♪ taylor: welcome to "bloomberg businessweek." julie: and i am julie hyman. taylor: this week, we are focused on that hospitality merger and the fight over loyalty points. julie: yes, a very loyal customers on both sides. we are also looking at the issue of key men risks. taylor: that is when one company is reliant on one ceo. julie: sometimes to the company's detriment. there have been examples in the

past weeks. facebook, a lot of questions about mark zuckerberg's recently leadership. papa john's and john schnatter. there are other examples. taylor: we are going to look this week at fiat chrysler. we had the late ceo and his relationship with fiat until his sudden death. julie: here's jim ellis. jim: the biggest threat is calming the markets down that he can be the ceo that sergio was. he was a ceo's ceo. he was a world traveler and a guy who was taking care of companies on two sides of the atlantic. he was a guy in the auto business was as close to steve jobs as you could get. he was a person who made outsized projections and surprisingly, in recent years, he has been able to meet them. the notion he could take chrysler, which always ran in the u.s. market, and turn it

into something that was a respectable profitable company, was surprising. a lot of people didn't think it could happen simply because european automakers have never been thought of as the most efficient in the world and the best managers in the world. he became a star from that. he took what was not one of the top companies in the world and basically built one by taking a remnant of a company that a lot of people thought was a has-been from the u.s., and suddenly he has a global player. taylor: manley has a task of also calming the markets and leaving the company. part of that company is going to china, where they have been struggling. what is their biggest struggle when it comes to china? >> with china, they are late. in that sense, he is starting from behind. that is a surprise about him. the light was so bright at having done this great trick

with chrysler, that people forgot that he had missed out on building a business in the largest auto market in the world. a lot of people concentrate on the u.s., but china is where all the growth is. the u.s. was stuck at about 17.5 million cars per year, and it is probably never going to go up. instead, china will continue to grow. all of the auto makers have been looking aggressively and how to expand their exposure. gm gets about 45% of its unit sales in china. chrysler-fiat is only about 5%. he is starting late, so he is going to have to do a lot to build up a dealer network there. he is going to have to find a way to get more people in china to want to buy large suvs. that is tough over there because there is a big push on fuel economy. he also has to find a way to get

electrification to be a bigger piece of the chrysler business in china. i say the chrysler business in china because the fiat business has been shrinking for years now. they made a conscious decision that fiat was not doing well in china, so let's put all of our money behind jeep and grow that business. they have been successful at doing that. the problem is that increasingly, chinese want to have more fuel-efficient cars. taylor: here is bloomberg businessweek editor joel webber. the issue this week examines key man risk. it has been rearing its head recently. what does it mean? joel: it is trending right now. i decide we put it on our international cover this week. when you look across businesses right now, there have been multiple examples of this just in the headlines. that is why we wanted to bring it all together. you have facebook where there is a founder's dilemma.

and then you have chrysler, where the ceo dies unexpectedly and now they have to deal with that. papa john's, where a guy makes a racist comment, he is the face of the company. what does that company do? or les moonves, where we have had 300 executives and we are grappling with a bigger social issue. all of those things, there is one guy who happens to be the ceo and the whole company rests on him. that is key men risks. taylor: it is interesting because you learn so much about the company, the board, and their fights between the board like papa john's and facebook. in facebook, they are controlling shares. how realistic is it? joel: it is really a story of the times. all of these are public companies. how are we going to deal with it when one guy has the weight of the world and company on his shoulders? the board interplay is interesting because we have seen boards become much more vocal in

terms of pushing executives out when they make mistakes. there is even a thing right now that happened, the weinstein clause, which wall street has introduced as a way of building that compensation that they had not been able to get. julie: what is so interesting about key men risks as well, is if these people had it existed, perhaps the companies wouldn't be what they are today. obviously, they have also been so important and beneficial to these companies in many cases. joel: facebook is really the textbook example of that. zuckerberg made the company. yet, now, investors have said, maybe he should not have had as much power as he had. that has really been part of the reason facebook is becoming facebook. taylor: you mentioned the weinstein clause, some new initiatives on a corporate governance perspective of boards starting to come in and limit them. maybe the first time in a while, limit the power. joel: that is why this is such a perfect cover for us.

