>> from the heart of where innovation, money, and power you collide, in silicon valley and beyond, this is bloomberg technology, with emily chang.

emily: i'm emily chang in san francisco and this is "bloomberg technology." coming up in the next hour, a bloomberg scoop, apple plans to slow hiring and spending. we have the inside scoop on how they plan to do with it. netflix says stranger things was even bigger than expected. but can netflix deliver in its earnings report this week after a dismal start to the year, stranger things have happened. bitcoin rally, jumping as much as 7% for the first time in weeks. what is driving the rebound? later this hour. we will get to all of that in a moment but first let's get a look at the market. stock slow down after the bloomberg scoop that apple plans to slow hiring and spending.

cutting back on a normally aggressive r&d budget. taylor riggs is here to walk us through the day. taylor: equity markets were green on the screen about 10 minutes before 2:00 when i went on air, all of it started to unravel with that headline you just mentioned. the nasdaq 100 off about .9%, certainly the big underperformer on that news. i know you will circle back and get to that in just a moment. you have a 10 year yield that continues to climb so recession fears not today. more about some of those stories. i wanted to talk about ibm as well, just after the closing bell off about 1%. -- off about 4%. overall, the topline numbers look good. they didn't mention the headwind when it comes to the dollar but there are still some concerns when it comes to how we are thinking about these companies navigating some of these recessionary challenges that may be coming up on us. finally, let's look at some of the individual sectors.

you mentioned netflix after hours dropping about 1%. stranger things is scary to me and i cannot watch it. alphabet, a 20-1 stock split. disney, a great story as well. getting $9 billion in out front adds, -- in out front ads, 40% online, so the earnings results we get starting with netflix and the streaming environment, finally apple, the story of the day. off to percent. one of the biggest one-day slides we've had going back in a few weeks. emily: as taylor mentioned, apple plans to slow hiring and spending growth next year, in some divisions according to , bloomberg sources. they are still planning an aggressive product launch schedule including a new mixed reality headset. the news about typically

recessive -- recession resistant apple is taking investors by surprise. mark, what exactly have you learned about apple's plans? mark: we learned that the company is going into fiscal 2023 and taking a more cautious approach to its investing and spending when it comes to hiring. you will see some departures over the next year or so through normal attrition. maybe apple will not refill some of those roles to save money. you will probably see them have headcount even instead of upgrading their headcount between 10% and 15%. they will be spending less money in certain divisions as well, all in preparation for the looming recession and the economic downturn that people are concerned about coupled with inflation. emily: talk about why the market is so surprised by this and concerned by this, given that apple, weathered the pandemic pretty well, also a bellwether for consumer sentiment.

mark: that is exactly right, because apple is a bellwether, the market and analysts and people who invest trust apple to make decisions ahead of time. if you remember when covid started to happen in the beginning of 2020, they were some of the first to be in -- to begin closing their stores and putting in measures to get the impact. apple has shown it has good insight and good research to understand when economic situations are going to happen. at the same time, i don't think it is hugely surprising given that we've seen meta and tesla and amazon, microsoft, all make similar moves. the difference is apple is going to try to keep that internal. instead of tim cook sending out a memo detailing their plans for 2022 and 2023 when it comes to the economic downturn, they are not going to announce it publicly. that's why we are reporting it based on sources as we see other companies do. apple doesn't believe it will have a major impact on consumers or employees.

you're probably not going to see layoffs or major changes to their pipeline and their long -- and their launch plans. i am still expecting an announcement of the first new major product announcement in years to happen sometime in 2023. there will be a big iphone and apple watch update, a larger ipad, so there is a lot in store for next year that the company still wants to get out to consumers. emily: another story you are following, apple being sued over pay and antitrust violations. explain to us what is happening here. mark: this one is a long time coming. apple is the only company that can have cap to pay -- tap to pay software on their phones. when you tap your phone to make

a payment, that is only through -- they are not able to develop their own application in order to use the near field communications chip that allows tap-to-pay on the iphone. now you see a consortium through a class-action suit to benefit consumers. that is happening now. they are upset that apple is keeping that feature exclusive to its own service then charging what they say are higher than normal rates, and those rates being passed on to payment processing companies. emily: mark will keep the scoops coming, thanks so much for joining us. coming up, will the metaverse really change life as we know it? my next guest says yes, indeed, and big time. he will tell us how, next. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: in the next couple of decades, today's internet will undergo a multitrillion dollar transformation to an interconnected 3d virtual world currently known as the metaverse, or so some tech interest say. think virtual malls, where we shop, work, play and more. all under the same roof. in the new book, the metaverse and how it will revolutionize everything, matthew paul offers a glimpse into this new reality. matthew joins us now from l.a. the question is when, so much of the progress made on the so-called metaverse so far seems to be pretty basic. when are our lives going to be "revolutionized"? matthew: we should keep in mind

