emily: i am emily chang in san francisco. this is "bloomberg technology." in the next hour as we close the chapter on earnings and big take names, they are hovering at record highs. can the bullish sentiment hold or will global headwinds change the tide? tesla's wild week as well. elon musk shocked investors to take the company private -- investors by his plan to take the company private.

how nasa is launching a spacecraft will a -- that will attempt to touch the sun. goolsbee to an engineer on this mission. first to our top story -- we will speak to an engineer on this mission. first to our top story. despite challenging headlines and worries about regulation, tech is once again leading the gain -- game. where are the possible headwinds? andmore i bring in dan eyes caroline hyde in london. dan, i start with you. what are the challenges and upsides dan: there are definitely challenges in the macro or geopolitical issues we are seeing. you're releasing strength on the enterprise side in terms of areas like cloud and cybersecurity that have been robust. we continue to think they will be robust with avondale memorize -- with m&a on the horizon.

there's a fork in the road with some strong fundamental trends on the enterprise and consumer side versus headwinds we have seen across some of the social media areas. emily: caroline, we see a broader selloff due to the risks in turkey, what some part of the tech sector underperformed even that. explain. coming saying is the bad news of chips came from your side of the atlantic in the u.s. we saw microchips have a bad set of numbers in tencent forecast, but it was on the back of the trade tensions concerns -- trade tensions concerns. concerns. we saw microchips fall the most since 2000. over here in europe we saw various down.

chipmakers were 2.4%. u.s. themthe underperform as well. goldman sachs took many by surprising intel was coming to their price target and worrying about the competitive thrash of intel. that was equally another headwind for the chipmakers. i think you saw notably chipmakers and telecoms underperform the market even in the face of a geopolitical tension trilling down on the rest of the market when it came to the banks, to the auto sector in europe particularly. emily: the story of the chipmakers is tied into the story of apple, dan. we saw apple break the $1 trillion mark and they are retesting the line. what you think is the long-term story for apple in particular through the rest of the year? dan: it is about the trifecta product cycle on the iphone

side. if you look at the super side one year ago, it is disappointing now. we believe there is 350 million iphones in the window of an upgrade opportunity. can they get 230 million of that? that's the key. the street is keeping an eye on the fact that china is on uptrend. election of that business billion.300 emily: i have a chart in my dtv library, caroline, showing the others coming behind apple. the are all pushing toward $1 trillion mark despite the fact that we are in the midst of summer. how does this play out? i think apple is probably

expected to tested once again. we are close to the trillion dollar mark once again all over. we still had earnings keep an eye out and we see how tencent and china performs. what we had to keep an eye on is how important these tech companies are. notably the outperformance from apple. over the last six months since the k the -- since we came up from the lows of the s&p 500, apple alone has contributed 12% to the rally we've seen over the last six months. microsoft is not far behind. of thee contributing 8% rally and amazon is outperforming as well. these companies are so important because of the huge market cap and importance to the rest of the market. when you look at the facebook, alphabet, netflix, and overall

as well as the amazons and other companies, you are seeing microsoft and apple are really contributing to the overall importance of this sector and overall heavy lifting. amazon in particular, i think the big ones will be amazon, apple, and microsoft in the last six months. emily: amazon hit another all-time high this weekend. on the flipside, facebook is reeling after the $100 billion wiped off its market cap. how do you expect those two stories to play out? in microsoft and everything happening on the cloud, that has been the golden touch. you are seeing it on the aws side as well. there's a massive shift going on chas been a tailwind for amazon -- and that has been a tailwind for amazon. when you look at facebook and social media in light of privacy post cambridge, this is a fork in the road. investors are looking at

something of -- some of the enterprise plays in big data. hasal media definitely headwinds and black clouds on the horizon. emily: we never want to see black clouds. we will be watching and caroline .yde, in london and dan ives thank you both. downs woodside is stepping overshadowing second-quarter sales and earnings that popped -- topped analyst estimates. a four-year that, he was essential in dropbox. the company said it would remote ,wo vice presidents to report but will not look for a new clo. fake news and conspiracy speech, facebook