it really brings all of these themes together in a really coherent package. it is not just trees. there is a forest happening here. the other thing to keep in mind is we are talking about men. all of these examples are men at the top of companies. it might look a little different if they were a little more diversity. taylor: up next, the case for loosening mark zuckerberg's grip on facebook. julie: plus, why some investors are losing their appetite for the big technology stock. ♪

♪ taylor: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek." i am taylor riggs. julie: and i am julie hyman. you can also find us online at businessweek.com and on our mobile app. taylor: in this week's business section, we continue our focus on the corporate key man risk. julie: at facebook, there has always been one leader, mark zuckerberg. taylor: for the first time, executives are questioning whether he should be the man and power. >> there are two things going on. the tone in the investment

community has changed dramatically over the last couple of weeks. facebook came out with this earnings report. it wasn't even that bad. the number of users declined of daily active users ever so slightly from 1.40 9 billion to 1.40 8 billion. -- one point49 billion -- 1.49 billion to 1.48 billion. by any measure, facebook is doing great, but it did not meet up with wall street's expectations. i think that, combined with the drumbeat of scandal causes stock to dive pretty hard. it lost almost 20% the following day. it is i believe, the single biggest one-day decline for any stock ever. $120 billion. julie: in terms of value. max: on wall street, that is pretty terrible. internally at facebook, i don't think employees have quite got there yet.

that is what the story gets that. mark zuckerberg is facebook, as far as his employees are concerned. i guess probably as far as we should all think of it, he controls the company, he is the founder, inventor. he is the person who is singularly connected to it. it is kind of like a strongman of a small country or something where everyone who works there either really likes him and feels he has taken them this far and is not going to steer them wrong. there is a disconnect between how zuckerberg is seen internally and externally. julie: all of that works out great until the economy of the strong man's country starts going into recession. we talked to scott galloway of nyu and he called it karma. even though the numbers weren't that bad for facebook, that it was sort of this karmic retribution for cambridge analytica, and for some of that what were perceived as misdeeds of the company. is it starting to trickle

through to zuckerberg at all? max: you have two things going on. number one, facebook is not as cool as it used to be. you are seeing declines in the u.s. and europe. this more mature market. facebook is dealing with that by making investments in instagram. julie: instagram is still cool. max: instagram is the coolest thing out there. internally, that is how they think of it. well, instagram is the future of this thing. that, combined with this sort of inability to manage the information on facebook, and more importantly, to articulate what facebook's policies are and how they want to deal with that information, it kind of creates feedback where it is contributing to the lack of coolness. if you are already feeling that facebook is not that great, and you do not want to go there, and then you read another story, one

came out just this week about another misinformation effort on the platform, this time with the midterm elections. that kind of creates this storm of badness that i think can really slow down a company, even a company as good at doing what it does as facebook is. julie: in the financial section, a number look at the tumble in shares of facebook. taylor: we got to stick with the editor about the faang stocks. taylor: those -- julie: those stocks facebook, and now alphabet. pat: knowing facebook was taking a steep dive, we were thinking is this going to be some psychological bellwether? the sheer weight of facebook on the market had a big impact. it is not an obvious stock that, despite its great size and huge presence in our life, it is a great measure for everything that is going on in the economy. they are very tied to

advertising and consumers, but they are such a unique and odd company. they are still growing. they have very specific issues around the political situation and regulation. they aren't really tied into the whole trade debate because china is mostly closed to them anyway. a lot of things going on are not quite facebook tied, yet, they matter to the market because if you are in an index fund, facebook is a fair part of your holdings. taylor: it was so interesting to me because facebook, more advertising revenue, whereas amazon makes sense to be tied to consumer because it is a much more retail-consumer driven. pat: it is perhaps the world's most important retailer. taylor: where we focused so much on facebook and set of the others? amazon is doing pretty well. pat: for the first few days

after the great facebook flop, the others were caught up in the slipstream of all of this anxiety. to some extent, that might have just been portfolio managers looking at their portfolio and noticing that we have gotten awfully concentrated in these big tech stocks. maybe we should rethink that. apple's earnings report has lightened the mood more recently on that. to some extent, there are always a lot of investors thinking about companies, but also do i have too much in this sector? am i too concentrated at the top of my portfolio in these stocks? before all of this happened, there was something going around on social media where people were pointing out how much of the s&p 500 the top five largest tech stocks were. it got a lot of buzz and attention. that was a moment where investors are saying, are we a little top-heavy? do we have too much in these companies? julie: up next, will starwood

fans be happy with the hotel's merger with marriott? and democrats meets a green wave of cash ahead of midterm elections, but are they using the money wisely? ♪

