♪ emily: this is "bloomberg technology," bringing you all the top stories in the tech world wide. coming up, the ceo of social capital joins us for an extended conversation on the biggest issues facing tech and vc's right now, relation, diversity, and facebook. plus apple sold more than 50 million iphones in the last quarter, but is it enough to keep the man in the global smartphone market? we will speak with gene munster,

and extending benefits policies, offering packages to hourly employees. we will hear from co jennifer hyman process more companies need to be doing the same. first to our top story, last week reported chinese smartphone maker shall will be the biggest ipo in four years with a $100 billion valuation. not that valuation maybe not so high at all and may be looking at evaluation of closer to $60 billion or $70 billion. why the cut in price? we are joined by tom giles and san francisco. what is going on, why the fluctuation? >> we don't know where the final numbers will come in, but we think it is about how you think of the company as being come is a smart phone or online games provider or at provider? it is all of those things. think about the biggest source of revenue, is smart phone, but it is not a big source of profits.

the question becomes if you think about it as a smartphone maker like you value apple or samsung? or services provider like tencent or alibaba? that is where you get this fluctuation in valuation. it was a big perspective with several hundred pages. as time went on, more people built deeper into it and made that realization that this is what tencent really is, and this is where profits come from. they do want to be thought of as a smartphone maker even though that is where a lot of revenue comes from and where you see a lot of rapidfire growth in recent months. but it is not where the profits are.

emily: this is a company that wasn't going much a couple of years ago and then we saw this huge turnaround. how excited are investors? tom: you are right, a couple of years ago were facing tough times. we were talking about how everything had gone wrong there and help the man had plummeted for their products, but they set up pop-up stores and got into a wide range of products. air purifiers is my favorite product. and that has caused a turnaround and caused a change in that company's fortunes, even though the evaluation may not be quite as lofty as the 100 billion. there's still a lot of interest in what this company does and what it represents and the growth potential of that. emily: tom giles in san francisco, thank you so much. sticking with ipo's, his wish company announced its intention to file for an ipo on the nasdaq

stockholm stock exchange. the company is linked to square and catalyst shop if i and the ipo is expected to be completed this year. coming investment bank and j.p. morgan will drink as coordinators with barclays also assisting as book runner. coming up, we heard from text influential and provocative voices, founder and ceo of social capital easier. -- is here. and if you like bloomberg news, check us out on the radio at and on sirius xm. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: executives are planning to attend a meeting at the white house does thursday on artificial intelligence and will be the first meeting between amazon and president trump since he targeted the company by a -- by tweets in march. while the meeting marked a new chapter the truck demonstration? here to weigh in on that and more is the ceo of social capital and joined facebook when it was a year old and has invested in companies from box to snap and is making big waves in silicon valley. great to have you back.

do you think this administration gets what these to be done when it comes to encouraging innovation versus regulation? chamath: it is too nuanced to understand so long away and these meetings probably say there is some effort they've given. that reality is people in silicon valley don't understand with ais, so until we grapple with what it is and what exists with fact versus fiction, it is probably going to take many years before the government really understands what is at risk. emily: some mark zuckerberg testified before congress and lawmakers didn't understand how facebook works, you think tech

these to be regulated and you think congress can design the right regulations? chamath: the right way to think about this is when technology was a smart part of the coming was best left alone and we did a good job of self-regulating. now the reality is technology is pervasive and there's no industry that isn't being remade by something new music technology as its core. there should come a natural expectation we can left by the same rules as anyone else has. emily: a few months ago you talk about having tremendous guilt about what you built at facebook that caused a stir. you later said you generally believe facebook is a force for good in the world, that was before cambridge analytica. wouldn't know how many billions of people had their data compromised. how does that impact your level of guilt now? chamath: the reality is facebook is the company that leads, but the reality is there is a bigger problem on which is not a facebook problem. it is a question among all of us as consumers.

we have grown addicted to things that are free and we rarely pay for things when asked to on the internet, is not an expectation. and the rest of our lives we expect to pay for things. ford does it give us free cars. whole foods doesn't give us free grapes. similarly what we have to do as consumers is ask ourselves, how much of this do we want to have for free? if we want rights, how much are we willing to pay for rights and that should extend to data privacy. and that is the solution of which are versions of this problem. emily: so you think facebook can do a subscription product? chamath: we all assumed the only way to make money on the internet is the gift software for free and is advertising to make the difference. the problem is we have a very weird and undefined gray area between was the consumer into is the customer and how much of a product are you a part of?

