i'm emily chang in san francisco and this is bloomberg technology. trade truce, presidents trump and xi but the trade war on hold , but what happens when they hit the deadline and what does it mean for tech? apple takes a gamble, deciding to wait on 5h. not available until 2020. spacex, 64 satellites in one falcon nine rocket.

-- top story.stop a trade truce for now carry the two agreed to a 90 day tariff laws. both sides will finalize a more comprehensive deal and the white house -- white house economic adviser larry kudlow says they new"pretty close" to a agreement on stopping intellectual-property theft. on the groundwas in argentina at the summit and talked to us about the agreement. it may be the best investors could hope for, but it doesn't necessarily mean big changes in chinese behavior ahead. it is an clear what was agreed to. a list of semi-specifics, if theng qualcomm companies are interested and purchasing massive amounts of agriculture, energy, industrial and other products. chinese officials haven't mentioned qualcomm and mention only they are "willing to expand imports according to the needs

of the domestic marketplace." no specifics on products. the u.s. administration says they will spend 90 days negotiating forced technology transfer, intellectual property protection, cyber theft. the chinese mentioned no timeframe and said president xi agreed to open his market and resolve the legitimate concerns of the u.s. there is no indication china will make any changes to its made in china 2025 effort to lead the world in the technologies of the future. on the other hand, the u.s. made no concessions on exports to china with potential military, and chinese investments to detailed review. 90 days hardly seems enough to make such progress on complicated issues which leaves twoysts saying that countries kicked the can down the road and trade tensions will

continue in 2019. emily: early monday morning, president trump tweeted china has agreed to remove tariffs on cars coming into china from the u.s. the tariff is currently 40% and while china remains silent on planned tariff changes, steve mnuchin confirmed the approach. tariffs. reducing auto there is a lot of work to be done in 90 days, but the specific issues we talked about was a significant increase in press -- industrial products, including u.s. autos, so big opportunity. emily: joining us to discuss, the senior fellow at the hoover institution who cochaired a report titled chinese influence and american interests, promoting constructive vigilance.

obviously, we're hearing more from the u.s. side at this point, but who benefits among the automakers from this truce on the car side? >> for him un-american -- for an american first president, you may be surprised to hear it is german automakers benefiting. plants in the suv southern part of the country and have been hurt by such a significant amount of tariffs thrown at both chinese made vehicles coming into the u.s. to u.s. made vehicles going china because they ship a lot of suvs out of those plants to china. you actually have some big beneficiaries, as well that would be considered u.s. automakers. is an important only brand in china, so this is a big development from them. plans to has some

build lincoln models in china eventually and told us last week they wanted to accelerate those plans, but were talking about sometime next year. they also would like to see relief on this front. emily: i have a chart on my gtv live showing the car surplus between the u.s. and china. is the number of cars that the u.s. sends to china, the red, the imports from china to the united states. what does this mean from an electric vehicle perspective? there is irony in that you have president trump threatening to end easy tax credits in the united states while in china, you have them this incentivizing traditional automakers from making gas guzzlers. craig: adding to the irony, last week we heard president trump in tweets talk about gm making a

big bet on china years ago and his prediction that won't pan out. ironically, there will be a lot of investment to make electric vehicles in china to serve that market because they are implementing tougher standards there and we aren't seeing a significant amount of imports into the u.s. of trying to build electric vehicles. of trying to build electric vehicles. gm does make the cadillac plug-in hybrid in china and has been importing those into the u.s. we will certainly see more automakers wanting to import some of the plug-in hybrids or fully battery electric vehicles that they make in china to serve that market. they are surely going to want to send those to the u.s. at some point. we don't have a whole lot of specific somewhat the models will be yet, but certainly they are flooding that market because the government is requiring them to do so in order to keep serving a huge market on the global market. emily: in the context of your

new report on chinese influence, what do you make of this deal in general, to taunt for now -- detente for now. how significant is it? larry: it is an interim agreement that reduces tensions. note, there are fundamental challenges the united states is facing just in the economic realm in terms of technology theft, forced technology transfer, misappropriation of intellectual property and all of the non-transparent forums of penetration of our university labs and those need to be addressed vigorously in the negotiations to come. emily: let's hone in on this intellectual property issue because larry kudlow has indicated the two presidents also talked about this

