emily: this is "bloomberg technology." google is making a big retail push. this time into china. a half a billion investment in jd.com means for the e-commerce lengthen. trump administration's actions against china could cost the u.s. semiconductor industry. a cold war is brewing in space. and president trump just upped the ante.

atails for his decision for six branch of the u.s. military. our top story. google made a big play in the race for a slice of the global e-commerce pie. this time by dropping half $1 billion in cash into the chinese retailer, jd.com. explore ideas through the united states and europe. as google prepares for long-term defense strategy. the move also offers google the ability to partner with a company that is had has its own religious did network just like amazon. this comes a week after google entered into a deal with a french retail giant. here to tell us more, we have got mark bergen who covers all things alphabet. and the senior fellow at the asia society. how does this fit into the broader e-commerce strategy? >> google is making a ship.

they had their own shopping service called google express. the new strategy has been the partner. it is the enemy of my enemy is my friend. their enemy is amazon. strategy with their around asia and china in particular which is a partner with a lot of chinese companies looking to expand outside of china. >> amazon does not have a great china strategy. markets they are focusing on our southeast asia and indonesia. and google. they are looking other countries in southeast asia. india's a big focus. google has talked a lot about their efforts and we've seen them chip away at returning to mainland china and they recently had a partnership with tencent. emily: what is your take on

this, isaac? >> i think the move is important, mostly on symbolic levels. the price is roughly less than 1% of the company's worth. but really what it is is google trying to say to beijing, listen, we want to come back into china, we want to do business with chinese companies. and so they picked relatively a nonsensitive company to do it with, e-commerce is less of an information business, than search engine, which has caused google problems in china in the first place. emily: i was in beijing when google left the country and there has been no sign of a potential return, so could this be more about being back into the good graces of the chinese government than it is about building an e-commerce strategy? >> we did see google open up an ai center in beijing, that is what they have been pushing with chinese developers. i think they are trying to back end with their cloud service. this is much more around their strategy in china, to go to chinese companies, the larger companies like jd and say we want to help you expand, and

essentially take on rivals like amazon. emily: isaac, google was never wanting to censor search results, which was the requirement of operating the search engine in the country, so is that something you think could change, or is this about getting into the country and not having a search engine there? >> in 2010, when google decided to leave china, the chinese economy was roughly a third the size it is today. china just becomes more and more inevitable for global tech companies. and i really hope google, unlike linkedin, which does censor chinese language sites, keeps to its ethics and keeps with the don't be evil vibe. emily: mark, talk about how this fits in with the digital strategy, with amazon has alexa, google has google home, into has seen some success. >> it is a different company now. the search now toward ai, that

is where the bigger challenge is from amazon, with amazon echo taking off it cuts the core of google's business. it is not an immediate threat, the business is still growing, but they are looking ahead and you possibly might see them return to asia, and to china, with a voice service. part of that network they are looking at is using partners like walmart and target here, maybe jd in asia, to actually have a voice commerce strategies of people can use their voice assistants to buy. emily: you think they will censor voice results? talk about, if this is about taking on amazon in the future, we know that amazon's ad business is encroaching on google and facebook. amazon has had not such great success in china and has been boxed out by the local heavyweights. >> may certainly have. i think it is interesting to watch american companies scramble to work in china, just as chinese companies are

scrambling to work in the united states. bloomberg's audience, some of them know what jd.com is, but the average american consumer has no idea about jd or alibaba, so we will see more partnerships i think in the future with a major american chinese tech firms realize if they want to get into the market, they need to partner with a local. that is why we saw the announcement on friday of the tariffs on chinese goods, we saw was held were tariffs from beijing, and it is possible that worsening political tension between the u.s. and china could mean that this is a rare piece of good news in u.s. china tech trade. emily: there certainly is a political angle. >> i think so. in their markets, like indonesia, the philippines, they probably do not have as much to do with jd, as they do with alibaba and amazon, now google

has brand recognition, so it benefits jd, and it will benefit google, if and when they return to china. emily: talk about the long-term benefits of the ad business, and how amazon is slowly encroaching on google's territory. >> it is basically a closed loop, they have everything from people going and performing search queries on amazon, then they purchase things on amazon, they have their credit card information. google knows a paramount, but they do not know what people complete a purchase, so with a partnership with jd and walmart, google with their partners now can actually tie the ad dollars that the major brands spend with google to an actual purchase. that is effective when they are going up against this challenge. in this perspective, they are building out an ad business, but it is very small.