that technological advances take time. we get the first consumer media services on mobile devices, blackberry, the iphone, in the early 2000's. what is clear now with the advent of real-time 3d as we talk about industrial applications, the advent in live patient surgery and the fact that hundreds of millions of people typically under the ages of 25 are all living in 3d worlds. emily: so not you or me yet, no offense, but what about how this is going to change our daily lives? for example you are joining us , now remotely, would it seem like you were here in the studio in this new world?

matthew: that is certainly one element. meta talks about the idea of co-location, but in some instances, we will still be using some of the devices we use now but we might be doing it in 3d displays. we might be sitting thousands of miles apart looking at it screen, but the actual presentation would be in 3d. studies show that has remarkable improvements on retention and engagement. emily: you've had your metaverse etf going, snap views the metaverse is so different from meta, where mark zuckerberg's vision has been called hypothetical. snap is betting more on augmented reality over real physical reality. and today, snap unveiled a web

version of snap almost seems like it's going backwards. how do we square these two visions? matthew: the way we square it is by ignoring the term all together. it is helpful to talk about a new generation of the internet. you find there is no concrete definition. some believe it fundamentally requires crypto. others have augmented reality centered belief. under the classical definition where we are talking about real-time 3d, you might talk about augmented reality lenses, mark zuckerberg might talk about the virtual world with all your other vision cut off. that is still 3d and they will still be interconnected in some shape or form. emily: let's talk about how it changes the world of streaming. you are a long time former amazon studio executive. how does it change the way we watch what we watch, and how? matthew: it's a great example of what is already in the world today.

disney produced most of the mende lori and using a game engine, a real-time 3d simulation, they can create the perfect sunset and hold that sunset in place. they can pull out the entirety of that virtual sunset and reshoot it and make it available on your peloton or videogame console in virtual or augmented reality. that's a way we will start to see in attainment change. -- entertainment change. talking about the idea you might be able to just play games on the smartphone. emily: netflix earnings are coming up. we've been talking about the success of "stranger things," which is not a surprise. what would you bet is going to happen here? are they going to buck the trend

that we saw earlier or will we see a slow degradation in the number of subscribers for a while? matthew: it's clear by all streaming benchmarks that stranger things season four was as exceptional as fans hope and in excess what netflix expected. third-party analytics show some are weaker than we hope for. one company shows that netflix ranks second last in terms of subscriber retention after 30 day sign-ups. there also at a four-year high for the overall services term of retention. the numbers say that even if it was a strong quarter for ads, the turn elevation will likely be offset. emily: lord of the rings, the new series, jeff bezos tweeted out the trailer last week. do you think it will be a megahit like "stranger things" has been for netflix? matthew: "stranger things" is still breaking records seven years later.

defining by that degree is going to take some time. do i think it will premier to outstanding viewership? do i think it will be one of the most significant things that amazon overall does in 2020 absolutely. emily: what is your take on the overall tech market dynamic? we got this negative news from apple that they will slow down spending growth and slow down hiring. apple is long considered a bellwether for consumer sentiment. are you taking that as a bad signal for the rest of big tech for the foreseeable future? matthew: it's not encouraging, certainly, when you look at how many other creators and founders and products and services rely on the iphone and the incremental improvements for every device refresh. none of that is good. we are seeing this industrywide separate from apple, the video game industry was down last year, we're looking at a broad

situation where consumer electronics, entertainment, all are getting threatened. the drop in the crypto markets is exacerbating things from a demographic view. emily: matthew, always good to have you here and we are excited about your new book. matthew ball, thank you. coming up, could elon musk's bid for twitter somehow be good for twitter's relationship with china? our next guest thinks so. isaac stone fish is back to talk to us about the future of china-u.s. tech relations and more. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: the world's biggest maker of batteries for electric cars is considering at least two locations in mexico for a manufacturing plant. the company could be positioning itself to help tesla and ford grow its market share in north america. the potential sites are near the texas border and the company is planning to invest as much as $5 billion in this project. meantime china is facing a slew of new challenges as its economy buckles amid stringent covid zero policies. there are ongoing protests at housing projects for example in more than 50 cities with residents refusing to pay their mortgage payments, and typically vibrant hong kong is struggling

