♪ emily: i am emily chang and this is bloomberg technology. a blow for uber. new york city cap's new licenses. could other cities follow? jack dorsey is on the defense about twitter's platforms about content -- twitter's policies about content. 9 forg unveiled the note the public.

we will gauge early reaction and discuss the tech giant's bigger strategy to take on the competition. ridesharing has been a booming business. were 13,000re right-shared -- ride-shared ca rs. that could all change. new york city has granted a cap on new licences, giving them the authority to set new wages for drivers. bill de blasio tried it two years ago but was shot down by the same counsel. discuss, a professor at the nyu school of business and author of the shine economy, the rise of crowd based capitalism. and bloomberg's caroline hyde,

where in london, bloomberg had to appeal the possibility of having their license completely withdrawn. uber is fighting these regulatory battles around the world. how big a blow is this particular situation in new york? caroline: this is the first major u.s. city we have seen install a cap on allowing new licenses for 12 months. are worried about the national attrition rate. how do we replace them? how does the limits of client? -- how does the limit supply? this helpshave said monitor supply and demand and, in short, they were saying they can find an equilibrium so they are not underpaying people. this can become a precedent

throughout the rest of the united states. they have had regulatory battles in the united states. and globally they have had regulatory issues in canada, in italy, in berlin. this is something we could see unfold around the rest of the world. they will have to subsidize the tri-cities and earnings of car drivers worldwide. how do they vindicate that evaluation? how does this change things for uber and new yorkers? guest: i think we will see a drop in quality of right hail services in new york. i don't like stories that say that uber and lyft are the only contributors. they certainly play a role but

an increase inen population growth. there is crowded subways and people are looking for alternatives. i don't see the approach of targeting just one contributor as being sensible. i think the one public transit service that new york has looked steadilyat has been increasing inequality will be capped. i think it will really hit the people in brooklyn and queens. once you have a cap on the number of cars, as demand grows, the cars will migrate away from the outer boroughs to the more profitable manhattan market. the cap by itself is bad news for new york. cap,: in addition to a what would you advocate?

additional legislation? guest: there are two separate issues. there may be an increase in congestion and we don't think drivers are earning enough money. lots of people feel that drivers are not earning enough in certain markets. foremically, the proposal freelance minimum wage seems encroaching. it might channel the demand toward more skilled drivers and leave the others out of the market. on the congestion front, like many people, i am in favor of congestion pricing. you have a higher price that you arein areas that actually suffering from increased traffic congestion. capping the number of uber and

lyft cars won't make a dent in the congestion, it will take cars away from the outer boroughs and into manhattan. emily: elaborate for us the argument on both sides. there are arguments consumers,ld hurt limiting supplies in the outer boroughs. in 2015, this is what bill de blasio tried to pass and it failed to get to the council to strike a managed heartfelt campaign that this would limit cars going to those of ethnic minorities. they felt that yellow taxis had been under serving that population. that seemed to pull at heartstrings. thing that needs to

be tackled whether there is any lack of equality. you focus particularly on the wealthier manhattan. this could hurt consumers in that respect. freight,to do with with tourism. this is something we're going to see in many a country, in many a city, having to grapple with how to regulate these companies. guest: i was going to say that i agree completely. we have seen different experiments and regulations roll out around the world. a lot of people thought there would be a domino effect after london banned uber.

but many cities around the world will be waiting to see what happens in new york. in particular with minimum wage and the cap. i'm not worried that other cities will jump on the bandwagon and say we will cap uber as well. many people realize this is the future of public transportation. this is something that their citizens like. new york city does have a unique with millionsling of dollars spent on medallions and how to address that problem, but that is new -- unique to new york city. runly: professor an sundaraajan of nyu and caroline hyde. coming up, our discussion -- the

decision of twitter to not ban alex jones. our discussion coming up. ♪

emily: twitter ceo jack dorsey continues to defend twitter's refusal to ban conspiracy mogul alex jones. jack: in the future we did not communicate why we might take action on tweets and why we might suspend temporarily or permanently. we want to communicate those reasons to the person who was suspended and also the reporters. simple communication within the product. job ofn't done a great communicating our principles.