emily: what about the cloud? >> i think that that is where google sees a lot of their future growth. outside of ads it is in the cloud, hardware. it is something they've talked openly about, how they see china as an exciting opportunity. i think if we see google back in china, with some sort of offering around cloud or ai. emily: but china is not without cloud competitors from alibaba has a huge cloud business, amazon with a huge cloud business, and also the cloud i presume comes with its own set of security concerns that the chinese government could raise its eyebrows at. do you think google will build a cloud business in china? >> think it could. i think the worry would be about what it would give up in terms of brand equity in the u.s. to do so, and security. i think the worry about tech companies partnering with chinese tech companies is being too involved with china and they often have to store their

servers in china. there is not the same reliability of data security as there would be in the united states. google could certainly be a lot larger in china, if it chose, but the question is what would have to give up to do so. emily: isaac stone fish, thank you so much, and mark bergen, you will be back talking about another story later in the show. alibaba's jack ma has said that asia inspires him. they have opened an office in kuala lumpur, and it will be launching special malaysian services. it will open next month and they were highlight malaysian brand across the platform. the prime minister and ma have a great to use alibaba's technology to help young people across the country. ma says he is confident malaysia will continue to welcome foreign investments. coming up, the microprocessor, could president trump's tariffs inadvertently hurt the chipmaking companies in america?

we will find out. check us out on the radio, listen on the bloomberg radio app and on sirius xm. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: the semiconductor, it is the heart of your smart phone and laptop, and more, and the chips could be hit hard in the tariffs being that by the trump administration against china. july 6, the white house will impose the first of two sets of tariffs on up to $50 billion worth of imported goods from china. u.s. chipmakers could end up being taxed on their own processors that are manufactured in china. what does it mean for the industry?

i would like to welcome in the managing director and senior allen's that most -- senior analyst at -- who will this affect? >> it is a $400 billion industry, companies like intel, qualcomm, all of the household names from the u.s. chip industry, which dominate the list worldwide. when they generally do is either manufacture here, or have their chips outsourced and manufactured in asia, then those chips go to china where they get packaged, so they get a stamp on them saying made in china. they are package in china, so they come back from china or they get installed in a phones or computers in china, to import into this country and elsewhere. emily: do you think this could have a negative effect on u.s. companies? >> i actually do not believe that the companies will suffer from products coming back from

china. intel and texas instruments are really the only two companies that assembled and test their products in china. they also happen to have assembly and test manufacturing and other locations as well, such as taiwan and israel. i think that these two companies stand out, but they do have the ability to move to other locations, if this thing with the u.s. and china goes through. emily: do you agree? romit: if i can say one more thing, i think the bigger issue is if the u.s. restricts u.s. semiconductor companies from selling components to chinese manufacturers, like we saw with zte, that would be a bigger issue, because china is obviously a large market for these companies. emily: two points, do you agree it will not impact or hurt u.s. companies?

ian: he made a good point in the second point, which is china is the biggest market for semi conductors worldwide, for computers and smartphones. intel and -- intel and texas instruments, they need access to the chinese market. f this -- if this escalates further and china responds, market access will become an issue in it could have a significant effect. emily: so at this point, is the chip industry more of a bargaining chip? pun intended. [laughter] romit: look, china needs u.s. semi conductors and the u.s. government knows it. china consumed almost $150 billion in semiconductors last year, and of that they only produced about 10 billion or 20 billion, so they had a trade deficit last year of $130 billion in semiconductors, most of which is u.s. related. this is a country that has a 2025 plan to be a leader in 5g,

in artificial intelligence, and autonomous driving, and there is no way they can do it without intel, and the deposition tools from applied materials. so i think that china will ultimately have to work with the u.s. to reach an agreement. and you know, this uncertainty we are facing is probably temporary. i think in the short-term you have an industry that is seeing strong fundamentals across most every market, datacenter, pc's, you know, wireless, all of those markets are poised to rebound in the second half of the year. so we are still fairly optimistic on several companies in this space. emily: we have talked about the fact that the tariffs do not necessarily impact consumer products directly, but will this

