in the place where the behemoth can logically and easily go. you don't want to be building something that would better be done as a feature of the market leader, if you will, as opposed to an entirely new product. unless you are interested in having your product or company acquired by the behemoth. if you take a look at how amazon and facebook got going, they had a contest in behemoths because they had a unique product concept and jumped on it quickly and drove to critical mass. by the time that happened, it was far enough away that the behemoths, microsoft or google,

people weren't responding fast enough and these new behemoths can grow up. david: your dad worked for ford, and you drive ford cars. we have seen the ceo going back and forth washington a lot. we have a president who seemingly interested in more interface with business ceos. is that a good thing? and what is the role of government in encouraging innovation and entrepreneurship? >> well, at the end of the day, i think business has to take care of itself when it comes to innovation. not that i either like or don't like a role for government, but it is the creativity of the people of this is who is going to really lead to these innovations. business execs can give input on tax policy and blah, blah, blah, but at the end of the day, the number one drivers will be what the businesses do that are largely independent of government impact. caroline: uber has lifted the lid on its financials. in an unprecedented move, the

privately held company showed the numbers exclusively with bloomberg and shows bookings more than doubled last year to $20 billion, net revenue was $6.5 billion, while net losses were $2.8 billion. the revelation comes as the company's corporate culture comes under fire. and top executives flee. we caught up with our bloomberg technology reporter, eric newcomer, and brad stone. >> we have seen this movie before, right? amazon losses over $1 billion, $1.4 billion at the time, 50% of revenues, extraordinary. now uber has some advantages , that amazon did not. it is a private company. we are in this extraordinary capital environment where it seems a lot of people are still willing to provide these companies money. uber is expanding geographically

as a platform, uber eats, uber rush, so i tended to give these companies the benefit of the doubt. obviously, it has to grow into that loss and continue to show topline growth. caroline: we were just hearing tom netflix that they need slash the cash. what interested me is how murky some of the numbers are when you are looking at them. eric, talk to us about this. the losses don't include stock compensation, automobile purchases. how much bigger could they even be? >> uber refers to them as losses. $2.8 billion not including china. they lost at least $1 billion in china, so we are looking at $3.8 billion which is historic. it is hard to find a private company that has lost that much money. even now, we are not quite capturing the full extent of it. we try to look through the actual money in, money out, so

if you look at that, you can see the losses don't encompass the full extent of the cash burn. just to add on to brad point, uber would say they are experimenting in parallel rather than in serial. they are doing eats, autonomous because investors are providing them the opportunity. while amazon has been aggressive with their cash flow, uber has been able to try to do it all at once. after the 2000 dot com spending, amazon laid off like 15% of its workforce, so there are dangers going in as big as amazon did. caroline: how much do we read into that investors have given them this cash and they are able to put it into work. and one investor is jeff bezos. how much do you actually think he actually says you need the jam today and you need to keep on spending? >> jeff bezos invested early on,

so he probably, i don't know he would back this kind of company now. i guess we will see. this is a company that has gone out every year, the public scandals over the past couple of months and these numbers which aren't for the faint of heart. i think we will see fairly early on if they go back and raise capital, what that valuation is. it doesn't seem the same optimism is around ride hailing. if they can raise more money or we see a public offering in the next 12 months or so, then we will see how investors are reacting. caroline: maybe this is trying to distract us from those scandals. eric, is that your viewpoint? also, yet another push from uber to allow tipping in new york and california. do think that will be allowed? why wouldn't they allow it? >> i do not think it is an

outright destruction but they need to reassure employees and investors and partners that this company is not imploding and they think the numbers reflect well. their view is that the per ride losses are going down and bookings are going up, losses are flat, and that is what they will be looking at. on the tipping issue, i said i think they could launch tipping this year.