to recruit and retain new talent. so how will this all impact the tech sector? i want to bring in isaac stone fish, the founder of strategy risks who works with companies with exposure to china. good to have you back here on the show. when you look at china right now, is it still the place to put your money? isaac: it depends on where you invest. there are a lot of other places, industries and sectors that have more minimal china exposure. for so long, people have been pricing the risk of investments in china and now that the risks are so much more clear, they are able to step back and say, oops. emily: is the center of gravity in the tech scene moving from beijing to hong kong, or from hong kong to singapore, where conditions are more predictable? isaac: i think a lot of people in the tech scene like the idea of it being decentralized.

especially the more bitcoin-y of the folks. china certainly is the center of the tech seen in asia, but it is really too early to see whether they have a global tech scene. chinese entrepreneurs have long succeeded despite the common's party and the conditions of china as their space grows narrower and narrower. i think we will see more of an exodus of talent to other parts of the world. emily: will the covid policies have a long-term impact will this be an inflection point? isaac: the metaphor of a guy stepping on someone else's neck and other people looking for solution, and the solution is, take your foot off his neck. it has been a long period of strangulation of china's economy. there are huge emotional damages in the cruel lockdown that they have had. yes, it will have long-term effects. emily: meantime you have

companies like tiktok just continuing to thrive. and the parent company is bytedance. do you think u.s. social media companies will ever be able to catch up? isaac: i think they will. the game that tiktok is playing is how can it seem as un-chinese as possible in the united states? the more it gets tarred with an association with the chinese communist party, the better it will be for meta- google and , microsoft and even oracle. emily: you have some interesting analysis on the elon musk-twitter debate. you think the drama in general could be good for twitter's relationship with china, which is interesting given that twitter has been blocked in china since 2010. what do you mean? isaac: musk, for someone who is such a free-speech avatar, has a massive blind spot when it comes to china and refuses to

criticize the chinese communist party in a way that is especially egregious for someone who is so open and no holds barred with so many other people. it feels like employees of twitter will read between the lines and say we don't need to be so aggressive in labeling chinese accounts, we don't need to push back against this kind of information and see this as misinformation. tesla is in china, why can't twitter be in china? and make a lot of sacrifices that musk has made vis-à-vis tesla in china. emily: so you think of elon musk's does the deal as he promised and takes over twitter it could be an entrée for twitter back into china? isaac: i don't think it will necessarily be good for twitter's bottom line. it will certainly change the way the social media platform works. we see tesla on one side which is heavily exposed to china. spacex on the other side, and

twitter will fit somewhere in between. i think it's possible they might fit closer to the tesla model than the spacex model. emily: how optimistic are you about the future of tesla in china? especially given the broader economic concerns? isaac: i think it depends on how far musk is willing to bend. there's a lot of concerns in china about tesla as a national security right because of all -- national security threat because of all the data it collects. i assume that musk will be happy to continue yielding to the chinese communist party with sharing data, with doing things like opening a showroom in a region in northwest china where upwards of a million muslims have been in concentration camps. i think we will continue to see similar behavior. the thing that would change it is if musk decides to be more heavily involved in politics and thinks it's just too much of a liability for me, but i don't see that is very likely.

emily: this along with current -- with concerns about tiktok. and whether or not it shares with the chinese government, what is your take? isaac: i think what people need to understand, and it transitions to an even darker topic, but if the u.s. and china go to war over taiwan over the south sea or vietnam or any country in the region, all of chinese companies and u.s. companies will be seen as enemy combatants. the threat with tiktok is less that someone is using tiktok new jersey in the chinese common's -- is using tiktok in new jersey and the chinese coming as party is watching that in real time, but the way that data, that information come of that location tracking can be weaponized if beijing so chooses. emily: dark indeed. thank you for taking us there and for joining us here in the studio. isaac stone fish, good to have you here. speaking of twitter, some headlines just crossing now

