announcer: from the heart of where innovation, money and power collide.

in silicon valley and beyond. this is bloomberg technology with emily chang. ♪ emily: this is bloomberg technology. coming up, hollywood breathes a sigh of relief. netflix is growing again. expectations were low after the streaming giant lost subscribers last quarter and suddenly pivoted to ads. what is working? we discussed. women are leaving the top ranks of companies in higher rates than ever before according to a new report. what they are calling the gray to breakup later this hour. why has zuckerberg been so quiet these days? the ceo seems to be ignoring his flagship network to focus on a vacant virtual world. first, a look at the markets.

tech stocks climbing for a second day as we head into a key earnings season. ed ludlow is here with the biggest moves. ed: back to back gains for the nasdaq, but the first back-to-back gain for tech stocks in two weeks. we have come into this with high anxiety looking ahead to earnings season. broadly, tech underperformed. yields creeped higher. a story we want to get to straightaway is that of apple. information reporting, according to people familiar with the matter, apple has cut production of the iphone 14, which impacted shares but apple accounts for a waiting perspective for 7% of the s&p 500. it had a jittery effect. the s&p 500 pared some losses, but you can see on the screen, a pretty stark drop. bloomberg reported some difficulty apple has had in managing supplies when it comes to the level of production for the iphone.

we are in the thick of earnings season. netflix reporting almost double what it expected in terms of subscriber growth. shares higher by 14%. other names, disney, roku also pushing higher. my favorite show was the tv series remake of resident evil. make of that what you will. what is interesting is netflix saying that after the current quarter, it is no longer going to guide us forward. like apple does with iphone units, there will be a guessing game. maybe they learn from their mistakes of being either too positive or too conservative. emily: i am thinking bridgerton? that came out so long ago. they need a new one. thank you for. -- lucas, what are the good things you are seeing in this report? why are we seeing a turnaround? before a lot of new changes are

even put into effect. >> it is growing again. they added 2.4 million subscribers in the most recent quarter, way above what wall street forecasts. they also estimated 4.5 million admissions in the fourth. netflix is still going to have its worst year in a really long time but people have jittery because it had shrunk for two quarters. the fact that is growing again is seen as a positive sign. it has all these hit shows, also positive. a pessimist would say, why did they only had to wait for million? that's a legitimate question but i think the response to the slowdown had been so dramatic that a lot of people are just breathing a sigh of relief that it seems to be back on more stable trajectory. emily: what do we know about the ads and how is that impacting your outlook on how much better we can get? >> it is going to release it in

november he will watch about four to five minutes of commercials per hour. most programs people watch or care about will be available, but not all. you won't have ads in new movies orchids programming, but you may have a pre-roll. that means netflix's add teir is cheaper than disney plus. a little more expensive than summer -- other rivals. people are optimistic that this should boost the company's performance in the years ahead, at least give a reason not to cancel but netflix is saying it does not expect material impact in the fourth quarter, more likely in the coming year. it could of course just be trying to manage expectations. emily: what about the content strategy? i mentioned bridgerton, but it has been a wild and they talked about monster, the jeffrey dahmer story. what are you seeing as the next generation of big netflix hits? >> there is a perception, then there is reality there is a

perception that programming has gotten worse and they are funding bad shows and movies. and that people have moved on. while i think there is some truth to that, and even netflix has said it is making too much, for the most part they are still making a lot of shows people want to watch. it had movies, it had dahmer, it had stranger things, it had this korean show that was hugely popular. i think you will see a lot more of that, netflix making a wide range of shows that appeal to people on the coasts, the middle of the country, all around the world and we will see over time if they are doing enough for people to come in. there's also a lot of concern about how much they are spending on marketing and the company is just starting to adjust. emily: what are folks saying in hollywood? they are not doing this in a vacuum, you've got competitors out there making changes as well.