♪ julie: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek." i am julie hyman. taylor: and i am taylor riggs. you can listen to us on sirius sm channel 119, new york 11:30 a.m., 106.1 in boston, 99 fm in washington, d.c. a.m. 960 in the bay area. in the features section, the starwoods hotel points program finally merges with the marriott program in august. a lot of challenges ahead. taylor: we spoke with a reporter and really got some insight into the starwood sends and why they are not so keen on their program at marriott. patrick: marriott, which is an

older company, they were sort of at the beginning of the hotel expansion in the u.s., whose loyalty program was really based on some variation on buy two get one free. you state a certain amount of nights, and you are going to get a free night. taylor: more of a value proposition there. patrick: what they call rewards, or what loyalty wonks call rewards. starwood didn't come around until the 1990's. marriott was always sort of known for a company that was good at executing on the business plan. starwood was always known as a creative company. julie: the integration of these programs two years after the acquisition is finally about to happen. marriott has already made some concessions like the late

checkout. you have an anecdote at the end of your story involving an spger who books a lot of travel over the course of the year who was upset that he was not going to get a concession. tell us that story in brief because i think that is an interesting window into this whole process. patrick: as part of the integration, marriott created a special type of lifetime status. in other words, if you spend 10 years as a platinum member of the marriott rewards program, which is what they called their old loyalty program, you would get lifetime status. you don't have to spend 75 nights with marriott every year anymore. you still get a lot of the benefits without having to deal with the travel. it is highly coveted by members. again, it goes back to this idea of i'm spending all this time on the road, and what am i getting out of it? i don't have to travel 75 nights a year for the rest of my life. i'm going to do it now and reap the benefits forever. julie: and still get the perks.

patrick: in the integration initially announced in april, marriott created lifetime status that could only be attained if you had achieved it through the old marriott program. the starwood members said what the heck? this isn't unfair and supposedly you really care about our business, why are you creating this special thing which is only available to these other people? they banded together, about 90 of them, eventually wrote a email to the marriott executive in charge of loyalty and said this isn't right. three weeks later, marriott out -- marriott put something out and said, you are right. they probably did not say you are right but they acknowledged. julie: it was a concession. patrick: the opened up this tier that can only be attained in 2018 through the integration.

they said if you spent an amount of time equal in the starwood program, you're going to get the same thing. when of the funny things about this is i'm not sure how viable -- valuable this lifetime status actually is. part of this whole case is that people want to know they are the most elite of the elite. they announced it. i talked to the guy that had organized this effort to lobby marriott. a guy who lives in singapore, he said well, it's great that they gave it to us, but part of me thinks that maybe this was a problem that marriott created intentionally, just so they would have something to fix. taylor: we go over now to our politics section ahead of key term elections. you have a record number of democrats out fundraising the republican opponents. julie: that is rare.

we will see if they do end up spending that money more wisely than they have in the past. taylor: here is editor matthew philips. matthew: this is a story that joshua green put together for us. it takes a look at where we are at the end of the second quarter on fundraising. there has been a lot of democratic enthusiasm. we wanted to look at whether that is translating into money, and in fact it is. they are raising record amounts of money. there are 70 house races in which democratic challengers have outraised their republican incumbents. it is looking at whether they can ride this green wave of cash, and whether that is going to translate into a blue wave that we have been hearing a lot about. it looks like, at least halfway through the summer, that they are raising a lot more money than they did last cycle. there are more candidates. they have a lot more money on