about twitter's feud with elon musk. twitter dismissing musk's complaints that he does not have enough information about spam and bought accounts. twitter saying the complaints are an irrelevant sideshow urging the judge to hold the trial as soon as possible over his proposed cancellation of the deal. we are expecting the first hearing in this legal saga tuesday. we will be back with more "bloomberg technology." this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: despite the major success of the latest season of "stranger things," netflix investors have been bracing for subscriber losses. shares are down. streaming gets more competitive and inflation forces consumers to be more competitive, but shares jumped to make things more competitive. so why are shares climbing ahead of what is expected to be a not so great report? >> optimism that things will be better than expected. netflix had forecast they would lose 2 million in the quarter which would be the worst quarter ever and for the year, they would have lost 2.2 million subscribers. i think there is some optimism based on reporting and third-party analysis and the obvious success of "stranger things" that maybe they will lose 500,000 or one million instead of i also think the last 2 million. time around, they've done a better job over the last couple of months of trying to explain what some of it means. emily: there's been some talk of

changing the binge-watching strategy, releasing episodes weekly, for example. do you think there's a chance that can happen? i guess stranger things have happened, pun intended. reporter: they are already starting it with the release of "stranger things," they have come up with the batch approach where they will release the season in two installments instead of all at once. i think you will see a lot more of that, or maybe in three. i don't think you will ever see netflix, at least not anytime soon, go with the weekly model that has been popularized in tv, but they are seeing a benefit in releasing four to six episodes at a time and then spacing it out, because it reduces the number of people who are canceling if they know they need to stick with netflix for at least two or three months. emily: they did that with "ozark" too.

does that work? as a viewer i found it really , frustrating. lucas: i think what you see based on some of the third party data is there is a secondary spike in viewership. that seems like a good thing if your desire is to make sure people are coming back to netflix on a regular basis. emily: there's also some reporting about hulu growing more than even disney plus. of course, disney is a big stakeholder in hulu. what are these clues telling us about what consumers want and what services are going to run them all? lucas: the important thing to keep in mind on the hulu report is it is specific to the u.s. and from third-party data. hulu may be doing better than disney plus in the u.s., but disney plus is still larger than hulu by a lot, especially worldwide. hulu is u.s. only. the question looming over disney is, are they going to end up

buying comcast out of it and folding it into disney plus? do they want to keep it independent? that being said, hulu is on a really good streak of programming. that is one of the reasons why you see netflix stumbling a bit. these other services, namely disney plus, hbo max and apple tv plus, to some extent hulu, have given viewers a lot of alternatives online. it used to be that netflix was the default for most people if they wanted to watch tv or stream. that is just not the case anymore. emily: meantime you have amazon coming out with "lord of the rings," long anticipated. who stands to gain the most from a potential decline in netflix subscribers? is it disney plus, amazon? lucas: it will probably be spread across a number of players. disney already benefited a bunch and hopes to continue to do so. hbo max has been in a really good groove and growing at a steady clip. paramount is one of the fastest-growing services, at

least in the u.s. amazon has been at it for as long as netflix and has been second or third fiddle to them the whole time. they're trying to get their act together. "lord of the rings" is their biggest swing and they hope it works. at the same time, you have another tech giant in apple that some would argue has done a better job of programming over the last couple of years. emily: lots to keep watching with netflix results out later this week. lucas shaw, thank you, as always. next to streaming, one of the industries perhaps most profoundly changed by the pandemic has been health care, accelerating the progress of telemedicine and more. able partners is a women lead investment fund supporting early-stage brands that focus on making the daily lives of consumers happier and healthier. they just ran a study on how gen z in particular is navigating the new complexities of health care. the founding partner joins me now. amanda, thank you so much for being here.

talk about this report and what surprised you most about these gen z? >> thank you for having me. the most surprising finding by far is that this generation, they might not want to go back to the office full-time, but they seem to want to see their health care providers in person. we asked their preferred communication method with health care providers and they chose in person communication well above any other form of communication. looked at another way, we asked their top criteria when choosing health care providers and they chose convenient location as their top criteria and telehealth capabilities were last in the survey. emily: interesting. does that mean you should be investing less in telehealth? amanda: i think we need to dig a little deeper into the findings. we find the preference is for a hybrid solution. while they want to meet their health care provider in person, when we asked them how often they want to hear back from the

provider, the majority said they expect to hear back from a provider within a few hours when they have a question or concern. they are really looking for the convenience of digital channels while still having the opportunity to make an in-person connection. while i think it is true the telehealth revolution has been oversold for this generation, there is a role for it. i think when you start looking at specific specialties, perhaps mental health care, there could be a larger role. emily: so health care is operating in not only a post-covid but now a post roe world. what are the trends that stem from that? amanda: when we think about the impact of the dobbs decision, that has the largest impact directly on providers of telehealth abortions. they've seen increase in demand as well as increased risk and liabilities as a result of that decision. but when you think about the broader impact, it has the