is ripe with all of them. if you like us, listen on the bloomberg radio app and on sirius xm in the u.s. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: microsoft is the latest tech company taking a stand against hate speech. they threatened to suspend web hosting services to social media platform gab over anti-semitic posts. the microsoft cloud division gave gab today's to take the content down. they were founded in 2016 as an alternative to twitter and has attracted several alt-right

users and conservatives to the site. this is after conspiracy theories were banned from facebook and youtube. twitter continues to host his 's content.jone jonesory around alex comes at a time where more and more americans are using platforms as news sources. twitter youtube and snapchat have seen double-digit growth in users who get their news from social media according to research. facebook only saw a 2% growth in the same timeframe. this is something confirmed by president trump's campaign manager for 2020 when we spoke to him last month. >> you watch for four hours and next year you are watching three hours of facebook and one hour of youtube. that changes. i think youtube and google continues to change to make

adjustments on a platform. google continues to put a lot of focus and they understand the value of the youtube platform. we're using it for a lot of things now. we're using it more now than in 2016. emily: let's go to the president and ceo of the medianews alliance to discuss. david, these platforms have struggled with all of these things for years and years. are we stuck with them this way or they can -- or can they be cleaned up? david: in some respects, it is way overdue. alex jones has been spewing his garbage for years, so why now? why this week? a big part of it is the platforms are finally and appropriately losing the argument that they are neutral. for long time they maintained that they don't take positions and are neutral. when, the platforms are the opposite of that.

would make billions of decisions on content you and i see. the kind and i see may be different than the content you -- the content i see may be different from the content you see. i think it is a good thing ultimately that they are more held responsible. emily: we have to confront the idea it is a big deal when a technology platform can decide who stays and goes. other better solutions than banning alex jones? sure. let's start with the understanding that they are not neutral platforms. they are the opposite. they make lots of decisions on what we see every day. frame, they are wrestling with these issues about fake news and bad content. publishers 2000 news and, as i always say, if you have a fake news problem, we are

in the real news business. why can't we work more closely together? a number of platforms have andinalized news publishers pushed them away at a time where they should be embracing what we do. they should highlight actual real news content. and, let's work together to deliver more actual, credible quality journalism to people. they seem to have a hard time getting their mind around that. part of it is their engineering perspective. part of it is not understanding how those issues are evolving in ways that do not work for them over long terms. emily: companies like facebook and twitter have refrained from journalists, and at the same time, in the midst of this controversy, the twitter ceo suggested it was journalists job to clean up the platform and decide what is right and wrong. what is truth and what is not.

he has retracted that statement in a way. he said his original suggestion was wrong. he said we need to work together to make decentralizing and everything possible. should they be a hiring -- should they be hiring journalists? david: the jack dorsey thing, first of all, he correctly notes what journalists do. they check facts and run leads. he seems to want to have them do it for him for free. more broadly, they do not need to hire journalists. that is what we do. that is what my members do. we have editors and hire journalists, and have a long history of doing incredibly.

how about highlighting our content and having away for us to make a sustainable financial wear, moving forward, journalism can thrive on the platforms rather than being completely marginalized. they don't need to do it. we do that. at the same time, they love to stiff arm the news business when we should be working together. we should be an answer for them rather than a problem. emily: i spoke to alan powell yesterday, the ceo who disagrees with twitter -- the decision twitter has made. take a listen. >> i think people are realizing this is not where i want my kids all day long. this is not where i want to spend my own time, so how do i manage that? as people get smarter and this is not the best place for having conversations, learning new ideas, there is so much that are information out there.