hand and in the bank. we're looking at whether they are being more strategic about that this year as compared to previous cycles. it looks like they are. julie: being more strategic in what way? what does that mean? matthew: in years past, democrats have never really been known as the party of big money. they typically get outraged by republicans. when they do have a cash advantage, they tend to focus it on a handful of celebrity candidates and races. they put a lot of resources into just a handful. this year, it looks like they are spreading their bets out a little bit more. we looked at it as kind of the equivalent of almost index investing rather than stockpicking. they are spreading their money out across a wider swath of races and candidates so that if they actually get a blue wave this fall, it translates into a bigger one. it is just a look at how they are being more strategic than years past. to give you some numbers to compare to 2014, this time in a 2014 cycle, you have challenges

on the democratic side having raised about $23 million. this time, it is $88 million. it is a really significant increase. taylor: when you talk about spreading the money out, i also want to know if there are particular states. is it really just swing states we are focusing on, certain candidates, or is this a broad, across all 50 states that they are focusing on for november? matthew: they are trying to be as broad as possible. they have 23 seats to pick up they want to take back the house. you are seeing more enthusiasm in places you might expect that are more liberal, california, massachusetts. but they are out raising a lot of those 70 races. they are in states and districts that donald trump won. for example, in ohio and michigan and parts of the farm belt where you're are seeing very well-funded competitive

democratic candidates. whether that translates into victory in november remains to be seen. there are still lots of hurdles. it doesn't ever guarantee a win. what we are seeing in this cycle is different in that democrats are raising a lot more money than they have in down cycles in previous years. julie: up next, the hazards of papa john's pizza being all about papa john. taylor: and south bank's big bet on brand lists. julie: this is "bloomberg businessweek." ♪ this isn't just any moving day.

this is moving day with the best in-home wifi experience and millions of wifi hotspots to help you stay connected. and this is moving day with reliable service appointments in a two-hour window so you're up and running in no time. show me decorating shows. this is staying connected with xfinity to make moving... simple. easy. awesome. stay connected while you move with the best wifi experience and two-hour appointment windows. click, call or visit a store today.

♪ julie: welcome to "bloomberg businessweek." i am julie hyman. taylor: i am taylor riggs. in this week's issue, we are traveling over to the pacific northwest. portland, oregon is looking to revamp its image. julie: from there to mexico. we will be talking about tequila and bacardi's interest on the patron brand. can they only two without diluting the? taylor: we are continuing our conversation on the ever important key man risk.

julie: our reporter look at the example of papa john's and the ceo who was recently ousted after causing controversy. really some questions as to whether the company can survive without him. julie: here is susan. susan: he said to us, the company does better when i am there. in the past, he has left twice before. he has never gone too far. from what we understand and even what he wrote in his biography, he was keeping a very close eye on the people who replaced him. just as he seems to be doing with the ceo now. not only has he said he should be back despite the reporting that came out that he said racist comments during the media call that was designed to train him to defend himself against accusations of racism based on

previous behavior, and as you are suggesting, a story that came out that also highlighted a lot of bullying culture, like a frat boy culture at the company. despite all of that, he still thinks he is the one who can get back in there and save the company. julie: not even just the comments he was making, but if you look at the financials of the company, it may be better while he is there over the long run, but more recently, it has not been performing as well, right? susan: i think you can draw a pretty direct link between problems the company is having financially in terms of selling pizza, and the kind of tarnishing he has done of the brand very directly. words out of his mouth. whether or not we have exactly heard them, they are pretty well corroborated. i think he wants to believe that the company is still his, and he

does own a third of it. and he is really the only one that can fix the problems, whatever they may be. julie: the creative director is with us now to walk us through the covers. let's start with the key man risk cover. this is an abstract concept you have to make visual and make concrete. how did you go about it? chris: when i first heard the idea, i was intrigued. it seemed like a unique way of thinking about this kind of problem. i wanted to find a way to show it that was more abstract, but also give you a metaphor for what was going on. i came up with this idea of the inverted human pyramid. with the ceo at the bottom under this pressure from the sort of bad way of managing the company, which is everything rests on one person's shoulders. taylor: what a love about the right-hand side as you start to see people tilt over almost. almost like the company itself sort of starting to feel that