we are getting better and better. we have a lot more work to do. emily: we went to somebody intimately familiar with the perils of online hate speech. ellen pao was the former ceo of reddit. after she resigned she said in my eight months i have seen the good, the bad, and the ugly. she says the good has been off-the-wall inspiring and the ugly has made me doubt humanity. she wanted to invest in twitter in 2007 but eventually invested in 2010 but pao sued the firm for gender discrimination. she lost that case but has become a vocal spokesman for the quality. we spoke to her about jack dorsey's defense. pao: it feels like he is standing on his own, that he feels like he can change twitter without following what other

platforms are doing and without learning. we have learned so much in the past five years. he is not incorporating any of that, building empathy for the people being harassed on his platform. instead, he believes they should be a free-for-all on twitter that he can somehow control and manage. revert toseems to some of the press that twitter has made. ms. pao: it really surprises me. i have seen people leaving the platform. i haven't decided for sure that i will leave but i'm not tweeting. i don't feel at participating anymore. you feel like you are contributing to this site that is allowing harassment, allowing and harassmenth that comes from it and

contributed to it if you are participating in it. emily: despite the fact that facebook -- facebook, google, spotify -- the app info wars is rocketing up the app charts. it is more popular than cnn, fox news. is all of this hubbub helping him? ms. pao: we will see. the jury is still out but at least those companies feel like they have stopped the spread as much as possible. apple? not really sure. you make it harder, you put friction into it, and it is better than doing nothing which is what jack is doing. emily: there was a post written about how rules won't save twitter, values will. the rules have never been clear, nor has how they are enforced. is there a different way to draw the line? how do you draw the line?

could twitter do that differently? thepao: i am empathetic to problem. the rules cannot address the changing circumstances. you have a clear rule but people are trying to get around it and you will make mistakes. it is always a problem that it never seems clear. this is a person who is perpetuating harassment across the internet and your product is being used as a tool. these families who have had to go into hiding -- where is your empathy? is this what you want your platform to contribute to? i don't understand how you can encourage this type of information. ms. pao: there is also the histion of whether and how behavior should be considered. he is potentially guilty of perpetuating violence against these families off the platform.

how much you should a platform like twitter or facebook consider that? ms. pao: we had a horrible experience at reddit where people were trying to figure out what happened in the boston marathon bombing. somebody incorrectly identified potentialas the person or potential bomber. that person was a missing person. his family was harassed. they said terrible things about him all over the internet. is, youook from that can't just look at what is going on on your platform. it doesn't matter intent, they are trying to find the bomber -- the frenzy that social media creates and the media actions that people take without harm,ng do immense

inflicted on individuals for no apparent reason. you need to take that into account. the fact that you are not the only reason doesn't mean you are not a contributing factor and abdicate all responsibility. emily: what you saw at reddit, and the choices you made were sometimes hard. if you are running twitter, what would you do? ms. pao: i would take that content off. i would look hard at online and off-line. mr. harvey said they are doing said they are doing that. she is very smart. but what are the rules, how do you want people to behave? what about harassment off-line? talking about free speech,

people like windy west, and others are coming off of your platform because they don't feel like it is safe to share ideas -- these are people who have resources, who are out in the public eye, and they don't feel at the platform is safe for them, where is the free speech? where is the sharing of ideas? though facebook took a stand against alex jones in this case, it is a platform that has a problem with how to deal with the issues. you recently tweeted that they don't understand and they don't care. snap for the first time having a decline in sequential users. we saw facebook having a decline in some regions. have we hit a social media peak? pao: it has taken a while but people are realizing this is

not a utopia of communication and change. it has become addictive. people are putting in tools to track how much time users are using it so they can monitor and manage time. the harassment problem has become very evident. you also see the discrimination and the bias in the products. people are realizing that this is not where i want my kids. this is not where want to spend my own time. as people get smarter, and they realize this is not the best place for having a conversation, there is so much fake information, there is hopefully going to be another source where people are going to get and have better conversations. fory: there is an analyst social media who says there is nothing we can do to stop hate speech. the genie is out of the bottle. would you agree? ms. pao: i don't know.

i don't know that we have a ceo who is willing to go out there and see if that is true. the actions that people are taking are tepid. like, let's follow somebody else. let's follow apple, but then apple was kind of halfhearted because they continue to allow the app in the app store. i'm not sure how we actually know if we can change it or not if people are not willing to experiment. emily: do you think a twitter boycott could take off? pao: i hope so but it is hard. even i'm thinking about not being on the platform but is that feasible? you are talking on bloomberg, follow our twitter feed to my here is our twitter handle. people are using it as a tool for information and are communicating.