hopefully, there will be another source where people will get better information and have better conversations. emily: are you optimistic, david, but there could be a nether source at this point given the critical mass that facebook has? david: facebook is a perfect example. they talk about community and social, meaningful social interactions. that whenll know is you have social interaction, some of it is good and bad. they cannot take credit just for the good stuff and not take blame for the bad. it all comes there. what they do have that is positive is this incredible connected platform where it could be an incredibly vibrant way for people to get great news and information about their communities. the information the community needs and wants. what they need is to focus on quality.

how can we highlight the people that produce good quality content, a financial way for them to succeed on the platform. by the way, that helps us as well because we deliver high-quality journalism and content to people. at the end of the day, you cannot solve all of the problems. what they need to do is have a higher percentage of good which will effectively suppressed the amount of bad content on the platform. emily: interesting. one solution there. david chavern ceo of the news media alliance, thank you so much for joining us today from washington. emily: coming up, how are big tech companies finding the next mark zuckerberg or steve jobs? one experimental fund says the playing field is unfair. we take a look at what they are doing to find the next generation of creators. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: big kick is known for some of the best and brightest, the industry may also be limiting its own talent pool.

disparities and socioeconomic status, race, and gender are producing what one study called lost einstein's. talents going unnoticed because of lack of equal opportunity. many got their start in the ivy league and they are also white and male. fundand experimental called pioneers is looking to address the opportunity gap. the group is hoping to be a search engine for talent putting more science into discovery with a more global search. to tell us more is the founder. at 27, she is a former partner search company was bought by apple in 2013. thank you so much for joining us. how do you plan to be a search engine for talent without having any bias at all? >> thank you for having me on. looking for project

millions of lost einstein's around the world. or albertelon musk einstein, there are many more that do not reach their full potential. we're trying to use the kind of power of software and internet to find the people at scale. emily:? how -- emily: how? >> unlike traditional grant programs, what happens with pioneer is prospective applicants compete in what we call the pioneer tournament which is a 30 day event ticking place over a month. instead of submitting one -- taking place over a month. instead of some of the one application, you submit information for 30 days. , the otherommunity prospective applicants vote on whether they find your work interesting. we think the power of crowdsourcing has a tremendous role in highlighting people from unrepresented or more diverse

backgrounds. emily: so you're are not just looking for entrepreneurs? this is across many fields? >> we are looking for many people that seem interested and curious about the world and have a project they are working on. it could be anything. it could be a company want to start or working fundamental physics that you want to do or art. we think that there's a lot of people out there in the world that are self editing themselves out of success. they're not even sure they can reach their full potential. i got the main benefits was not just the investment but it was somebody telling me that i should take the idea i had more seriously. emily: and you apply from jerusalem while you were attending a military prep camp. how old were you? >> i was 18 when i applied. i was the youngest to apply at the time. i want to find people that will be significantly more sex full -- successful than i was. emily: how do you find those

people? daniel: our application process is unlike any other. no one has tried to use software to find these people. second, we are trying to get the word out using the same growth techniques that silicon valley has used to get the products out to different markets in the world, looking for people trying to get visas in various countries,, looking for people that are doing research in various companies. we created a whole network of a diverse set of experts and industry experts from different categories and backgrounds. hopefully they will serve as inspiration to people looking to apply. emily: there are many people backing this. my question is, let's take gender as one example. how do you make sure the people who are voting, the people who are part of this more collaborative process do not

bring their own bias into the process itself? like genius and visionary, we don't often use those words to describe women, using gender as one example. wordl: we don't use the genius. we call them creative outsiders and ambitious outsiders. we spent a lot of time thinking about this and making sure we do not bring the site in a way that would be negative to anyone. times to the site many and felt that it must not have been for me. we are sensitive to the fact that the main barrier we work against is people's own self editing. reducing theant of activation energy required to get a submission in. emily: you are actually on the show many years ago for your original company which was a search engine for the iphone, right? and i you got involved by apple -- you got bought by apple.

what if you learned from the process that you want to bring to this? daniel: the largest observation i made in the entire journey i had coming out from practically nowhere in israel to silicon valley and raising the series a and b, running a large set of machine learning at apple read there was one thing i kept -- apple. there was one thing i noticed over and over, the role luck played in my success. what we are trying to do with pioneer is remove the lock you need to be successful. the fact i had a serendipitous encounter with someone that took a bet on me is something we want to systematize. look for talent, ambition, and potential, not the lock. emily: we will be tracking you guys and girls. thank you for stopping by. wild weekd, tesla's

and more on the twist and turns following elon musk's tweet and issues that may await the electric carmaker. that's next. this is bloomberg. ♪ retail.