pressure as well, and maybe not be as steady as they were before. chris: with the illustration, we want to have a little bit of tension. having these characters at the top kind of falling over gives another layer to it. it helped start the metaphor home. julie: you can easily imagine if you yank that person out of the bottom, everybody else comes tumbling down. let's talk about the rewards programs. the other cover where we are trying to merge the starwood and marriott programs. there, you guys went with the photo, a different concept. chris: there are always tropes with the hotel room, and were playing with a couple of different signs. they do not disturb sign worked really worked well with this idea of all of these fans not wanting you to mess with their point. we came up with this idea of a photo illustration. taylor: what i love about the door is that so many points we have been talking about are a free room. stay two nights and get one free

or a free breakfast, so having that sign hanging on the door really made me think about some of those points that are so wrapped up in these stories. chris: and we got a little bit of a double entendre with the merger in there, too. they just came together really nicely. julie: up next, the euro site that already has its sights set on amazon. taylor: plus, could a global expansion undo the legacy of patron tequila? this is "bloomberg businessweek." ♪

♪ julie: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek." i am julie hyman. taylor: and i am taylor riggs. you can find us online at businessweek.com. julie: and on our mobile app. in the technology section, softbank has invested in brand list. -- brandless. taylor: it is relatively new, but they already have their sights set on amazon. >> they are a veteran of online media plays. before this, it was a venture capitalist for a few years. they started the company pretty quietly in 2014 and launched a site in 2017. just a year later, according to softbank, it is worth about $200 -- $500 million. the company has put in about $240 million in exchange for what they think is going to be a big success story in the world of e-commerce.

brandless sales are not a -- are now a relatively small market of generic home goods. sort of the opposite of the amazon theory in a sense of incentive being the everything store, we will sell you a curated selection for less than the competition. julie: there is something appealing about that when you're wading through everything on amazon to get what you want. one can see the appeal of it. how does it fit into softbank's portfolio as well? softbank has a very diverse set of investments. jeff: the vision fund now at $100 billion and soon to be much more. they have their fingers in everything. particularly in the world of e-commerce, they have been a little hesitant while they have a significant piece of most of the other big e-commerce plays around the world, notably

alibaba. this is only the second e-commerce investment they have made in the u.s., the first one was in sports apparel, also a company that has been pretty quiet. this is pretty targeted play. i think it's reasonable to be skeptical of anybody who is going head-to-head against jeff bezos. for the time being, they seem fairly confident that it is scaled in terms of the kind of audience that they are targeting with. relatively upmarket stuff, whether it is organic peanut butter, or other kinds of gluten-free veggie chips or non-toxic dish soap. they are betting that it will be a more reliable draw for repeat customers than a bigger e-commerce platform that now, amazon is a good example of a company that in order to be the everything store, and to keep their inventory growing, they have had to open up to a lot of merchants that in some cases are

not delivering people what they have expected. taylor: i think the key thing you just said was the draw for repeat customers. the name itself struck me as there is no sort of brand loyalty. i'm going there for generics. i'm not going to get my toothpaste, whether it be colgate or crest. i'm just going to go from a regular generic brand. is there any customer loyalty? julie: brandless is the brand, though, and i would imagine eventually there is a certain cachet of getting the brandless stuff. taylor: is that where the customer loyalty is? jeff: that is really the hope. the story is that ironically, brandless hired a brand consultant to try and figure out how to become a recognizable brand.

she is sort of burning the tactics that she used in her previous ventures like a site focused on baby news and shareable stories, to try and convince people to post recipes they have made from brandless products or to deliver feedback in conventional ways on a products either on the website or on facebook pages and other forums. the hope there is that they will drive up business among repeat customers as opposed to sort of the snapchat vision of social media as opposed to facebook, that you are building a smaller and more dedicated audience. julie: it's a community. isn't that one of the buzzwords here? building a community. you talked about the valuation. do we have any information on sales or users of the platform? jeff: so far, they have been very kg about that. they will give our reporter all of the usual growth is great general stats.