intellectual property theft issue and are close to reaching some sort of agreement. how is the state of play in china is not respecting u.s. intellectual property and the implications of that? larry: american companies are pretty much forced to hand over their intellectual property, according to a rapid timetables conditions for gaining access to the vast chinese market. that is one problem that needs to be addressed, that kind of course and needs to stop -- thenion needs to stop and there is the simple theft of technology. people coming into american universities sometimes who are pla, people's liberation army research scientists, but they don't say that on their applications form. they mask the real location of where they work by giving some generic technology university

if they are really scientists for the people's liberation army, what is their agenda when they come here and work on advanced robotics or gene splicing or driverless vehicles or whatever the cutting edge technology may be? all of this needs to be addressed. we need really radical transparency in this relationship. emily: we are looking for an update from the white house on that issue, but in particular, this is an interim agreement. the deadline is march 1. what can happen by march 1? larry: i think the trump administration has that so heavily on this that they just can't accept a fig leaf here. and think aery wary lot of people who have been working on this report are very wary of a generalized trade war, we do think there needs to be ine reasonable reciprocity

the u.s.-china relationship, not only on trade but in all the different matters of exchange between think tanks, journalists, and and so on and if that isn't forthcoming, then i don't think president trump is going to be able to just put a band-aid on this and say we have an agreement. i think the chinese need to understand that we have really reached an existential questioning of the entire relationship and they need to be much more forthcoming and change the way they operate in and with the united states. emily: it's going to be a slow march going toward march 1 and we will cover every step. larry diamond at the hoover institution and bloomberg's craig trudell, thank you for joining us. the next iphone won't be able to connect to newer, faster networks.

hold off until at least 2020 before offering a phone that can use 5g networks sets to be introduced next year. easier forakes it rivals to win over customers. apple did the same with 3g and 4g, waiting until problems were resolved before digging in. we will talk about the implications this hour. facebook's messaging market in indiana over 2 million users. we will talk about opportunities and challenges their next. if you like bloomberg news, check us out on the radio. app,n the bloomberg bloomberg.com, and in the u.s. on sirius xm. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: amazon, microsoft, and apple are net connect for world's most valuable company. microsoft shares past apple, then retreated, then amazon past apple, then they retreated. it is anyone's guess who will be in the lead. joining us, our guest who has followed these companies for years. he is a partner at true ventures. what is the most significant narrative behind this back and forth? we have moved out of the industrial age and into the post information age and theibly add facebook to four companies of this new reality. emily: not google. om: and google, i'm sorry. emily: apple and amazon had

touched one trillion dollars and retreated. now all of them are trading around the same amount in market cap. i don't think anything has changed in the last two months for amazon or apple or microsoft and i think if you look at these companies and add google to the mix and facebook, things haven't really changed that much and they don't change that much in terms of growth for these companies. there are dips here and there s, theseonger-term companies are doing well and we will see some changes when , appleannounces the holiday quarter. we don't know which way they go and in general, these five big

tech companies are the result of the postindustrial age. emily: apple will not be reporting numbers for the iphone as it transitions to a services company, that apple is -- we've asked this question many times over the last several years, but losing its cool, using its ability to innovate. to answert know how that question. i feel they are doing what they are supposed to do as a company. they are making new technologies, new products. they are actually pushing the envelope on their products, whereas they have new services, which are growing really fast. as a company, they are doing what they are supposed to do. do i get bothered by them not reporting their numbers? a little bit. i think you need to be more open. emily: let's talk about facebook. i have been dime to get your

thoughts on the controversies and new reporting about what mark zuckerberg and sheryl sandberg have specifically been doing the last couple of years in response to russian election meddling, fake news, and more. the title of that "new york times" deflect. news has been a drop of that maybe they weren't truthful when they responded to that article. this is a company that shares have plummeted 35% from july and you have seen hundreds of billions of dollars wiped off the market cap of the company. you've followed facebook for a long time. you know mark zuckerberg. what is your reaction to these leadership issues? om: let's separate the leadership issues with the business. there aren't that many players in the advertising market. there is google and there is them. advertisers aren't leaving facebook anytime soon. they may make nice statements in the press, but not a single one

