♪ emily: i'm emily chang in san francisco, and this is "bloomberg technology." coming up in the next hour, slack could be very hot of the usual ipo route by opting for direct. while the company might follow in spotify's footsteps. plus alphabet's board is being sued for claims of sexual misconduct. among the names, googles co-founder and one other. we look at the missions to come in the new year. first to our top story.

2019 is supposed to be the year of big tech hitting the public market. but a u.s. government shutdown has caused some ipo talks for companies like uber and lyft. the messaging platform slack is taking time to weigh options. the company is looking to sell shares directly to bidders on the stock market, choosing a direct listing over ipo. if it goes ahead with this unusual route, slack will follow spotlight which began trading in new york in april also via direct. for more, i want to bring in a guest who covers ipo's for us. what do you make of this potential strategy? elizabeth: this is something we know they happen considering for a while. they have not filed anything yet. the shutdown has been a big problem, but it looks like they will go down this route and go

for the direct listing. what is interesting about that, it is the second big tech company to make this move. after spotify, people thought there might be a big rush of people but it has taken a while for someone else to take the plunge. it means they will still have banks working on this, but you avoid the big underwriting fees that come with things like that and put yourself at the mercy of the market. emily: when it comes to spotify, is there a perception the direct listing was a success, that it was the work all? elizabeth: in terms of how it went, how the day went in april, everything was very smooth. it quietly starts trading. the company is not looking for the last publicity you make it. but everything went very well at the time. since then, shares have slipped. whether companies look at that attribute that to the direct listing decision or the business. emily: what are the potential disadvantages of choosing this route, which uber and lyft thus far are doing it the traditional way? elizabeth: the company does not raise any money this way.

it is something unique, so they do not need that. slack has the brand recognition of one of the social media companies. in terms of stable revenue, it was like a mature business software company. they are not looking to raise money. what this allows them to do without doing that is provides a liquidity to investors and employees. emily: what i'm looking at for a potential valuation here? elizabeth: about $7.1 billion back in the middle of last year. i think they will not be aiming higher than that. but the 2018 on financials which we should get in the next couple of months before they go to market, that will help investors decide how they want to value the company after the ipo. emily: what about timing? we talked about the impact of government shutdown on ipo talks. we have seen slight delays in

the talks that uber and lyft are having. could slack going direct allow them to avoid the hiccups? elizabeth: if anything, the opposite. this is unusual to read the sec does a lot for small companies but not big large technology companies. they need to have more interaction with the regulator in more discussions. definitely the shutdown can cause a delay for that. emily: interesting. i know you will keep us posted. now turning to apple, remember when the iphone maker in an effort to boost sales offered trade in sales for people buying the new iphone? two major chinese retailers are slashing prices. they may have misjudged the chinese appetite for its flagship product. for more, i want to get to mark in los angeles. how unprecedented is it for them

to cut prices like this? mark: it is fairly unprecedented. we have seen the trade-in deals from apple and promotions from companies like best buy, perhaps a u.s. equivalent to the chinese retailers you mentioned. but this is in no way insignificant. this is a big move for apple. it means they are slashing the price i that the are using to sell to the retailers to sell at higher prices. imagine what the retailers are paying in order to sell those lower price points. it is not unheard of given the current climate with the response to the 10 r. it is a big move for apple and the retailers. emily: sales going to be something chinese consumers come to expect? mark: right. the main problem with the iphone, if you want to consider it a problem, is that it is much higher in price compared to very similar devices. even almost double the price in some cases.

you are not really getting a lot more for your money in these specific cases. by lowering the price, it matches them more closely with other chinese phone makers. so it could help. in that case, apple is really fighting with their features and services and hardware offerings versus people just going pretty cheap alternatives. emily: now we know that apple is working on its new phones for this year. there are reports they will be offering three new phones, just as they did last time. in your reporting, what you're hearing from sources, are you hearing anything to cash in apple will change its strategy in 2019? mark: no, and he reportedly is not really news. they have had three new models for the last several years. this is basically a continuation of the same strategy. the news would be if they are

doing more models. we have been expecting these camera improvements. in terms of changing the strategy, it appears apple realized they had a problem on the hands in terms of slow iphone sales between november 1 and december 31, so the two month period. these things get locked in at a high level. features can change but the high-level plans get locked in a year-and-a-half before release. this only started happening a month or two ago. too late for them to change their plans. the whole plan for 2019 was to be not a significant iphone update but the 5g upgrade. emily: i'm curious what you are seeing in terms of market share at a micro level and what new data we have. we have seen stocks slide. several analysts citing competition from huawei. are some doing well and others not doing well in china? mark: i think what we are really going to see here is apple and

