♪ emily: i'm emily chang in san francisco, and this is "bloomberg technology." microsoft extending its lead at the world's biggest company by market cap, and the only member of the trillion dollar club on the strength of azure. we will break down tech earnings so far and look ahead to next week. plus, what a week it has been for big tech execs on the hill. facebook and apple grilled by lawmakers. how these last few days have shaped silicon valley's future.

>> we choose to go to the moon and these other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. emily: and we mark the 50th anniversary of the first moon landing. i speak with the captain for moonshot on nasa's legacy and why we should not be going to mars. first, to our top story, what else but big tech earnings? shares of microsoft jumping after strong fourth-quarter results thursday. the tech giant has benefited from ongoing strength in the cloud computing as your business. and microsoft has extended its lead over amazon, apple, and alphabet for the title of world's most valuable company. joining us to discuss, ross gerber, and bloomberg opinions' shira ovide.

ross, what is your take? ross: what great numbers. talk about a mature company showing it is still a growth company, and how great the management change has been, from ballmer to know della. it has been an amazing shift to the positive for microsoft, and we are seeing it across the board, all their businesses, pretty much, doing well. i am excited about microsoft. it has become one of our top holdings of all the major big tech companies. we are really happy with the results. emily: there is an irony that microsoft, after all the antitrust pain it went through in the 1990's, was not on capitol hill this week. how much do you think it helps that they are not a part of this

antitrust conversation we are having? shira: it helps enormously. i think if you had told somebody in 2001 that we had been having angst about technology, antitrust, and microsoft was not a part of that conversation, they would not believe you. emily: ross, netflix, the opposite story, historically a volatile stock, but this quarter is more interesting in that we had "stranger things" come out and the forecast looks good, but the slate for last quarter was weak. ross: we think that was part of the strategy. because "game of thrones" was such a global event, isaac they held back on content because there was no need to release it because everyone was obsessed with "game of thrones." this shows competition matters to netflix, and if there is competition that is compelling, it reflects the results at netflix. this is something that should be

a concern for netflix shareholders moving forward with so much good competition on the horizon, led by disney=, a much cheaper platform. the second issue being people switching from platform to platform, depending on what shows are on, canceling and then re-subscribing, which is not good for netflix. overall, netflix is a good company doing well, but the valuation is stretched for the coming competition. emily: shira, you are nodding. why? shira: i think it is a good point, that the bull case on netflix is the default. it is the everything store for entertainment. if people decide, we are not that interested, we will turn it off for six months and switch to hbo or try out disney+ for a while, then i think netflix loses that position as being the subscription service people subscribe to and that never turn off.

i think that is a big risk for netflix, particularly at this valuation. emily: next week, we have facebook, alphabet, amazon. i have a chart showing how microsoft has surpassed all of that. ross, what are you watching for next week? ross: i think all these companies are taking a different path. we used to look at it as they all kind of rose and fell together, but it is now as if they are all separating into their own orbits. it was from the explosion of facebook being a corrupt company. facebook is doing well in the advertising format because instagram is still a juggernaut, but their fines, their legal bills, the regulation, i just don't see a future where facebook is not heavily regulated going forward, and i think they are very clueless, and libra kind of proved that. on the others of the coin, we think amazon is doing well, and they are dominating the markets

and continuing to drive growth in many areas. it is probably one of the most innovative companies in the world to this day, despite their size. as we go through different things next week, i think we will start to see divergence of the pads of these companies, depending on the choices they have made. emily: shira, what is your take? faang has been a sort of misnomer by some, but not all. what are you watching? shira: for me, the issue for all these companies is growth. can they continue to grow at the inexplicable rates we have seen over the last few years? for amazon, we have seen the revenue growth rate and the rate of growth in the individual items they sell start to come down significantly this year. they don't have a good explanation for that. at this point, amazon's u.s.

e-commerce sales are not growing much faster than the entire u.s. e-commerce market, and to me that is a little bit worrying. we will see how they do in the third quarter and beyond, but this company's growth is slowing down. at the same time, it is spending more on things like warehouses. the margins people have been excited about and amazon are coming down at the same time the growth rate is also doing that. emily: ross, tesla coming up next week. i know you always have provocative thoughts on tesla. where is your head at? ross: i am excited for next week. tesla has gone through an enormous growth phase. the first quarter was a stumble, trying to get that international rollout, but it looks like they have been successful with it. delivery numbers are over 95,000. i expect them to make a profit.