i think that is where you have to introduce things like payments and subscription so those markets are clear. for example, when you look at netflix, there is a relation between netflix and consumer. spotify has the same thing. apple has the same thing, when you are a customer of amazon prime coming at the same thing. there are many examples of the evolution of internet business models. in my organization, a lot we talk about is that in how we move away from just relying on at supported businesses and think about embracing subscription, because it clarifies a lot of these problems. emily: let's talk about something we don't get for free, and that is tesla. you once thought apple should buy tesla and make elon musk ceo. that was a long time ago, and now we see elon musk calling out

-- calling analyst questions boneheaded and boring. we have seen that april fools jokes. what you think about that kind of behavior? is that ok? chamath: unlike most people who read the peanut gallery version of the call, i listen to the call, and i would tell you that a lot of the stuff is overblown. in fairness to public market investors, they provide critical liquidity for his companies. specifically, this that is made critical point where they may need more money so i think it needs to make sure that you have the right kind of exchange. i'm not sure if quarterly earnings calls is the best way to get at them. they are too perfunctory in general. there's currently no opportunity to ask the right question, and what i would rather see you

don't do is take the four or five analysts that understand business and at the top of that list i would adam jonas and bring him under the tent and say let me explain the business to you and heavy arctic laid back to the rest of wall street. that will be a step that bridges the gap between people's tradition of the call and frustrations with the actual content of the call. emily: let's talk about apple. talked about the problem with innovation and we have seen apple earnings. quarterly earnings the fight expectations by being stable and defining the smartphone market slump. do think apple still has an innovation problem? chamath: i think apple has a fantastic cash machine and has a demonstrated yet the next path is. why that is critical is the underpinnings are constantly changing, and if we move from at services to subscription, there may be something that comes after a phone perhaps in vr

headsets in. . order to accommodate change, i think the best course of action is to try many things. be ok with failure, don't be embarrassed, and refine the ultimate thing that works. i as an investor would love to see more public facing experimentation that says we know the iphone business isn't going to be around forever, so we are going to try something to that scale. in fairness to them to have tried things that are exceptional, air pots are fantastic and an unbelievable product. everybody uses them loves them. emily: and not the price point of an iphone. chamath: is not going to replace the iphone business, so you have to find a multibillion dollar trillion dollar market. for what ever reason, there are only a few, health care,

education, autos, housing. so they have to try something big. emily: you talked about markets that are undervalued. where do you see opportunity that public market investors aren't seeing? chamath: if you go back to where we started committing over the next 15 or 20 years consumers are we get the realization that they are going to want to have rights and the ultimate customer. what that means is businesses like netflix, spotify, and many other subscription-based, are going to do incredibly well. i think they will massively outperformed other kinds of business models. in part that means is other kinds of businesses, at supported businesses, will get revalued and related. there is the scepter of privacy risk and regulation. we are spending a lot of time of finding companies that is expressed that view.

subscription-based relationships with customers. emily: we continue our conversation with chamath palihapitiya and talk about his mission to bring more equality to this industry. we are livestreaming on twitter. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ emily: social capital is a unicorn with four female investment partners and an industry where women are grossly underrepresented. progress elsewhere is incremental, but it won't be so long if chamath palihapitiya has his way. so, why isn't the industry changing faster and why are you

one of the few people out there talking about this? chamath: there are two reasons and the first is a dirty little secret in silicon valley, just there is not a lot of incentive to change, because technology markets are quite small still, and are growing quickly. the return to generate by basically staying the same, are high enough to keep you in business. so for venture capitalist to retool, the rules don't exist. why we do it differently, i think it is a poor business, and i think if you put the best on the field and in order to get those people come you closer eyes and asked the same questions and make the same judgment and end up with the more diverse team because you find the are people you otherwise exclude or friendly better than the people you would otherwise take. emily: give me the evidence, is it showing in your returns?