potential to make employment and investment more or less appealing in any number of states. if you are in austin or miami, you have a recruiting disadvantage at this point. in our survey, we found nearly half of gen z women were somewhat or very unlikely to take a job in a state that had restricted abortion rights. that number was 30% for men. if you're an employer and you are looking at potentially 40% of your future workforce not wanting to work in your state, it doesn't matter where you stand on the political divide, that's just a business decision. i think the secondary impact of that is we will see further moves towards permanent work from home policies and companies that will continue to optimize a distributor workforce will continue to have advantages. emily: how is all this infecting where you as an investor put your money? amanda: at hazel partners, -- able partners we are focused on , a concept we call the wellness

cap. gdp per capita has gone up and to the right, consumers have had more money in their pockets. but if you were to plot on the same graph measures of physical and emotional well-being, those have been stagnant to down, particularly over the past two decades. that has created a literal gap in the graph. we are most interested in funding companies that are looking to close that gap. we have a secondary lens of stigma we like to look at where we feel like communities have been underserved because of historical stigmas and that offers large market opportunities. emily: a wellness gap, interesting. thank you for joining us to tell us about it. able partners founding partner, amanda eilian, appreciate it. coming up, bitcoin and altcoin rallying after the crypto june wipeout. we will talk about why, next. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: time for our crypto report, bitcoin rallying, at one point trading above $22,000 for the first time since early june. and testing the upper range where it has been stuck for a few months. ether extending a rally that began last week after lock chain gave a target projected to lower the networks energy and other coins like avalanche, polygon. -- energy usage, and other coins like avalanche, polygon and card

ano in the green. let's talk more about this with hannah miller. why are we seeing bitcoin and other coins rallying right now? hannah: there has been some space between this rally and a freezing at celsius, which we saw a huge downturn in price for cryptocurrency in mid june. bitcoin is sparking traders' interest. it's hope that maybe bitcoin will break out of this in $19,000 to $20,000 range. for ether news of the merger , that could happen as soon as september has really sparked interest in theory him again. emily: yet we had a guest last week that called ethereum a giant ponzi scheme. what do you make of that? hannah: there are people that are concerned about the safety and risk that it poses to investors.

especially in light of what is happening with celsius and the freezing of withdrawal from various crypto lenders has put a lot of people on edge. emily: let's talk about that. there are new developments when it comes to this big crypto hedge fund, as well as the celsius bankruptcy. all of this amidst calls for more regulation. hannah: yes, we have a fuller picture of what's happening with the collapse of three hours capital. we have a more detailed list today of creditors and it is a pretty interesting list. there are some really big names in the industry like digital currency group, and one of the cofounders of three our capitals' wife has a claim in. it is pretty interesting to see how interconnected the industry is, and we are still getting

details emerging about celsius, and still untangling this web of what is happening. emily: hannah miller, thank you so much for all the updates. speaking of distressed crypto terms, the rise in companies like celsius and others have calls for more legislation and regulation in the crypto space overall. here's what a member of the alphabet board has to say about that earlier. >> regrettably, there's usually -- we usually wait until there's some calamity before there's regulation. the question is always, was this calamity big enough, or does there need to be another let down before we have appropriate legislation? emily: my next guest founder the world economic forum's blockchain and digital assets

team. there have been a lot of big red flags, celsius, three arrows, you heard what marty chavez said about regulation. are we behind? are we waiting for a calamity? >> i don't know that we are waiting for a calamity i find , that a bit dramatic. we've seen a number of cycles and waves in this industry. i've been in this space for seven years now and this is not the first time we've seen a big crash followed by pretty quick rally. as hannah mentioned earlier, we are starting to see a little bit of that rally start to happen. the markets are starting to be more confident in alternative assets. i don't know that we are waiting for a calamity. i think there's been enough attention placed on the industry. i would say do we play some skepticism around it, but i think there's a lot of attention already paid. emily: what do you think is driving the rally, and how long does it last? it seems to be bad news everywhere else when it comes to the economy. >> that is right. i think we are part of a broader market meltdown happening. i think it's profound that