is that going to be good for my company or my nonprofit? what if i'm not out there promoting ideas and sharing and learning? good, itt would be changed the week that uber htag, buttrending has that may be the only way. i don't know what uber's board is doing. i'm surprised they haven't stepped in. this seems to be a clear area that needs leadership. case and yourr fac book, you talked about how you wanted them to invest in twitter in 2008 and they declined and invested later in 2010. ms. pao: it was 2007. it is amazing how much this affects people. i have met so many wonderful people at the harassment is too much. when you see what is happening off-line, it is sad.

there is so much good that can come from it but unless jack can understand what the harassment looks like, to have your kids harassed, to have your dead kids harassed -- i can't imagine what that must feel like. emily: the last time you came on the show you said that you thought twitter should ban donald trump. do you still believe that? ms. pao: yes and i think it is worse than anything. i don't follow him but i see the fumes coming out in other's tweets. what are your rules if they don't allow you to ban donald trump or people who are making up information to harass other people? emily: our discussion with project include ceo ellen pao. from elon musk continues. can he keep investors on board if tesla goes private?

we will discuss, next. ♪

the u.s.'s s.e.c. is intensifying its scrutinizing of elon musk's provocative tweet about taking the carmaker private. matt, as i understand it, it is about the intent to take the company private, it is him saying that funding is secured? matt: with the agency is looking at broglie are the statements are the -- and broadly statements about is it factually accurate? is the sec is looking more broadly at statements throughout. it is good to point out that this is very preliminary.

this is the information gathering stage of what they are looking at. but what could the repercussions be if they violated standards? matt: that is very far off right now. they would need to show this is far off. it tendstypes of cases to focus more on biotech, we have a new drug and we are getting closer. they need a basis for those types of statements. if they found something that was far off or something was not matching up with -- if things were not matching up publicly or internally, the sec could bring action. emily: i know that you will continue to follow and keep us updated. thank you so much. coming up, we will take you

behind the scenes in new york as samsung unveiled its priciest phones yet. will it rejuvenate sales? ♪ 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.

emily: this is bloomberg i am emily chang in san francisco. two years ago samsung rolled out its highly anticipated note device. apple came aake on disappointing turning point. there is a design flaw that caused devices to spontaneously combust leading to recalls. this is the start of a new chapter on falling -- unveiling the galaxy note 9. i want to bring out mark gurman who attended this event.

what is your take on the specs note nine? mark: they're positioning it as a big thing for the consumers but the reality is that what looks new is new to consumers and this phone does not look much different. screen, andh bigger much upgraded stylus and a faster processor but i don't think that is enough to score many upgrades from the previous model. --generally a would agree people are not upgrading any phones anymore. people are upgrading every two years or two and a half years. it is incremental at best. the pen technology is kind of interesting. there are more interesting announcements later in the

event. if you look at the time spent it was relatively modest because it was a relatively modest upgrade. emily: you have done incredible reporting on the iphone to come. todayes what was revealed compared to what you expect apple to reveal in the fall? mark: that is kind of you, it is a team effort. it fits right into a not very significant upgrade. in how manyicant different versions of the iphone x, different screen sizes and different pricing strategies. it will be an exercise in marketing. emily: there have been questions payt whether customers will $1000 from the iphone x. same question here. do people want to pay that much

for a samsung phone? any appleamsung has fan boy equivalent is the note series. there are people who want the best android phone. be 512 gigabytes model will $1249. this is not the entire market. --s is their dedicated people who like using the new pan, the primary focus around new features were around the pen. to me what's more interesting is the spotify news. it reflects a bigger pic -- bigger picture strategy across all of their different devices. emily: how does that compare with apple who has apple music? mark: that is a good question. spotify at a low level is not

going in-house. these to have one called milk. they've had a few others, they terminated all of those projects. now partnering with spotify, it is a smooth move by samsung. even spotify investors seem pretty impressed. emily: other things talked about are a revamped smart watch, a home digital speaker. you have been tweeting about the size of this speaker, 1.5 times of the home todd which is already quite large. >> is a revamped version of the smart watch strategy they have already had. i don't think it will move the needle. the market has truly become saturated. i'm not sure where samsung will fit in there. on the other hand, it is also