>> people are on one hand relieved because netflix's problems had impacted stock prices for a lot of competitors. even though they are rivals, nobody wants to see netflix collapse because every other company has basically bet their future on streaming. at the same time, you hear whispers about the quality of programming on netflix and how it is not as good as it used to be. there is truth star that, but some of that is also a lack of understanding about what people are actually watching. we will also see in the next few weeks what results are like from warner bros. discovery, disney plus. unfortunately we don't really get numbers for apple tv and amazon broken down, but the positive results for netflix should be assigned that if you can program well, there is plenty of growth to be had. emily: we are in the middle of the major macro economic downturn terry -- downturn. how many descriptions do we want

to have? there has been a reset in the content business. ready you think this stands a year from now? how does this shake out? >> the big question is, at what point some of these players decide they would be better off consolidating. you talked about people being careful with how much they are spending, even the most optimistic that person would say people will want to pay for four or five streaming services. does that mean paramount plus-warner bros.-discovery-hbo peacock, do some of those consolidate? we have already seen disney and fox come together. we have seen viacom and cvs come together. there has been a lot of speculation that at some point there will be bigger deals come we just don't know when. emily: lucas shaw, thank you for your analysis. coming up, not a lot of ipo's, but some dates on potential

public offerings from instacart admits massive valuation cuts. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: intel self-driving technology mobilized targeting a low expectation ipo. intel had recently lowered an expected valuation from $50 billion to $30 billion due to turbulent market conditions.

now, that's closer to $16 billion for you to discuss, crystal z. clearly the market conditions are not helping, but what is behind this other valuation cut? >> ipo takes a long time to prepare. they probably came up with the idea of listing this unit when market was still booming. right now, it went from 50 to 16. 16, probably not the final valuation. emily: it could go lower? >> it could go higher. it could go lower. it is not the final valuation and we will know next week. emily: are you expecting them to go ahead with this? is there any cold feet on the others? >> the market pricing falls like today where things are doing ok, they could go ahead. everything is market dependent. it could -- on a day where everything is in the red and could be a total disaster. we shall see.

right now i think they have the intention to go through. emily: what is the timeline? >> we should expect a listing next week, perhaps midweek. emily: there is a question about the unprofitable ipo and whether that era is coming to an end. you have covered so many ipo's and now you are covering the lack there of. how are companies thinking about strategy in terms of what they want to get out of a public offering? >> anyone who has raised money in the past year when valuation was good and money was available will unlikely be looking at an ipo. the mentality right now is that if you do not have to, don't. i am sure that is what bankers are advising their clients. if you are a company and you have a parent company looking to return some money, you would go ahead with a listing. but for people who have a choice, they will most likely not. that also gives an interesting power dynamic.

you are an investor and you know the company needs to go public, you have more power. emily: how long does the drought last? >> bankers are saying we should expect the rest of your to be quiet. we will likely see deals coming back meaningfully in the second quarter of 2023. it would most likely start with companies that are potentially revenue positive, or even profitable. things we have covered in the last year where they have no revenue or no profit, those will have to wait. emily: we will keep checking in to see if the timeline changes. thank you. i want to move onto another ipo that has been anticipated, instacart. let's bring in adam, executive director at gp bullhound. $1 billion under management. instacart, another one that has had massive valuation cuts. i believe it was valued at $39 billion at its height.

now we are down to $13 billion. what is your expectation with this one? >> instacart is in an interesting position because they do not really need the money right now. they have done a few things that were very stupid. they raised capital on higher valuation. they got their business models such so that they became cash flow positive. they have evolved their business models that they have alternative sources, so they have an advertising model that is doing well. all of that adds up to they do not need to do an offering. the reason for doing an offering would be to just get to liquidity to a 10-year-old company. i do not think they need to -- and there's another dynamic that is interesting, this legislation floating around washington, the reclassification of -- that is something that would have a material impact on their cost

structure. shoppers going from being independent contractors to employees. i think the company is certainly up for it, it is a very well-managed company. this company went from 200,000 shoppers to 500,000 shoppers. during the height of the pandemic, just a well-managed business. all that is being said is that there is no need right now for them to have to do an ipo in a very auspicious market. emily: are you saying if they have to classify workers as employees, it is not going to dramatically and negatively impact the company? they are prepared for it? >> i am saying i think they would be able to handle it. but it is going to impact the valuation models that institutions are looking at for sure. i think that in and of itself is a reason you hold off on rushing into an ipo market when you don't need to. this is a consumer facing

business. the aura of an ipo is important and there's no reason to rush into a market. when you're in an environment like we are in right now where there is so much read on the screen the institutional investors with pass ipo's, you really need to pull off a transaction successfully, you have to have everything in line. you don't need this kind of variable out there which is -- cost structure. what i am saying is they do not need to do it right now. they are up for the task if that is where the legislation happens, but that is far the fait accompli. emily: we just talked about the ipo which was popular among technology companies, instacart saying it has turned a corner on profitability. i imagine that might be one less thing to worry about. is that era for unprofitable ipo's over? >> i would not say -- never say