the street has said this company is dead and bankrupt, and that has proven to be untrue. the demand for ev cars is continuing to explode. the heat in new york is so bad today, if this does not commence you climate change is an issue, it should. it is going to be a fun week. emily: we will be watching to see if your pair addictions hold true. ross gerber, shira ovide. this conversation is not over. you are sticking with us. we will have coverage of tech earnings next week.

emily: it was a wild week for tech when it came to capitol hill. facebook, amazon, and alphabet spent time under lawmakers' lights, but it was facebook that was under the radar. take a listen. >> facebook might not intend to be dangerous, but they don't respect the power of the technologies. they are playing with a toddler that has got his hands on a book of matches. >> i don't trust you guys. instead of cleaning up your house, you are launching into a new business model with libra. >> in terms of whatsapp and messenger, they will support third-party wallets other than libra. >> senator, i want to clarify --

>> every time you start with "i want to clarify," it gives me a great level of pause. >> i don't think you should launch libra at all, because the creation of a new currency is a core government function and should be left to democratically accountable institutions that are accountable to the american people. >> we are told by some that innovation is always good. the most innovative thing that happened this century was when osama bin laden came up with the innovative idea of flying two airplanes into the towers. that is the most consequential innovation, although this may do more danger to america than that. emily: still with us, ross gerber and shira ovide. all the companies were present on capitol hill. there was a google specific hearing that did not get much attention. it was facebook and this libra hearing that drew the most

spotlight. how do you think facebook performed? ross: they are sympathetic. what in god's name are they thinking that they are going to launch a currency after they completely manipulated several elections all around the world and have basically let every bad actor run amok on their platform? they are the most on trustworthy company i can possibly think of, and yet currencies are built on trust, so they are clearly so clueless there, i don't think i have seen anything like it. emily: shira, i will let you bat right back. shira: it is hard to disagree. if you are facebook -- and i think mark zuckerberg has said this explicitly -- you can't stop coming up with new product ideas and keep moving the company forward just because you are under this intense glare and keep being compared to 9/11 terrorists.

but you also want to be more thoughtful about the kinds of products you rollout. i think my colleague, matt levine of bloomberg opinion, said it best, that the issue with this facebook cryptocurrency is that it is both so vague and so grandiose that people project whatever fears they want to project onto whatever facebook is doing. you're taking something that is basically inapt payments, which is not a big idea, but facebook is blowing it out into a philosophical cryptocurrency for the world. in doing so, they have tripped over their own feet and drawn more heat on themselves. emily: ross, does libra happen? ross: no, it is going to be shut down. bitcoin works pretty good and is a decentralized system. there is a reason why governments have their own money, and it is called control. when crypto came out originally with bitcoin, it was about not

letting governments have control over a global digital currency, and it works well. there is no purpose for labor at all, other than for facebook to collect data and facebook to monopolize more information that they can then sell to whoever. i thick with a sit down again and look at this, they are going to be like, what are we doing? you can't get approvals from 180 countries. it's never going to happen. emily: we could go on and on for hours, but this is all the time we have. ross gerber and shira ovide, thank you both. coming up, one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind. it has been 50 years since the world watched neil armstrong take the first steps on the moon. now nasa wants to go back. nasa's cfo tells us about plans to put humans back on the moon within five years. and we are livestreaming on twitter. check us out there @technology.

♪

>> it takes hundreds of millions of dollars to get started with something interesting. i want reusable space vehicles so the next generation can actually have two kids in a dorm room all day build a great space company. emily: that was jeff bezos talking about the benefits of space travel with cbs news this week. saturday marks the 50th anniversary of the historic apollo moon landing. neil armstrong took his first steps on the moon, and the space race was dominated by a rivalry between the u.s. and russia. a lot has changed. however, dani burger takes a look at how the space race has evolved.

dani: in the half-century since man first walked on the moon, the space race has fundamentally changed. it used to be a battle between the u.s. and the soviet union, but now most new missions are by private companies. the number of companies launched into outer space has also skyrocketed, from just two in 1957 to over 450 last year. industries using satellites in completely different ways. companies can now monitor the parking lots of retail outlets to get data months before official releases. the last 50 years have seen a seismic shift in humanity's understanding of space, but

while it is still vast, unknown, and mostly unreachable, it is now also a resource that businesses can start to utilize. emily: bloomberg's dani burger there. humans live set foot on the moon in 1972, and nasa now wants to take us back. project artemis aims to return humans to the moon by 2024. this time, the space agency wants to do things differently. the goal of artemis is to create a sustainable human presence on the lunar surface by 2028, paving the way for humans to eventually to mars. jeff dewit joins us. jeff: it is an exciting time with the 50th anniversary of the first moon landing.

