♪ caroline: i am caroline hyde in london. this is "bloomberg technology." facebook hopes to put the data scandal behind it. the annual meeting did not go according as planned. we will discuss what is next. plus, a new threat has emerged in the cybersecurity space. why hardware components on computers could make companies vulnerable to an attack. one of the most important days of the year for apple is just

around the corner. we will discuss what to expect at the worldwide developers conference. but first to our top story, the facebook shareholder meeting was anything but business as usual. protesters and activists arrived for the event. inside, one investor it compared its poor stewardship to human rights violations. another person was kicked out for repeated interruption. the company has been accused of harming democracy, russian interference in elections, fanning violence and hate speech on its platform, and letting bad actors harvest information. joining us is our guest david and sarah friar, who covers all things facebook. run us through the events on thursday.

it feels like quite a tense environment. >> i have covered many facebook shareholder meetings and i have never seen one this contentious. a lot of people wanted to make their point. facebook has critics on all sides of every issue. we talked about content moderation, censorship, gender pay equity, taxes, there are all these issues that came up during the shareholder meeting. this company is now so powerful and it has this immense impact on society and people are coming to terms with it and understanding all the ways in which facebook needs to be held accountable. caroline: david, one step further from that, how powerful

it is and who has majority control is mark zuckerberg, but yet there does not seem to be change to that. >> certainly there will be no change to zuckerberg having unilateral control of the company, but i agree that it is sinking in on the shareholders and attendees at the meeting and the world generally that this company has an unusual social footprint. it is a corporate entity with a global civil role, which is an unprecedented reality. this was manifested in the meeting and other appearances recently. the company itself has not come to terms with it either. people have come to terms with it. they have critics on all sides, but the company does not seem to believe that dialogue with its critics is necessary, and that

is peculiar. caroline: it is peculiar. we are seeing the company maybe not getting it. are users getting it? i'm looking at the slowing of growth in daily active users versus monthly active users. are we seeing people drawn away from facebook? >> this sort of dominance, maybe it is sustainable, maybe it is not. one study yesterday said that facebook is actually losing some percentage of teenagers as was the case a few years ago, that 70 plus percent of teenagers in the united states were on facebook, and now 51% say they are, so that is one indicator of how facebook may not be able to the this powerful forever. snapchat, instagram, youtube are ahead of them among teens. facebook owns instagram comes so that is how they have already

thought about this and built it into their future. they own instagram, whatsapp, messenger with more than one billion users as well, so this company has its influence over parts of its users lives beyond facebook itself, so even if it was not used as frequently, there are so many other ways in which the company can continue to be powerful. caroline: david, do you think it matters if the facebook entity itself is slightly less on trend for millennials or teens when they have instagram, whatsapp. they have diversified. do they still need to focus on facebook as a core product and make sure it is capturing all age ranges? >> it is their core product, but they are hedged against young

people losing interest, and instagram is a spectacular hedge. it has done unbelievably well for them. whatever you might think of the company, it is probably a mistake to focus too much on the idea that people are turning away from it. i don't think that is happening at scale in any significant way. certainly advertisers are as interested or dependent on facebook as ever. there is really not an alternative anywhere comparable to being a targetable medium for affordable advertising targeting, so facebook for better or worse has a part of the ad market locked up and still growing, and the massive users are remaining. caroline: we understand mark zuckerberg will not start giving away his majority control of the company. he built it. executives have had their mea culpa moment and are starting to

understand the roles and responsibilities. regulation is coming, certainly in europe. how do you see the executives reacting and starting to shift the dynamic of the company going forward? >> a lot of it is rhetoric. i was hearing zuckerberg respond to these criticisms, complaints, and concerns yesterday. a common theme was just saying, yes, we hear you, either fair criticisms, we care about this, it is not true we don't care about it, we are working on this and dedicating ourselves to this, and that seems to be the common theme in facebook's conversations with lawmakers, saying we are on the same site and really care about data privacy and election interference, but over the next few months it is really going to be the measuring stick, are they able to make changes, not just with talk about taking on more responsibility and caring more