samsung having problems in china for the next few quarters. certainly saw it last quarter. it is interesting because samsung is fading away as an apple competitor in some respects. obviously, they are still the biggest rival. but i think huawei is creeping up in that sense. since i was going to be announcing its new devices february 20. these are going to be hot new products with lots of new features. they will announce the folding screen, the edge design on the new s10 and the s10 plus. they will have a floor model. tons of new technology. the landscape right now in china is going to be huawei versus apple and other chinese lawmakers. but samsung in other parts of the world, europe and u.s.,

really going to be a challenger in the second half of the year. emily: interesting. i know you will bring us all the details on the new models when you have them. mark for us in los angeles today. coming up, alphabet's board of directors being sued for their handling of sexual misconduct claims, but lawyers are hoping to make changes that go beyond google. if you like bloomberg news, check us out on the radio. listen on the bloomberg app, bloomberg.com, and in the u.s. on sirius xm. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ emily: in november, thousands of google employees walked out in protest at the company's approach to sexual misconduct. now, shareholders are going after the board. on thursday, a group of investors sued alphabet directors for approving a $90 million exit payment to andy rubin, father of android, while covering up his alleged sexual misconduct. the suit filed represents the first legal action against the board directly, targeting top executives, including cofounder larry page and sergey brin. google did not respond to bloomberg's request for comment. so you obtained the board minutes, which were in the complaint filed, but redacted. what can you tell us about what is in them? frank: unfortunately we cannot tell you the details in their.

we have five pages of allegations but because google has demanded they continue to remain sealed, they will be sealed until the judge rules on that, which can be in the next couple months. emily: you would not have filed the suit if the minutes did not back up your case. right? frank: that's right. yes, we would not have sued the board if after reviewing them we determined there was no liability on their part. emily: so all the nine directors you say in the complaint were informed that these allegations against andy rubin were credible. do the minutes show that anyone raised objections to the payout? ann: i don't know if we can speak specifically to that. but our concerns are that the board acted in a way that was

inconsistent with any of the knowledge that we believe existed. emily: just hold out a couple of lines from the complaint. you say he was allowed to quietly resign after intel investigation found the allegations of sexual harassment by rubin to be credible. he was elected to engage in human sex trafficking, and hundreds of thousands of dollars to women to be owned by him. we have a statement from andy rubin's lawyer. she told us this lawsuit mischaracterizes his departure from google and sensationalize his claims made about him by his ex-wife. he let google voluntarily and allies any misconduct, and we look forward to telling his story. he is coming out swinging. but why do you think you have such a good case? frank: what is different about our case is we got the nonpublic documents.

no one has obtained those before. and we reviewed those to determine whether the board itself was liable. that has been our confusion. the committee at google that approved this compensation was comprised of some permanent people up there. john doerr was the chair of the committee and approved this. has was ram shery ahn. and paul otellini, who is now deceased. we reviewed what they did with respect to mr. rubin and determined that the board has direct liability for breaching their fiduciary duties. right? ann: absolutely. emily: alphabet did not respond to our request for comment. we reached out to john doerr and other representatives of google who declined to comment, and a couple other board members did not respond to our request for comment either.

do you believe that these are isolated incidents? what happened with andy rubin? do you think this is a broader problem? ann: there is no question it is a broader problem and we are hoping to get more information once discoveries start about what has gone on. there has been a massive impropriety, not clearly sexual harassment, because some of them seem to be consensual, but they were with people including the others who were having sexual relationships under wing of theirs. and in one case, mr. drummond, the general counsel, had a relationship with a woman who had his baby. she is married. emily: she no longer works there. ann: she no longer works at google because she was demoted

initially from her work in the general counsel's office. and then after that, she was pushed out. emily: so you claim that the board paid rubin for fear that he would make the details of sexual harassment by a senior executive public. what evidence do you have of that? frank: wall that is as connecting the dots. there was no reason for google to pay him $90 million. all of the equity that rubin had when he left in october 2014 was unvested. it was about $177 million. they did not have any obligation to pay him that equity, so you have to raise a question of why they would pay him $90 million to leave when he did not have any of the equity vested? that is the only question we can discern from that type of obtainment, especially in terms of the light of the fact that,

