>> this is bloomberg technology with caroline hyde and ed ludlow. caroline: i am caroline hyde at bloomberg world news headquarters in new york.

the uk's antitrust watchdog strikes again with an investigation into amazon and microsoft's cloud services. more concerns u.s. tech giants could be abusing market power. it is day two in the historic ftx fraud trial. a look at the crypto hedge fund. in this hour we have an exclusive conversation with them for it -- with san francisco fed president mary daly from the economics club of new york. first let's check in on the markets because it is about the federal reserve that is currently affecting the market. the macro picture being the jobs data is still looking strong. we see selloff in the nasdaq. the nonfarm payrolls data coming up the jobless claims. two year yield recovering somewhat. stabilization in the bond market. still above a 5% level. what is there for the risk appetites when we have high-yield? the dollar stabilizing.

let's look at some of the individual movers. i am looking at micron, up .6%. they be that is because samsung electronics managing to boost the price of their own memory chips. analysts saying we are downgrading the stock as well as wells fargo. amazon also off 1.4%. this is as it is being hide by the u.k. in terms of its monopolization. they are worried about the cloud market. the ftc warning amazon about its marketplace and this is all this atmospheric more regulation coming toward some of these big tech companies and the worry of the prominence they have. let's stick on that particular role of amazon. i want to bring in bloomberg's thomas sealed for more that the cmi -- the cma is trying to show its chops. there analyzing amazon and

microsoft. thomas: that's right. it is the next one in the series and microsoft in the spotlight. amazon and microsoft occupied 70% to 80% of the storage market. it is decided there are concerns it has given this to the antitrust watchdogs which could suffer huge process again. caroline: amazon has said you are misreading our data, but what is the argument they are seeing in terms of pricing power that these players have? thomas: they really outlined three concerns in the study. one is a thing called egress fees, basically exit fees. if you try to check your data out of the cloud you get charged , especially if it is a big amount of data. this is something that could lock you in.

another thing is interoperability. lots of big companies want to run different clouds for different things. that is technically difficult. the final thing is discounting for big committed spend. this could incentivize keeping all of your eggs in one basket and that is not competitive. caroline: amazon has come back and said we disagree with the findings. they say they are based on a fundamental misunderstanding of how the id sector functions. remind us, this is really expensive to be an offer of cloud. you have to almost be a huge player. how hard is it to have a lot of smaller players within this? pres. daly: -- thomas: amazon and microsoft do not fall into this. they have the backbone of the internet. massive data centers. data centers close to cities see you get that snappy 5g internet

everyone will be needing. they have put a lot of work into maintaining and building this position. the cma will be looking into can anyone else get into this? is this going to impact the kinds of services we have in the future? are there potential concerns for what this means for ai, which will use even more cloud computing then we use today. caroline: ultimately we are interested in the u.k. vis-a-vis the u.s. vis-a-vis germany. the u.k. has been looking into competition in the cloud space. how much is that something the big tech companies have to navigate. thomas: i think you are asking about international comparisons. it is an interesting one for the cma because post-brexit it is out there alone whereas before it was part of europe. the report does note what is going on in other parts of the

world. it notes the ftc looking at this , the eu looking at this comment may maybe the cma becomes more of a sideshow as these much bigger regulatory regimes hone in on the same market and start to think -- caroline: and start to think from a work perspective or generative ai. great to have some time with you. now let's get back to antitrust in the u.s.. googles trial is still underway. in transcripts unsealed by the judge we learned that apple held talks with duck duck go lace google as the private search engine. bloomberg sara forden joins us from washington. more detail coming out of how much apple had analyzed other competitive search offerings. sara: yes.