about their impact on the world, but how does it manifest in the product and how are they going to measure their change in these areas, and how transparent are they going to be about the ways they tweak their formula and operations to tackle these large problems? caroline: over all the shareholder base has shrugged it off, really bouncing back from the selloff in march when issues, particularly surrounding cambridge analytical, surfaced. it went back up. >> the two groups, the only groups not critical of facebook, are investors and advertisers. it still works for both of those groups, and it works for the first group because it is working so well for the second group. we agree on so much of this. they do realize that they screwed up. i think that is fair enough but

i think that their promises of reform our unconvincing given they really did blow it the first time and allowed all these problems to emerge, partly because then they did not have enough dialogue with outsiders who could have given them more insight about some of the risks, and that remains the case, so i don't see why they think we will be convinced by them continuing to say we get it, we care, we are going to fix this. they think artificial intelligence and other tools will come to the rescue, and just good nature and good judgment, but ultimately they need help in consultation from society and regulation will help them with that whether they like it or not. caroline: we did see investors try to hold them to account. will we hear more of this?

or will they shrugged this off? >> as david noted, zuckerberg has majority control here. investors can come and say we want you to adhere to these demands, but facebook doesn't really have to do anything about it. they said something at the meeting that struck me as odd. they said just because we voted against all your proposals for more transparency and accountability doesn't mean we don't agree with you. in fact, we agree with you on many of these things, but we don't think what you proposed is the right thing. one investors spoke up and said the proposals we put forth were not prescriptive. we are just putting this out there in a general way. it is not that much to ask. still, that is really not -- the shareholder base is not going to be able to affect a lot of change here. facebook is very sensitive to public opinion.

they do constant polling on people and how they feel about zuckerberg and facebook is a company and how innovative it is. they want to make sure people feel good about using the product, so to the extent that affects them, i think that will be more harmful than even regulation causing them to change their business. caroline: david, react to that. what could facebook do to alleviate any further concerns from the user base? they are the ones who will eventually dictate any change. >> they are taking actions to make their system more resistant to manipulation, which is ultimately the challenge. manipulation by people who would abuse people's privacy, manipulation by political bad actors, those are the two categories where we are most concerned. one of the things that was interesting to me at this week's code conference of the cto said there is a mind shift in the company from assuming the best of people to assuming almost the worst, which is very much necessary. it is good they have done that. so if they can succeed in

insulating and and not service from and chelation, they will maintain popularity among users and the public. i am skeptical given the scope of their influence and the ways they can be manipulated that they will be able to do that for the long term. i suspect public opinion will turn against them in key countries in the not distant future. caroline: meanwhile, shares at a record high over the week, a $560 billion valuation. david kirkpatrick, sarah friar. micron technology, the largest u.s. maker of computer memory chips said chinese regulators visited its offices in that country, a move that opens a front and a growing trade dispute between china and the u.s.

chinese media reported that some sun and sk hynix received visits from local regulators seeking information. coming up, silicon valley adding operations in europe. we will talk to the bank about opportunity in the region. 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: silicon valley bank may be known for its operations in the tech held, but also has a presence in europe. it announced it is expanding to germany and opening offices in frankfurt. so why into this market now? our guests join us right here in london. frankfurt was an interesting choice. i used to cover the tech scene in berlin. why frankfurt? >> because of longer-term ambitions in germany to build a big bank where you will find all of the jobs in banking, not just the sales and relationships jobs, but berlin is often called the center of innovation in germany, but it is relatively small companies, startups, but technology companies are spread far and wide in germany, so we have been thinking about how to cover munich, frankfurt, berlin,

and other cities. it is more spread out than in the u.k. caroline: you wanted to be a fintech hub. who are the clients you are aiming at? >> we start with early-stage companies lending alongside a series a investment from venture capital. caroline: offering loans? >> loans alongside the equity, but right through scaling up companies, create-ipo, post-ipo, so companies of all sizes. berlin is a beacon in the way tech city is an startups in paris, barcelona, stockholm, and so on, so you are seeing a pervasive across europe. caroline: what about paris, barcelona, and stockholm? >> they are strong markets for innovation, germany, france, scandinavia region, and the u.k., so we have ambitions and all of those markets. it is a question of prioritization. caroline: how quickly?