chamath: the way we look at it is how performance is relative to the s&p 500, and it automatically outperforms. i look back and say, was both the top firm in sun valley over the last 10 years? who can compete with sequoia, and are three organizations, and we all take different approaches to get there. my organization started seven years ago, to have done this in a short amount of time represents a commitment to this idea that really good, thoughtful hiring of people who are qualified, independent of race and gender turns out to be the smartest business decision you can make. so why not do it? emily: one of your investments is to build this mission or algorithm that will identify

companies and global entrepreneurs around the world without any human beings involved, and give. decides whether or not to get funding. what results are using and as his model work? chamath: humans to get involved come up after the computers at a recommendation, found in our first batch that these are businesses that 40% were founded by women and 80% by minorities. they are companies that spent 17 countries around the globe, and many states and the rest that never would have received venture capital funding, any not california and new york. what we find, there are amazing people everywhere and they are trying their best to solve important problems that improve the quality of life for people around him. when you take a need like a project and asked simple questions, it has everything to do with the quality of the business versus the demographic makeup of the founder. of invariably find an amazing collection of people. emily: and you intend to scale this to 10,000 investments next

year. chamath: i told the team that if the goal is to support 1000 companies this year and 10,000 a year every year thereafter -- part of managing a sophisticated technology team is to set audacious goals. to be honest, it is not whether -- not clear whether 10,000 opportunities to invest in exist, but by mandating something like this allows us to really ask the hard questions. how do we train algorithms, how do we use data judiciously and how do we help businesses that may be close to funding it over the line and be better? how do we actually become more democratic in teaching people how to be entrepreneurial? had to integrate with massive companies like amazon and google so people can start businesses in an even simpler way? it is forcing these conversations and in many ways it brings me back to my roots of

building the interesting products that start with small steps, internet to be quite transformational over years. emily: speaking of ai and algorithms, i know you see an opportunity there. how are we thinking about this and are we thinking about ai in the right way? chamath: i think ai is a misnomer and the reason why is people think about these computers making decisions for us. there is actually an important step that happens before it, which is how does the computer get trained? a computer get trained with enormous amounts of data. emily: data and ai and computers are not necessarily unbiased. chamath: that is about the iteration of things improving over time. the point is this is a land grab for data. why there's so much concerned about these large companies is because of the enormity of the data they collect. on what had can use it to improve basic core services.

on the other hand it is too much power in the hands of a few. what we need to do is having lots discussion with talk about ai and the perils of it, comes down to who is collecting the critical information that will train our computers over the next 20 or 30 years to make important differentiated decisions on our behalf. emily: who is in the lead? chamath: if he said to his went to be the leader in data consumption, i would say amazon. if you ask about intent, it would be google. if you talk about content consumption, it would be facebook. for example, in health care that is no clear winner yet, in education and adaptive learning, there is no clear winner. in financial regulation and issuance of credit, there is no clear winner. there are many markets where we don't know yet. so now it is about figuring out

how to start companies think about this as their core primary reason to exist, and they collect data and use it in a really thoughtful and honorable way. emily: you have raised $600 million. excuse me, $690 million to help companies go public. everybody wants to know if a startup has been chosen? i am trying to read your body language. chamath: no comment. emily: would you consider an overseas company? chamath: i really can't comment. part of it is i want to respect the confidentiality of the process and the realities of sec regulation, which i want to honor. until there is a deal, we can say anything. generally speaking, we are going to find a lot of utility for products like this, because what it allows us to do is to bring scaled financial capabilities and toolboxes to get businesses.

but that will do is accelerate great companies to be fantastic. emily: chamath palihapitiya, always great to have you on the show. thank you for stopping by. coming up, apple's big business is the iphone come up and much longer can this hold true? we will look at the health of the smart phone market, and up ceos one of the biggest will speak out about employee benefits of all. we speak with jennifer hyman. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ emily: this is "bloomberg technology." earlier this month, apple reported second-quarter results that thrilled investors but all eyes are on the moneymaker, the iphone. the iphone x became the best-selling phone of the quarter. at the time, tim cook told bloomberg it is an incredible result if you think about it. when asked about smart phone market growth, cook pointed out half a billion feature phones were sold last year that can still be upgraded. he argues the iphone has a relatively low market share but points to a huge opportunity in india.

we know people are willing to pay $1000 a phone now. how frequently will operate -- updates actually occur? here to discuss is gene munster in minneapolis who has been covering apple for years. of those things we heard from tim cook, are there any myths you want to bust? or anything you in particular shine a light on? gene: there is a myth how investors think about the story. it is important preface to my comments that we have been in this anxiety over iphone growth for the last six years. understandably so because the iphone grew 37% in 2017. in i think we are moving into 2015. a different paradigm in terms of how people will think about the iphone. i will hit on that and go to a tim cook's comments. the new paradigm is less anxiety about the iphone and this is a generally stable business. not a high-growth business, 0% to 5% growth business, but stable.