and you have to remember, before they fire been they did an extensive investigation at google and determined the allegation of sexual harassment were credible. so he should have been fired for cause, in which he would have gotten zero dollars. the only rationalized lunation is the board paid him to stay quiet because if they fire him, he would have sued them for wrongful termination and said, hold on, you are saying i did something wrong? all the senior executives and even the cofounders of the company are doing similar things. happen you fire me? emily: is it true any monetary damages would just go back to alphabet? so then why go this route? what does this accomplish? ann: because we are asking for changes. not just at google and their governing structure as well as their approach to sexual harassment, investigations, their approach to equality of how women are treated in those investigations. clearly what we know is many

people have been dismissed from google. lower-level employees. emily: google did say that 48 people have been fired for sexual misconduct issues in the past two years. ann: and then they received a payout. it is very clear what happened with the high-level employees for whatever reason, they are treated differently. they get a pass. when that happens and the employees know it, it creates an intimidating environment in the workplace. and we also think this is probably true in other companies in silicon valley. emily: i wonder, what about addressing an environment that creates 48 people who have these kind of allegations against them? let's talk about changing that. ann: precisely. and there are a number of things, and it is not specifically stated in the

complaint, but there are some things in the board governance that the complaint has asked for. but also, in my view, they need more women on the board because people would respond differently if there were some women on the board. emily: you are preaching to the choir on that. you also want them to change the voting structure and the share ownership so that larry and sergey don't have as much power. frank: right. we wanted to go to a one-to-one structure. there should only be one vote for each share. the only reason they control the company is not ownership of stock but the voting rights. they can effectuate whatever they want through their voting control, and we feel that is a big the problem. they were involved with wrongdoing so if you change it to one vote per shareholder, as the case with many publicly traded companies, you will allow the public shareholders to have greater input into these issues. emily: all right. we will be following this every

step of the way. appreciate you coming by here to share the case you are trying to make. frank, ann, who filed the suit against alphabet. frank: thank you. emily: spacex launched and landed its first rocket of the year. what to expect from the company for the rest of 2019, next. ♪

♪ emily: spacex has successfully launched its first mission of what is expected to be a busy 2019. on friday, the company launched the falcon nine rocket carrying 10 satellites into orbit. these are the first of 75 satellites that replaced their existing commercial satellite network. dana: it is a fairly routine launch from the market went up, satellites deployed, they landed on the drone ship.

this is showing that spacex has gotten pretty good at launching rockets. it was just a couple years ago when landing was a big challenge. now they do it pretty routinely and they are expecting to do roughly 18 to 20 launches again this year. last year was a record 21 launches. it is going to be a big year for them. emily: how does that compare to what the competition is up to now? dana: they are working the competition by far. ula had eight launches in 2018. spacex plays in the launch market. they have the government, nasa, and commercial satellite operators. emily: what are potential challenges this year, potential breakthroughs? dana: the big thing is the potential crew program with nasa. elon musk wants to settle on mars. flying astronauts to the iss, we will see the first demonstration flight.

that as well, they can be flying astronauts this year. emily: this year they could be flying astronauts? dana: they could. emily: we will see. nasa is a conservative agency. the goal is to fly safely as opposed to sticking to a schedule. right now, the united states is dependent on russia and a rocket to get astronauts to the iss. a big push to return that ability. emily: where is nasa in all of this? dana: because of the government shutdown, we don't know. emails and phone calls to nasa cannot be returned right now because the press officers are on furlough. they said they are eyeing no earlier than february for the first demonstration flight. emily: all right. thanks so much. dana: thank you. emily: coming up, gm is betting big on cars and making cadillac its leader. our conversation with gm ceo mary barra is next. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ this is "bloomberg technology." back to our top story. while companies like uber in lift are trying to get down that road to ipo,'s lack is looking to get to the public market differently. according to "the wall street journal," they could potentially choose a direct listing over traditional ipo. you might remember that spotify took this route back in april, 2018. so are we going to see more of this from tech companies and 2019? joining me to discuss, a partner at the venture capital firm nea, and the ceo of the national venture capital association, both from washington. the government shutdown happening in your town, delaying

