♪ emily: i'm emily chang and this is "the best of bloomberg technology." we bring you the top interviews from this week in tech. coming up, lyft officially have -- hit the public markets this week, the biggest listing of the year so far. we will break it down. apple meets hollywood. after months if not years of speculation, the iphone maker unveiled its streaming plan with a star-studded event from steven spielberg to reese witherspoon and oprah.

a lot of excitement and a lot of questions. in securing the vote, a congressman is sounding a call to protect the 2020 election. we will discuss his plan about getting it right next year. first to our top story, the biggest listing of the year, lyft hitting the public markets this week. now officially trading on the nasdaq under the ticker lyft. investors are watching closely good in the roadshow leading up, investors packed a standing room only luncheon to hear the company's pitch and the offering was oversubscribed. we parsed through all of the details after the company listed. >> it is important to have a context that we are going after the trillion dollar market opportunity. every year in the u.s., american s spend $9,000 owning and operating their cars but only use it 5% of the time. so this massive market shift, just like entertainment has gone streaming, it is happening with car ownership, and we are investing to take advantage of that. our economics are improving and

we are very confident in the past ahead. -- the path ahead. emily: in your risk factors, you say you may never be profitable. how do you convince investors that they should be betting on the optimistic? >> if you dig in on the numbers , every year, the economics of the business improve. and we are confident that the business will be very profitable. there are, of course, risk factors, but we are making tremendous progress going after this once it a generation shift ,here this entire industry potentially, a $1.2 trillion market could shift from an ownership model to a service we are -- to a service model. we are leading the way. emily: let me put it this way. if you focus on margins, does that give over an opportunity to call back? >> we are not focused on competition, with focus on what we can control. every day, we're thinking about how to serve drivers and passengers and build a long-term model, pushing down operating costs. that is what has allowed us to

go from over 20% market share to nearly 40%. we don't focus on market share, we just execute and serve our constituents. emily: is getting to 50% market share in the u.s. more important than expanding internationally? >> our focus is always on taking care of our customers. we don't set market share goals, we focus on delivering the world's best transportation to our customers. so we do think about international. every year, we sit down and make can we gooff good deeper on this $1.2 trillion market in the u.s. and deliver better transportation to our customers here or is it time to go abroad? a little over one year ago that we launched in canada and that has been a great experience. we will continue to consider international opportunities. we think it is a great option. emily: what do you mean? >> there are many future growth

opportunities in this business, whether we are going deeper in north america or going international. so we look at that as a call option for the business, and we may choose to do that someday, but we don't have current plans. emily: let's talk about founder control. you have a lot of voting power, must -- almost 50% voting power but only own 5% of shares. there was some backlash. what is your argument that that is the best way? >> we put a lot of thought into this with the board and investors wanted to set the company up to go after the long-term and make the right investments to seize this long-term opportunity. we think that will be necessary to deliver the largest shareholder returns over time. dual class was an important peace of it. john and i together still have less than a majority control. we have selected an independent share, sean has stepped in as independent share on the board. we have an incredible board from a diverse set of backgrounds set

up to guide the company. we think collectively that is the right package. emily: but there are concerns that this will not lead to the appropriate checks and balances you need on a public company. we have seen situations at where and facebook founders made decisions were made that were maybe not the best. how do you respond? >> we have been balanced in how we put this together. we have an independent chair, a diverse set of shareholders. when we talk to investors, we let them know that we care deeply about their views and incorporating them, and our track record shows that. emily: you have been investing heavily in self driving technology. how much and how fast do you think self driving technology will bring your costs down? >> i think we are still years away from self driving. emily: how many? >> i wish i knew myself. i don't. i think there's kind of a conception that there going to be a magical self driving

vehicle that will appear one day. but the way we see it playing out from all of our work is that the first generation of vehicles will only be able to do a subset of the rides. i think it will be critical that they are rolled out on a platform like ours where you can count on drivers to fill request spirit -- requests. it may be a long time for security reasons before autonomous vehicles are allowed to pick up at an airport, let alone drive in extreme weather, drive at night, drive at certain speeds. there are also the restrictions the first generations of vehicles will have. i think a network application will be the majority case. emily: in the meantime, i know you are focused on changing transit and car ownership, but in many cities you are seeing an increase in cars on the road. you're actually seeing more car ownership.