i love the segway, which is really the topic, which is, yes, we are going back to the moon. the goal is 2024 with project artemis. the goal is to land not only the next man, but the first woman on the surface of the moon. part of that is really going to be to prove the technologies we need to do to get to mars. the ultimate goal is to get to mars and to plant an american flag on the surface of mars, which we will see in our lifetimes. it is a very exciting time for nasa and our country for doing that. emily: where is your funding? we know you asked for supplement

budget requests, $1.6 billion. tell us where that stands. jeff: back in those days, nasa had over 4% of the federal budget. now we have less than 0.5% of the federal budget. we have a lot of partners. jeff bezos a wonderful partner with nasa. we are driving a thriving commercial sector in space. that's what's helping us get there with a lot less taxpayer dollars. it has been a good use of taxpayer money today. we are looking for an additional $1.6 billion for this year to help secure a lander and other things to get started on right away to help us get back to the surface of the moon. we already have plans to go to the moon by 2020 eight, so if you shift those forward, you think about the things we would have done in 2025, 2026, 2028, and it shifts those forward. emily: say you don't get the $1.6 billion. will the schedule shift?

jeff: it will shift. we were talking with congress about getting that money, and we have strong bipartisan support. i think we have a good shot of getting it done. if you don't get the necessary funding, things will be shifted on the schedule and be done in later years. we want it to be done by 2024, because it allows us to get to mars when we want to get to mars. mars, there are certain windows of time where the planets align and you can get there. we want to get to mars, and this administration is pushing strongly to get that done. i think we will get that done. emily: let's talk about what happens -- if we do have another moon moment, what happens beyond that? we will hear from an executive later who says we should focus on the problems on earth, not in space. why should we go back to the moon, be exploring mars?

jeff: back in the apollo days, there were the same naysayers who said, why don't we focus on earth first? while that is a very noble thing to say, when you look at the technology and economic activity that has come out of the apollo days, all the things that we have that are driving the economy here that we did not have before -- there is a sign up in my office that says, "we landed on the moon before there were wheels on luggage." so many things. there's a laundry list of things that we have that are driving economic activity. billions of dollars of products that have come out of nasa technologies. we regularly share nasa technology with the private sector. by going to the moon and mars, we are improving life on earth. emily: it was vice president pence that opened the door to the modern generation of nasa,

and yet you have had tweets from president trump that indicate he does not think getting to the moon is important either. how much support do you think you really have from this administration to pull off what you want to pull off? jeff: we have spoken to the president. what he wants us to do is focus on the ultimate goal, to get to mars. the ultimate goal is to plant the american flag on mars. that's what we are going to do. he understands that we have to get to the moon first. it is a gateway to mars. but there are some technologies we have to prove. we have water ice on the south pole of the moon. there is also water on the surface of mars. if we can learn on the moon how to start harvesting that resource and using the water that is there, that helps us get to mars sooner. right now, we have to pack our own fuel, water, air, everything with us when we go, but if we can get water and crack it, it can make rocket fuel.

if we can start harvesting the resources on the moon and figure out how to do that, that allows us to get to mars sooner and take less with us. the moon is a proving ground that we need to do, but mars is the ultimate goal. emily: what are we going to be talking about in the next 50 years? 20 seconds. jeff: 50 years from now, we should have regular colonies of people on the moon, a regular base on the moon, if not one on mars. we are going to look back at this as a watershed moment, what this administration is doing, as a very good thing for the country. it is the beginning of something really big that, 50 years from now, we will realize how wonderful it is. emily: you could have just made history. we will see you in 50 years. nasa cfo jeff dewit, thank you for stopping by. we will hear from the alphabet x lab later in the show.