some of those ipo talks. now we are hearing that lack good for go it all in go to markets directly, but that might be a more difficult route for them. what is your take on this potential decision? >> well, i think for some companies like spotify, it's an opportunity. they have brand recognition and that is what a lot of companies look for when they have ipo. this gives another opportunity for a subset of companies to make it to the public market. >> is the shutdown impacting work in silicon valley? is it impacting any of your companies? >> you know, i don't think so, not really. it has only been a couple weeks and the only big impact is that are required to send companies public are not at work. downturn at the end of last year and anyone who

was planning to go out on the first of january is the lane claims anyway. a lot of companies that are tee up for great ipos this year have really strong fundamentals. any soft january in terms of the number of ipos is not going to affect them. but if you are a company that needs cash you are probably watching the ipo window very closely, but this is definitely a new existential risk they do not account for. >> another and perhaps bigger problem is the broader macroeconomic slowdown. we have seen a lot of volatility, hundreds of billions of dollars wiped off the market cap of big tech companies. that said, we saw a record amount of venture capital raise last year, $129 billion, 33% more than the year before, leaving only the records set in 2000, which is a little bit for boating, given what happened after 2000.

how concerned are you about a broader macroeconomic downturn? >> well, obviously, there's a lot of relationship between private and public markets. folks of the venture capital industry will watch it closely, but they are very resilient. they are used to taking on risk, uncertainty. that $130 billion that was invested last year in portfolio companies is great for our country, to make sure that the next generation of new companies are born and are able to grow. what i see over the last several years, we had $55 billion raised by venture firms that will start to be invested over the next several years, coupled with the strong fundraising over the last four or five years. to me, they are prepared and they are ready, and if there are market corrections, you will see the best and savviest investors be able to support the entrepreneurs that need it.

>> are you at all concerned that if the volatility continues that funds could dry up? billion, the only way to go is down. >> that's a good question. it was a peak year in terms of money going into companies. but the nice thing about private markets, especially when you get into venture capital, now we know a lot of this went into later stage deals, is that you don't need -- there is a return to building core, strong fundamentals and companies, and we have seen that over the past few years and i don't think that will change.there has not been a rush for exit . the market seems strong all-around. there might be a period of slower growth, but we don't think there's going to be any

significant change in the ability of companies to raise capital or fund capital. >> ok, but how about the willingness of raising capital? there was a provocative headline, more startups have an unfamiliar message, get lost. they are talking about a countermovement to not take venture capital money, because investors have for so long focused on rapid growth, which some of these entrepreneurs are thinking, maybe that's not the best way, maybe we should go more slowly with a better chance of creating a sustainable business. is that a larger movement you are seeing? >> i don't think we have seen evidence that it's a large movement. when you look at the data, when you see that companies, particularly tech companies, are still north of 10 years between founding in some sort of exit opportunity, that suggests that companies, even with venture capital health, staying in for

the long-term and that's good for them,. i don't see the data that shows there's a big change. >> all right. bobby franklin and dana grayson. it's going to be an exciting year to say the least.thank you both . >> thank you. >> g.m. is betting big on the electric car market, putting pressure on the competition. the company reaffirmed it will cast cadillac as it lead brand going forward. david westin spoke with the ceo, mary barra, and asked about the push into a greener auto sector. take a listen. >> cadillac is our technology brand. when we look at the technology that we will put on this vehicle, it's appropriate that cadillac is believed brand. we will fill out the portfolio that makes sense into the customer driven, and it's a very important part of rebuilding cadillac and demonstrating that cadillac is a true luxury brand.

delighting customers with the technology and electric experience. talked to dan hammond who said that by 2019 this year you will have some commercialized versions of electric vehicles. that allieve autonomous vehicles should be electric vehicles. that the leveraging of the electronics and the technology. we are working on the rate of integration, and we just posted a really cool video yesterday, demonstrating how we continue to learn new operations in the dense and urban environment of sentences to. i think we have demonstrated that we will make decisions that vehicles are safe. but based on that rate of iteration, we believe that we in atake the driver out constrained environment and demonstrate our electric vehicle capabilities. -- youan is announcing

announced a new architecture in china, brazil and mexico,. talk about why you're doing that. >> you look at being customer driven, the customers in those markets, they want the latest technology, and they want performance from safety and connectivity. we step back and often those markets are served by older architecture. with the scale and the significant share we have in china, the strength in south america and other markets like mexico, let's do a dedicated new architecture where we can deliver something special to the customer. we will be sharing some of those vehicles today. i think it is going to be significant and we start that rollout later this year in china, slowing to south america and mexico. >> we hear about electric vehicles a lot. how many people are acquiring them, it's not that high a