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

"bloomberg is technology." i am emily chang in san francisco. bloomberg is reporting that tesla is considering going private to avoid concentrating ownership between too few holders. they are apparently canvassing investors, including large asset managers. for reaction, take a listen to what a few people had to say. it doesn't economically make

sense for him. at the stage the company is in, it doesn't make sense because he is in a growth stage. companies go private that are generating significant cash but shares are not getting evaluation that -- a valuation that shows their value. he needs to raise financing for both equity and debt. >> no, this doesn't change my perception or my outlook and it hasn't changed my short position. we are shorting more shares today on the strength of the stock. it would remove the stock from the scrutiny of the central markets. it may be comfortable near term, but they probably don't generate enough resources from growth. it would make sense in private at this stage.

we can only take what was said with a grain of salt. happen.is not going to it may be to put the fear of god and investors. do i think this is going to come to fruition? i don't. but if you bet against elon musk, it's a very bad bet. emily: indeed. we have liam denning of bloomberg opinion. there is reporting from cnbc that the board has called on elon musk to recuse himself. what do you think that tells us about the relationship between musk and the board at this point? matt: this is what you would expect if there is a buyout. normally a ceo has to recuse himself. it's just that it's happening way before you would announce it. the board coming out and saying

well, we kind of talked about it a week before, that's not much time at all. dellu read about the buyout, that was going on for months and months. this is proceeding along. some people said it was possibly a joke or a ruse, but the longer it goes on, you think maybe there is an offer here. emily: liam, there are still questions we don't have answers to. we have been trying to get answers over the last three or four days. money.where is the who are the funders? do we have any clue? liam: i don't think we really do have any clue. a lot of people are calling this a leveraged buyout. it can't be a leveraged buyout. this company is consuming cash

as it grows and is already heavily in debt. be superhave to patient capital. public markets have been very patient over the years. ,ery accommodating to dilution misconduct, a lack of profits. who would don't know be willing to write a check that large. emily: is there a clue in that we don't have clues? it's not that surprising that the banks didn't know. i mean, it is surprising, but in this kind of non-reality that we live in, it's not. i think what we should be looking at is silicon valley in people invested in unicorns like uber and airbnb.

if you squint, you might see tesla looking a little bit like uber. amazon and google all have an interest in cars. has something, but apple doesn't. that could be one possible angle , either an equity investment or an outwardly -- outright proposition. it would not be -- outright acquisition. it would not be totally surprising were totally out of character. emily: it's a good reminder, as you put it, how far elon musk has feared from his master plan in 2006. remind us what that plan was -- veered from his master plan in 2006. remind us what that plan was. and: you take revenue plowed into a cheaper version and sell it.

and that kind of made sense. , these businesses are famously capital-intensive. at the beginning, tesla went public and threatened to raise more money, a fairly standard thing. about 2013 onward, which is when we saw the first big uptick in the market cap, the companies and visions -- to metastasize. i think where we are now is this is a company with a high stock price that has been underpinning its finances for a wild. of expandhas to kind its ambitions to fulfill that stock price. the problem is what has been happening with the model three and the setbacks there has really started to test people's faith in the vision of the