what evidence have you seen that ownership trends are -- k car have seen pea ownership. if you look at national numbers of people purchasing or deciding not to purchase, if you look at millennials coming of age and not getting their license, and if you look at our growth, there is a pretty obvious trend. last year, over 300,000 lyft customers got rid of a car. some families are going from two cars to one car, but it has begun. emily: in your roadshow, you talked about how you don't do food deliveries, you don't do trucking, you are about focus. that said, you are getting into new businesses. what is going to be your biggest source of new revenue in the future? will it be international expansion or will it be something that we do not know about? >> we compete with car ownership. when you open up the app, we

want to provide you every possible option you can be trading on. whether that is public transit or connecting you with a lyft to public transit. whether it is a bike or a scooter, a shared ride. we want to provide you with any possible options. we will be competing with the car parked in your driveway as your primary goal. emily: speaking about the future of drivers, i know self driving technology is very important, and it is long-term, as you say. has been about the values of treating customers and drivers well. if you are investing in self driving technology, does that undermine the jobs? >> i don't think those jobs go away, we will need many more drivers. think about today. the entire rideshare market is miles traveled. if that goes to 10%, you would need either 10 times the number

of drivers. if we were at nearly 2 million now, we talking 20 million drivers. obviously, there is room for increasing the number of work opportunities, and adding vehicles. emily: where are you in five years? >> in five years, we want you to be subscribing to a package of miles. similar to the way you have a cell phone and subscribe to a number of minutes, we want people to completely get rid of their car and jump in the world of transportation as a service and subscribe to miles. so that you don't have to think about each trip, you are just fully on board with the lyft ecosystem. emily: is this like a monthly thing? >> it will have to take shape, but i think people will be subscribing to miles. emily: boeing says they were very close to a software fix for its 737 max 8 jetline when the ethiopian airlines jet crashed on march 10. the plane maker has spent months working with regulators and

refining software. flight data from an october crash in indonesia has showed the system repeatedly tip of the nose down before losing control. the boeing update says the update proved more complicated than the manufacture initially estimated. lawmakers pressed the faa at a hearing this week about its oversight as the plane maker remains under scrutiny. coming up, apple goes hollywood, their plan to take on netflix and disney in the streaming world. and if you like bloomberg news, check us out on the radio. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪

after weeks, months and years of chatter, apple finally revealed it is all in as a services company. they unveiled a news and magazine service, a video gaming platform, and with a parade of hollywood elite from jennifer aniston to steve carell and oprah, a new premium video service to rival the likes of netflix and amazon. >> our vision for apple tv is to bring together your favorite shows, movies, sports, and news and make them available on all of your devices. so you can spend less time looking for something to watch and more time enjoying it. emily: perhaps the key is apple's brand-new credit card in partnership with goldman sachs to facilitate payment for all of these new monthly services. the card is tied to apple pay, which a marketer claims has been adapted by 39% of mobile payment

users, just behind the starbucks app. to discuss all of this news, bloomberg's mark gurman who covers apple joined us monday along with research president bob o'donnell. >> we knew which shows were coming, every time it went in closing on or was filming, apple or the producers would a very publicly announce these deals. we knew that this was going to be some sort of subscription service. we knew it would be premium, that it would be high-end. what we did not know was two basic things, how much would they charge for, and which devices it would be supported on. apple did not come out and say it, but my sense is it will be available on android in addition to roku boxes, but no word on if they will be available on amazon or android tablets.

we also do not know what the price will be good they did not really discuss pricing for the apple channels, and by the way, same name as the amazon channels. will be waiting on those. that is what investors compare , prices. emily: apple is also offering a bundle of tv channels which will include hbo, showtime, they obviously pulled out all the stops with this announcement. it was cool and it shows the amount of priority they are putting on these new services. >> absolutely, and it was a big, splashy event, which apple is good at. they get you excited, but the question is how are we going to feel tomorrow? tomorrow, were going to go wait a minute, what exactly are we getting from this? there are plenty of other options to get everything except apple's original content. really it is going to boil down to how compelling can they make just from package not a feature perspective, but

a pricing perspective. so the lack of pricing to me was very disappointing to me and others as well. in ironically, i don't think the tv service was the biggest or best announcement. i think it was the credit card. emily: that is kind of a big deal. let's listen to the vice president of apple pay, who unveiled the credit card in a partnership with goldman sachs. listen up. >> anytime you pay using apple card, you get daily cash. not a month from now, but every day. every day you spend, cash is added to your apple cash card, which is also in the wallet app. it is cash, real cash, you can do anything with it. anytime you pay with your iphone or apple watch, you'll get 2% of the purchase amount in daily cash. emily: aside from oprah, that was my favorite line. it's cash, like real cash. this is something we were not

necessarily expecting, apple is getting into the credit card business and trying to change the credit card business, and a lot of things they are offering make a lot of sense and consumers are probably going to be pretty excited. no late fees? >> they hit a lot of the pain points. transaction fees, late fees. i am a credit card buff and you can cycle through tons of credit cards get the best bonuses in different cash back percentages. what we are seeing here is 2% flat rates through apple pay, and that is actually the highest in the industry i believe from a flat rate but that is only from , using it with the phone. you have the physical card, which looks like it comes right from apple with the titanium and laser etching. that is only 1%. if you are in an environment with lots of apple pay around you and you want high cash back i don't think there is a better card on the market for this. but there are other places with better options. emily: how impactful do you

think this card could be given the hope is you are charging a lot of new apple services on this card? >> it will take a while. people have to get used to paying with their phones still. that's why we see adoption still relatively modest. but the joke i made with a couple of folks is that the credit card proves that apple is still the best hardware, because that was the coolest thing. the actual hardware. having a card with no numbers, it reshapes the way you think about credit cards and the app that goes with it. that to me was apple at its very best, taking something that is hard and has pain points and making it simple through the apple magic. the question is how many other capabilities are we going to see them do this on? to me, that will be a bigger story long-term. but i thought they did a great job of showing off how you deal with paying off things, and people want to know. emily: let's talk about the news subscription service, $9.99 a