that stability is a platform for them to grow services which grew nicely in march at 30%. last, the share buyback. that trifecta is how investors -- that does not change the narrative around what is the growth. i want to talk about what he had said, i have 17% market share. cook said there are 500 million feature phones, a flip phone, hard to believe, but 500 million phones phones -- feature sold every year. they can inch into that. my buffing of the myth is it is unlikely the will get much of any traction at the low end, which is that market. i do think they can grow fractional market share. each 1% share that they gained is about 13 million units or about 4% increase in the iphone base.

so, it is easy for them to inch up. that part of cook's comments is valid. emily: do you think the price of the highest end iphone could go up significantly? and that consumers are willing to pay. tim cook told me he is not worried about the price of that $999 iphone. clearly, it is selling, but how much more people going to be willing to pay? how much can apple continue to rely on these higher average selling prices for the phone in a particular quarter? gene: they can rely on that because as tim cook said, the phone market is the best consumer market in the history of the world. i think there is a big base they can tap into, but it is a smaller group. i will put some perspective around the opportunity in the high-end. they have seen better sales in their iphone x than they typically see. the iphone x is more expensive than a normal phone.

i think the proof is in the results of last two quarters. consumers are valuing their phones at a greater level and willing to pay up for that. the reason this will continue is because high probability -- bloomberg has been reporting a lot about this, the new family of phones that will be out in the fall. one of them will probably be 25% bigger and could be a $1400 asp on it. that is compared to the $1200 now. my point is that they will have more options, even more options to spend up. i think we have learned that this in fact will gain traction. emily: we talked about xiaomi going public earlier. how much of a threat is xiaomi to apple? gene: that is one of the reasons why this iphone business probably will not grow above 5% over the long-haul. that xiaomi market is the 500 million units that is the flip

phone market, getting those to convert over will be very difficult for apple. getting those high asp's. it is a big threat. it is why the iphone business will not grow at probably 10%, 15% the future. i think it will. that is the competitive threat. emily: we were talking about apple's innovation problem. it is unclear what the next lily pad is for apple. you mentioned earlier, the trifecta -- iphone, services, share buybacks. is services the next lily pad or are you looking for something more? gene: we are, and we have a history of getting some of these right and some of them wrong. it is the one other factor here in the story, there is optionality value on other things they can get into. probably the two most obvious is something around wearables. they have made recent acquisitions around glasses.

this is one of tim cook's favorite themes, augmented reality. taking that to a level where it adds value to the consumer. i think that is a lot of opportunity for the company. second, there is the piece around content which plays into services. the last real wildcard is around the self driving, autonomous cars, vehicles. they have a project. you can hear more about what they are doing and self driving cars. emily: we are watching this potential trade war with china and apple could particularly be harder than other technology companies given how many smartphones and manufacturers are in china. what is the worst case scenario for how apple and the smartphone market at large could be hit if this trade war really does explode? gene: well, you have a market -- the big issue obviously is the

price consumers will pay. it is still unclear about if this war actually plays out, but the impact would be. the worst-case scenario is let's say there is a 20% tariff that goes on iphones. instead of being an average selling price of $730 like it was in the last quarter, that goes up to $830 or $900. that will diminish their market share and that will take the iphone from being 3% growth last quarter to being down 5%. these are some pretty dangerous scenarios that people cannot afford. it is important to note that $200 is a lot of money for most people. i think that can have a negative impact on the iphone business. emily: gene munster, as always, thank you for joining us. coming up, jen hyman joins us to talk about how she is making changes to ensure all employees at the start of are treated fairly and that other companies should too. later, picking up the slack. how the online office platform

has been bringing users on board. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: the u.s. is in the midst of unprecedented strength in the labor market. the approach jobs report shows the unemployment rate dipped below 4% for the first time in 17 years. the workplace is changing. in 1960, only 20% of mothers worked. today, 70% of american children live in households where all adults are employed. the majority of workers spent more than 40 hours a week on the job. productivity has increased 440% while benefits like leave and health care are not guaranteed. in the tech industry, there is a rising split in the workforce. competitive pay with great benefits or salaried workers while warehouse and hourly workers are left with little or

no incentive. jennifer hyman wrote about this issue saying our hourly workers working at the rent the runway warehouse and retail stores have to face life events like a newborn, grieving for the death of a family member or taking care of a loved one without the same level of benefits. jennifer hyman joins me now. because you have done something about this and made a big change. how did you come to this realization? jennifer: the change -- we decided to equalize benefits across the company, across all functions. meaning that parental leave and sabbatical policies and pay family sickly and bereavement are the same for corporate employees as they are for warehouse employees. emily: you said you were not doing this and that was a mistake. why? because it was always done that way, cheaper? jennifer: when you found a business, you really take your

