emily: i am emily chang in san francisco and this is "bloomberg technology." donald trump's meeting with kim jong-un produced a handshake and a promise to keep talking but was light on details. what does the summit signal for what's to come? plus, is silicon valley still the beating heart of tech investing? we will start to a startup ceo about the next chapter after a high-profile me too departure and their focus on international growth. tesla announces job cuts 9%

across the company. elon musk promises this won't impact model three production. we will gauge investor reaction. first to our top story, president trump has left singapore after a historic meeting with kim jong-un. lea signed an agreement to begin a process they say will lead to the denuclearization of the korean peninsula. before returning, president trump gave an extended news conference, going over his discussions with kim jong-un and all he believes their conflict. around my -- pres. trump: my meeting with chairman kim was honest, direct, and productive. we are prepared to start a new history and write a new chapter there is no limit to what north korea can achieve when it gives up nuclear weapons and embraces commerce and engagement with the rest of the world that really wants to engage.

people thoughis could never take place. it is now taking place. it is a very great day, a very y oft moment in the history of the world. we will be stopping the war games, which will save us a tremendous amount of money. i am mark crumpton at bloomberg headquarters in new york. we are going to go live to washington, d.c., as we interrupt bloomberg technology. you are looking at the lead counsel for at&t, talking about today's merger approved by a federal judge in washington for at&t's $85 billion merger with time warner. >> -- the combination of these two great companies and how it will benefit consumers for generations to come. we are disappointed that it took 18 months to get here, but we are believed it is finally behind us and we look forward to

closing this transaction in the upcoming days. peoplebeen asked by many , what is the significance of this transaction on many other deals peg in the marketplace? is eer to that every one of these transactions stands on its own, as this one did. clearurt's summary make that its decision was grounded evidence the facts and that were presented at trial. variousrnment asserted theories, but the reality is after a massive investigation afterpanned over a year an intensive pretrial discovery process and after a grueling six-week trial, the government could present no credible proof in support of any of experience.

-- any of its theories. this decision was a sound and proper rejection of the government's arguments to stop this merger. >> what did you think of the judge's admonition of the government not to seek a s >> the court recognizat the defendants have been subjected to interminable delay -- i think we are up to 600 days since the merger wasounced back in october of 2016, and that it is unfair to the defendants, to the hundreds of thousands of employees and their companies whose lives have bnging in the balance, and to all the shareholders and other constituencies of these two great companies. it is time to complete this transaction and move on. one at a time, please. negative the

evaluation on time warner after 18 months is a different animal. [inaudible] clerks there -- >> there will be no divestment of any assets. the government sought to block the merger entirely and that request was denied. reporter: were you surprised the entirety came down to you guys on every po >> for all the lawyers and people who worked on this trial team -- i am up here, but i am just one of many people who contributed -- it was clear to all of us what the evidence was each and every day of the trial. the government simply had no credible proof to support any of these confessions -- contentions that i from the ing o the end of this process, as ndicated in our closing arguments, the case shrunk and shrunk until there was nothing there. the judge's sweeping rejection

of the government case does not surprise us at all. it is consistent with the absence of any credible facts or evidence to support the case. because it was such a decisive decisioat do you think was behind the government's case? why did they bring it? >> we attempted to investigate that issue. as you know, the court decided it was not going to go in that direction. we cannot fault the court for that. the court wanted to try the case on the merits. we were not able to ascertain what the decision-making process was. we were surised when this case was brought. as i said in closing arguments, have been brought.never should reporter: with the admonition against seeking a stay, do you think that was political pressure? >> i think the judge was just

commenting on how long we have been subjected to the process. reporter: is president trump the reason you had to wait 18 months? >> we have no insight into that. reporter: [inaudible] >> as the evidence of the trial showed, this will only serve to benefit consumers, just as we have seen from all the other vertically integrated company is providing so many wonderful new offerings and innovations to consumers as they are atching televin in so many new different ways. this is just an iteration of that process. one more question. reporter: did you ever consider [inaudible] >> this transaction is going to 20se no later than june under the court's order and the timeline the parties agreed to. thank you very much. reporter: -- political motivation behind the challenge? petrocellidavid

speaking to reporters outside federal court in washington, where a judge approve's bllion merger with time petrocelli said the government could present no credible theories to stop the merger and he called the delay of 600 dayince the proposed merger was announced interminable. he said it was unfair to the defendants, employees, and shareholders of the company's. again, dave petrocelli. "bloomberg technology" will continue, already in progress i am mark crumpton in new york. emily: -- about their ability to do so. the complaint filed almost three years ago alleges microsoft is committed against women engineers in pay and promotion. coming up, a venture capital firm that has made its name in silicon valley is striking a major deal in the middle east. we will speak to this eeo -- to