of them has quit facebook because they can't afford to. how many people have quit facebook, employees? not many. things haven't really changed. what people forget, that the biggest challenge in terms of facebook is not mark or cheryl, it is more the business model. it is based on fundamentally engaging people constantly and in order to do that, they are willing to sacrifice any sense of morality. sixy: to that point, cofounders of a company that face -- that facebook has acquired over the years, instagram and oculus have left and not with nice things to say. how concerning is that? om: everybody knew what this company was for a long time. since 2007, i have been saying constantly that we have to be very careful how these guys collect information, how they push the society and what they do with our data. unfortunately, 10 years later,

it's a little too late to actually say that. when oculus were instagram sold their businesses, they knew exactly what was going to happen and to think they were unaware of the outcome is childish. in the future, can facebook achieve the same growth that they saw in the original social network if indeed engagement is plateauing on facebook proper? instagram much faster than facebook because they have more economic pressures to grow. in order to do that, they really push the envelope and that would mean instagram -- the lifespan of instagram as a golden goose is much shorter. emily: what about what's app?

the co-founder appointed this guy chris daniels to run the company. he has been to india a couple of times. you understand better the most what is happening with technology in india. do you think that is a huge opportunity for facebook that they can exploit? om: it works out. to make uses whatsapp phone calls or send tech messages -- text messages. everyone lives in whatsapp. doi don't know how they turn tht into money. it is still a big if. i don't know if it is very clear as to how the whole communication channel gets monetized. is it through e-commerce, advertising? is it through paid services? check service -- chat services? definitely they have a big opportunity there. , this is you think

still where advertiser dollars are going, but do you think we will ultimately see a decline of facebook over the next 10 years? do you think status quo? om: it took 25 years for yahoo! billionld for a few dollars so i think facebook is going to be here for a very long time. emily: do you think facebook is the next yahoo!? om: eventually, we all become yahoo!, right? less relative -- relevant, less able to innovate. every company goes through that phase, but with mark in place and their ability to just overlook any kind of morality or doing the right thing, will keep them in a good place and make their investors happy. emily: i want to ask about google. the ceo is supposed to testify on capitol hill wednesday.

it is now a national day of mourning for george h.w. bush. -- answerve to tough tough questions about google reentering into china. what should google's strategy be? om: i'm not running google, but at some point, a decided their values were not that important to them. they used to say don't be evil. , you can be a little evil and a little bit more and a little bit more, and here we are. a capital society -- >> has tech lost its moral company? om: i don't with all tech has theyits moral compass, but need to look themselves in the mirror and say, what do we really stand for? i mean facebook and google. categorically, i believe advertising based companies are

challenging, because they are now defining our future by collecting data. they are defining how ai is defined, because they are collecting the data and creating the morals and sharing them with others. a lot of what they do is going to define what our future looks like. emily: is tim cook right to call them out, or is that hypocritical? om: absolutely. tim cook doing the deal with google doesn't make much sense to me. another searche operation instead of working with google. emily: om malik, never mincing words. thank you. coming up, a massive mining shuts down under way. only it is not the coal industry. how the cryptocurrency slump is shuttering digital mining operation.

plus, spacex just launched its 19th launch of the year, launching 64 small spacecraft from 34 different organizations into lower orbit. all the details you need to know ahead. ♪

emily: one of the consequences of the recent route in bitcoin is well underway, and likely to have a profound effect on the leading cryptocurrency. there is a consolidation among the so-called crypto miners. they perform the calculations needed to generate the digital currency. the plunge has rendered many of them unprofitable. at least 100,000 individual miners have shut down, according to autonomous research and global advisors estimate 1.4 million servers have been unplugged since early september. next, what the new trade truce inns for the tech sectors

the u.s. and china, and does it mean qualcomm fails big? we will discuss, next. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: this is "bloomberg: technology." i'm emily chang. the trade truce between china and the united states. the immediate focus may be on the auto industry, but what about president trump's promise to protect u.s. ip and address the forced transfer of tech? press secretary sarah sanders says the leaders have agreed to negotiationsbegin on structural changes with respect to force transfer, cyberrror barriers, and theft, services, and agriculture." she added if it isn't done by 90 to additional 25%.