never. i would not say it is over forever, but it is over short-term. i would say that there is a focus, and we are seeing this across the board, we do a lot of transactions, we are doing a lot of capital raising, we just raised money for business. there is a big focus on more mature models that have provided a pathway to profitability. we are demonstrating that there models are evolved. the days of companies going out with a somewhat pipe tree into public markets, which frankly they should not have been in public markets to begin with, we are not going to see that for a while. emily: how are you changing your strategy? what are you telling your clients amidst these evolving conditions? >> what we are telling people is the m&a market continues to be open, particularly from good evidence. things like cybersecurity.

we do work with digital analytic transformation companies. these are companies that have core, organic growth within their addressable markets which are going to continue. we are telling people that for those who are considering the ipo market right now, that is not something we would strongly recommend. definitely not something that needs to be done. i think there are coming in between all of this negative discussion, still we are going to have a record amount of capital coming in to venture funds. it is just going to be more concentrated. i think there is just a general flight to quality. we are advising people, don't rush ahead to do something unnecessary, but there is certainly transactions to be done and very fair valuations for companies that have more mature business models and have the economics to support.

emily: how long do you think the downturn will last? we are hearing six months for the ipo window to open, i'm hearing from other folks two to three years before we are out of this. >> it is a great question. when you look at what has happened over a period of time, right now all of these valuation models that institutional buyers look at are predicated on an interest rate. when you do not know what the interest rate is going to be, it is hard to build the models accordingly. so it becomes very challenging when you have a bed that -- a fed that is focused on breaking the back of inflation. that is certainly the right thing to be doing, but it is hard to -- i think once you get to a strong period of time in interest rate raises and you start to see that we are entering into and labor statistics supporting that, you are going to see a market that

is more receptive. when markets start opening to the ipo, the companies that go out in those environments have to be primo. they have to be the best companies in their environment. that is what traditionally happens. in any sort of bad ipo market, the market is back because the best of the best go out there, they were, institutions feel comfortable, then they see additional companies come out. to answer your question, i am thinking mid time next year. i would say q4, no. she one still feels early. maybe q2 or q3. equity capital markets are an environment that is fuddruckers. emily: you are on the more optimistic side. adam birnbaum, gp bullhound.

coming up, apple drops after iphone production. the company unveils new ipads. we talked about how the pandemic has changed the company approach to tablets. this is bloomberg. ♪ ( suspenseful music throughout) ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪

♪ emily: apple launched its first fully redesigned ipad in five years. shares dropped on a report to the company will cut production of the iphone 14 plus let's bring in mark gurman. this report coming from the information. what is your assessment? >> i am not sure what else apple, investors or analysts should expect. it is basically last year's phone but bigger.

it is only eight dollars per month less than the iphone 14 promax. there's really not a good reason to buy the $900 iphone 14 when on installments, a much better phone is only eight dollars per month. if you are already spending nine dollars -- $900 on a phone, chances are you can spend $1100. emily: you've also got new reporting on the ipad, the new ipads. tell us how big a change you are seeing here. and why. >> two new ipads. one is the new ipad pro. the second is a new entry-level ipad. the ipad pro, smallest update in the history of the ipad. the first one came out seven years ago, they have essentially added a faster processor. 15% faster. i do not think you are going to

see major gains from last year's model. there's a new pencil hover feature. if you take the stylus over the screen, it can sense 12 millimeters away that you are there. kind of a cool, soft week. the entry-level ipad, i have no idea why anyone would buy the ipad air. $600. this entry-level has the a 14 chip. a little bit slower, but over $100 less expensive. it's going to be an incredibly hot seller. the question is, what is apple thinking with its ipad strategy? it is all over the place. you have five or six distinct models, a lot of overlap in both pricing and functionality, capacity, design, color. the software story is not good. people have been asking for major improvements for years. i do not think stage manager, which they are launching with

ios 16, is the answer. i think they will do well over the holiday season with the new colorful ipad, but they need to give the ipad pro some serious juice both in terms of hardware and software and to define what the vision of the future for the ipad's. i think it is going to be multitasking, but we will see what they have up their sleeves. emily: you are never sure to cut anything, that's why we love you. you give it to us straight. coming up, from the great resignation to the great breakup. why women across corporate america are leaving in the grooves. that is next. this is bloomberg. ♪

millions have made the switch from the big three to the best kept secret in wireless: xfinity mobile. that means millions are saving hundreds a year with the fastest mobile service. and now, introducing, the best price for two lines of unlimited. just $30 per line. there are millions of happy campers out there. and this is the perfect time to join them... add a line to your existing plan, or see for yourself how easy it is to save by talking to our helpful switch squad at your local xfinity store today.

