mark: i'm mark crumpton with bloomberg's first word news. -- with "bloomberg technology." been are times confirmed they are sharing more data than they disclose. and the first big suit by u.s. -- against kim are generally tick up. plus, how door -- went from hemorrhaging cash to becoming one of the fastest-growing startups in the crowded and

competitive delivery market. wded and competitive delivery market. emily: and why did elon musk hold a big party for his boring company? one-month after a scandal facebook, their information borders are under scrutiny. the new york times reports that after facebook tighten rules to limit user information that could be hooked into outside companies apps and websites, the company made many exceptions and cut special deals with certain companies as well. example, facebook gave spotify and netflix the ability to read, write, and delete personal messages. amazon, sony, and microsoft could get people the militarist is through their friends. even the new york times them self got access to friends lists to enable article sharing.

150 companies has access to more data than facebook disclosed impacting hundreds of millions of users every month. i want to bring in rich greenfield who has a buy rating on the social network. also with us is sarah frier. straight, this facebook gave spotify and netflix the ability to read, write, and delete my personal messages? what does that mean? sarah: what facebook was trying to allow you to do here is use facebook in a way that was better integrated with those apps. you can send a song to a friend, a show to a friend, and you would not have to go straight to facebook and copy and paste. it was integrated. you need to have the repercussions and write permissions -- you need to have the right permissions. spotify and netflix go in there and read something i sent to a friend in 2013? sarah: that's unclear.

the times does not go into that detail and neither does facebook. what it really wants to know is that there is a big difference here between allowing you to do that kind of messaging, sending things to a friend, and be able to read all of your personal messages with people who were not even using spotify. it's not clear where on the spectrum this falls. what matters is that facebook said post 2014, it wound down while of the deals to share data with third parties. they said that the congress. this is an example of how that was not quite true. emily: according to the new york times, one of this deals was ongoing with yahoo! as recently as this summer. saide statement, facebook "to be clear, none of these appsers or features gave information without permission, nor did they violate our settlement with the ftc."

is saying partners did not use the state to thoughpriately, even there is certainly no way to verify that. do you think all of this bad news is going to impact growth? i would go back to what sarah just said. you think about a consumer, you take a song on spotify and want to share it with a friend, copying a link to that song and going into facebook, and looking up your friend, and pasting it in his cumbersome and not user-friendly. much wanted to be or has wanted to be since the earliest days, the social layer that connects you and everyone you are friends with across the internet. many of the things you're talking about, or that the new york times is talking about, tie back to wanting to be the social connectivity. login with facebook, share content with your friends with third-party sites.

this is to make your life better. it's easy in the maelstrom that facebook seems to be stuck in now, it's easy to say the company has evil intentions with all of this, but it seems that this was done to make the consumer's life easier. it's a part why consumers like to use facebook and instagram so much. they made life easier than what life was like before the two applications existed. yes, this is making it easier for consumers, but the problem isn't so much what they did, but how they talked about it. they were telling people they had full control over their data and telling people they could opt out of these things and kind of deals were not going on. yet, we hear they are. this iss is -- even if something consumers want, was itebook being clear about with people? rich: the article also said netflix was accessing people's s

private messages. just because you put words on a paper does not mean every word is accurate or correct. even if the capabilities were there, if they would even be utilized. -- twos to bring sides sides to this. more on were the third-party data -- third-party companies leveraging this information? it would be a different issue if this was utilized with some the various intent. emily: let's talk more specifically about what facebook got out of this. some of the data they got back from the companies enabled them to empower the people you may know, the people you may know feature, which many people, and i have seen friends suggested myself, that it feels creepy.