the ceo, next. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: silicon valley remains home to the biggest tech firms in the world and is the epicenter of tech funding and deals. in the last few years, some venture capitalists has gone global. earlier this spring, 500 startups struck a deal with abu dhabi financial group, which now owns a stake of the company and helps oversee operations. it is one of the most significant moves from the ceo, christine tsai, who took over

the position last summer after a high-profile me too departure. christine joins me in the studio. let's talk about the abu dhabi deal, very unusual. how will thiwork? >> our mission has always been to discover the world's most talented entrepreneurs, help them build successful companies and thriving global ecosystems. over the past eight years, we feel like we have made a lot of progress, but we have just scratched the surface. invested in more than 2000 companies in 16 countries and we feel like our mission is far from done. in terms of our partnership and investment with abu dhabi financial group, we are looking forward to taking 500 to the next level. they have joined our board, have a minority stake in the company, and we are looking forward to them helping 500 mission -- 500's mission. emily: do you worry about giving up control? >> it is an interesting question

when you look at silicon valley over the last couple of years when you think about the concept of governance. when you look at vc, there is not much sense of governance. you have limited partners who are investors, but fost in silicon vc's valley, it is the private partnership, different from operating company where you have more of a board of directors. we feel like there is a lot of synergy twinighters and adfg -- a lot sgy between us and adfg and we look forward to than being involved at the board level. emily: did you lose any of thes result?p's as a >> they were excited about having institutional support from adfg from the operating perspective as well as our funds. in the future, they plan to anchor our upcoming funds. lp's, most of for

the reaction was popular. public500 startups went before it was invoked. are -- before it was in v ogue. are you seeing returns? >> we had a vision to be the most global silicon valley vc. in the early days, it was seen as curious. emily: you went to southeast asia when it was not cool. >> when we look at the companies we have invested in over the past eight years, a light the promising companies have come from outside silicon valley, outside of the u.s. samples include carousel, top desk, which was originally from outside the u.s. and has set up headquarters in san francisco. there is a lot of opportunity in terms of talent as well as, eight years later from when we started investing internationally, downstream capital.

a lot of markets seatac as the asure of -- markets see tech the future of economic development and joon. we d this. we have seen increase of consumer tech product adoption and capital being deployed. a lot of it is driven by governments because they see this as the future of their market. emily: if there is so much opportunity, why aren't others jumping on the bandwagon? why do they avoid global investing? >> it is not for the faint of heart. i think a firm can do very well investing in a 50 mile radius, so it is to each their own. for a lot of silicon valley, i think the question of whether there is opportunity in international markets is less of a question -- it is clear there is. more than 50% of companies valued at more than $1 billion -- the beloved unicorn -- more than 50% are outside the u.s.

no one questions that. in terms of gp's and what their expertise is and that willing to go into a market and understand the nuances and what trends are, it is hard. we have definitely seen the ups and downs of trying to go into different markets. it is not easy. i do think, for example, in terms of what you see as hot and exciting in silicon valley -- typical things like blockchain, crypto, ai,ll the buzzwords. to seed be interesting some of that same fervor put into investing in global markets. the world has gotten smaller. we are starting to see even u.s. based companies acquiring international what were once startups. we see a lot of opportunity in these emerging markets. emily: i know 500 startups is trying to turn a new page, develop its new identity.

i have to ask about dave, the founder, former ceo, who left amidst allegations of sexual harassment and even assault. there were allegations that people at the firm knew and did not act soon enough. when he hired you, he was so excited and i imagine it has been tough for you. do you still talk to him? and how are you weathering this transition? >> last year was really -- i guess the best way to call it is a reboot for the firm. we work together as a team to reset our mission and values, our culture, our policies, even our strategy. for us, we are looking forward to how we move forward, and in many ways we have. personally, i feel like there is a lot of positive momentum in silicon valley. for us as a global firm, we look at this from a global

perspective. in terms of whether that is going to turn into sustainable change for the industry, i think it remains to be seen. to me, it emphasizes that we really need to focus on our mission and values and contributing to this meaningful change, both in terms of the investments we make as well as who we work with and our own team. emily: do you still talk to him? is he still involved? >> today, dave does not have any control or governance over 500. think of it as many cofounders who separate, the relationship is very -- we do still communicate. emily: i find it interesting that you are taking money from a know,e that has, you essentially deep-seated problems with sexism. how would you address the skeptics there, that that is where the money is coming from? >> i think what comes to mind is a little bit -- when you think