company. emily: i can think of a couple other capital-intensive businesses, and one of them is a. is it realistic to think elon musk could use the same model he is using at spacex, which is still a private company, that that could be applied to tesla? >> think it makes sense in elon mind. because he runs a spacex and things are going -- at least they are more stable than they are at tesla. you could see why applying a similar structure to tesla makes sense. structure is similar to uber and other privately held venture companies. the problem is the rocket business is a lot different from the car business. a lot of revenue. 62h of these launches costs

million dollars. once you open the gates and let people in, which tesla did, there are all sorts of complications. one obvious one is the tesla employs a lot of people. they will not be thrilled to have their liquidity taken away. they will not have as much freedom to sell their shares. ifng public is really good you have capital. it's what you want to do. it makes it easier and cheaper to raise money. emily: unless, apparently, you are elon musk. thank you. we will continue to follow this. i am sure there will be much more to chew on next week. after about five years at the company, doug steele is heading back to apple. unitll likely join the car . apple kicked off an ambitious effort to create a self driving

car. after opening new offices, car engineering machine shops and hiring thousands of engineers, buildingfted away from cars with self driving technology. consumer dna tests have taken off in popularity, promising clues to your heritage. but who owns your genetic data? explains why you should think twice before sending in that file. >> personal data doesn't get much more personal than this, your dna. consumer testing companies promise to reveal your heritage. to consumerdirect genetic testing. the industry has boomed in popularity. sales are predicted to triple in the next five years. but watch out. after the test is done, those companies still have your genetic data and there are a few

limits about what they can do with it. >> if you read the privacy policies for any of these genetic testing companies, they outline for you all the reasons you might want to think hard before you participate in them. 20 three and me struck a deal with glaxosmithkline that provides them data to develop drugs. that's a huge part of the business. >> these agreements also save the company may have to share data with law enforcement if compelled by a court order. they have not yet applied -- complied with requests, but they may not need to. state case of the golden killer, police believe they cracked the long cold case by matching dna from a crime scene two that of one of his -- to that of one of his relatives on an open source dna site. privacy laws are meant to bar employers and health insurers from using people's genetic

information against them. >> could they use your information to decide whether to offer you a policy or not? >> but at least the products do what they advertise, right? yes and no. >> one thing they can 100% tell areis other people you closely related to. after that, you get declining accuracy. >> for example, breast cancer. >> what if you get a test result back that says you are negative for one kind of breast cancer, but maybe you are at risk for other kinds. there are thousands of markers and they are not all well understood. the science is not there to effectively say how you should be exercising or eating, or what skin care products you should be using based on your dna. >> even if you decide a dna test isn't for you, you may want to convince your relatives as well.

there dna could inadvertently reveal a lot about you. remember, spitting into that tube is not just personal, it's the meal you. emily: coming up, for the first time in history, humanity is setting out on a mission to the stars. we will discuss the lunch to the sun. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: for the first time ever, we are going on a mission to a star. plans to travel closer to the sun than any spacecraft. if all goes well, it just might change the way we look at our solar system. is scheduled for august 11. the upper stage rocket will lift off from the kennedy space center in florida. joining us to discuss it is

steve condon, lead engineer for nasa's solar probe. explain why this is so peoplereaking and what hope to learn from this mission. >> we have never been this close. to put it in perspective, if the earth and sun were on a football field, we would be on the five yard line. we are getting really close. there is a lot about the sun we don't understand. wesounds technical, but don't understand how solar wind is accelerated. which is an import feature. we also don't understand why the corona is hotter than the surface of the sun. the corona is the hazy region we all saw when we looked at the eclipse last year. and it is hotter than the surface of the sun and we don't

know why. we are going to that region to try to understand what's going on. emily: you were instrumental in developing the heat shield that will make this all possible. you have been working on this technology for nine years. >> yes, i have spent the last 10 the heatking on shield. it is about four and a half .nches thick it is a lightweight composite form of carbon and carbon foam. spacecraft will only be 85 degrees fahrenheit. we are keeping everything cool behind our shadow. emily: talk to us about the timeline. went you arrive, wendy return? >> the spacecraft will be launching tomorrow.