you hear about the horror stories of psychiatrists and patients being connected to each other when there is no reason facebook should have that information or those people would want to be connected more publicly. talk to us about what facebook got out of this. facebook is collecting data from every possible avenue it can. even beyond the new york times or we had a separate discussion with facebook yesterday about location data. they were users on medium howt how they posted they turned off gps yet they were getting location-based ads. is one way tothat turn off location, but we can always get your location in other means. there was no way topped out out of location-based advertising on facebook. like whatnot sound they were explaining about how you have control over your data. with peoplebe clear

about exactly how this all works because in confusion, there is fear. emily: facebook shares has been -- have been suffering. have information on the market cap and how it has declined significantly. i know you have been more thatistic about the idea this won't impact growth significantly. that this bad news want to be bad for facebook's growth. i can tell you not just as a journalist, but as it user, these revelations bother me. i don't feel i have this information when i signed up to facebook. are you changing your opinion at all that this will hurt growth? sarah: you might want to look at the cookies that are tracking you on every device you use rather it is -- whether it is your mobile device or computer. i would argue you probably have hundreds of cookies tracking literally everything you do. everything you click on is being tracked by some site.

the entire premise of internet advertising is tracking you and everything you do, pictures you look at, pictures you click on, everything you do on the internet is being used to target in some fashion. this is a broader issue that goes well beyond facebook. the reality is, this is a great story from what i would call the tech industry overall. when you look at consumers, consumer usage of facebook has been in decline, not in terms of users as much as time spent has been shifting. that time has been shifting to instagram. you have seen explosive growth of instagram over the past couple of years. that is very much unchanged. consumers love using these applications. they continue to love using these applications. there's not a great alternative. useou are not going to instagram, what are your obvious

alternatives? when you think about messaging your friends overseas, whatsapp is the default application that almost everybody is using. not only is there not really good user alternatives, people like using these products and have embraced stories tremendously over the past 12 months on instagram. i think the advertiser side of lost in theets story, is that there are not great alternatives. the bread-and-butter of facebook and instagram is not large, multinational companies. it's literally the millions of small businesses all over the world which can target consumers using that data targeted all over the internet and target ads ads areit so that the generally untargeted and boring. the reason that adds on instagram are so good is because it is targeted for you. that's reality is lost that there is not great choices for

advertisers to look for on the internet. it's a google and facebook world online. growthual revenue occurring at facebook's stickier than investors are giving it credit for. there is fear, but the reality is far more secure than people realize. absolutely right. other services like google and twitter need to be scrutinized more and need to be more transparent, but am not sure regulators and lawmakers are convinced this is not a facebook more specific issue. we got a tweet today saying "it is beyond obvious today saying social media problems are ensuring the proper syria -- congress might step in. opened a new inquiry into facebook compliance with that degree from 2011. the sec is investigating facebook, and today, facebook

was sued by washington, d.c. over the cambridge analytica scandal. how concerned about you are in red ligation -- you on regulation? rich: i think regulation is good. laying ground rules for the broader internet would be helpful. gdpr more interesting than which seems like more of an annoyance to consumers. regulation -- if you talk to the google is an facebook's of the world, i don't sure how thenot government comes to regulation. i don't know how regulation looks like and how you defined regulating the internet. that's not an easy thing to do. , asave a divided congress you know heading into 2019. at somethink regulation basic level, i think it would make it easier.

companies that would benefit google and facebook would steam to benefits because they have -- seemed to benefit because they have the ability to adapt to that's regulation which might be harder for startups to really build themselves in that trigger litan world. emily: here's a bigger picture question, sarah. his facebook too big to be governed by anyone executive or any government? is it just too big for its own good? lawsuit ind.c. perspective, that is a tiny constituency of users. this company has 2.5 billion users using its products around the world. governments want answers and almost every one of those countries -- in almost every one of those countries. conflicts fueled by fake news and other issues they have seen. the thing that is a problem here is that there will be a constant drumbeat of scrutiny from here on out. antitrust might be part of that. --t would be the thing

gdpr is a thing for them. the s&p 500 is already investigating facebook on several fonts -- fronts. i think they will continue to be on the defensive. the problem is, are they going to be able to live up to the promises they have made for change? emily: and whether a consumer protection law -- rich, i love debating with you but we have to leave it there. i was about to say the consumer protection law and whether we need one in the united states, similar to gdpr. rich greenfield and sarah frier, thank you. coming up, door -- was about to be left in the dust by the food delivery competition. now the company is growing faster than any of its competitors. we will speak to the ceo, next. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: a year ago, door -- looked like just another meal delivery app, facing stiff competition and thin margins. the company was struggling to differentiate its products. then, things turned around. door -- started turning a profit. that is minus overhead expected -- expectations. it was enough for softbank's vision fund to swoop in. here to discuss, the future of the company and food delivery, the door -- ceo. i will double down on the fact that that is a generous definition of product because salaries and rent are part of everyday business. how well is the business doing from a revenue-generating