cues on corporate culture on already successful companies. i just looked to what companies that i admire were doing. they were doing incredible generous things for their employees and corporate. they had very standardized, more skimpy policies in their warehouse and customer service teams. i just followed suit. it really took me the consideration of now having a team of 1200 plus people with a company that is doing extremely well. understanding that i am in the position i am in because of my entire team, not just my corporate team. why is it that my pregnancy is more important than someone on my seamstress team? it is actually not. a life event is as important for any person in my company. emily: this is going to be expensive, isn't it? how do you account for that

expense? jennifer: first of all, while it might be an expensive upfront cost, i do think it will all come out in the wash in terms of higher retention rate, having more productive employees. the cost of bringing in and training new employees is extremely high. and the loyalty all the employees will have at rent the runway. what was remarkable about the changes his we did not change that much as related to corporate employees because our benefits were already really generous for that population. we just equalized the benefits and the people that at the most positive reaction to it were our corporate employees, because people want to work at companies that exemplify their values. 70% of millennial's, the majority of the labor force right now, say they will not work at a company a less than example vis a value set they have. this value set of treating everyone with respect and equally is something that is extremely important to the younger generation. emily: let's talk about some other companies with these two-tiered workforces like

amazon or starbucks. how does what you are doing compared to them? jennifer: it is very different from them. as an example, we have a policy that is four weeks of bereavement leave. now that for weeks is for anyone on the team that is grieving for a family member. that is a really generous benefit that sheryl sandberg put in place at facebook and lots of other companies followed suit after she did that, but they did that for their corporate team. why is it a death in the family is more important for some of the works in corporate? it is just not. the thing that was really important to me was thinking through the opportunity to arrive in a corporate job. what has given me the privilege of being a founder and ceo?

yes, i work hard but i also grew up on the right block with the right parents. a lot of people who work on my operations team, in my customer service team did not have the same educational opportunities and certainly did not have the same career opportunities. they work just as hard as i have. emily: what is the call to action here? what should companies like amazon, like starbucks be doing? jennifer: i think if someone works for your company, whether they are salaried or hourly, they should be treated equally. you should do whatever is financially viable within your company and stage. i'm not making the claim that rent the runway's benefits are the most generous out there because we are still growing. we are not a company the size of amazon, but i am making the promise that everyone is equal and as rent the runway continues to grow, i will continue to deliver more and more values to my employees. emily: while i have you here, we

have been talking a lot about diversity. we have the bloomberg business of equality summit going on at headquarters today. we talk a lot about companies that are working really hard to change it. the numbers are moving. rent the runway is a company that has been diverse almost since the very beginning. i don't know, you tell me why. is it because you have a female ceo? is it because you were able to attract more women on the executive team? give me your progress report and what others can learn from it. jennifer: we have always been diverse, both in terms of gender but also minority and background from the beginning of rent the runway. we are a team that has been 70% female since the beginning. i think no one ever wants to be the minority. because we started off with a diverse team, it is easier for me to be a diverse team today and to attract minorities,

attract women because they see that those women and those minorities are leaders at every level of the company. another problem that companies have is if you have an upper echelon of management that is all white men, and you say you have diversity on your team, there is no one i can look to who is like me. therefore, why do i want to symbolize what all women think? you never want to be the only woman in the room or only person of color in the room and you have to express the opinions of an entire race or gender. emily: why is it taking so long for a company like amazon -- women drive 70%, 80% of consumer purchases. even more ammunition. why doesn't a company like amazon change to represent its customer base? jennifer: i think it is complete bs that companies are not 50% female. it is because of a lack of value. you showcase your value by nature of who you hire and who

you promote and who you let go from your organization. cultures persist because of the ceo and the decisions the ceo makes. it is often more important who you choose to promote and let go of your organization than who you choose to initially hire. if you are not hiring when it, -- not hiring women interviewing , women it tells something about your value set. in the same way if you are treating your corporate, more educated, whiter employees better with better perks than your less educated and more diverse warehouse employees, that says something about the values you hold dear. i think we need to question what are those values? don't claim to be progressive and if you are not actually walking the walk. emily: jennifer hyman, ceo of rent the runway. thank you for joining us. coming up, we speak to slack's new chief product officer. how the company is attracting

new users to its platform. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: uber is getting it out of this world boost to get cars off the ground and into the sky. it announced a partnership with nasa to study urban manned aircraft. it will develop air traffic management systems for a world with flying cars. uber is working with manufacturers in conjunction with its ride-hailing network to possibly develop flying taxi like vehicles. since its launch four years ago, slack has become one of the leading names in online workplace collaboration. the company has just released its latest metrics, detailing growth since september 2017. daily active users has risen to eight millions. paid users has hit 3 million. it now includes 65% of the fortune 100 companies.