coming in extraordinary late. the amazon echo came three or four years ago. the home pod was late as well. amazon and google home really have a handle on that market. i'm not sure what percentage of the market samsung will be able to grab with this device is ashley with a few details they are providing. i would not be surprised if it is not released until the end of this year. they are late to the game and it does not appear they are bringing any new innovative technology to the table that would inspire anyone to buy one of these things? emily: is a too late? as hillary pointed out you are ready have a very strong position for amazon and google. we are seeing samsung talk about galaxy brand.

they call it the galaxy watch and galaxy home. they are trying to build this overall connected device storage. when you think about the appliances they make and the other things, they are the only country in the world who potentially can do that. work on that bixby speaker? that is a unique opportunity, but it will be an uphill battle. apple'sou wrote about failure to capture the india market where xiaomi and samsung have surged ahead. compete samsung due to globally compared to apple? >> this comes down to this head-to-head battle that apple and samsung are going to go at. and iphone 10

plus. they will have a lot of cup edition against each other in the u.s., europe and asia. there are a lot of one device consumers. allowbigger screen phones business users to get more done than they normally would. that is what the story of the willr half of this year be, sam -- apple and samsung going toe to toe with high-end technology. thank you both. deutsche telekom is forecasting higher full-year earnings bolstered by growth in the united states. deutsche telekom -- deutsche is a market leader in germany and europe where growth is hard to come by. coming up, from uber to airbnb.

the waiting game for ipo's is getting longer. why some are opting to stay private. this is bloomberg. ♪

a slew of high-profile startups are opting to stay private for as long as they can. investors and employees are finding more ways to trade shares privately. deals in the private market have grown dramatically this year. are joined by nelson griggs,

president of the nasdaq stock exchange as well as bloomberg's julie for hay -- julie of her -- julie, whobeen has been reporting on this. -- what is driving the volume difference? all i can think of is uber. >> it is a group of companies. you have a lot more activity this year. we saw at least 50% more companies to conduct these private transactions and it is driven by the fact that they have changed from company buybacks and third-party tenders. that is driving a lot of the activity. emily: are they typically trading at a discount to the are --private valuation? or our employees at insider

getting more for their money? >> typically when there is a discount it is from the last preferred round. it depends have a public markets are reacting. we have 35 programs this first half of the year. i couldn't comment directly on seeing any but you are slider discount this year than you have in past years. julie, what is so appealing about this liquidity, does it not matter if it is coming from a third party or company stock? julie: employees on the outside of things, usually companies are staying private for a lot longer. these are great programs for employees who want to do something like buy a house or get married or start saving for something. this is a great way to get liquidity on that paper money

that silicon valley has come to know. when i started writing about this i would not have thought it would have mattered. but nelson, you guys say that it does matter. nelson: it matters quite a bit. if you think about it buybacks, they have to be comfortable having it on their balance sheets to perform those buybacks. more companies are participating. number of programs have increased at least twofold this year. we are seeing the consistency of these offerings and the ability for employees to do this on a more regular basis. i know you have said you cannot name any specific companies but what were some of the largest transactions in terms of dollars that you have seen this year?

i will say that there are names we are able to talk about because the companies have given us permission to do that. one such partner -- we did a larger program for them that was very broad-based. i would say that the range and size of transactions is very large. you've seen some larger transactions down to just $20 million. we're zynga broad range of the number and size of deals. when you mentioned earlier how long companies are staying private that has been a big change as well. typically last two they were down private from a 10 years and that has come down to six. i think the big changes more third-party tenders and buybacks. programs are more broad-based. companies -- the

third leg is seeing companies plan for these and have a real long-term vision of doing these in a regular basis. a lot of our customers are repeat customers. emily: a lot of trends we are seeing, tech ipos pick up, companies like elon musk talk about taking public company's private, and uber and airbnb wait even longer to go public. what do you see over the next couple years? will tech ipos continue to rise or will they slow down? we are seeing a high degree of ipos than 2014. we predicted a very robust third-quarter or fourth quarter. in the broad spectrum a lot of software companies are going public. the larger ones taking longer to go public which

is part of the process of getting access to private capital and solidifying business lands and you have long-term companies. you mentioned one in particular but i say those are few and far between. if it is right for the company, they have the ability to do that. emily: lastly we saw a huge rise in private transaction like this pre-facebook and in there was a big crackdown. a that was a bit more of mechanism. want in activity outside of the company sponsor program. if you look at how many hundreds of millions of dollars of private rounds have been raised only 26 all13 is year. you are seeing a lot of private capital that will sustain the marketplace for quite a while.