about where the money comes from , foreign money is somehow not as good or less moral than institutional money in the u.s. we have seen all sorts of things come out in te, firms that do he similar issues. adfg as acus just on firm, we have known them for several years. they align very well with our mission and values. that was critical for the firm to make sure there were synergies and alignment. in terms ofdle east and north africa region, there obviously are skeptics around what you mentioned. in terms of looking forward and the progress they are making, i would focus on that. was in the middle east, all the different -- within the middle east, the different countries are different. i think this is really a chance to show they have invested into a female lead firm, a firm that

looks to invest in diverse businesses because we believe it is just good business.emily: its a ceo. int are you doing to invest women, hire and promote women? >> it really does start from the very simple believe that it is good for performance, good for business. from the beginning, it has always been important. we look at it in two ways. one is how we are deploying capital and recruiting and actively seeking out female founder deal flow as well as deal flow from underrepresented minorities. there is a lot of interception audi that often -- interception sectionality that often gets overlooked. as well as who is deploying the capital and making sure we have that. right now as it relates to gender, about 31%, myself

included, of our investment partners are female. we want to continue to push ourselves to do even better as it relates to investments and our staff. emily: christine tsai, thank you for stopping by. tesla announces it is cutting 9% of its workforce. what does it mean for the ambitious production schedule? this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: tesla plans to cut about 9% of jobs. musk internal memo, elon says the cuts will not impact model three production targets. joins --s, max, who who writes about tech in bloomberg businessweek. what do you make of it? max: it has been quite a week. every week is pretty exciting for elon musk. yesterday the stock jumped a lot when he promised there would be

additional self driving capabilities in tesla cars. today, we saw this layoff announcement. it is something tesla had telegraphed and elon musk had talked about a real organization. he also said the company was going to try to get the profitability in the third quarter, which would require some heroics, so we are seeing the other shoe dropped. people might feel good about this. business the company finally getting serious towards profitability. on the other hand, not great for employee morale to let 3000 people go. emily: elon musk tweeted, difficult but necessary tesla reorg. my email has already leaked to the media. here it is unfiltered. your point about investors is it is going to be welcome news, if it does not impact the production schedule, as he says. does this prove he is willing to

make difficult decisions for the bottom line? max: it is really hard to say. in the moments after this memo was reported by bloomberg, the stock started falling pretty precipitously. part of what is going on is a lot of the people who are betting on tesla are not super concerned about the production numbers in the short term. what they are concerned about is the future. the want tesla to be world's biggest car company, to rewrite the rules for transportation and energy storage. letting a large percentage of your staff go, while it may not impact production in the short term, may not include factory workers, that isn't so great if what you are concerned about is the future. emily: so what's next? we are going to see these cuts happen. the we know where they're coming from? he says they are coming from salaried employees. and how that will affect the rest of the business? >> we don't know yet. tesla and elon musk have

historically been very good at getting things done very efficiently, creating new innovations. what is coming down the pipe besides the model three, we will see some model three production numbers after this quarter and that will be a big point. the next thing will be the driverless car thing he has talked about, if tesla is able to do something amazing there, that will move things around. the next really big thing coming for tesla will he launch of suv, ael y, the compact popular class of car that elon sk has promised for n march. that is a long way off and it is hard to see how tesla getshere if they are laying people off, having to deal with this quote unquote production hell. emily: coming up, a historic summit between the u.s. and north korea brings promises of

denuclearization. we will dig through the implications for global tech next. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: this is "bloomberg technology," i am emily chang in san francisco. a historic summit between president trump and kim jong-un. the u.s. and north korea agreed to seek complete denuclearization of the korean peninsula. yet no deadline was set and the past remains undefined. president trump also said kim has accepted an invitation to visit the white house, but no date for that. joining us now, corresponding kevin cirilli it was on the ground in singapore. give us the color of the promise yet lack of substance here. kevin: it was quite remarkable to not see the detail of what

had been a month-long -- months -long summit in the making come to fruition. we should know, president trump routes round -- back en to the united states already. he has been calling his allies around the world, including xi jinping and shinzo abe. mike pompeo will be touring north asia to meet with allies to continue to lay out the case. meanwhile, back in the u.s. the fallout continuing, not just from democrats, urging the president to take a more cautious approach to verify whether north korea is actually going to need new clear eyes -- going to denuclearize. of senator marco rubio, mccain,nedy, raising their concerns about how to ,erify the north korean german as the president -- north korean chairman, as the president is referring to him, for how he