the unsealing of this testimony was quite extraordinary and an important part of the case. the judge said he read through the testimony, which had been taken in a sealed courtroom. he read through it line by line and felt that what is being said by these executives cuts to the heart of the case against google . this has to do with googles $12 billion agreement with apple that allows it to be the default search engine on all apple iphones and other desktops. it gives them access to a tremendous amount of data and we know data and building scale for a search engine is key to keeping those search results hi and dominating the market. caroline: the level of detail is extraordinary. duck duck go ceo saying he met with apple 20 meetings, and phone calls with the head of

safari. does this paint a picture that they did not find a better offering out there that what google currently serves to the market? they are not favoring google because of the money. it is just a better product for the consumer? sara: that is true. there was testimony from the apple executive who negotiated the deal with google who said ultimately they did not go for an alternative and he revealed there had been talks with being as well in 2018 or 2019 but they decided google was the best. certainly that is a business case. we think this will be critical in terms of how the judge decides about the market issues. the judge will be the one to decide this case. caroline: earlier this week the

judge was out trying to build being as a competitor. it is in this moment we feel there is competition from bing with the partnership they have with openai. from all of the testimony thus far, is there any read you are getting as to which direction the judge might end up landing? sara: it is still too soon to say. certainly the government is putting on the best case it can. this is a test case. this has never been done before. this afternoon the expert witness from the justice department will be testifying about market definition and that will be key. caroline: we will keep abreast of it with your help. coming up, we will be looking at another trial.

sam bankman-fried, the disgraced 31-year-old prepared to convince a jury's crypto empire was not a fraud. and let's take a look at shares. as we go to break there plenty of things on the move when you look at the micro detail. we are looking at individual companies that are currently not on the downside. rivian tumbling. we sought down as much as 19%. this as the electric vehicle company is looking to sell convertible debt. it could end up boosting the supply of shares. the stock is off 20%. $19 is where we trade. also looking at lucid group. this could be falling in sympathy but the be maker offering a cheaper model. investors reading the worry about whether that is a price cut. it is down 9%. this is bloomberg technology. ♪

the first time you made a sale online with godaddy was also the first time you heard of a town named dinosaur, colorado. we just got an order from dinosaur, colorado. start an easy to build, powerful website for free with a partner that always puts you first. start for free at godaddy.com

caroline: we want to get you up to speed on the latest on the

trial of sam bankman-fried. sonali basak is keeping the context of who else will be giving evidence in what shocking revelations we could hear from them. sonali: i love being on set next to you but that courthouse is also fascinating. you have the witnesses starting to come up, including a developer at ftx who has been speaking about his long friendship with sam bankman-fried since m.i.t. as well as what he was told while he was working at the company. more interesting, you have gary wang, the former technology officer, cofounder of ftx, expected to testify as early as today. he was one of the people who had pled guilty and is a cooperating witness for the trial, one of three important key figures from the innerworof ftx. the prosecution has drawn out that there were only a few people that knew the extent to which this was -- allegedly this

fraud was carried out. caroline: one of the key people is caroline ellison who was heading up alameda research which ultimately was attested to be sharing and comingling funds from an early date. sonali: the caroline ellison part of this is becoming more pronounced as this trial goes on. was brought up in prosecution's opening arguments as well as the defense. for the prosecution, remember the in circle i walkig about. they were talking about bringing her to the four for them to explain their interactions with sam bankman-fried. the prosecution defines two ways. that alameda had taken money through ftx with cash as well as his digital wallets. they will be using caroline ellison to explain how that happened and what sam bankman-fried knew and what he directed. in the defense part of the argument they have said carolyn allison was running alameda.

they made the defense that one person, one ceo cannot be at all places at all times and as a shareholder and directed caroline ellison to do things like hedge the portfolio ahead of the crash that led to the ultimate bankruptcy of ftx despite the comb mingling of the funds. this is sam bankman-fried's former girlfriend who had a lot of details about how sam bankman-fried operated himself. it will be up for the jury to decide but his colleagues who have already pled guilty. caroline: thanks for keeping us up to speed. let's go macro. let's go to the economic hub in new york where our own lisa abramowicz is sitting down with none other than the san francisco fed president mary daly. let's listen in. pres. daly: i will remind everybody my views are my own and i do not speak for anybody on the fed committee. that is how i think about it.