but they have been hesitant to give us from numbers. taylor: we have talked a lot about amazon. they are trying to go up against everyone these days. i know that they are focused in the u.s., but you wonder if there is any plans for international expansion. alibaba huge in china in terms of an e-commerce giant. are they really just focused on the u.s. to start? any plans on taking on another e-commerce giant internationally? jeff: there is some talk about what the next markets would be, for sure. particularly as the company start to get to a point when they're going to have to deliver more tangible growth metrics for investors, especially softbank. i think that is going to start to take focus. part of the investment was a guarantee that entrance into asian markets would be on the horizon. for now, it seems their largely -- they are largely focused on the u.s. taylor: over in our features section, we are talking all about tequila. bacardi owns patron, and they really have their sights set on going international. julie: when you have a corporate owner and a big expansion, there

tend to be concerns about quality. taylor: we got the update on those concerns. >> how can you scale up without sacrificing what made patron, patron? it is an open question right now. mccarty is not safe -- bacardi is not saying much about what they're going to do without saying they see petrone as -- patron as an international brand. most of the tequila consumed in the world is consumed in america and mexico. they see a lot of broad opportunities internationally. to do that, you have to build more factories. a lot of companies have built diffuser factories, which are able to make a lot of tequila, but not at the same quality. julie: you mentioned the government role of percentages, but patron is 100% of agave. are there sourcing issues around it? can you get that much agave? bret: you can. it is about how big you want to

get and how fast. to do that, you have to change something in the process. it is very hard to change the process they have now and scale up globally. answer try and take over cuervo. which is the high-end maker of tequila. taylor: what is the state with bacardi as they try to ramp up volume? there's always the battle between quality control and wanting to scale up. what is the patient shannon -- what is the position on town nervous he might be on not being able to have total control over the distilling process? bret: he seems like he is pretty chill right now. according to a 2013 lawsuit, which is the best information we have on this, he stands to have made about $150 million from this deal with bacardi. he is 72 and stepping back now. he has allowed some of the other tequila makers that he has taught to take the lead in some of the newer products that they have made. they had a new line start in

2014. to be honest with you at this point, he is trying to enjoy the fruits of his labor. he is a quiet and humble man. he is not somebody who has ever had flashy stuff because of his success. for the time being, he seems perfectly willing to say, hey, i have done what i have done here. there is actually a statue of him that hacienda patron, so he has made it. julie: in the meantime, there has been more competition because there has been this uptick in consumption. because of the world in part he created, there are now an increasing number of premium tequila's out there. bret: you had george clooney's brand, which just sold for $1 billion. there is a time of competition, but there is so much interest and passion around high-end tequila these days. between 2002 and 2017, consumption quadrupled. people are just now catching on that you don't have to put tequila in the margarita to enjoy it. in the same way that people in

the "mad men" era really caught onto bourbon and whiskey, people are now catching on to tequila, and have been for the better part of a decade. i think what you're going to see next is a big movement in rum. rum has a lot of potential to come up to where tequila is now. julie: we just talked about patron tequila, and we have an interesting chart that looks like tequila prices versus other alcohols. taylor: this is really cool. come into my bloomberg. we have a great way to show all kinds of data in a visually appealing way. this week is a little bit of a lighter note. tequila prices are ticking up. i have charted in blue tequila prices relative to the overall prices down in mexico. we have been really focused on patron. this is a ratio. you have it ticking up. it take to below one, and now we are coming back up to par. it ticked below one and now we are coming back up to par. this is of course as tequila drinkers are becoming a little more interested, pushing up the demand.

that is maybe pushing the prices back up to par. julie: even as we see more and more supply as bigger companies get into that particular market. taylor: up next, why vimeo is becoming a place filmmakers can get tools. and we go to the pacific northwest. portland wants a new image. ♪

♪ taylor: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek." i am taylor riggs. julie: and i am julie hyman. you can also listen to us on the radio and sirius xm channel 119. also on a.m. 1130 in new york. 1061 in boston. 99.1 fm in washington, d.c., and

a.m. 960 in the bay area. taylor: and in london on dab digital. this week's game changer is the ceo of vimeo. julie: it is much more than a realized. taylor: we got to sit down with her. 34 years old. relatively new ceo. she came in and immediately change the strategy of the company. >> vimeo is the world's largest ad free online video platform. we have over 80 million members >> vimeo is the world's largest uploading and sharing their videos around the world. when i stepped in as ceo a year ago, we were focused on investing and original content. sort of a similar strategy to netflix, hulu, amazon and many others. what we decided about a year ago was that that wasn't where we could really offer a differentiated strategy.