plans to denuclearize. the president will need congressional approval if he plans to ease sanctions. no sign of that yet. the president by all accounts extending an open invitation to kim the first of many steps to come in a dialogue with north kea. at that marathon press conference, more than 75 minutes president trump took questions, he was more praiseworthy of kim jong-un then justin trudeau. emily: that is not difficult to do. kevin, talk to us about the reaction inside north korea. as far as we know, how do we imagine north koreans are receiving this news? it is such an interesting question because there are limited reports about access to north korea, and in fact the propaganda arm -- i can't even

as a journalist call it journalism because it is the state-run propaganda arm -- barely even acknowledged that kim jong-un was going to be meeting with president trump here in singapore until just a couple of hours before. then right behind me you are staring at this beautiful backdrop of downtown singapore. kim jong-un had only made four international trips since assuming power. this is the fourth trip he has made, to china as well as the demilitarized zone in the korean peninsula. of angapore, this recluse world leader actually took his sister out and his tand toward d toured downtown singapore 12 hours before a meeting with president trump. as somebody who has covered candidate donald trump since the beginning of the campaign and president trump now, i have seen president trump interact with many different types of world leaders. , am no body language expert

but his interactions with kim jong-un were more warm and welcoming than with german chanceor angela mer emily: again, not hard to do. ue, i acron-esq bloomberg's chief washington correspondent tirelessly covering this story, thank you so much. are president trump and kim jong-un still talking, texting? if so, what kind of phone might they be using in nor korea? according to research from a u.s. cyber security firm, it is likely being done using a device made by an american company. for more, we are joined by julie , who wrote about this topic in bloomberg's fully charged newsletter. north korea may not be as disconnected as we think. what kind of devices are available in north korea and who is using them? the leaders in north korea might not be as disconnected as we think. kim jong-un has been

photographed using macbook computers and other devices. this study shows there has been a lot of leaders -- they can't name names and say how many they have -- there have been a lot of reports of computers and other devices being used in north korea, which is contrary to what many would believe with sanctions and the way typical north koreans use the internet. it is very state sanctioned, only accessing certain sites and go through in different products. usually not an iphone. this is shocking in that a lot of the leade are bucking that trend and still getting access to things like the iphone x or samsung galaxy. emily: samsung is interesting given it is in their backyard, and yet their mortal enemy in south korea. how does the use of apple devices compared to samsung? julie: i can't say exactly how many each of them have, but there was a list of devices and

there are a lot of samsung devices, various versions. everything from t 6 to the iphone x. it has been a lot of new products. most of them appeared to be -- it gravitates towards older devices, things running on older software. it does appear maybe the sanctions have gotten tougher before yesterday's meeting and that might have pared back some experts where maybe kim jong-un does not have access to the iphone x yet. if yesterday went well, like it sounds so far, maybe he will be able to get one. emily: is there concern that some of these products, american products, could be used in cyber espionage? julie: absolutely, that is a big concern. a lot of these -- a lot of the espionage might be happening outside mainland north korea, but some of it is, and that is a concern, they could be using

devices from an american company to do things like cyber espionage and work on these threats to the united states ing american products. that is something the report calls out as reason for concern, although again, if they do in fact go away from all these nuclear plants, denuclearize the nation, that would not be as much of a problem. emily: bloomberg tech's to leverage -- julie verhage. bloomberg has unveiled a light version of its app foemerging markets. it would able to be used even when there is spotty internet connectivity and take up just five megabytes of storage. the app is available in india and will roll out to marc-andre's. coming up, we discussed the future of machine learning with the former evernote ceo, who has a new company focusing on ai. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: from big tech to startups, there is a new crop of companies trying to expand their presence in ai. that includes all turtles, a startup with a growing international presence. for moore, caroline hyde in london. caroline: we are joined by the cofounder of all turtles, a man we know well, phil libin. you have been in it for more than two decades, the tech ecosystem. what is the problem you are trying to solve with all turtles? >> the central inefficiency of the tech system is we are

forcing brilliant product people to make companies. competition is hard. when you think about it, it does not make sense, because if you are a mozart level musician alive, you don't have to make a music company. the platforms exist to reach people. why does it have to be different for product people? why can't product people just make a product rather than go through the trouble of making a company? caroline: so you are helping build products through all turtles and helping bring it to europe. you are about to announce you have settled down roots in france. >> that's right, we are doing this worldwide. part of what we believe in is eliminating the requirement for people to make little companies before products. we can unlock innovation wherever there is brilliant people and engineers and designers. europe is a great place for that. we are opening up in paris as our european hub but we will have teams all over europe. caroline: you already have them. >> we have five different