percentage. when is it coming? when are we there? >> i believe the customers exceptionally rational. if you look at china, because of the regulatory environment, you will see it grow more quickly there. one of the things we are focused on is if we can have a desirable, profitable, weropriate perspective, think we can create demand. for now we are only working on the electric vehicle technology but we are also working on the infrastructure. we made an announcement that we will have the largest charging infrastructure available for customers. we continue to see real pain points and we take that is going to allow the growth to occur. >> if you look at the industry overall, would we be where we are today if tesla did not exist? did tesla spur this or was it going to happen anyway? >> when i look at electric vehicles, we have been doing that since ev1, the chevrolet

vokt. i think there have been many important players that have helped, and there's even more coming out. >> g.m. ceo mary barra with david westin. more coming up. we are going to be talking about the future of retail, next, in facebook security problems ahead. that's next. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ >> a series of lackluster holiday sales reports prompted

the selloff and retail stocks this week, with many of them struggling to figure out how best compete in and on the channel world. for the world's biggest retailer, walmart, investors in technology is key. as part of our retail transform series, walmart's chief technology officer told emma chandra that the robots are coming, but they are still hiring human. >> i think the biggest thing we've done in the last year or two, we have a robot that scans the shelves and goes around the store to make sure that items that are in stock and are available -- oftentimes this is a human and machine combination where the robot can go down the aisle and spotted item that is out of stock on the shelf or misplaced, then assign a human to deal with it, getting stuff off the top rack. it is really that combination of man and machine together that is

making as much more efficient. >> how do you think people react to this? i imagine it would have preferred human combination teamwork in the past and would be concerned about robots. >> the robots are doing jobs that humans don't do very well. if you scan an island are looking at a row of 1000 soup cans, how do you determine which ones are in the right place? >> but if they are not doing that, it must mean less work. >> the great part, what customers want to see is more humans in the aisle, answering questions and helping out. it offloads that box sorting, aisles scanning process to allow customers to be on the floor in talking to customers. that is what customers want. >> we are not going to see job losses? >> in some cases we are adding. example, wefor added 10,000 jobs just for grocery picking and for grocery pickup. >> we are not going to see going

down the road with amazon cashless stores, removing humans altogether? >> we are testing computer vision, that sort of thing. we are talking about a huge scale. though 7-eleven size stores are one thing, but when you're talking about a walmart, it's going to be some time before we can go completely cashierless. >> walmart gets a lot of credit for the scale of its investment in those stores, and investors are a little frustrated that investment might be hurting profitability. how did that affect your decision-making? are the things you like to do but you can't, because investors want to see margin improvement? >> walmart has invested in 1970's, andince the we have always had a good balance between profitability and investment on tech. we are growing our technology team pretty dramatically. we had about 1700 people last

year, and we are going to hire another 2000 this year all are on the globe. >> you are not feeling any cost pressures? >> right now it's all about how fast they can grow. it's not a blank check, but we want to be smart. it's really about how can i get the right now it's between how fast can you grow into being efficient with the organization. >> so you don't have to thing necessarily about investor can terms -- investor concerns. >> i always do. the best part about the cto job is looking at new technology, but the worst part is sitting in on the meeting. >> you partnered with microsoft on a five-year computing deal. how much would that decision to partner with microsoft driven by not wanting to partner with amazon? >> microsoft is a great partner. i have known kevin scott for many years. years -- wet couple

have been talking about cloud computing more than five years but only in the last 18 months hasn't been cost competitive, at a scale of walmart's size where we are building our own data centers and have strong networks and infrastructure teams. only now has it been cost competitive for the cloud service providers to compete with the company of our size. we have been working with microsoft on their cloud infrastructure for the last two years, and we started implementing a number of other platforms. >> i'm sure not giving data to a competitor when it comes to grocery and retail must be part of that decision. >> absolutely. most retailers are in that vote, where microsoft is a better partner for them. >> and in terms of looking into you'dare there any things like to announce our let us know you are working on? the hiring --ned,