>> we are working on a behind-the-scenes now. caroline: talk about the activity and loan for you you are seeing. how does it stack up when you compare the u.k., germany, versus silicon valley? >> pretty similar. california dominates from a technology point of view. life sciences, the east coast, boston. few banks are focused on this space in the same way. it is something as an organization you need to be specialists in to do it at scale. for us, we really focus on

adding value to companies around the world, so we need to be in these cities that really matter, so it is important to develop our business in these european cities as well, and certain european countries are focused on slightly different things based on their historic specialities. in germany, you will see fintech, commerce, but also over time technical, industrial applications. germany, technical manufacturing, software and so on. it is exciting to be there. certainly we have been warmly welcomed. caroline: do you think europe could compare to the sheer scale of falla and from the united states? >> i would not expect that to happen in my lifetime, but

europe is smarter nowadays, embracing the u.s. and partnering versus the rhetoric of creating our own silicon valley. i think now money is flowing across border into the best companies, so investors in europe can get a company moving, but when company scale and they need bigger amounts of funding, then often you will find money from asia or the u.s. coming into those companies. i think it is about embracing that than trying to compete with it. caroline: how does that change the game when it comes to the overall risks, especially credit risks. you have softbank's vision fund based in london, $100 billion to put to work. they are accused of pumping up valuations. how does that affect how you lend to these businesses and assess risks. >> it is harder for traditional banks to come into the market at scale because these are

companies still holding enterprise value. they may be losing money and burning cash and several investors investing in that company, so our dialogue is not just with the management team, but with a number of investors understanding the story of growth, the story of disruption, and creating a large company over time, so you really need to live in the ecosystem to be able to make good choices about the right companies to back. one thing we have seen globally that is true in asia, u.s., and europe, the dollars are at all-time highs and strong liquidity in investor pockets, but the number of deals is

slightly reducing. that points to a concentration in companies, and that is why we are seeing softbank and other u.s. funds raising more money to be able to double down on the winners. caroline: i have to ask you in a week of political tensions that encapsulates spain, italy, and geopolitics with brexit, does that affect the startup community? >> i often think entrepreneurs and disruptors like uncertainty because they see opportunity. the traditional industries have been figuring out how industries are changing. for me, entrepreneurship breaks through that. they are focused on becoming winners. i don't think that changes. caroline: i like to get your perspective, very international at heart. coming up, initial coin offerings are at a record pace. even as u.s. authorities are trying to clamp down on shady cryptocurrency dealings, we discuss it next. "bloomberg technology" is live streaming twitter and be sure to

follow are global breaking news network as well. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ >> shares of germany semiconductor manufacturer fell after the decision to cut orders from apple. they cut their price target in half, saying that the order change was made a year earlier than expected. initial coin offerings continue to be hot, having raised more than $9 billion this year, more than double that was raised in 2017. some of the biggest offerings this year include telegram with $1.7 billion raised so far. after facing backlash from

musicians and record labels, the world's biggest music streaming service will no longer police artist behavior, but will still remove hate speech. this is spotify's attempt to take a stand against sexual misconduct by removing artists like r. kelly from its playlist. coming up, there were some big deals this week in the autonomous car space that showed two heavy hitters could be emerging in this fast-paced business. we will bring you the details next. later in the show, the hacking of frontier, how the heart of your computer is at risk. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ caroline: this is "bloomberg technology." i'm caroline hyde in london. some of the key players in the autonomous car industry made a big moves. softbank's vision hunt -- fund made an investment in general motors self driving business. giving the automakers unit a much-needed thing of capital. waymo announced it is greatly expanding its fleet of chrysler pacifica minivans. what does it mean for the self driving car race which is already crowded with players and funding?

let's go to david welch and reporter mark bergen. david, it was a phenomenal move in gm shares on the reaction of the softbank injection of cash. how will this expertise come -- coming from softbank, now that the money is up in the cruise unit? david: gm has been investing quite a bit in cruz. it was not clear they needed money. softbank appraised -- approached gm. he gives gm more than $2 billion to help develop self driving cars. they don't need to take it out of their existing r&d product budget. $2 billion, that is two new vehicle programs for cars that need money. g.m. can spend their internal cash on programs that will return money now. it gives softbank's -- their endorsement on gm's technology and maybe some players in silicon valley, somebody like uber, maybe they will be more interested and tying up with somebody like an old traditional car company. then they would have before.