impact consumer prices? ian: we will have to see, because as he explained, you have a lot at stake here. quite unusually the u.s. is in a strong position, china needs with the u.s. is offering. and it could play out, it is more likely the actual market prices, of flash and ram will affect the prices more in the short term. emily: obviously, china has their own ambitions and they could to miss -- they could turn this into an opportunity, the chinese chipmakers. romit: easier said than done. this is why -- they have this massive trade deficit last year, it is because they lack manufacturing capacity, they do not have ip for some important technologies, ian referred to

d-ram and nam, they do not even have the wafers -- wayfarers, they are paying premium prices for that. so i think for all these reasons, you know, china is in a difficult spot here. emily: the chinese goals, are they unrealistic in the chip industry? ian: that remains to be seen. this will act as an incentive to accelerate them, but it is hard. everybody thinks, how hard can it be, but these are the most complicated pieces of industry equipment in the world, it has been incredibly difficult and in has been tried to do this for a long time. they've been able to buy parts. they have the ability to do it, but it is difficult. there are very few companies in the world that can make chips

and be on the leading edge, intel, samsung, and china has been trying really hard to do this. there is no shortage of money, but it is difficult. emily: ok. thank you both. the overseer of the central bank said that bitcoin may never be ready for prime time. for banks or international settlements. and they are subject to too much manipulation and fraud to serve as exchange. the decentralized nature is a fall rather than a key strength. and coming up, former tesla workers chilled on speaking up about safety concerns because of an agreement. all the details, next. we are live on twitter, check us out and be sure to follow our global breaking news network on tictoc. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: last week, tesla announced it would dismiss more than 3000 employees, or about 9% of their workforce. it underscore what many had been saying for months, that tesla has reached a pivotal moment. after misjudging how quickly the carmaker would be able to mass manufacture an electric car the first time, they are pumping the brakes from hiring at breakneck speed. now one of the biggest issues for those who were fired is the language being used in a confidential severance agreement. they dismissed them from going public about the concerns of the company. here with more on the severance agreement, josh adelson.

what we know about what they're asking their workers to sign? >> we reviewed in agreement that had provisions of like requiring the employee to say that i had the opportunity to raise whistleblower issues and they were satisfied with how they were dealt with, to not disclose what the company calls business related or confidential information, to assist the company in defending against claims from people, to not bring claims, to have any disputes about the agreement resolved in individual arbitration. emily: are these things that other companies would ask? >> some experts, including a professor that used to write agreements like this, said it is not dramatically different from elsewhere, but other experts have said that this language could have a serious chilling effect, even if it is liquid you might see somewhere else. that somebody who has sided something saying i had the chance to bring this stuff up and was happy, will be hesitant in the future to say, actually

there was this concerning thing i saw. emily: does it make somebody think that there are safety issues? >> it is to some yet another sign that the employees, or former employees, might have a lot to say that the company may not like. emily: and there is a story where some of the fired workers are still out there praising elon musk, so is there a smoking gun? >> a number of people have come forward saying, even though i was fired, i believe in the company and what they are doing is heading in the right direction, and of other people who work there now who have said, to me and others, while they believe in the mission of the company, they have concerns on how people get treated along the way. emily: what is tesla saying about it? >> what they have said is they let language stay in there, because they want to know if somebody had an issue, and on their way out the door if they did not raise a something, this language is an opportunity for

them. emily: bigger picture, you know, what does this tell us about elon musk's own sort of, as we said, hitting the brakes on his vision? >> we have seen just this weekend again in tweets that he has a sense that he is being treated unfairly and that people are out to get him, and the company, and that there are vultures, so to speak, whether it is the uaw, or other auto companies, or reporters coming after the company, and there is concern from elon musk about what people are saying about tesla. emily: yet the shares are surging. >> that is right. emily: investors do not seem too upset. >> i am sure some of them would say that this correction, in terms of removing some people, elon musk says we misjudged how many people we needed, but that this is a positive step to some investors.

emily: what are other things you are watching for? i know we are trying to pull back the layers to see if there is something we need to know about what is going on. >> inspections have been opened by osha, multiple inspections, and last week i covered the trial that the labor relations board had opened, that is going to be going on for months. emily: you are there for four days. >> that is right. we had just the beginning of a process in which the government prosecutors are presenting witnesses who say, for example, the managers try to prevent people from -- to coworkers, prevent them from wearing union t-shirts. there was a point an employee said that people were able to wear drug paraphernalia t-shirts on the factory floor, but were told they had to stop wearing union t-shirts. they also said this was an infomercial presented to tax the company. emily: ok.