joining us now to discuss is the chief product officer, april underwood. thank you for joining us. slack in the enterprise has been interesting growth experiment for you. what are you learning about the difference between these enterprise users and those consumer focused, smaller group users that were so enthusiastic about slack in the beginning? april: thank you so much for having me. last year has been really phenomenal for us. in addition to the milestones you mentioned, we hit eight million daily active users. 500,000 organizations using slack. one thing we're really proud of his we have delivered a lot of new product last year that actually allowed more types of customers to use slack. in doing that, we brought on board a number of larger customers like ticketmaster, rei, moody's and target. many of those customers are taking advantage of our products we launched last january called enterprise grid.

you asked what is different about these users. what is fascinating about these customers is the more i spent time with them, i find they want a lot of the same things that small organizations want. they want transparency, agility. they want the tools that allow their organizations, which are quite large, to be able to work as seamlessly and effectively as smaller organizations. that is a lot of what we do at slack. that is what we are focused on building. that is how we think about building a product that works for this diverse audience from the smallest customers all the way up to those with tens of thousands of customers or employees. emily: is there a difference in user behavior when the product is integrated top down versus bottom-up? april: fine question. we're still in the early days of this. we created this category and

identified early on that there was a need for a new way of working. something like slack was going to be critical for organizations to be able to work transparently and to have the communication tools that are needed to allow them to mirror their digital work, the work they do all day every day with their actual organization and how it functions. what we find with those organizations is where is that top-down buy-in, we see cio's who started using slack, really take hold and want to play a critical role in the success of slack and its internal adoption. there is no question that is a huge boon to adoption and helps the organization adopt to this new way of working. but that being said, most of our growth across the 500,000 organizations i mentioned has oftentimes been bottom-up. small teams within companies have adopted slack because they wanted to work differently and it spread like wildfire.

emily: slack has also been especially focused on how it grows its own workplace. i have to ask you, slack releases new diversity numbers a few weeks ago. improved on almost every measure. slack has constantly held up as this example of a company that is doing it right or where something is working. 40% across the company, 48% of managers are women. you are seeing improvement on underrepresented minorities. if there is takeaway, what is one thing that companies can do to get numbers to look more like yours? april: i think if there is any secret to how we have gotten to where we are is by starting early. slack was founded by four founders, all men. what that early team did is they started talking about intentionally focusing on bringing diversity and inclusion to slack very early on. with some of the other work i do

outside of slack with my investment group, that is one of the things we advised the founders of the 50 companies we back to do. diversity is not something you can focus on with 1000 employees. when he gets baked into the outset, you have leaders that represent the kind of employee base you want to build and probably the customer base you want to serve. that is the one point of advice -- start early. if it is too late for your company because you are already quite large, that support and attention from the top is really critical. stewart has always been a big advocate for diversity and it really drives a lot of that focus within the company. emily: april underwood, chief product officer at slack. thank you so much for joining us. that does it for this edition of "bloomberg technology." tomorrow, we will bring you highlights from the google i/o developers conference. google's assistant will now book

you an appointment on its own. we will bring you our conversation with alphabet's vice president of news. that is all for now. this is bloomberg. ♪ mom, dad, can we talk?

sure. what's up, son? i can't be your it guy anymore. what? you guys have xfinity. you can do this. what's a good wifi password, mom? you still have to visit us. i will. no. make that the password: "you_stillóhave_toóvisit_us." that's a good one. seems a bit long, but okay... set a memorable wifi password with xfinity my account. one more way comcast is working to fit into your life, not the other way around. mr. elliot, what's your wiwifi?ssword? wifi's ordinary. basic. do i look basic? nope! which is why i have xfinity xfi. it's super fast and you can control every device in the house. hey! let's basement. [ grunting ] and thanks to these xfi pods, the signal reaches down here too.

so sophie, i have an xfi password. and it's "daditude". simple. easy. awesome. xfinity. the future of awesome. announcer: the following is a paid presentation for the bissell crosswave. ♪ ["blue danube waltz"] ♪