softbank has a big name in the tech world. caroline: plenty of ponies in the mark, we are seeing big pockets coming from softbank's vision fund. equally, waymo. the parent company, alphabet, has huge pockets as well as they have been splurging money too. mark: they are not short on cash. i think this is a significant show in the fact of the criticism of alphabet. waymo has not been able to get up to scale with enough vehicles. this is 62,000 vehicles they have committed to buying. they have not given a time frame. there are some saying they are skeptical that we will see 62,000 say, next year. this may be waymo hedging their bets a bit. i imagine they are talking to honda, they are selling to -- willing to sit down with more carmakers. what they want to see is a carmaker go in and design an entirely new vehicle to do fully self driving. that is where we will see a big commitment from waymo. caroline: david, this is what is

so interesting. where all these carmakers and tech companies fit in the food chain of all of this. tell us about what gm is doing. they potentially have been talking about selling cars to individuals or not so much? david: gm wants to start with ride-hailing services that runs without a driver. that is the first thing they were duped or could they sell cars to individuals that drive themselves? it is possible. those vehicles are expensive right now. and will be for the foreseeable future. you have to start off with a delivery service before they get into anything like that. what gm is trying to pull together are a network of other starting their own ride-hailing business once they get the autonomous car going, or someone like uber, and they have been rebuffed fight uber before. with softbank as an investment, could they possibly get an entree the? it's possible.

caroline: mark, this is where the tactics differ. at waymo, your hearing them talk of making this an autonomous vehicle to individuals. this is not all about getting them as a taxi service. mark: yeah, the ceo has mention that is part of his four tier business plan. i have talked to former employees who have scoffed at the idea. i think the engineers have been building towards either a licensing service where they go out and give off the waymo technology, for what they are doing now in phoenix, a ride-hailing service. i think the odds -- they are really expensive. they will either be luxury vehicles or of of it will have to subsidize him heavily if they sell them for retail models. i think that sounds like something fiat chrysler wanted to rancher its investors that they are in the long game when driverless takes over. caroline: mark, you are mentioning phoenix.

talk to us about how the regulatory landscape fits into this? we haven't got a date of when waymo will be making this investment and getting the cars on the road. where do we stand in terms of this becoming a reality? mark: waymo and crews are going back and forth in their announcements. waymo said they are planning to launch their first commercial service in arizona outside of phoenix. they haven't given a date. i imagine the summer is so hot there, they have talked about testing without a driver in the front seat in the second city later this year. most likely to be either in california, texas, or washington, based on where they have the most robust tests right now. caroline: david, give us a sense of what detroit is talking about, particularly the car owners. i remember speaking to ford, and he said the fight is on for

whoever joins the data -- owns the data. they don't want to see it lost to the tech companies. do they feel they have a fair share of this pie? david: it is going to be really tough if you're talking about the data for anyone to really on that. car companies have tried to keep apple, google out of the dashboard by allowing certain apps to be used from your android or apple found. they want to keep control of the data. with people getting more concerned about privacy, it will be tougher for companies to sell it. but it is also -- it is hard to see how anyone can own all of that since people use so many different apps and they use their own phones for things and cars. all that creates a data for people to use. in terms of self driving, gm is behind waymo. waymo has a big lead in terms of collecting information and testing cars, but gm has a pretty good set of assets. jan that can afford is far behind because they have really only been working with a company

am a they bought argo a year ago. they have a lot of catching up to go. they don't have cars being tested in places like san francisco. they have some runway that they need to sprint down before they can get in the race with g.m., and some of the other leaders. caroline: not to mention what tesla is up to. mark bergen in san francisco, david welch in detroit. coming up, hackers are out there. they have a new way to get at the heart of a computer. we discuss with a man trying to stop them, next. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ caroline: the computer hacker. we are all aware of the imagery. the shadowy figure in the dark, trying to get a credit card numbers, bank account, and more. there is a growing new threat out there that hackers can exploit. to go straight for a computer's heart. it is hardware. hackers are using previously known problems and microprocessors as an entryway into the computer's so-called firmware. from there, they can access a computer's most sensitive information. to discuss this brave new hacking world, i would like to welcome the ceo and founder of eclipse he him, a cybersecurity startup focused on finding firmware threats. he was intimately familiar with intel's chief threat researcher. also with us, jordan robertson who'd covers for bloomberg.