thank you for keeping us honest. we will catch up with max election, coming up, to talk about tech and more. this is bloomberg. ♪

>> i'm emily chang. this is "bloomberg technology." in early april, a quarterly report on global adjustment was published and the authors made a bullish prediction, they expect global stantec investment the hit a new high in 2018. this week, tech giants and blockchain experts are coming together in new york at the insights future of center conference. one heavyweight in attendance, max levchin, who cofounded paypal it is not trying to build the first modern bank for a younger demographic, starting

with point-of-sale alone. he joins us from new york. max, thank you for joining us. progress report, you have raised about $2 billion, the valuation, and have made a promise that a firm is going to be something big. what makes you think it can be a giant in consumer financing, next to traditional and nontraditional players, given what you have seen over the last few years? max: i think there are some secular trend that we have created and the time is now. the biggest one is the new generation is mobile first, completely plugged in, and differentiates frame much on the notion of transparency and simplicity. young people today want to bank and to do with financial products that are honest, but tell them exactly what the cost

will be, and have no gotcha's. this is hard for traditional players, where fundamentals are built on unfair advantages, to speak to that audience. i think that is where the opportunity of fintech is. you launched -- emily: you launched a whole set of campaigns, there is a summer travel campaign for example, where you are learning different ways that consumers want to pay. what are some trends that you are seeing there that are changing the way that you do business? max: simple transparency really translates to these audiences, it is hard to overstate how important it is. and another trend, a little bit different, is self budgeting, being able to look at your overall expense planning and say i will travel, i expect to go shopping, i expect to maybe do some interesting experiences, and i want to understand all of these things together in a single picture, and working hard to address that. this notion of guardrails against overspending, against getting into debt, against

carrying something that sticks with me all the way from the beginning of the school year, that is a powerful idea for young people. emily: you said he wanted to build the modern bank for the young demographic and you started with point-of-sale loans, from fiscal products, to experiences, so what is next? max: i have tried hard not to comment on the next feature. i think there is so much we can do at the point-of-sale. traditionally, we spend a lot of are cycles online, we have now just started in 2017 offering a firm offline in brick and mortar and it has been amazing, in part because of the elimination of the embarrassment of applying with credit and getting rejected. it is an expansion for us, and is part of why the fundraising you talk about, after that there is just an aimless opportunity as far as i'm concerned, a lot of it comes from the fact these products have been the same for the last 50 years and there is so much more we can do. emily: after the financial crisis, a lot of millennials lost faith in the traditional

financial institutions, but now we see firms like goldman sachs, with good early success with their digital loan products, so does that mean perception is changing? max: i think goldman sachs is an interesting outlier. they were traditionally not in these financial products, and after they turned back during the crisis, they've decided to take in -- take advantage of the license they got. i think it remains to be seen. i think that there is plenty of entrance, and some exit is, in this market. the reality is, the u.s. credit card debt alone is over $1 trillion. i think the opportunity is fundamentally with of those who are try to innovate, as opposed to those who are eyeing each other. i think a lot of the traditional banks are married to the

business model that unfortunately calls for the profitability coming from late fees, which i think is unsustainable. emily: where are you on bitcoin and cryptocurrency? we just had another big institution, the bank for international settlements saying it will never be ready for prime time, yet warren buffett saying it is rat poison squared. what does max levchin think? max: i think that the comparison that people draw with cryptocurrencies and the internet is if you look at the 1990's, the internet was difficult and not user-friendly, and we are still finding out -- in the 90's, we were figuring out how it worked. i think there is something to the comparison, but i think it is one step even earlier. the applications have not been developed for cryptocurrencies. as they exist today, they are the building blocks, not of the web, but for communications protocols. i am very bullish, very long-term. i am staying out of the speculation, because i try hard to look at things that are

meaningful, as opposed to up and down all day long. it will take some brilliant product people to come up with what it is good for. i remain neutral, but i love the different logic behind it. >> do you own any and if so what? max: i used to say, no, i don't, except one of my employees pointed out to me that a long time ago i accidentally invested in a company that paid dividends in bitcoin. so it turns out i do, which damages my claim of neutrality. it is not a lot. >> has been reported you been in talks with walmart to offer installment loans to customers, so what can you tell us about the potential opportunity? max: i cannot say very much about the speculated relationships with retailers, no matter how small or large. >> you have partnered with luxury stores as well, even though we were discussing