products we are helping build all over europe. caroline: what sort of products? >> we call it practical ai, which means it's all a very easy to describe problem in a very non-magical seeming way that would have been impossible three years ago because the technology was not there. we are using the hard ai platforms developed over the past couple of years to make easy to explain products. the one we are about to launch is called spot, which is probably available. it is an ai for recording -- reporting workplace harassment and dissemination. very straightfrd. very big problem, but something easy to understand how to help fix. if we had tried to build that years ago, it would have taken more resources, but now it is possible for the first time. caroline: so it is a product that has a market fit. you are getting plenty of inbound demand, plenty of roots on the ground. do you scale that? do you make that a company?

>> we could, but the idea is we want to get to in cap first -- get to tech first and then think about scale. this is a big difference of the world right now. when i was making my first companies, you needed to get to scale before impact because it needed to be big enough that you could reach people. none of that is true anymore. now you get to impact first. you solve the problem first and then you decide, how they should it be to have the most impact? we want to get to the product first, make sure people love it, then asked, does it need 20 people, 1000 people? about -- talk to us you seem to be moving against the grain of how technology has been built. there is backlash against big tex at the moment -- big tech at the moment. what do you think about that? i saw your post on linkedin about how you watched mark zuckerberg take to the stage in front of politicians.

how do you think silicon valley is dealing with the backlash? >> the world is getting a more realistic view of silicon valley. it is not a place to be lionized. there are a lot of great things, a lot of innovation, but also a lot of fundamental problems in efficiency getting baked into the system. the biggest problem is he so much of the silicon valley culture is about taking shortcuts, moving quickly as possible. a big company can afford to do and softly, but a startup you are being forced by your investors to move as quickly as possible, you have to take shortcuts. often the shortcut -- hastens the end. if you need to hire as ssible, the natural thing is to call your friends, but then you only end up hiring people who look like you and you never get a diverse team and don't have a broad idea what the product should be. all these short-term things catch up with you. one of the things we're trying to do is learn from the rest of

the world and give products more altitude, more oxygen to take long-term positions that are better for everyone. some of theat about practical applications of ai? could they solve some of the issues? fake news comes to mind. manipulationthe occurring with the electoral system. are these issues you are looking at? >> we are. everything we work on has a strong component of being good for the world. we will not work on a product unless we think the world would be at least slightly better off. that is a very important criteria. everything we work on has to solve a real problem. it has to be the problem first. we look for a crisply articulated, acutely felt problem, or else we won't work on it. that eliminates 95% of the pages i would see as an investor.

even 98% of the time, when you pitched, it is not a real problem, it is because someone fell in love with a technology or are chasing a perceived market need. that is especially true in siey, most of the pages are from stanford kids. stanford kids don't have a lot of problems so they tend to focus on things which are technology first. we would rather be problem first and then find the best people to work on the technology. caroline: you are still an advisor to general catalyst. they are backing all turtl what do you say to them? i fundamentally don't agree with ecosystem you are perpetuating? >> we are working at different scales. we are trying to take what we do globally outside of silicon valley, outside the centers of where startups happen. general catalyst is an amazing venture capital firm. what they are really good at is writing the checks to teams that don't need their help very much

because they have already got what they need to be successful. they may need some help, some introductions, help going public. what we want to work on is fundamental problems with founders who may be are not well-rounded ceos, who would not want to start a company. we just want them to focus their billions on a product and then we create an entire ecosystem for the products. it is, mentoring to the top-tier vc mod emily: thank you for joining us here in europe. phil libin, cofounder of all turtles. fascinating, turning the current model of silicon valley on its head. emily: it is interesting given the conversation you had with the london mayor yesterday about toutingas the ai capital of europe. a company like uber might say, you are stifling our innovation. caroline: it all seems to be really focused upon -- yeah, the ways and the heart of companies

and the ways in which they behave and certainly whether ai can be a force for good or negative. it is interesting the way london is driving the focus on not only the ethics behind it, that seems to be something london is trying to spearhead and something phil libin seems to be thinking about as well. emily: it is all relative. the ai capital of europe is one thing, the world is another thing. caroline, thank you so much. coming up, long-range wireless charging has been promised for years, so why hasn't yet to reach the mass market? we are going to hear from a leader in the space. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: amazon is rebooting its film and tv studio business with jennifer selfie, who has signed jordan peele to a deal with his