jordan, i will kickoff with you. it was sparked by your business week piece you did on this. tell us about this key new threat. how we are seeing chart -- hardware being focused on and how it can lead to data? jordan: sure. we have been talking for quite some time about this idea of hardware hacking. really when it comes down to is this we are all aware of the threat of what you would call normal computer hacking. hacking into software. you enter an entirely new realm when you talk about hackers getting into the hardware. the way they do that is there is code in the computer chips inside all of our computers. if hackers can tamper with that code, i think it is fascinating. they can create what is essentially a permanent infection on these computers. perhaps he can explain about that later. you are talking about the ultimate hack in many ways. modifying the code in hardware, hackers can create in permanent hack. it is a wild idea. caroline: talk to us about what spies, the nsa has known about this hardware weakness. we seem only to be catching on

to it or what was the new eureka moment when you found this new area of focus? >> it's a significant development in the research -- the research community. we have built upon that research. we have applied it to two new areas that can compromise the computer. caroline: jordan come again and with a question. i'm sure you have plenty. jordan: absolutely one thing i was hoping you could walk in viewers through is this idea that we talked about firmware, we talked about what happens when you modify firmware, you can create this idea of the permanent infection. can you walk us through about how that works? that is different than ordinary hacks. when you can create a permanent infection, that is the idea that

sticks with me and that it helps with resonates -- that resonates with viewers. can you walk us through that? yuriy: what we are seeing is there is an increase in tension by the adversaries to attack firmer and hardware. the reason is the infection at that level can persist in the infrastructure of a corporation of enterprise for many months or years without it being detected by conventional security mechanisms, for eradicated by conventional security procedures. in addition to that, the attack at that level, to allow adversaries to permanently attack the hardware, and break critical equipment that companies rely on. jordan: is part of the problem -- go ahead. as part of the problem that

companies are not looking inside the firmware? i would assume lots of companies -- companies are looking at every piece of technology they have. your contention is that companies have not looked in the firmware. does it -- this has been an area that companies have not examined for security problems. is that right? yuriy: absolutely. there is a significant gap today between the hackers who look to compromise firmware and hardware, and companies who look to defend their systems from this type of attack. there is a significant gap in the technology today. caroline: jordan, from your peas, you outlined how at the moment, because this is a new area of threat, not that much money, $100 billion have been spent on cybersecurity which is going toward the hard weight -- hardware side of the equation. jordan: that's right.

i think it is part of the problem. i've been covering this for over a decade. i have seen this industry grow from a niche industry. it is one of the most important sectors of technology paired companies are developed and defenses are paid for based on what companies can see. if you can see a threat, you know an attack is happening, you will buy technologies to defend against it. a lot of that 100 billion dollars in projected revenue for cybersecurity spending this year, a lot of that goes to things like consulting, things like firewalls, antivirus, and defenses against a taxi

conceived or part of what i find fascinating about the research is that it is not that you can never see the threat. you have to look really hard for it. you have to know this is a place where the spies hide. this is a place where the intelligence community and nation state hackers, they love to target the hardware of computers for the reason yuriy described. you can keep your malware in these computers forever. you can hide undetected. that is a beautiful attack here in there is little money being spent right now on looking at those areas. but i think that is changing. caroline: last question from me, how are you different? in jordan's piece, it he outlined how there are players who are looking at this area. how are your different? how is your technology different? yuriy: we exist specifically to get these organizations infrastructure, this critical infrastructure. we are trying to bridge this gap today with our technology and find those advanced hackers compromising firmware and systems that we rely on in our daily lives.

caroline: it is one to watch. yuriy bulygin and jordan robertson, thank you for your piece in business week and the interview. a new report from cybersecurity firm, fire i'd. it says your election systems are increasingly at risk of cyber attacks. that is as russia continues information operations to so political division. state and local election infrastructure is becoming a popular target for hackers, particularly those. that is according to the report. the department of homeland security has said russia targeted 21 states, but only among oil has indicated publicly that some of its data was stolen. coming up, can't take your eyes off your iphone screen? waiting for the next notification to pop up? apple is trying to change that. that is next. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ caroline: apple is gearing up to try to fight what some concerned parties including a couple of major apple shareholders in january have increasingly singled out as a problem. smart phone addiction. on monday, at its developer conference, the iphone maker is expected to announce talks users monitor how much screen time they are spending on their smartphones as well as the apps within. this comes at a time where common sense media polls show 50% of american teens and 27% of their parents say they feel addicted to their phones.