month, building on what apple has already done. attempting to make it bigger. take a listen to roger rosen rosner. -- roger >> over 300 great magazines, wall street journal, l.a. times, those great, premium digital subscriptions, there has literally never been an offer like this before. if you were to subscribe to all of these individually, it would cost you over $8,000 per year. with apple news plus, you pay $9.99 per month. [applause] emily: if you look at the subscription price for the wall street journal alone, is over $20 a month. so make sense of this for me, mark. >> there is some debate online. apple is telling some people that you get full access to the wall street journal, whereas the wall street journal sent out a memo from its ceo earlier indicating the subscription service would not cover the

journal in its totality, that some business news would be exclusive to people paying higher subscription rates. so until that is sorted out, i cannot comment completely. but i think apple will probably get its way here. if that is what they are telling people i think that's what is going to happen. emily: these magazines, they look amazing on the ipad, but you are talking about an industry that is already resource starved. do these magazines and newspapers have the resources and staff to build out an entirely new experience to make it worth it? >> great question. like you said, they showed some great demos with the floating city video on the cover of national geographic and all these cool things. but there's a lot of work involved in making those happen. people have had the opportunity to get digital magazines before, and it has not become a huge business. i think this is a good thing apple is doing, i think it is interesting. i'm not sure is a huge hit in

terms of economic impact. emily: the idea is certainly attractive. >> is attractive, but apple bought a company that was essentially offering the service before. mind you, they were not apple. that does change things quite a bit, but there's a question of how much they really will get from the wall street journal and from other magazines, how long they can sustain the interactive version of their magazines, and frankly, how many are willing to pay for that despite the suppose it value. because at most, you will read a couple anyway. that is all anyone could possibly do. emily: that was bob o'donnell and bloomberg's own mark gurman. meantime, youtube is said to for aanceled its plans slate of high-end dramas and comedies, a step back from the companies designs on a pay service that features hollywood quality shows. bloomberg has learned this is reportedly due to the high cost it would take to compete with

the deeply entrenched players and without it, youtube is still making a lot of money the old-fashioned way. we will stay on apple ahead of this week's conflicting decisions in the long-running dispute between apple and qualcomm. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ emily: just one day after apple's big services event, the iphone maker barely escaped an import ban on the iconic smartphone. the international trade commission rejected a patent infringement claim filed by qualcomm tuesday. apple is not out of the woods, the decision coming just hours after a separate judge says they have infringed a different qualcomm patent and recommended an iphone ban. the case is subject to review by

the full commission which is expected to complete the investigation in july. on tuesday, we spoke with the cofounder of the ventures. >> it will play out over the small bumps in the road country by country, unfortunately. i think, to put some context on this, these headlines sound most concerning. sound is the important work. the substance is that this is purely noise. ultimately, to answer your questions, how will this play out? we will see varying degrees of announcements for qualcomm and apple, but that does not change where the trajectory of the relationship between them is going. that relationship is moving in a different direction where they will eventually be separate. you can point to some of the hires apple has had recently in san diego, similar to a decade ago when they started to build their own chips internally. they want to do the same thing

around technology they are in dispute with qualcomm. they have an option of moving in that direction. so the big picture, the simple reason why this is noise is that, in the future, apple will not be dependent on qualcomm. this irritation going on in the courts only accelerates that move for apple. emily: the iphone has been banned in other countries in other rulings pertaining to qualcomm. i know that it mostly involves older models. even if it is just older models potentially being banned, you think that is still just noise? >> it is, and there is some dispute about which models are going to be banned. apple uses intel chips further most recent models. it's going to be the older phones. to your point, if you think about the simple exposure, said -- say iphone 7's are banned the

u.s., that probably has a 5% headwind to the overall business. it is a measurable piece of the business, but we come back to the central theme. these customers likely are not going to make a decision based on a price point that is unavailable, for $50 or $100 to jump to an android phone. apple has retention that has been steady for the iphone between 90%-95%. i think that availability, or lack thereof, is not going to materially change the number. emily: loup ventures cofounder gene munster. coming up, can the u.s. government safeguard the 2020 presidential elections from foreign influence, and what is silicon valley's role? we will hear from congressman ro plan to makehis them work together.

check us out and follow our breaking global news network tictoc on twitter. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ emily: welcome back to "the best of bloomberg technology." i am emily chang. special counsel robert mueller's investigation of russian interference in the 2016 election is wrapped, though the political fight may continue. there is still plenty of work to do ahead of the presidential 2020 vote. congressman ro khanna has laid out what he believes needs to be done in a washington post op-ed, writing, "completely preventing the injection of foreign government propaganda into our discourse is impossible, but we can ask our tech industry to reduce the amplification of such messages and quickly detect, quarantined, and report forein