perspective? >> the business is on fire. >>we have tripled sales in a year. we are north of a billion and a quarter of net revenue. there are maybe a handful of businesses that can say that. no one can say they are going that fast. restaurantstry, the delivery business, we are gaining share faster than anyone, growing faster than everyone, and we are on track to be the gross platform in the space. emily: how do you translate that into profit? rich: earliest markets are profitable -- tony: the earliest prophets are profitable. on turninglaybook growth mode into a positive. it's only after that playbook that was developed that we decided to raise financing in march and later on in august. emily: we asked the head of uber eats -- we had the head of uber aid their business

is growing -- that said their business is growing as well. how do you stand up to the competition? what you doing to differentiate yourself? tony: a lot of the work that led to the result in 2018 happened before 2018. since day one, we have had a differentiated strategy on focus on the margins i building more -- by building more features like door -- drive. we are delivering other types of meals. isstarted with food, which the hardest in terms of paris ability. our partnership with walmart that started in april of this year, has now reached over 500 stores. we deliver the vast majority of

their groceries. emily: where do you think this is growing? be a fewink there will established players? do you think some smaller players will go out of business because -- he does not seem like there are many different food delivery players surviving in this industry. tony: i think you are starting to see some of that evidence. it's a vast market. 30 years ago, five to 10% of pizza sales were delivered. today, when you think of pizza, you think of delivery. over half of sales are delivered now. what you're seeing is the beginning of an industry that is much bigger than any of the industries that come before us in the consumer space since 2010. second, you are seeing that both ,alent, capital, merchants relationships, partnerships, are going to a couple of national players, and door -- is leading

the field. emily: where are we going to see you expanded use more of the softbank money? tony: door -- started the year with 600 cities and we are now 3000. and we spoke in march, i think i mentioned we would be in the 2000s. we are well ahead of the goal. with that said, we have a lot of the u.s. -- we serve the largest coverage today in the u.s., but there is still 25 to 30% of households we do not serve. more cities,t to second, we need to expand. today we deliver drive with partners like to pull a, wing stop, and walmart. there are many other businesses for them to survive the next decade that's need to build their own e-commerce and for film it channels -- for filament channels. channels.ent door -- ceo, tony xu --

doordash ceo, tony xu, thank you. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: shares of softbank's telecom unit has one of the first -- worst first aid declines for japanese ipo wednesday. this comes after much buildup and fanfare that the company is among the largest ipos in history. david reports from tokyo. >> a lot of reasons why this didn't go alone the first-ever trade, you look at market conditions and this is hardly the best time to do a large listing. was over 23 billion dollars raised. we are this close to christmas and there is a lot of volatility in the market. a lot of people had warned this

ipo was a little overpriced, especially if you talk to institutional investors. if you talk to retail investors, it was different. they saw something different in the ipo. they saw a national champion. masayoshi son is a household name in japan. he's a visionary if you will. it was sold as a dividend play. if you brought up the ipo price of 1500, you would have gotten 5% dividend yield and the company had promised and the company had promised an 85% dividend payout ratio on that income -- on net income. these prices,o that he'll play, -- that yield play, that goes up further. , if you havehere foreign investors, they look at the net income, the denominator when you calculate it, and they see it is the third biggest layer in a market that is

mature, likely going to be under pressure from the government to lower their prices as we have seen in recent weeks, and is the fourth player coming in. it's hardly a very good sell to foreign investors. it'll be interesting to see how this pans out ahead. as i mentioned, it was sold as a dividend play. at the moment, given the price, 14% drop, you will get a lot more dividend yields. tokyo, david ingles, bloomberg. emily: uber has lost a bid to overturn a court ruling in london that allows drivers to get a minimum wage and holiday pay. challengessed uber's today. this is the third time they have lost in the lawsuit. according to a spokesperson, they will now take the case to a supreme court. and new details on anthony levandowski's new act. the guy at the center of the law street -- lawsuit between google and uber.