couple this with a new research bezos 45% of u.s. teens say they are constantly on time -- online. it seems like spot on coming from apple. joining me to discuss, bloomberg's mark berman who covers all things apple. what can we expect, it is all about our digital health come monday? mark: monday is when apple's annual bash for developers, software announce matters -- announcers will take place. it is in san jose for the second year in a row. it is the 29th reader edition of the conference which sounds like a long time, nearly three decades for apple which is about a 40-year-old company at this point. digital health, that will be one of the big focuses p using your phone using your devices more responsibly. like you said, there have been calls from key investors, including the teachers union in california, to implement new tools and the iphone for parental controls around using your phone too long and normal consumers to monitor how long

you are watching video, have your screen on, using individual applications. caroline: how much can apple control to a certain extent, given the addiction is -- the blame is laid at the feet of the platform? how much can apple play a role, do you think? mark: apple doesn't really have to control anything. the role they need to play is giving people the tools in order to measure these things. if you look at it like a bathroom scale, you can go to bed bath and beyond, by a scale, and weigh yourself every now and then. you can monitor your intake air it in your car, you monitor how many watts you have left on your battery charger how much gas you have left in the tank. what you can't do on an iphone, and to that same point, is measure how long you're using it. it is just about providing tools in order to measure it, like a scale or car. caroline: talk to us about what else we can expect?

we know tim cook has been going big on ai. i'm sure there would be plenty of that on monday. mark: a big ar update, not to have say it -- not the headset, but improvements to the ar experience on iphones. ar has been a big upgrade. you see other phone makers like samsung and google stepping up with their own ar platforms for applications. apple is going to update their own platform with two new key features one is called persistence. that would allow you to place an object, whether it be a couch, painting, a tv on your virtual wall, and put it there come a block away for a few minutes, launch the app, and it will still be there. it will remember objects dropped in your virtual environments or your augmented environments. the other will be multiplayer gaming. you and i theoretically could play in ar game together. you are in new york and i am here and we will still be able

to play it over the network. caroline: a whole new world for e-commerce and gaming. what about the hardware part? how much are developers going to get excited about that? will there be much unveiled? mark: last year was an anomaly. they had a town of hardware for the developers conference. they have the home pod, they had multiple new mac, ipod upgrades. we are told this year there is not going to be any mac upgrades. apple is working on a bunch of new mac laptops and desktops. those will be coming later this year. likewise with a major redesign to the ipad pro. center display, thinner bezel, space idea, some of the iphone x features, also later this year. caroline: what about what they will not have, you did great reporting on how we might not be seeing that cutting-edge oled screen coming anytime soon. will that be a knock for developers going forward? mark: there was a report in one

of the south korean papers indicating the other day that apple will switch to a complete oled phone lineup in 2019. it hit some of the lcd did place -- display makers, sharp, pretty hard on the stock market. what i believe is that is too early to move to all oled. it is more difficult to produce. they are more expensive. apple is coming out with a new lcd iphone, to perversion of the iphone x this year. i don't believe that will be a one off, when your device. it makes little sense to me both from a marketing perspective, practicality perspective, pricing financials perspective, consumer perspective, it doesn't make sense for them to go all oled next year. caroline: talking about suppliers, one notable supplier in europe was hit hard. the likes of semiconductors. how much are we likely to see apple continue to rearrange its supply change and make it more internal? mark: the hit to dialogue stock price, it was not too

surprising. i would have figured that news would have been built into the price already. this is something both dialogue and apple have been signaling for 1-2, even three years that this switch was happening. this has been something they have been working to gradually -- we've reported on in the past. i will say it again, when we talk about these things, apple is not going to be done until they move every single component in the iphone to an apple brand and apple design component. it will take decades. but they think they will eventually get there. caroline: maybe that is what helps boost that stock further and further. a record high at one point in this particular week's trading. getting ever closer to $1 trillion valuation. mark gurman, wonderful to have you on. good luck covering all things worldwide developers conference. that does it for "bloomberg technology." this monday, we will be covering apple's worldwide developers conference with none other than mark gurman on the ground. speaking with true ventures and

arianna huffington. that is all for now. from london, this is bloomberg. ♪

>> the following is a paid program. the opinions and views expressed do not express those of bloomberg lp, its affiliates, or its employees. announcer: the following program is a commercial presentation of total gym fitness. ♪