larry kudlow has said the two sides are close to resolving a deal on tech theft. where ourto beijing guest is standing by. what is the reaction in china to this agreement, at least in principle? >> generally neutral to negative. people in the last 24 hours have ,een looking into the text comparing disparities, particularly on tech transfer and ip theft, no direct acknowledgment of that issue in the chinese statement. i think the general sense is they are quite a ways apart. emily: what does it mean in essence for the china tech industry versus the u.s. tech industry? state ministers involved in ownership over

state-owned enterprises has stated that events like the zte ban, and other actions taken throughout the process has woken up the chinese tech industry to its need to develop core thenologies and i think situation continues to breed sentiment within the chinese that they need to look for other trading options from other territories between the agriculture space, looking for markets to sell their product and overall, reducing dependence on the u.s. as an importer and exporter. toly: the chinese seem reopen the door for the potential of a deal between qualcomm and nsp that the government effectively killed. qualcomm has said thanks, but no thanks. what do you make of this? ben: it appears the deal is probably not going to come back.

the world is a different place than when the deal was under discussion and up for approval. semiconductor sales falling a qualcomm is in a different place with regard to using more capital for share buybacks, penalties for having broken the transaction, so overall from qualcomm's perspective and where the market china is looking for alternatives from japan and taiwan where there is appetite for that product in the market today. i don't see high probability for that transit can going forward. emily: china he will be a nailbg 90 days for folks on both sides as we move toward the deadline. what will you be watching for specifically? thati think that the fact light heiser has been heading this process from the u.s. side casts a bit more of a shadow over the process.

90 days is not a lot of time. if he came out on the 20th of november and stated no actions have been taken from the chinese side to reconcile the sections real one last, the fact -- 301 list, it means we are quite a long ways apart. i worry about other elements of the statement, the fact the u.s. didn't mention protections for united state -- chinese students in the united states and no ban reduction of student visas, or work visas. americaese side stated is receptive to having chinese work there. i think -- [inaudible] , we will haveburg

to leave it there. thank you for joining us from beijing. msa capital, ben harburg. spacex just launched 64 satellites in one fell swoop. a record-setting mission. what you are seeing is considered to be the largest rideshare mission in u.s. history. the falcon nine rocket lifted off from vandenberg air force base in california earlier. the mission illustrates the growing demand to launch small satellites, devices that some companies hope will empower new businesses from internet services to supply chain monitoring. launch,spacex's 19th surpassing its previous record last year. next guest.our we have max chafkin in new york. how big deal is this mission? max: a big deal in the sense pointt is another proof in what seems to be a growing

sense that spacex is a mature, successful company that elon haveand glenn shotwell turned this into a big aerospace contractor that is a force to be reckoned with. what makes this particular mission unique and what it took to get here? it is the 19th mission of the year, a new record for the company. the have managed to recover first stage booster again on a drone ship and this had flown twice previously. the first time they have caught or recovered a rocket booster that has already flown now several times. -- theyying to catch are trying to catch it with this crazy boat. live video, but we are monitoring the feet. 64y have launched microsatellites. typically, the payload is a huge

object. either one massive satellite. in this case, it was 64 small ones and that it -- that is where some people think the industry is going. smaller payloads. emily: what does this pave the way toward? obviously, every mission is another step toward something and toward elon musk's broader goals. max: it paves the way toward having a long sustainable business. we don't know for sure what spacex's books look like. we know they are collecting a lot of revenue because the revenue numbers for each launch are relatively public or at least the list price is. to build a sustainable business, to be able to make a much bigger rocket, the next step, they need to generate profits and being able to tap into the public doner, which spacex has