we are really focused on not only the robotics platform, but using walmart stated to our competitive advantage. i have a massive amount of data when it comes to customers, but also supply chains, merchandising, and pricing. we are investing heavily in machine learning platforms, and folks that really understand the data space. >> walmart cto jeremy king with emma chandra. coming up, the u.s. government shutdown is ongoing, and it means there are fewer eyes keeping watch on cyber threats. are we at risk? we will discuss next. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ >> we are now three weeks into

the partial u.s. government shutdown, and we have heard several stories of national parks strewn with garbage in the tsa closing airport screening lanes due to staffing shortages. but there's another field that could feel potential long-term impacts from disclosure, cybersecurity. for example, the department of homeland security has furloughed 40% of employees in a unit countering cyber threats. to discuss this and other cyber security issues around the globe, i want to bring in our guest, creators of hotspot shield, a privacy act downloaded on 650 million devices. that unit of the dhs, 45% furloughed, 85% at the national institute of standard of technology. they provide security standards and guidelines. is cybersecurity, national cybersecurity, at risk? >> cybersecurity is one of the most important things to keep people of this country safe, and

really it's something that could be at risk if the government shutdown continues, if employees in the cybersecurity units are not at work. there's a lot of work private companies are doing as well for privacy and security of people around the world. unfortunately, a lot of the largest security companies in this country are still focused on security for the legacy pc computer,irus on your and not enough effort is going into mobile security, which is where most of users are spending their time. >> so at a government level, what do you imagine is not getting done? >> i don't know enough about the details of what's happening or not happening at the government level. i'm looking at the world from the lens of what's happening for end-users on their devices,

being a company that provides the largest privacy and security platform in the world with the largest mobile security platform for end-users. at how do weg protect people on their mobile devices, and as you mentioned, 650 million people to date have turned to us to enable that production. >> on the one hand, we have these external potential threats. on the other hand, you have potentially internal threat. you could look at a company like facebook and all the scandals around how it handles user data and how foreign actors have exploited it. more faceotten a lot time with facebook engineers, what do you see? >> a lot of engineers in silicon valley are saying i could piece bending my energy on helping facebook exploit user data, or i

could join a company that is helping protect user data for the next billion people. >> so how many more resumes are you getting from facebook employees? ago, it wasear pretty hard to recruit anyone other facebook, because people didn't realize they were part of this movement to exploit user data. they were led to believe that they were helping people connect with friends, when what they were actually doing was helping facebook make billions of dollars off our data. i think people have realized what's actually going on, and a lot of people have said we are going to work with companies that have a real mission, a real soul, a real purpose. i mentioned to you before last time we met that the first companies to reach one billion people online were google, apple, and facebook, and all three are in the business of exploiting user data. >> apple has come out pretty strongly and put itself on the opposite side of these consumer

data companies, if you will, saying what happens on an iphone stays on an iphone. apple also just hired sandy kirk, who used to work on privacy in this since become a vocal critic of facebook. what do you make of that? >> well, i think we have a lot of respect for what apple is doing. >> are they really on the right side of history? because they also have deals with apple -- excuse me, deals with google, for example, when it comes to search. >> my thinking is that apple is trying to do the right thing. are extremely excited that there is at least one really large tech company that wants to protect user data. been talking about privacy for a number of years and have always felt like we are alone. everyone else wanted to exploit, and it's a relief to have apple say we are in the same boat, we

want to protect user data. >> do you think apple could single-handedly forced these companies to support their growth in business model? >> it could, but it would probably not do it. apple is fairly cautious about its partners. at the same time, they are trying to do the right thing to put their users first. i think they will see an influx of facebook engineers applying for jobs. >> you raise $295 million for a quickly. what is on tap for you this year? what's the next frontier in cybersecurity? >> it's exactly the things we've been talking about. security is not getting as much innovation, and all the biggest security companies are still helping secure your pc. we are looking to build the largest 30 and privacy suite for

mobile users. >> we'll have you back to talk more about that. thanks for stopping by. happy friday, everyone. that does it for this edition of the show. we will see you back here on monday. this is bloomberg. ♪

>> the following is a paid program. the opinions and views expressed do not reflect bloomberg lp, its affiliates, or its employees. >> the following is a paid advertisement from time life. robin: my name is robin williams. >> hold onto your hat. robin: for those of you on acid, this is a frisbee. >> the time has come for an epic entertainment event. it's mind blowing, it's jaw joe-dropping, and most of all. >> it is genius. >> genius. >> comedic genius. >> time life proudly presents a once-in-a-lifetime collection in the making. robin williams, comic genius.