walmart, and one of the criticisms is this makes it almost too easy for people to buy things that maybe they do not need, and even if they can afford it, maybe they should not buy it. what is your response to that? max: the position we have taken from the beginning is we have to be very nonjudgmental and extremely perspective. that means, if you are buying shoes and that is the thing you have to have and he wants to finance it, if you cannot afford it, we will. if you are buying diapers, and cannot afford it, we do not want to be a party to that financial transaction, because we feel like we are pushing you into debt. so this notion of we cannot know what is right or wrong for your personal decisions, but if it is financially wrong for you, we will very much -- the transaction, no matter how badly you want it. it has served us well, because our business model has no fees, no late fees, no hidden fees, and as a result we only make

money when the consumers pay us back on time. so when we do not believe they can or they would, we have to decline the loan. and i feel like that has kept us on is for three years. emily: you are in the business of giving people loans, which means you are collecting sensitive information about consumers, and i am sure you have been following the facebook data privacy scandal, you have folks like the cofounder of whatsapp saying, delete facebook. elon musk has deleted his facebook page. which camp are you in? max: i have not deleted any facebook pages of mine, if that is the question. but i think that consumer privacy is essential. and i think it is essential squared for financial institutions, and we've always had that point of view, so it is not news, not really a change for us because we were always fixating on the ownership, the

minimum data extraction, where we do not require much to underwrite, but i think it is the essential and one thing that has changed is a lot of these scandals or stories, they have brought attention to just how much data silicon valley companies have access to. it is something that is probably healthy for the industry, to look at itself and ask, are we doing enough, and can we do more? emily: did facebook make a mistake by not policing itself and being too generous with its data? not just on how it uses its own data, or the data it gives -- but the data gives to developers? max: it is an experiment that can only be run runs -- once. i think that they are not actively stepping out and saying, we will take this seriously, we are taking it seriously.

i think silicon valley will experience a massive scrutiny from not just the press and the regulators, but the consumers, asking the question -- we have always been telling people that this is a tech utopia, trust us, we are great, but i do not think people will take it for granted anymore. as a result it is essential to get in front of these issues and to tell people, this is what we are doing going forward. emily: max levchin and selina wang, thank you. coming up, elizabeth holmes has been charged with criminal fraud, and legal experts say she could face significant prison time. we will get the full picture, next. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: theranos founder elizabeth holmes was charged last week with defrauding investors. once reigning as the youngest self-made billionaire, she faces now multiple fraud charges and a jail time. olivia, tell us how this happened and what she is facing. >> on thursday, the u.s. attorney's office dropped a criminal charge on elizabeth holmes, who is now the former ceo of theranos. and they could do a plea deal, or they could fight this. they will likely be facing jail time in both instances.

there is sort of an ironclad indictment. and i am told that it could be about 20-24 years. emily: we had john on the show recently, the author of the new book, "bad blood," and the investigation that toppled the first domino that led to this. take a listen to what he said about her motivation and whether there really was malice. >> she overpromised and it got to it got to a point where the promises and the reality, the gap was so enormous that it became a fraud. why did employees not blow the whistle -- there was secrecy.

her boyfriend was the number two of the company. he was the enforcer of that culture and he was constantly firing people and it was very clear that the company was litigious. she had sued earlier employees. emily: you know, we are talking about blood tests where people could have gone false results. what about the overpromising and the end justifies the means, the big it and -- bake it until you make it attitude. >> in silicon valley, there is a culture of overpromising. you make it attitude. that works with a new app, that you cannot mess around with blood testing.

in this instance, the u.s. attorney's office said, no way, we won't let you get away with that. i think that is what happened, she thought she could do it, then she kept pushing and it was not happening. and ultimately the u.s. attorney's office is now charging her with a massive fraud. emily: we should mention that the two of them were in a relationship together, free -- for a time. what are they saying? >> we understand that elizabeth holmes has a settled with the sec, which means she did not deny or admit the charges that came down from the securities exchange commission. balwani is continuing to fight the charges. with the criminal charges, it is most likely they will enter into a plea agreement, but we will not know that probably until the