business with the air force and nasa, but from startup private companies, this will be good. there are other rocket startups, like rocket lab, that are betting on small satellites as a focus. if spacex can keep the small satellite market and do the big launches for nasa and the air force, that will be great for them. emily: dana, a contract to send to then astronauts international space station. how far is that? dana: the first test flight is supposed to be in january, no astronauts on board. if that goes well, they could be flying astronauts as early as june. that is a big deal. elon musk to colonize mars, but likeever moving he can humans safely. if they can do that, it will be a proof point. emily: what needs to happen before they get there? isn't nasa doing an investigation into spacex and boeing? dana: nasa is looking at the

safety culture of both companies. this grew out of concern over muska's decision to smoke pot on a podcast. nasa's excuse to look under the hood of the safety culture, but it hasn't affected the timeline at all. forything is still a go commercial crew and nasa has invested resource into making sure commercial crew happens because without boeing and spacex comedy -- spacex, the alternative is a russian rocket. think thewe investigation will turn up anything of significance or raise any red flags, or do we expect everything to move forward for spacex's plan? max: my expectation is it always takes longer than you think, especially when you are talking about elon musk, with a tendency to be optimistic on timelines. also, this is an issue that neither nasa nor spacex nor boeing can afford to screw up. if nasa does not

have these private companies, it won't have a way to send humans into space. would have to rely on the russians, so this is a thing you want to get right and for the safety of the crew, it is one thing to be launching very expensive satellites into space. it is another to be putting human beings on that rocket. in the same way that tesla has missed deadlines, nows that musk has set but reached some of those goals, do we see the same in spacex, or is spacex more on time? dana: the launch industry in general is notoriously late. today's launch was supposed to happen last week and they delayed because of weather and then they were looking over technical specs. plans willlonization always be late, falcon heavy was late, but it is a privately held company and a little more of the standard in space in general. everything is late in space.

it is not just an elon musk thing. ,mily: dan hall, max chafkin always good to have you here. apple is taking a big campbell on 5g, but it might not be why you expect. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: apple is in no rush to make its iphones 5g capable. the company will wait until at least 2020 before offering an iphone that can connect to the next generation of high-speed networks. why the weight? -- wait.

? our guest follows the development of 5g and another who covers apple for us. apple has waited before, why are they doing this now? is a good question. they want to wait for 5g networks to ramp up in more places across the world. the difference is, the stakes are higher this time around. they waited that year for 3g 2008, waitedand for 4g in two thousand 11 and 2012, but the stakes weren't as high. everyone was buying iphones anyway. these days, the -- other companies are working on, so the stakes are higher for apple to wait out such a key new technology that all their peers will be pushing to phone buyers. --emily: is apple making the rt call right now? yet. don't know

we will see an announcements very soon from the providers, apple's providers, chip companies. to echo what mark said, what the industry is saying, this isn't just another incremental increase in speed. you are going to get new services, capabilities, lots of reasons why you want that new phone, why the carriers want you on that new phone and that is where the concern creeps in. maybe apple is going to be a little late. emily: what is so hard about the incorporation of this technology? ian: they are using new frequencies, lots of different things that need to happen, a whole new modem. these things take months to make. they take months and months to be qualified on the network, so it is not something apple can decide at the last minute. if they haven't decided now, no way they would be able to get it out by the launch period of late in the year. emily: the iphone is at an

inflection point, sort of. apple has said they will not release unit sale numbers for the iphone. more specifically, they are transitioning more to a services company. how much do you think samsung and these other cheaper android makers can win significant market share while apple waits? mark: the problem for the industry as a whole is that smart shown -- smartphone growth is the -- slowing dramatically for everyone, but samsung announced they would be coming out with a 5g phone in the first half of the year. this is going to be there s10 model just like apple made the big deal of the iphone x, samsung will do the same this year at the competition is going to be really high and hot for apple. the good news is this 2020 iphone for the year 2020, that is a big year, is shaping up to

be a big deal. appleically, when releases a new technology, very likely this will be an all new type of iphone like the iphone x was a couple years ago. it should be exciting for consumers. but are they going to wait until 2020? emily: what does it mean from a chipmaker, supplier standpoint? ian: a complicated situation in that qualcomm is at war with apple in so many ways, with a legal dispute, apple doesn't use qualcomm chips. qualcomm is going to have everything ready for everybody. emily: and they have focused on advancing 5g. and they have huge incentive in terms of moving things forward, because they are in the doldrums with earnings and it is really who is going to get this done as quickly as possible. they will use samsung as a vehicle to do that, not apple. emily: so much going on behind the scenes.