you are seeing individual coins starting to turn around and pick up a little bit. i think it really is about the merge, the idea that it is a long time coming. people were talking about the marriage since theory him -- e thereum was first launched. the idea that there could be a transition from proof of work to proof of state. i know there's a 99.95% reduction, a massive reduction of energy. energy has been a big talking point for some folks in the space. i think people are excited to see, not just about the energy usage, but the fact that this major technology change can be achieved. it is complicated and hard to do, the details building the systems are so complex, but here we are seeing this massive change in the way infrastructures are going to run. i think it's proof that if you give it time, rings will thrive. -- things will thrive. emily: i have to ask you about

comments we got last week from a founder who basically called ethereum a giant ponzi scheme. you got major skeptics not just outside the industry but inside the industry who don't believe in it. >> i think one thing that is important to note about crypto is it tends to be pretty tribal. you have folks that pick their token and they will talk about their team as being the best. like with any industry, there are a bunch of options. they have some similarities and differences. in some cases, pretty significant differences. i'm agnostic about it. the market will decide which ones are taking off and which doesn't. some of these things will fail and some will grow. it is normal to see they may be favoring a different opportunity and talked about other opportunities in a negative frame. you see this quite a bit in the industry. emily: tribalism indeed.

where are you on the big debate about whether crypto is a security or a commodity? obviously that has major implications for how all of this will be regulated. >> this is the debate of the aid right now and you are seeing a lot of activity on the hill, also in europe about this. deciding, what is the classification of this asset? determining who regulates it and what are the rules of engagement, what are they allowed to do, who owns the disclosures, and how will they happen? all of this will shape the way this develops. most things do start off to some degree, you have a group of people who are engaging in that build. we have seen several that over time have really evolved to be truly decentralized. the howey test determining whether or not something is a security does have a prong that talks about the engagement of others, how much does the activity of one group of people

really affect their efforts, how does that affect the nature of the build of the project and the price and all those things? in decentralized systems, there's an argument to be made that is really strong that there is not such engagement from any individual or even prove it will affect the way the thing tends to land or grow. i do think we had a pretty strong idea that commodities, other things being developed as it happens right now, but we will get to a place where more and more decentralization is the norm. emily: we will be watching every twist and turn to see how it plays out. crypto council for innovation ceo sheila warren good to have , you back here on the show. coming up, twitter response to elon musk. and the judge that was supposed to run this big hearing, coming up, has covid. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: it is a big week for the courts and the integrity of m&a.

twitter has responded to elon musk ahead of tuesday's hearing. bloomberg's just healy joins us from wilmington, delaware where this hearing will go down. jeff who joins us now on the phone, elon musk responded to twitter suits saying he needed more time to prove his argument in court, that twitter was trying to rush and obfuscate things. twitter has responded to what elon musk had to say. where do things stand right now? reporter: it is just a bad all over, two sides think. twitter today basically said that mr. musk's arguments that they had not turned over enough information on the spam and robot bots within their customer base was basically "an irrelevant sideshow" and he knew all along how many bots there were, and this is a pretext to walk away.

basically we are at the stage now where the judge is going to have to decide whether to fast-track it and go for trial in september or february or somewhere in between. emily: in another twist, the judge who will run the hearing actually has covid. so the hearing, i understand it was supposed to be in person, is still happening but it will be on zoom. reporter: that's right. we've had a little boom right now if the new variant, so the judge sent a letter out today saying she tested positive. we are pretty familiar with this. we did zoom hearings for the better part of two years, so it will be fine. emily: so what exactly is going to happen at this hearing? what will the judge decide? reporter: so twitter has asked to basically what we call fast-track the lawsuit. that doesn't give you any specifics in terms of how fast, but it means months rather than

years. twitter says every day that passes with the cloud over its shares is harming its value. that's why they are pushing for a sped up trial for september 19. mr. musk on the other hand says the case is way too complicated to try to compress discovery of pretrial information exchanges for that period, and it really needs to be spread out in the trial should be held in february of next year. my suspicion is the judge will come down somewhere between those two things. emily: what are experts telling you about whose case is stronger? quickly. reporter: again, it is a question that will be decided by kathleen mccormick. many people believe twitter holds the stronger hand because mr. musk waived due diligence on the bots before he signed a deal.

but you just never know, things have to develop and there may be things that we don't know at this point. that's why they have two sides to every court case. emily: two sides indeed. thanks so much,jef. he will be covering this hearing for us in delaware. we will stay tuned to your reporting. that does it for this edition of "bloomberg technology." tomorrow we will hear from a big investor in netflix and we will break down netflix results. as always, don't forget to check out our podcast wherever you get , your podcasts. i'm emily chang in san francisco. this is bloomberg. ♪