he worked for googles waymo units before starting his own self driving company. that's got bought by uber and became a flash point in the trial. more and facebook, next. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: this is "bloomberg technology." back to our top story -- facebook was sued by the district of columbia over a privacy breach in which personal information of millions of was transferred to a.mbridge analytic this came after a separate report from "the new york times," that the social media giant 11 more than 150 companies to access users' personal data -- more data than it had previously disclosed.

suit filed is this y washington, d.c.? matt: i think it is something facebook has to take seriously. the story keeps getting worse for facebook by the day. are going up at the same time. this is a sign of that. the real risk is this may just be the first of many suits by the states. this suit may just be aimed at protecting d.c. residents from facebook's alleged practices. you could see more states jumping in and doing the same, and states have pretty broad powers to impose civil penalties for practices found to be deceptive. all of this also relates to the larger investigation at the federal level.

emily: a new inquiry was open into facebook compliance because of facebook's privacy violations from earlier years. on top of that, the doj and sec are investigating the company. how does this fit in with the new lawsuit today? matt: it's directly related. similar to authority the federal trade commission to look for deceptive and unfair practices from companies. what we're seeing with this suit is exactly what the federal trade commission is investigating right now. remember, at the federal level, ofre's almost no regulation these companies. it is something congress is exploring now, but as you said, facebook is bound by this 2011 the new yorke, and times raise last night -- are violations?

the risk for facebook is every violation potentially leaves it on the hook for $40,000 per violation. when you have a company that serves the number of users facebook does, the threat is serious. this could lead to billions of dollars in damages from the federal trade commission. you could see states following up doing the same thing. this is a serious risk to the company. emily: facebook executives have been apologizing again and again. listen to what sheryl sandberg had to say about personal data back in april. >> we know we did not do a good enough job protecting people's data. i'm really sorry for that and mark is really sorry for that. what we're doing now is taking really strong action. emily: that is from an interview i did with her several months ago. since then, more and more revelations and more and more indications that facebook has

not been transparent. of are the statements facebook executives, testifying before lawmakers, lobbying facebook is doing on capitol hill -- how is that impacting the actions we need taken here -- we see taken here? matt: i do not think it is impacting at all. if anything, it may be hurting the company. as these stories come out, it may be hurting the company. will only up the atssure on regulators, first the federal trade commission, those in other states, to really go after the company, and looming behind this is congress getting ready to look seriously at imposing federal regulation. the company can apologize and say that it is trying its best, but i'm skeptical that will be enough in this environment.

emily: lots of legal issues. i know you will continue to help us follow things. thanks for stopping by. big tech and especially facebook has been taking a beating, but what does it mean for the rest of silicon valley? venture capitalists in the united states are expected to reach $100 million, and we've seen companies hit the public market. a late stage venture capital ,irm was an investor in dropbox so what will 2019 bring? ft scheduled toy go public, the general partner is here. about think the bad news facebook will have a drag on the broader industry? >> i don't think so. i think it is isolated. my perspective is the young emerging tech companies in the u.s. typically venture back and they are pretty far a field from what the tech giants are doing

in a lot of ways. i think it is more isolated than that. i don't think it will impact the investment climate for the young emerging companies. emily: do you think it will reveal an actual opening for startup social media companies or startup social networks to have a chance? we had an analyst on earlier who said everybody wants to use instagram. nobody else has really succeeded. look at what happened to snapchat. is there a company now that could have an opportunity to isrupt? >> it certainly creates may be bit more of an opportunity, but broadok still has such technicals. other platforms have made inroads, but i think a pure start up in the area is still pretty tough. emily: what are you optimistic about in terms of trends for next year? mr. miller: in terms of types of companies or the marketplace? emily: both. mr. miller kohler and think the