so many people are overweight now and asking themselves, "why can't i lose weight?" for most, the reason is insulin resistance, and they don't even know they have it. conventional starvation diets don't address insulin resistance. that's why they don't work. now, there's golo. golo helps with insulin resistance, getting rid of sugar cravings, helps control stress and emotional eating, and losing weight. go to golo.com and see how golo can change your life. that's g-o-l-o.com.

emily: welcome back.

i want to get to one of our top tech stories. twitter shares jumping after a bloomberg scoop the company has frozen stock accounts for its employees. this as the deadline to seal a deal with elon musk approaches. ed ludlow helps break the story. >> this is the equity awards center. it is a short page where employees can go and look at the status at their restrict stock units, their value and what the trading dates are. the company essentially in the employee faq said they had frozen it. the reasoning was that it is pending the acquisition from elon musk. it is basically a status update. it is part of them saying that the air shareholders of twitter stock is a public company, some are employees and for the time being you cannot look at or trade those shares. it is important to note we are in a quiet period anyway where

staff are prohibited from trading, but the timing has the market paying attention to what is largely a procedural development. emily: how do staff feel about this? they are already struggling. >> we know that sources have told us staff had a number of them with restricted units november 1. they were holding up the siding on their own future. should they leave the company? stocks are a big part of compensation. you also saw the market jump. emily: why did the stock jump? ed: kevan: it has got a bit quiet in what is an awkward situation where a judge said you have until october 28 of work this out. go away and do it. it is an incremental sign they are moving deal closing. it is a formality, but a positive sign to the market. emily: we expect you to keep us posted thank you. now to what has been dubbed the great breakup.

the phenomenon of women leaders leaving their companies at higher rates than ever before. and the gap between women and men leaders quitting. that is the largest it has ever been according to the 2022 women in the workplace study. i want to talk about why with lorraine -- i am always looking forward to this report every year. mostly for a progress update, but this one is not so good. explain what you mean by the great breakup. >> it's exactly what you said. for the first time we have been tracking, women leaders are as ambitious as men but they are leaving companies at the highest rate we have ever seen and higher rates than men. we already know women are underrepresented in leadership, so companies cannot afford to lose their precious women.

to put this in perspective, for every woman director who gets promoted, two women directors are choosing to leave the company. that is one up in two out and that is a problem. emily: you have been working in corporate america for so long, why is this happening? >> we see persistent headwinds, none of which will surprise you. we see a change in the mindset of women. some of the headwinds, we have seen lots of different cuts, but we saw clearly 40% of women leaders said someone took credit for their idea in their meetings this year. there were debt -- and they were two times more likely than men to be mistaken for someone junior. undercutting their leadership. the list goes on. they are also not getting credit for being great people. we are seeing that when women give more, when they make sure that work works, when they take

care of wellness and pay attention, they rarely receive credit. those are some of the headwinds, which are signals to women that you are not going to advance. women's mindsets are shifting. they are saying, i am positively ambitious. i would like to get promoted. i would like another opportunity. if that means i need to break up with you and go to another company, go to a competitor or a smaller company to get that promotion or raise, i am willing to bet on myself and do it. emily: yet far fewer women are being promoted to manager for the eighth year in a row. can you explain this to me? i feel like we are getting a lot of conflicting information. i have also heard that more women are being promoted in-house, or that you were actually seeing that as a potential path to success, perhaps a more accessible path to success than bringing in new women into leadership roles from the outside.