♪

♪ emily: this is "bloomberg technology." i'm emily chang in san francisco. the peter thiel-backed company n26 -- valuing the company at $3.5 billion. it is one of europe's most highly-valued firms. and, the highest valued german start up-to-date. n26 has made waves with its mobile banking app and just launched in the u.s. last week. joining us to discuss is n26 co-founder maximillian tayenthal. thank you for joining us. tell us how it works. big banks are not perfect, but why should i give you my money? maximillian: when we entered the space, we believed the financial

service area is ready for disruption. for many years, the banks have failed to provide a good user experience and still charge unfair fees. i think, like a growing number of customers, these 50% are not using the bank branches anymore and traditional banks are investing heavily in the bank networks even though they cannot differentiate themselves from the competition by these networks. we actually came to the market to provide a great product, like for a young audience that likes to be on the smartphone. we realize there is no great digital experience for people that like to do things on this platform. emily: big banks is one thing -- scale, infrastructure. how do you handle things like risk and fraud at your scale? maximillian: we have been around for six years in europe.

we have a bank license in europe and providing banking services. if you look at the bank market in europe and all around the world, it is a very fragmented industry in a way that you have french banks for french customers, german banks for german customers and so what. we had the vision to have multiple platforms on one bank license. the financial needs across the whole western world are alike. we are sure that product is going to work. over the last years, we have built all the systems that are required to do banking business. we have risk management. we have built up compliance and reporting to the regulator. we are now adapting all these things and rebuilding these things for the u.s. market. plus, we work together with the regulators and in san diego.

emily: you are growing fast, over 1000 employees. yet you said you will not be profitable in five years. what is the vision? maximillian: we are profitable on a per customer basis, but like every euro, u.s. dollar we earn, we are reinvesting. we are reinvesting and scaling up our team, growth and onboarding, expanding our product. while we could be profitable much quicker, for us, we have a big vision. we want to build the first global financial institution and that vision needs a lot of money. plus, we have investors with deep pockets and share our vision. there willing and able to back n26 for many years to come. emily: one of them is peter thiel. whenever one company takes money from peter thiel, they become the thiel-backed startup.

he is known for his controversial comments. made one recently, calling google treasonous. openly asking if they have been infiltrated by foreign spies. president trump has been deeply unpopular in silicon valley which is left-leaning. what is your reaction to the thiel controversy and having that attached to you? maximillian: we are actually not commenting on the politics of our investors. on the investor side, thiel has been a great support for many years. he has a very good vision of scaling. he was a part of paypal. he has a great vision of how to scale, like a financial service company globally. he also believes very much in the company. it has been a great support. emily: talk about your plans to expand. you are in the u.s. now. i understand south america is next and maybe even asia.

maximillian: yes. as i said before, we wanted to build a european bank. we realize the financial needs across the western world are very much alike. we want to build a global retail bank. if you think about it, you don't have to go to the 194 countries on the planet. but if you get the european union, plus the u.s. and seven or eight other markets, you captured about 80% of the worldwide banking revenue potential. we just launched in the u.s. with our product. we are going to brazil, it is a massive market. there are other markets to follow, mainly in asia and others like south and north america. emily: all right, n26 co-founder maximillian tayenthal, thank you so much. the popular photo-editing app faceapp went viral this week with a new age-defying filter.

now, it is raising national security concerns. the russian app is at the center of a global privacy debate, next. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: next week is shaping up to be another big week for tech in washington. president trump's senior advisers have invited tech companies to the white house monday monday to discuss resuming sales to blacklist the chinese tech giant huawei. the white house economic advisor larry kudlow and secretary steven mnuchin have arranged a meeting with chip and software companies to discuss how they move forward.

among those invited are intel and qualcomm. the president said he would loosen restrictions on huawei last month. as we mentioned, president trump has advocated for a global ban on huawei on security grounds. alarming european telecom operators who rely on the equipment. the eu says it may deem certain 5g suppliers a security risk because chinese law requires companies to collaborate with intelligence companies. the eu is putting a risk assessment report together. if huawei and zte are banned in europe, phone companies would endure $52 billion in costs. the rollout would likely be delayed as well. and medallia shares surged in the first day of trading. a 62% up shortly after listing friday. vonnie quinn caught up with

medallia ceo leslie stretch on the floor of the new york stock exchange. leslie: i'm a software guy. i'm looking at the future and how we can build better software to help our customers understand their customers. it is a great day for everyone. great start for the company in public life. vonnie: what was the investor reaction? we have seen a lot recently that might have been an option, but you did not choose that option. why not? leslie: i think people need to know the story of medallia. we are an enterprise company that has worked with the biggest brands in the world. to help them understand their customers intent. why they leave, why they stay and why they buy more. it is useful for us to do the traditional roadshow and communicate with investors, long-standing partnerships with the investor base. vonnie: what her future plans to diversify your revenue stream? right now, it is a healthy growth rate you are seeing. it is primarily