environment is super healthy overall. in 2019, we had kind of a peak in private valuations. we have moderated somewhat from that. they are still high at a historical level, so attractive for companies to sell shares, but i think investors feel there fromill value in discounts public cons have become -- and discounts from public comps have become premiums again. i think it will be a big year for private investing. you mentioned at the outset the amount of private investment in 2018. i expect to see 2019 stronger than that, despite the volatility in the public market. i think the public market in 2019 will be the best in quite a long time. emily: why? mr. miller: because we are poised forward. i'm really only speaking about tech companies, but a large group of private tech companies in the u.s. that have scale --

let's say $50 million to $100 million in revenues -- and are growing, those companies are eligible but most have been holding back because private money is available. it's not just getting the capital, but getting the visibility of public offering, the liquidity, and it is healthy for thecompany and ecosystems. i think people have been ploys. right now, there's more companies on file silently, and the silent filing has been a huge blessing. there's more companies on file silently in the tech space than ever before. that list went public, it would be the biggest year in a decade. skeptic might say given this volatility, they will get dragged into that. mr. miller: the great tech

companies are going public in any market. went, google, none of them in buoyant markets, and none of them had successful ipo's, actually. some of the biggest value builders of all time in the industry. the ability now with the silent filing and testing the waters, two aspects of the job act, allow the company to move swiftly and complete an ipo in a way that was simply not feasible five or 10 or 25 years ago. you can time the market in a way that we never could before, and that is a big advantage. in a market full of volatility, i think people can find their slots to make it happen. emily: you have had some big exits this year. where are you going to be

putting your pets this coming year given the competition from softbank in the late stage investing market? >> from our perspective, softbank is not a competitor. the scale of their funds and the scale of investments they are looking for simply -- it is just a different business than we are in. we are in late stage capital. the venture business becomes a big business with a lot of segmentation. there's big segments for individuals because they are looking at -- for us, they are more likely to be either a follow on to something we do or an exit strategy because i think they are going to build a tech conglomerate. toly: sandy miller, great have you here. thanks for stopping by. the european union is investigating a potential leak of "sensitive information," following a report that hackers breached the bloc's diplomatic

communication network. according to reports, hackers informationo revealing reports of donald trump's administration, struggles with china, and nuclear risk.an's coming up, the boring company has opened its first underground tunnel for demonstration. how it could transform the future of transportation. 's leadershipk called into question after a year of controversy. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: it has been a difficult

year for elon musk, but not for his boring company. on tuesday, the company unveiled its first completed underground hawthorne,in california, putting them a step closer to realizing the vision of a zero emission high-speed transit system musk hopes will alleviate traffic in l.a. musk claims to have court about $40 million of his own money in the two years into this project since the founding of the company. it is looking to build similar tunnels in chicago and d.c. here to discuss, sarah mcbride, who was at this event. what happened? happened? sarah: the event was super fun, lots of razzle-dazzle. all kinds of celebrities and people just wanting to take a

ride in the car. elon was there, his girlfriend mom was there, and it was super fun to get a ride in the cars. emily: talk to us about what that was like. sarah: the trip i went on was a little bit space-age-y. the --been modified so you got an a modified tesla, modified so the wheels could fit in the grooves, and you go into this batman elevator and come of a small tunnel with a lot mm flashing lights, and then the car kind of takes off. it has to be a self-driving car, in future, musk says it will not have to be a tesla. all the demonstrations yesterday were on teslas. targeted 4000 vehicles in our at 145 miles an hour. walk us through how this works at scale. it sounds like a car on a track.

sarah: right. in one sense, it is really old school. as you say, it's a car on a track in a tunnel. emily: what sort of firm interest has there been from cities? is the idea that cities will just order up a tunnel?