>> you are right. eighth year in a row. the broken rome in the first critical step to manager is still broken. for every 100 women who were promoted to manager -- i mean for every 100 men, only 87 women and 82 women of color. here is why that matters. at a typical company when you look at the manager level, 60% are men and 40% are women which means literally there are fewer women to promote. that's company first pipeline problem. and now we are talking about their second pipeline problem, which is on top of that, women leaders are leaving. our message to organizations is we've got to double down on holding onto our women leaders and our up and coming women leaders. emily: the report cites one in four c-suite leaders is a women and only one in 20 is a woman of color.

lorraine, are startups doing any better have a job than corporate america at getting these numbers up? >> i wish we could say yes. we seek consistent, lackluster results across any size company. to give you a flavor, if you are a black woman, latino women, asian woman, as you try to climb, you face so many challenges. one thing that is important to note is women of color are extremely ambitious. black and asian women want to succeed and rise to leadership roles the most. yes, they face these challenges. if you are a black woman, you are more likely, three times more like the, to be questioned on your credibility. you receive the least amount of support from your manager. all of these things add up. in a world where we have one in 20 women of color at the very

top, and given all the emphasis that companies have talked about and are aware of in terms of racial reckoning, you would think we would be making more progress. the fact of the matter is that we are not. emily: let's talk silver linings. you talk about remote work but you mention remote work earlier, but given these numbers, how is remote work really showing up for women? >> we knew before the pandemic that all employees, particularly women, really valued flexibility. we also know that many companies are continuing some sort of commit and to a level of flexibility. but when you look at remote and hybrid work, it's not just about flexibility for women, they are actually having a better workplace experience when they are working from home. they are less likely to experience micro-aggression. being mistaken for someone more junior, having someone take credit for your ideas. those obviously have a huge impact on women.

women with disabilities are half as likely to experience micro-aggressions when working at home than when they are working in the office. certainly flexibility is not the end all, but it is important women because that allows them to fit work into their lives. emily: let's talk about a plan of action. how can companies and managers and leaders use this information as an opportunity to get better? >> exactly. this points a spotlight on what is not working. granted there are a lot of things not working, but there are solutions. when we look at better companies, companies making more progress year-over-year there are a couple of things they do they actually hold themselves and managers accountable. they do not just have dashboards that say they need to improve, but they hold leaders accountable. in their business reviews and performance evaluations.

another thing we see is that they empower managers, giving them the tools to do better. positive intent is there. they do better in practices. they go beyond the basics. it is wanting to have an antivirus training once a year, it is another thing to say i am going to have an anti-bias observer and really bust that bias in the moments that matter which are performance reviews and evaluations. it is another thing to invest in career development versus just networking on women. there are some really concrete things that companies can do and i am extremely optimistic that they can step forward. emily: i have to ask you about the founder of the lien in who started this movement, sheryl sandberg league -- sandberg, who just left after a very long tenure. what can you tell us about her next steps and how much more time she is now going to be spending focused on these issues

that are part of a movement she capitalized. >> i love that cheryl got to a point in her career where she was ready to leave we always have the right to make choices about our career, as you know so well she said publicly she has always been incredibly involved in the work to fight biases and barriers for women and will continue to do that. we are thrilled to have sheryl sandberg with us every day speaking up on these issues that are critically important. emily: last question, there's a lot to be worried about. what can we be optimistic about? >> we should be optimistic about young women. in the survey, we found -- and a lot of people wonder about women under 30. what is there feeling? i have good news, they are so ambitious. they want to be senior leaders and that has increased over the years.

they have a very clear view of the workplace that works for them and they are going to step up. when we think about the future of women at work, i look at young women and say look, that is our future. we have to invest in them, develop them and bring us up into senior ranks. emily: thank you both and thank you for the work that you do on this report. every year. coming up, why one crip the venture capitalist is asking the public to look at crip though as a technology, not a token. this is bloomberg. ♪

>> blockchain is a technology which is real. we deploy with onyx. [indiscernible] a lot of these technologies are going to work. they are going to make things cheaper. banks will be big users. it made this intermediate some parts of banking but so be it. we've had that problem with technology for 50 years. my issue has always been with what you guys call a cryptocurrency, which i call a crypto token, which doesn't do anything. emily: jamie dimon last week doubling down on his disdain for crypto tokens. but backing blockchain technology. michael anderson, cofounder of

framework ventures, reacted to what he had to say. >> i think the part about blockchain being real, he's right. there are a number of different application categories built on blockchain today. cryptocurrency just happened to be one of them. nfp's are another. we are seeing the rapid innovation of what these concepts can bring about not just from a cost savings perspective, but new types of economic transactions that can exist in a new ecosystem that can connect to the financial ecosystem. you touched on it, but gaming happens to be one of the segments of the market that is completely new and a new business model for gaming. >> he makes an interesting point about the clients. i have always wondered myself, even if you see the beauty of the blockchain, aside from faith from the group, what is the reason that these tokens should be worth a lot of money?