we transitioned from being a company that invests in content, to a company that invests in creators. what that means is instead of being a destination for consumers to watch videos, we have become a technology and software company that builds tools for creators to make, distribute and monetize their videos everywhere. it is a really unique strategy, and one that allows us to add a lot of value in a market that is growing incredibly quickly. julie: when you talk about all of those members that you have, are those members creators? are they filmmakers? i know i have seen a lot of music videos on vimeo. those are the people that are making the content that join and use the tools. anjali: that is right. we have an incredibly diverse community of creators. creators range from filmmakers and videographers to agencies and small businesses to large organizations.

vimeo has everyone from hollywood actors to saturday night live comedians to the world economic forum in davos live streaming their conference to jillian michaels launching her own fitness channel using our technology. it is a really diverse group. we expect that it will continue to get more diverse. there is an interesting statistic that by 2021, over 80% of all consumer internet traffic will be video. there needs to be a platform that brings tools and lowers the barriers for creators to meet that demand. that is what vimeo is focused on. taylor: you are going up against some pretty big competitors. when you are focused on original content, you're going up against a netflix or youtube. it was interesting, you actually now have a link where you can link to vimeos directly on youtube. how has that been transitioning from viewing them as a

competitor to being able to work with them? anjali: absolutely. we absolutely have now seen those competitors as partners. that is exactly what we have done. we have invested in tools that enable our creators to find an audience on what previously were competing platforms. one of the reasons we can do that is because we are an ad free business model. we don't put ads on your videos. we don't make money from advertising. that means that we don't have to keep eyeballs on our own platform. we can actually help creators get an audience all over the web. in a world where there is a battle going on for eyeballs and ad dollars, we can really be an independent and agnostic home for creators to help them succeed. julie: also in pursuits, we go to portland, oregon which now has a big tourist scene, lots of hotel rooms to fill and lots of restaurants.

taylor: they are really trying to revamp their image. they don't want to be known as the portland from portlandia. julie: carol massar and jason kelly talk to the editor. >> the city is in fact changing. they have a very small population of portland. it is a city of about 640,000 people. quite small. they have 1000 new residents a month moving in. which is absolutely insane and it is mostly on the heels of big companies like amazon, google, all setting up satellite offices in portland. cheap real estate. all of the great restaurants. all of the things we just talked about luring in big business, totally ballooning the city. carol: what are we having? sky rises, spas? >> lots of things are opening up. the skyline is definitely changing. for people who want to come visit portland, the most important thing is there are great hotels opening. that is something the city has not been able to claim. it has lacked real luxury hotels for as long as i can a member. that, finally is turning. jason: what should you be thinking about doing if you go there? >> you have to book into the

right place. i am really excited about one hotel opening that is an offshoot of a british brand. they have beautiful paneled walls, amid century chandeliers, communal workspaces in the lobby. jason: i have been to a couple of their hotels in london. it feels pretty portland. >> it does. it is a really good fit. it really has a synergy with that city's culture. they are opening in chinatown, and it is one of the first hoxtons in the u.s. there are also several really great hilton properties. people do not think of hilton as having these boutique hotels. there is one called dunaway that has a library stocked with games. a very edgy hotel. whole nine yards. i think that is where you start your trip planning. you book the right hotel. our writer recommends a totally different one called the jupiter

mix, which has the balls in the minibar. carol: where should we eat? >> it is still not a city where ostentation is excepted. all of the marquis restaurants that have put portland on the map in terms of its dining scene are all spinning off of these affordable, very casual little sister restaurants. carol: with great food. >> great, great food. taylor: "bloomberg businessweek -- bloomberg businessweek is available on newsstands now. julie: also online at businessweek.com. what is your must read? taylor: i really focused on that key man risk. we heard about fiat, and earnings in the recent week. really just how corporate governance comes to play in all of this. julie: my must-read have to be tequila and that story on patron. i always find it fascinating to read about the story behind the brand i actually consume.

more bloomberg television starts now. ♪ 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.

♪ nejra: the outlooks. we look at the big things to do, watch, and worry about for the rest of 2018. racing for brexit. what financial firms are doing in the face of an uncertain outlook for the eu's relationship. we'll get the latest pair welcome to bloomberg markets "rules and returns." i'm nejra cehic in london. rules and returns is the show where we delve into the regulatory challenges and opportu o