in the june summary of economic projections there were two more rate hikes projected this year. in july we took one of those rate cuts -- rate hikes and another was the median outlook. the bond market has tightened considerably over 38 basis points since we met in september. that is equivalent to a rate hike. the need to do tightening additionally is not there. from my own perspective that is what i look at. our job as i see it is not to tighten -- just do our part, it is to watch financial conditions. monetary policy works, we raise the fund rate and it moves through interest rates. the financial conditions are tight our work is not necessary.

does that make sense? lisa: absolutely. richard clarida said the rising yields does the fed's job for it. would you sympathize with that sentiment? pres. daly: that is how it works . one of the things that has happened in the last 90 days is that financial markets have collectively taken on board a variety of things. one of the things i heard from many commentators in the market outreach i do is they have general understanding that we are committed at the fomc to keeping rates higher for longer in an effort to bring inflation fully back down to 2%. that recognition, along with all of the other factors we can put into risk about why bond yields have risen are affecting the financial conditions and the tightening and i see that is a positive outcome that we would have tighter financial conditions. then we can get the job done for putting inflation back to rest.

lisa: when is a selloff welcome from the perspective of finally the market is coming to terms with what the fed has been saying and when is it disruptive on a level that is causing concern? pres. daly: you always wanted orderly repricing over a disorderly paris pricing. so far -- over a disorderly repricing. what is happening is financial markets are trying to find their footing and the right price for things and they will digest a lot of information. one is the supply and demand to changes in the treasury space. supply is going up and demand is going down, especially with foreign buyers. that is one factor to digest. another factor to digest is fed policy. a third factor is this increasing conversation people are having about whether the real neutral rate of interest has risen. we came into the pandemic about

.5%, which means nominal neutral, and when people say the neutral rate might have risen for a variety of factors, i am everything from maybe it is five to something i would say more likely, which is between 2, 5, and three for the nominal and neutral. we do not know if it has risen. certainly we should have those conversations. then markets try to price that in. there is lots of uncertainty in the economy and geopolitical risk and our own fiscal risk. markets digest a lot of information and try to find their footing and that is what we are seeing. so far it has not spilled over into disorderly. even today when the jobs claims came up and it was i don't know what to make of it, you did not see things shaking up in a wild or disorderly fashion. so far, so good. lisa: you bond quote of the day, 4.70% on the 10 year. it seems like yields are coming

in. back in march, when there was this concern about the banking situation, yields were at the low of march. 150 basis points lower than wherewith they are now -- lower than where they are now. are you seeing the same type of financial stress today you did back then, even on the peripheries? how you rationalize why it has not materialized in the same way? pres. daly: march was a unique situation. we had a bank run, very old-fashioned but true bank run where the banks liquidity was completely squeezed and it dissolved in a period that was rapid. that spilled over into two other banks. that was the extent. one of the things i always remind people of his we have over 4000 banks in the country and three failed.

they were neighbors in size and balance sheet distribution composition. they felt stresses but they manage those stresses because in part it had been more effective at edging the risks and then the fed came in with the bt fp and that produced a lot of palm this in the water -- a lot of calmness in the water. since that time banking stresses have not been something when you ask people in the community what is the top of your worries, that is not something they list. they list inflation, uncertainty. one of the reasons we are seeing this yield rising not spilling back over is essentially we know what is going on in the banking sector. investor letters have been published for months saying here's what this balance sheet looks like. there is not a surprise. the second is because the banking system is resilient. we have remedies in place that