considering the fact that you don't even need the full token to get on the blockchain? >> one of the hardest things we did for ourselves as an industry is called this industry cryptocurrency. what it should have been is maybe crypto commodities. it is just a new technology platform. there are reasons why tokens need to exist to secure networks. one of the ways a theory is you are taking a theory of tokens and putting them up as economic security to validate transactions and provide security and that network. there is a core reason for that. a cerium has a number -- the amount of transaction revenue going through it every single day is tantamount to something that is massively scalable if it were to be traded on the nasdaq like salesforce. if we look at them from that

perspective, there are assets that are fundamentally valuable. >> tell us about the businesses you are invested in that are doing actual work that has nothing to do with the value of the token. for example, smart contracts of the recording events, what can blockchain do that you are actually seeing it do? >> one of the companies we just announced a large fund raise for was stardust. hannah miller broke that story. they just raised a new round of funding which we continued on with our existing investment. they provide an ecosystem for traditional game developers to develop their games and integrate blockchain with the ease of integration of an api, tooling and infrastructure. we like it to being the coinbase for web 3d gaming. onramp's for hundreds of developers building in this ecosystem who want to integrate

in fts. the integration of an fts represents a new business model for game developers. it is not speculative, the developers building on top of that are actually building and succeeding today. we are going to continue to see that trend continue. emily: framework ventures cofounder michael anderson. coming up, what's going on with facebook? mark zuckerberg is an about it. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: let's look and facebook, which some might think has been abandoned. in favor of his new child. that is just one interpretation including from our own max chafkin who wrote this piece for bloomberg businessweek focused on what zuckerberg is talking about now and it is not facebook. >> the metaverse. emily: is he really ignoring facebook? this is huge. is not just facebook, it's instagram and whatsapp. >> facebook and whatsapp and instagram, this is still the core of meta's business. in some extent, they are continuing to make the trains run on time to generate revenue and profit. to be clear, this part of the business generates huge profit. if you just looked at that by itself you would say, mark zuckerberg is doing a good job. but then when you look at it in the context of this pivot toward the metaverse, which happened

less than a year ago, the company changed its name to this new thing, and then you look at the comparison of user numbers, basically 3 billion people a day are coming into facebook properties, including instagram and whatsapp. it looks like about 200,000 people are in horizon worlds, the flagship virtual world that zuckerberg was touting last week. that is a product that like, if this happened with some other product facebook was offering, they would kill it instantly. mark zuckerberg i do not think it's up in the morning for 200,000 unique spirit but the company has decided this is the future and they are pushing towards it and i would argue at great risk to the brand and maybe society in general. emily: facebook still has a lot of issues. instagram has issues. we've got an election coming up. if he is not paying attention,

what hope does that give us that these problems are going to be fixed? >> it is important to say -- the company would argue they are paying attention to these things. nick clegg has been elevated to this more important role overseeing stuff that includes elections. when you go back two years and look at what company was talking about and what mark zuckerberg was talking about, they were focused not on just elections but the responsibility facebook owes to society. zuckerberg was talking about covid vaccines. right now we are talking about getting as many office workers into the metaverse come up which i do not think has anything to do with issues of societal responsibility and might actually work against them. i am not sure anyone one really wants that. he's talking about sending workers to the metaverse at a time when most ceos are trying to get back to the office. it feels like they are working

against a bunch of trends and may be working against their business. emily: is this going to work? in hindsight, is he going to be able to say look, i was right? is it's similar to when facebook transitioned to mobile and it seemed like a big leap at the time? is this different? >> it is possible. if that happens, we will all bow down before mark zuckerberg because he will have done this amazing pivot two times. one thing, that pivot to mobile, sheryl sandberg was very involved. he had help that maybe he doesn't have today. and just because he executes one pivot correctly, i am not sure you can say he is going to execute the next correctly. the leaks and the news we have seen out of facebook are not super encouraging. as we learned last week from the verge and to the new york times, facebook is having trouble keeping its own employees interested in the metaverse,

which makes you wonder how they are going to get people who don't work for mark zuckerberg excited about it. emily: check out max's latest piece. always good to see you in person. that does it for this edition of bloomberg technology. wednesday, the co-ceo of warby parker, talking about the future of his business after stocks tumbled since their ipo. check out our podcasts. i am emily chang. this is bloomberg. ♪