we go through 24 passes in the next seven years and get closer usingoser to the sun gravity. it is a seven-year mission. as we get closer and closer, we are going to learn more and more. we expect to get data back and start learning things right away. i am curious. once we get that information, how will that change our lives? >> space weather is an important phenomenon and it affects how satellites are going around the earth. it affects our understanding of what -- understanding why solar forms happen is on -- is

important to our understanding of life on earth. understanding why they happen and what happens, how the sun is is vital to us understanding how to interact with our star. we will also understand more about other stars by exploring our own. space has become such a controversial new frontier. the trump administration is proposing a space force. is that something that you, given all your work in space, feel is necessary? >> i don't have anything to say about that. emily: what are you most excited to learn on this particular mission? what are you going to be pouring through for that first piece of information. >> hundreds of thousands of people have made this mission

possible. being part of the team is so special. -- ilooking forward to know we will be rewriting the textbook about the sun and learning completely new things no one could ever imagine. to be a small part of that is amazing. gdon, nasasy cond engineer, thank you for joining us. up, we will hear from the ceo of movie pass about his turnaround plans. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: a service that was too good to be true for customers and an easy target to bet .gainst the ceo of movie pass joins bloomberg to talk about the new subscription plan.

over the last year, and 3 we havesubscribers, been able to watch the segmentation of our subscribers by the movies they go to. subscribers cost is 40% of our goods. by capping it up three -- at 3 -- if we said we were going to give you $45 worth of movies for $9.95, you would be saying that's a good deal. it's going from a movie a day to three movies a month. ant of our subscribers see average of three month. that's why the model is sustainable. the united cost in states is $10 per movie. our money through advertising, studio partnerships

. we generate income from going to dinner, etc. julie: in addition to questions about sustainability, there is the service itself. people love talking about the company when we bring it up. two of our producers had been members. both canceled the service, for different reasons. one said every time he tried to use it it wouldn't work. you can't call someone. you have to digitally contact them. she ended up paying for the movie anyway instead of being able to prove -- to use her pass. are you fixing some of the technical issues? nothing makes my hair raise more than hearing those stories. but we are half the size of cinemark without owning real estate and we have grown 15,000%

in 10 months. julie: but how many cancellations are you getting? are still well over 3 million subscribers. yes, we have people who are canceling, but we are delivering amazing value every day. why not just go to amc, cinemark, or set a world which rld, which isewo now in the u.s.? you have 45 significant competitors. or five significant competitors. >> with movie pass, you can go to four times as many theaters is thes program, which largest out there. our target is the occasional

moviegoer who was only going for her five times he year. that's the group we are trying to focus on. if there's any mistake, it's trying to serve all movie customers. we are half the price of amc. that approved -- that appeals to moviegoers. >> what is your confidence that going to sethanges the plan in place? you are trying to raise the .95.e to $14 you have surge pricing. how do you assuage subscribers who think it's just a matter of time before you come at my purse more. >> only time will tell. this change is built upon a huge amount of data. there is no other movie

subscription service with this amount of data. we are confident this is the last big change. emily: that was the movie pass ceo. finally, competition in the ranks of the most popular app on the blockchain. people are turning .o gambling instead over a recent 24 hours, a fomo app got more than five times as many viewers -- users. 3d. not just fomo a category is only second to exchanges. that does it for bloomberg technology. that is all from san francisco. i am emily chang. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ david: you also ride 120 miles a week on a bicycle. have you thought how much higher the stock price would be if you did not spend the time on those 120 miles a week? dennis: i thought i should start riding 200 a week. david: if i could look like you and drink the diet mountain dew, sure. let's talk about the space program. dennis: this is the most exciting time in decades. david: you grew up in iowa. dennis: every morning i had to milk the cows. david: did you ever say to them, drink some mountain dew? >> would you fix your tie, please? david: well, people wouldn't recognize me if my tie was fixed, but ok. just leave it this way.