company. in a challenge to compete with netflix, amazon has tasked jennifer with rehabilitating its reputation in hollywood after the departure price amid allegations of sexual misconduct. over a year ago, energous announced that five consumer electronics companies would use its wireless charging technology, yet shareholders focused on a huge name missing, apple. apple is still missing from the list of companies energous works with. the company is pushing toward the latest in wireless charging using radiofrequency waves to enable content-basedt a distance wireless charging solutions. why isn't apple racing toward energous's technology? joining us, the ceo stephen rizzone and mark urban, who covers consumer devices and apple. why isn't apple on your list? >> we have not said one way or another. we don't speak about our strategic partners.

it is very proprietary. we can say we are working with the largest consumer electronics companies in the world and you will begin to say these devices hit the market in the next few weeks and rapidly accelerate through the end of the year. emily: this technology has been promised for years, but we have not seen it. what is actually possible when it comes to long-range wireless charging? >> energous represents wireless charging 2.0, which is really the ultimate implementation of this capability. it represents charging on a contact basis, where you can take your mobile device, your smart phone, your headset and quickly charge it on a mat. that same headset or mobile phone can be charged while you are walking through the office or in your car with a transmitter. the idea of wireless charging 2.0, which energous is the major

proponent, is the ability to charge mobile devices from contact distance. weistances of 15 to 18 feet. mark: in terms of the different technology, how many different types of technology -- you have contact based and long-range. there is a medium range as well. i have seen at your offices the short range and medium-range in action. how long do you think it will be until we see a 10 to 15 foot range? >> our plan is to release transmitters in three iterations. the first is contact based. you will start to see those hit the consumer market in the coming weeks. the next iteration is the first distance iteration, desktop, from three feet out your it we think those transmitters will start to hit the market late this year, early next year. the long-distance transmitters with the ability to charge devices 15 to 18 feet will

probably be heading markets at the end of 2019. all while a number of receiving devices -- this is very important -- all receiving devices are compatible with all transmitters. we expect to see a number of announcements in the coming months of receivers and a number of different verticals, including wearables, hearing it. -- hearing aids. emily: why has it taken so long for this technology? >> it is not a matter of taking so long. was really launched four years ago. when we did our ipo in march 2014. we are a semiconductor company. in terms of coming to market, that is actually moving very quickly. it is a very complex system. a semiconductor company is our go to market strategy. we developed reference design that include antennas, software, hardware.

also you have the regulatory element. that is a very important consideration, because this is brand-new technology. it has never been released -- or never been approved from the regulatory agencies. we are paving the way for that, which is one of our big compliments -- big compliments -- accoplishments. apple announced wireless charging last year and have not been able to pull it off yet. can you talk about the difference between the technology everyone is talking about and the underlying technology in the energous products? >> chi is a first-generation technology. it is an induction technology. it has serious limitations. those are some of the problems that the of the mentors are starting to realize. it has for an object the texan problems. iffoan object detection problems.

if you place a device on the mat, it can heat up. it has limited to no independent positioning capability. you have to be very exact where you place the device. these are very limiting factors in terms of the overall user experience and utility. wireless charging 2.0, which energous is the leader, eliminates all those problems. we have no foreign object detection problems, no interference problems. we are free in terms of positioning. you can drop these devices anywhere on the mat. you have the ultimate benefit that the same receiver can n be lifted and be charging while you are walking. emily: quickly, optimistic? mark: 2019 seems aggressive for 10, 15 feet. we will see. are you confident? >> that technology -- it is all the same technology, the same silicon. it is a matter of how it rolled out. emily: stephen rizzone, ceo of

energous. thank you both. that is it for tod's editionolo" tomorrow we will be broadcasting from e3 in l.a. we will talk to everyone. this is bloomberg. ♪ retail.

under pressure like never before. and it's connected technology that's moving companies forward fast. e-commerce. real time inventory. virtual changing rooms. that's why retailers rely on comcast business to deliver consistent network speed across multiple locations. every corporate office, warehouse and store near or far covered. leaving every competitor, threat and challenge outmaneuvered. comcast business outmaneuver.

♪ haidi: u.s. stocks finish a listless session in the green with a series of central bank decisions. question your yields rose while the dollar gained and the euro fell. safe haven assets of gold and the yen edged lower. clear elsewhere, at&t is to take over time warner. the 80 $5 billion deal will create a multimedia powerhouse.