evaluations can change and can slow it a bit, but with all the private capital, i think you will see it continue. thank you both. coming up what exactly happened when elon musk spoke with softbank last year. some of our conversation next. this is bloomberg.

emily: softbank is eyeing a world of disruptors. sprint spoke exclusively with bloomberg in kansas. he said artificial intelligence will be the next thing for softbank to invest in and also we talked about elon musk after it was reported that he had talked with him about 10 julie

particular -- potentially taking the company private. great company is always in evolution. it was a company that was traditionally at telecom -- at telco. it has always been a technology investor. but he would like to focus the company on technology, investing and transition to be more of an investing company than an operating company. this is why we are doing the deal with t-mobile in terms of sprint potentially becoming a 20% ownership that the group will hold. the thinking is, if we are so good at investing what put most of our attention in terms of investing capital into technology and disrupting the way that the world lives.

>> when you talk about technology, what is the unifying thesisehind softbank's in terms of investing? softbank sayeard that artificial intelligence will be one of the unified things if not the most important. afore the pc, it played critical role and then the internet and the next enormous wave of disruption will be powered by artificial intelligence. -- talkeder thing about is having the companies talk to each other. how as coo do you facilitate that? job is to help the company. when you look at the entire portfolio it is hundreds of billions of dollars.

how can we make our companies work better to generate a better return? we can grow faster and expand faster. but it is fascinating to be evil to say we do have financial capital and we are the largest tech investor in the world but at the same time, we will help in other areas. we have the most exciting ecosystem in the world. we have the world's leading technology companies. entrepreneurs love to do business with each other and we like to help them. other entrepreneurs have done an incredible job springing technology to one particular country. once they are ready we help them expand their business to the world. lastly, how can we help them grow their business? a lot of these are new companies

that might be ipo-ready soon. entrepreneurs our unleash their full potential. >> this notion of transition and makes sense for softbank to be doing this but if i'm an investor, what is my holding? the company today will be different in five years. how do i quantify my investment? >> the best thing is to look at softbank as an operator. we have done an outstanding job. the best inone of the history of telecom. when you look at what we have done with sprint, it has been remarkable. we look at the track record of

an investor, the amount of money that softbank has invested, it is probably the best in the world. inwhen we put more focus replicating and putting more money to work in areas we don't do in the past and then we can invest and put most of our attention in investing in working with these entrepreneurs and helping them grow their business. >> so you have been linked with elon musk, how real is your interest in tesla? >> we wouldn't comment and if we had conversations or not, but i can tell you that most entrepreneurs who want a transaction or who are looking for a buyer to help expand their business, we will have conversations with them. if something happened with elon musk or not, we wouldn't comment on that way but if there is a deal going on him a there is a

chance that we will be part of the conversation. can buy that kind of company would fit the bill in terms of the types of founders that softbank would back? --i will say that is more they will disrupt the way that we work, the way that we live, the way transportation gets disrupted. has been an amazing entrepreneur that a lot of people admire. like elon, there are so many thatdible disruptors today are leveraging artificial intelligence to change the way that everything gets automated and that is where we are putting most of our focus. emily: he was speaking to bloomberg's matt hammond.

the us defense department released a report to congress outline a plan for a space force with aggressive defensive capabilities including system that could do gray and manipulate adversaries. feist president mike pence gave a speech championing a space force and called on congress to allocate funding. >> today we renew the president's call. to renew an additional $8 billion in space security systems over the next five years. took todent trump twitter writing space all the way. many critics still question whether such a force is feasible or this is harry. that does it for this edition of bloomberg technology. i am emily chang in san francisco. this is bloomberg.

>> stocks recovering from a second day of losses. >> tesla among the losers erasing all the gains from the going private tweet. haidi: it could be make or break for us trillion's energy fix. newleen: samsung launches a weapon in the