ian king, mark gurman, thank you. one of the biggest venture capital firms is taking an unusual step. we will speak to them next. ♪

one of sick -- silicon valley's biggest venture capital companies is taking an unusual step. spinning off some of its more mature startup investments into a mature fund. the operation will be called nea startups heldst byr a decade and will be run a long time partner, who joins us in the studio. you are creating a new fund from scratch of companies that you have stakes in indy united states, but -- in the united

states. really responding to a change in the venture capital ecosystem. the past few years, companies are taking longer to go public. there is more capital in the markets, and sometimes, that stretches investor hold periods and this is a response to that. but we found after reviewing the portfolio is that we found a basket of companies who are really high quality but either , hence new view capital. emily: how much is uber? ian: -- ravi: it is a small part of the portfolio. emily:? what else? ravi: -- what else? me, it is a pretty diversified basket of companies. emily: there is a reason some

companies haven't had an exit yet, maybe because they are not on the same trajectory they were on initially. clearly, you don't see it that way, but some might. ravi: if you think about the funds life, it is 10 years. you are investing in the later part of a fund. as you know, it takes eight to 12 years for a startup to reach liquidity, so there is a mismatch. that is one reason. secondly, look at 23 and me. there is a lot of great press on it, it is doing well. haveimes, older funds end-of-life issues. also, post financial crisis, a lot of funds raised are no period are having the same issue, so you have issues with firms and funds where they are

reaching end-of-life come yet the companies they have are performing well. how do you solve that? emily: what is the expected lifespan? ravi: probably six to eight years. emily: what is your job going to be in terms of managing it? you are not making any new investments, right? you are focusing on the companies you already hold? ravi: both. the vast majority of the portfolio are these companies. it will still be company building, so active management of companies. company building, helping them. there will be capital investments. there will be a mix of both. emily: how much dry powder is there if the fund is 1.30 5 billion? ravi: a significant amount. not only for new startups, but follow-on capital for existing companies. emily: what kinds of other companies are you looking at and

why would you do this vehicle rather than any a --nea? ravi: the strategy is typically later space -- stage, technology. one of the reasons it is a good fit, it is scaling nicely but an older fund. the ones holding this company are having end-of-life issues or a partner , theeft, so the management follow-on dollars, the resources doesn't make sense to survive in that fund. we can take it on. emily: what kind of company can have the first exit? ravi: you would probably know. there are companies making the news, but there are a lot of growth stage companies. , theok at growth stage scale is well over 50 million, so there are a bunch of companies and i wish i could tell you which will be the first exit. emily: is this motivated by softbank investing tons of money

into later stage companies that other venture capitalists just don't have that kind of cash? ravi: i think that is partially true. it is a broader issue happening over the last five to eight years, which is capital being available in the private markets. companies for good reasons want to stay private longer, don't feel right to sell and that has resulted in softbank and other funds, multibillion-dollar funds, these megaphones are out there. are out- mega funds there. firms are holding more companies. we need to actively manage those portfolios. emily: what sector are you excited about? excited about? ravi: the areas that have companies -- even with

salesforce and a lot of other companies come in automotive tech, there are interesting things going on. health tech and technology, and consumer. why is interesting now is is there so much capital? there is so much capital because the fundamentals of the ecosystem are as strong as a -- ever. view capital managing partner ravi viswanathan, thank you so much for stopping by. that does it for this edition of "bloomberg: technology." we are live streaming on twitter @technology. follow tictoc on twitter. i'm emily chang. this is bloomberg. ♪ ♪ there's no place like home ♪

argh! i'm trying... ♪ yippiekiyay. ♪

mom. ♪ manus this is "bloomberg daybreak: middle east." top stories. the trade truce rally. fall overy futures confusing signals over the u.s.-china talks. hasflattening yield curve its first inversion in more than a decade. does this mean a recession is on the way? opec. ditchingounces it is the cartel. the long going standoff with saudi arabia. theresa may