sara: there were a lot of city last night. there's a delegation from chicago which has entered into exclusive negotiations with the boring company to build a high-speed train to the airport -- when i say train, i should say luke. they are putting the finishing touches on that deal. the boring company has been talking to officials on the east coast about a tunnel going between washington, d.c., and baltimore, maryland. the environmental review has already started. -- when i say train, i should oop.luke and all kinds of cities are interested in using these tunnels for utilities, he says. he says cities would want to use these tunnels for electric cable, water, things like that. emily: fascinating development

on the anything but boring boring company. thanks very much for sharing your report. meantime, nasa has disclosed it is investigating a hack of employee information of both employees. former the agency said it does not believe any of its missions were affected. still ahead, highlights from our conversation with former sisters -- former cisco ceo john big tech including it companies can recover from tarnished reputations. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: in the latest episode of "studio 1.0," i caught up with john chambers, one of the longest running ceo's in tech history. he ran cisco for 21 years. chambers: you know i'm a big fan of sheryl sandberg and leaning in. i believe in gender diversity. i was the first ceo that asked her to speak to my leadership team of 3000 people and required everybody to read the book. emily: i remember that. her she'srs: i told too tough on women and she needs to press women. she was making a point. she was saying we have to control our own destiny and lean then and when you are breaking out of a challenge, you got to be able to do it i'm making bold statements.

emily: as much as i have and itsd from "lean in" message, you cannot lean and if the door is nailed shut. don't companies need to lean and more, to? mr. chambers: yes, they do. have gender diversity because it was the right thing to do. we have really talented female leaders who were amazingly good. you've got to pay everybody -- that should be a given -- for the same job. the let the same rank should be paid the same level, period. in a startup, if you just require people to email -- to for everyone female open position, we saw numbers change dramatically. emily: we know you are friends with sheryl, so i know it's tough for you to answer this question, but what do you think she and mark could do differently? mr. chambers: this is where i am

a fan of replicate double -- replicate-able playbooks. you face strife, you have to determine how much was accidentally created and how much was internal. you want to determine how long it will last and how deep it will be. you outline the strategy for it and paint the picture of what your company should be coming out. i think it is important all the high-tech companies and leaders do that and they realize that in today's world, you got to be transparent because it will get out anyhow. then you've got to be realistic depend onannot governments. you got to build trust relationships. the lesson learned is the minute you find yourself with a major challenge coming in front of you is you realize how serious it will be. i think silicon valley struggling for tech for good versus tech for bad, are we really a force for good. just for america but around the world -- i think we can be, but we

have lost that focus and i think it's important we get back to it. emily: do you think facebook is a threat to democracy? mr. chambers: no. one accompanies doing well or leader is doing well, everybody angs your praises -- when company or leader is doing well. every time we got knocked down, we came asked longer. that is likely for facebook as well, but it does mean they have to do things differently. are good people, but they have to deal with the issues in front of them and deal with them decisively. you got to see what it looks like at the end. emily: given how many times you have seen this movie before, do recovers? acebook mr. chambers: and the company -- any company that does not constantly think through a is in trouble.

his employeesd to amazon could be one step away from failure if we don't have the courage to reinvent ourselves or deal with tough issues that come at us, we will get left behind. 45% of the fortune 500 will not exist in 20 years. if companies do not navigate through their problems, they will get left behind. emily: it's interesting you mention amazon because this is a company that just that they will create 50,000 new jobs and you have people in new york protesting in the streets. they don't want amazon in their city. why is that? doeshambers: anyone who not want amazon in their city with the talent they attract, they should think about a little bit more. we got to live in an environment where we create more jobs than we destroyed. i would love to see them relocate in the midwest because that is where we are losing jobs, and it's an area that if we do not create a startup culture of new jobs, we will have the voting patterns you are seeing now because for the first

time -- and remember, i lived in north carolina and georgia and west virginia and ohio and indiana and illinois. for the first time, people in that part of the world think the as good aill not have lives as their parents. this is where i think the high-tech community has to jump in and make a difference. emily: former cisco ceo john chambers. you can catch my full "studio 1.0" with chambers tonight. wide range of topics. that does it for this edition of "bloomberg technology." where for -- we are livestreaming on twitter. follow us on tictoc. this is bloomberg. ♪

>> very good morning from sydney where us trillion markets have just opened from trade. >> good evening from bloomberg's global headquarters in new york. asia." me to "daybreak: >> our top stories this thursday -- >> the additional tightening of -- ncial conditions