subscription-based which pleases investors. is that going to continue and is there other ways you can go for different streams of revenue? leslie: absolutely. the market is huge for customer experience. we are the market leader. coming out in public helps us to expand our market. we can take our platform stories to small and large companies across the globe. that is so exciting about this for step. vonnie: it seems to be the conventional approach, goldman sachs, morgan stanley, you have excluded both. can you give us the reason why? leslie: those are great businesses. i have done business with both of those firms in the past and will again. we think the number one ipo player, bank of america, great partners. they really understand the customer experience mission. pretty easy choice and i feel it

did a great job for us. i love the other firms too. emily: medallia ceo leslie stretch there. medallia had the best start for any u.s.-based company since chewy on june 14. the online pet retailer reported its first earnings since its debut and painted a rosy sales picture in the second quarter. emma chandra caught up with chewy ceo sumit singh. she asked how long the company can keep it up. sumit: we just posted strong first-quarter results in line with our confidence with the market and the items that will be published reflects confidence in our ability to execute. combine that with the fact the market is large, $70 billion, growing 4%. e-commerce overall is fairly low penetrated in the u.s. and we are early days in our growth. combine that with the fact we have a mission to create a one-stop pet shop that has not been done in e-commerce before,

we are excited. emma: we got to speak at the time of your ipo. sumit: hi. emma: since then, we have heard from a number of analysts. you mentioned e-commerce growth. a lot of concern of how you are going to deal with the amazon threat. what can you do to reassure investors? sumit: a couple different things in the way we are focused on pets. we have 10,000 members, team members who are pet parents, many of them are pet parents themselves. and really focused on the pet category. two, we are built for pet. our vet side all the way to the high customer service. that is important. we strive to offer exceptional personalized care, which is so important in this category because we treat pets as family. we are pet parents serving like pet parents.

we have this index we are bringing to the category, along with the scale and convenience of e-commerce. you combine these two together, it is powerful for our customers. we are offering them competitive prices, a broad assortment of fast and reliable delivery. underneath of that, 24/7 personalized care. that is a powerful proposition for us. emily: that was chewy ceo sumit singh. switching gears, who can you trust? or more accurately, which apps can you trust? that is the debate after faceapp went viral and the magic word was uttered -- russia. the fact it hails from there caused everyone from privacy advocates to senator chuck schumer to sound the alarm. i want to bring it mark milian. what is the latest on this debate? mark: the latest is there is a lot of people who are very freaked out finding out this company is based in russia.

this is a company that has been around for several years. it is not the first time the app has gone viral. it is a different era in america right now where there is seeds of a red scare. after this app blew up again, the democratic national committee put out a warning to the campaign saying do not use it, it is russian. we don't have any evidence anything is going on, but be wary. security researchers have looked into the more outrageous conspiracies that the app sucks up all the photos on your photo roll and sends it to their servers. there is no evidence of that that we found. as of right now, it is a russian company that made a very popular app that has been a novelty. emily: there is an irony here. a lot of people fell for it or used it, including everyone on the bloomberg tech team. but, companies like facebook and google and amazon and apple have

far more information about us than a single photo. mark: yeah. our colleague eric newcomer wrote a piece this morning about how this is just a small startup and lots of these little startups that have a moment and a lot of people upload a picture. when you consider all the information of the big companies like google and apple have on us, it is like our concerns are maybe a little misplaced. emily: we will see how that plays out. lyft is adding new features in new york city. tell us about that. mark: yes. they are over the next few months going to be adding subways to the lyft app. this is a part of the strategy that both lyft and uber are looking at and talked about on the run-up to their ipo's. they want to be the app people go to when they get around cities. part of that is they are adding more of their own businesses like bicycle sharing which lyft

has. scooter rentals you can get off sidewalks which lyft and uber both have. lyft is adding subways. just open the app, maybe you will take a subway but it might be better if you hail a ride. emily: exactly. how does this impact the ongoing rivalry between lyft and uber, and the rivalry between new york city and lyft and uber? mark: they are both going after the same strategy. uber does not yet have subways but they are talking with cities about being able to buy train tickets within the app. i would not be surprised if uber does something similar. lyft does not have any partnership with new york city. they are using the publicly available data the city puts out. lyft does have a pretty dicey relationship with new york city right now. they are suing them over some pay laws that were recently passed.