fall. emily: how quickly could we expect things to proceed? >> it will take time. i think in the fall things -- we will really start to hear more about what is happening. we know that she stepped down as the ceo of the company, now the company is really being run by their legal counsel. emily: what is theranos at this point? i saw the headlines about elizabeth holmes stepping down, so what is the company today? what was she the ceo of? >> you know, i think they have a lot of legal work to do, so the company exists to help with her that. i am sure that they have all sorts of pending lawsuits from people who received these blood tests, and who want to pursue legal action further against the company. emily: ok. olivia zaleski, i know you will keep us posted. still ahead, the president's space aspirations take off, calling for robotic explorers on

the moon as soon as next year. that story is next. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: president trump wants to create a u.s. space force. he announced the new military branch at a national space

council at the white house on monday. >> i am hereby directing the department of defense and the pentagon to immediately begin the process necessary to establish a space for us as -- force as the sixth branch of the armed forces. emily: the president says it would be separate from the air force, but equal in stature and he signed a also a directive, which aims to make it easier for commercial companies to operate in space. other goals, to send robotic explorers to the mid next year, year, andmoon next another human landing in the next 10 years. chad has invested millions of dollars into private capital and into commercial space ventures, and attended the meeting with the president, so what exactly would a u.s. space force do? chad: i do not think many people know, this announcement was not expected, and i do not think

that people have details as to what exactly it would mean. like you said, he said it would be on par or equal to the air force, but i do not think we have many details on that. what he said today, he said a lot of things, but one of the remarks was that they are 1000% behind budding space businesses, which was the interesting part to us. and the resounding sense, from the room and all the speakers in the room, about leveraging from the private sector. emily: the president said he coined the term space force originally as a joke, and some have been lukewarm on the idea in general, but is it something that the united states needs? i know there is concern about our competitiveness in space, but in general do we need a sixth branch of the u.s. military in space? chad: i think the idea is to

show the emphasis on space. do we need it? i do not know, the air force is doing a lot in space at the moment, and they are doing an exceptional job. the conversation, from our perspective, we are focused on the private businesses and the startups and ventures that are innovating in space. the conversation is really about the military aspect versus the private interest in how it falls. so putting emphasis on the military side of things, it definitely shifts the balance a little bit in that direction, but it was good to hear again the resounding sort of wave of support for private ventures throughout the rest of the meeting. emily: one of the concerns is space traffic control and the clutter and debris in space and space-based collisions, talk about what kind of problem that is.

chad: it is not much of an issue now, it is about thinking how far we have come in the last couple of years. we have gone from satellite operators having a dozen on the larger end, to know companies like planet having hundreds in orbit at the same time. we have done that over a short amount of time. and looking forward, we have mega constellations, like one web, space-x planning to launch 4000 plus. so tens of thousands of satellites being planned to start launching in the next few years, so the idea is getting ahead of the issue, recognizing that there is a lot of the brie, and -- debris, and figuring out a way to keep those highways in space clear and able to operate efficiently. emily: i know you are excited about the president's broad support of space initiatives,

sending people and robots to the moon, should that be one of the top priorities? chad: that was a key talking point throughout really the entire space council meeting today. and there were astronauts and the scientists and professors, people from all walks, talking about this issue. and the long-term goal is to get humans to mars. the conversation was really about, is the moon the best way to do that. and i think that was the general consensus of the room. jim bridenstine is the new nasa administrator and this was his first national space council meeting, and that was a key message he was looking to get across. using human exploration and robots on the moon is a key stepping stone to getting to mars. we heard from some different astronauts, speaking about exactly that, how the

exploration program today should mirror the expiration -- exports -- exploration program of apollo, that started with mercury and gemini, and culminated in apollo. thinking about how we have had the iss and if this is a way we can demonstrate how we can live and work in space, now getting down to the lunar surface, how it is a great way to test technology we need for mars on a different surface. and the mars mission being the ultimate sort of today's apollo. emily: what do you imagine elon musk is thinking right now? chad: they were represented in the room and i think that they were happy to hear again the resounding support, the interest from the government on all levels, and the interest from the commerce department and their increasing role here. the business of a space is top of mind. emily: chad anderson of space angels, back from that meeting

with president trump. that does it for this edition of "bloomberg technology." we will be back tomorrow. this is bloomberg. ♪

>> this is "bloomberg daybreak: middle east." trade tensions rise. china vows retaliation as president trump threatens to place tariffs on another $200 billion worth of imports. warning signals. paul jones says market prices are dubiously high and interest rate policy is crazy. larry summers has this to say. have greatd will difficulty in responding economically if there is a downturn. crude com