they're butting heads on a number of laws as the administration tries to pull more revenue out of ride-hailing companies. emily: more to watch. mark milian, thank you so much for stopping by. still ahead, it has been 50 years since humans first landed on the moon. the captain of moonshots tells us about what kind of legacy the historic mission has left behind. that is next. this is bloomberg. ♪

jeff: space tourism is going to start with a very short, kind of 11-minute ride into space. you will see the thin atmosphere and see how fragile this planet really is. everyone who goes to space will come back a little changed and they realize how beautiful this planet is and how small and fragile it is. something we cannot see when we are down here, but up there it becomes obvious. emily: jeff bezos there, founder of blue origin, talking about the future of space travel with cbs news. in the decade since the moon landing, spacex has shifted to private companies, like spacex and blue origin competing. earlier this week, i sat down with astro teller, head of alphabet's x lab, where he is looking for google's next moonshot. we asked him about the anniversary of the moon landing. here is more on this conversation. astro: the biggest impact that

nasa has had on this country is not that a few people stood on the surface of the moon. it's the multiple generations of young people who were meaningfully inspired to change their lives and to spend time on technology with aspiration to make the world better because of nasa. that's the real legacy of the moon landing, not competing with the soviets or exactly how much thrust came from a saturn v rocket. literally in the history books, and it turns out not to matter much. but, the inspiration they created -- and a lot of these sort of side effects that were learned along the way, everything from velcro to wearable ekg's, an incredible number of things came out of the effort to put somebody on the moon. it showed that optimism can get

things to happen that you would not think could be done. it inspired a lot of people. i would like to think for us at x and other places, we can do our part to do some of that inspiration for the next couple of generations. emily: nasa's budget is a fraction of what it was in 1966. do you think the u.s. can have another moon moment without that money? without that, perhaps, government support? astro: it certainly does not break the law of physics. government is -- in principle, having less money causes a kind of scrapping this and creativity which is actually very healthy. we practiced a lot of that here at x. the government is not always the best at having necessity being the mother of invention. i would like to think it is possible, but that is probably

not government's long suit to do more with less. emily: so, do you think that we should still be trying to get to the moon? the president has argued it is a waste of time, waste of money. we should be focusing on mars. is this still a worthy endeavor? astro: this one drives me crazy. and, maybe it is because we are wired around a very different, a very specific kind of purpose here at x. but, if you think you know how to terraform mars, could you please terraform the sahara desert first? emily: you have to define terraform for me and my audience. astro: if you think you know how to make mars livable, which is, to put it very mildly, an inhospitable place, and we would have to live there in a circular economy, sustainable way because we pretty much have to take most

of our stuff with us and then not use it up -- we live on this space station that is holding the 7.5, almost 8 billion of us now. it was literally designed for us, or we were designed for it more accurately. if we cannot make this space station work for us, there is no way we can get mars to work for us. if you know how to make it so we can live on mars, why not for 1/10 of the cost help one million times as many people by going to some desert like the sahara or mojava, let's make those places hospitable again. there are a lot of people who would appreciate that. a tiny number of people will enjoy being on mars. i don't see how that is helping humanity. emily: is what elon musk is doing a waste of time, trying to get to mars? astro: it is aspirational and it could have some of the positive tech benefits and optimism benefits that nasa created.

if you actually want to look at how much it is helping people, we would be better off focusing on the space station that the rest of us are already on here. emily: that was part of my interview with the captain of moonshots, his official title, astro teller. you can catch more of that interview in an upcoming interview of bloomberg "studio 1.0." it is one you definitely do not want to miss. that does it for this edition of "bloomberg technology." we're live streaming on twitter. find us there @technology. follow our global news network, tictoc, on twitter. it's friday. have a wonderful weekend, everybody. 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 those of bloomberg lp, its affiliates or its employees. >> this program is a paid presentation for omega xl. it is brought to you by great healthworks. ♪ larry: welcome. i'm larry king, here today to report on a significant health investigation that has been taking place for the past couple of years. the information i will provide you during the course of this show is relevant to everyone's health and be