solve parts of the crisis. it is the same thing when you have the rise in yields. we are doing it against a strong economy, a solid banking system. that means the ripple effects are not going to be tipping things over. the fragility is not there and you have this and it is able to absorb the tension points. lisa: one thing there has been a debate around is long and variable lags. if you think 10-year gilts are at 5% rather than 4.5% or 3% that changes what implication there isn't into different business models? how much does it change the business model of commercial real estate owners and residential real estate owners and the constituents you speak to on a regular basis? pres. daly: that is a terrific question but i will unpack it into two parts. the long and variable lags and

how are people reacting to that? i just met with a variety of commercial real estate ceos with national footprints on monday so i can bring some of that to this conversation. definitely there is always a debate. if you want to get into debate get a phd in economics and you'll spend a lot of time debating long and variable lags of monetary policy. here is what we can agree on. there are lags in their variable and people debate about how long are they? i go with long and variable lags in the question is we know from the fed's communications to financial markets, and then the question is how long does it take to get through the economy. i am of the view we are still seeing the effects of that. we saw that initially in housing, now we are seeing it in the labor market and inflation. it is absolutely happening. we want to continue to watch

that because with the risk balanced on the economy we could overcorrect then under correct and that is why taking the time to do it right is where i think we need to be. what i'm hearing and these rising yields, they are less concerned by commercial real estate roundtable about the lags and monetary policy as much is this. there is this time when people -- one person described it as a foot race. it is just like i have to see if the fed will cut rates before i have to refinance my properties. you are in a look ahead and you are saying if the fed cuts rates like the market suggests they will come of the market suggested six months ago early in 2024 for the middle of 2024 than by the time i refinance i am golden.

that equation changes if we are higher for longer to get inflation down or if the yields are going to be higher. then projects that penciled out at near zero interest rates were something much lower do not pencil out at five. one of the things we think a lot about is what is the switch point for commercial real estate? you want that to be an orderly repricing. so far it has been, rather than a disorderly one. that is a risk worth watching is these higher yields change the psychology of what is possible for people and they start making those adjustments immediately as opposed to a timeline that goes with the refinance schedule. lisa: this idea of 5% or 4.8% or 4.7% of long-term rates being priced into markets, how much does that imply a significantly greater degree of distress and

some of these areas like real estate, commercial real estate, that rely on this idea of refinancing? pres. daly: this is one of the things we will have to do as a nation. if we are in eight higher interest rate environment in general, and i do not think we should jump to the conclusion that is where we are. i think we should have a conversation. the low interest rate environment where will we have a neutral of 2.5%. will be fighting inflation from above our target for a persistent amount of time for will it go back to fighting our target. what is really important is commercial real estate owners and purchasers have to be willing to play the longer game. what does the longer game look like and how i get to the longer game? i am hearing that in the san francisco ceo roundtable. these folks have a national

footprint but i will share what i learned. they are already crunching properties. if you have high quality stuff you're putting all of your work in terms of leasing into that property. there yields to be had so people with income to use buying those properties up. property and buildings are valuable down the road. if you have property that is not just in the world of higher interest rates and lower in office work, then you say i will go back to land value and i am going to not try to spend a lot of time leasing that property, and that is the repricing we will need to see. we'll need to digest some of those losses in position for the new world. the yields going up, i think it does not change that dynamic. it just brings people's awareness to the problem. you could have seen the problem coming and i think many did,

which is why i do not have alarm bells ringing. commercial real estate people tell me this all the time and i've learned to believe them. you have to have a strong constitution to be in commercial real estate. it goes through cycles. the way the successful ones persist is they recognize the down point is not forever, nor is the high point. they get used to it and they stockpile in their refinance early and when they see interest rates going up they try to put things into longer maturities. i think that is going on. that is a sector to watch. this will be another piece, the higher bond yields will be another piece that makes the scrutiny more intense. lisa: to connect that to the idea of financial distress, people talk about a fed put. how high is the bar for the fed put? how high is the bar for financial distress for the fed to take actions to add liquidity

to the system? how much higher is the bar at a time inflation is still running at the levels it is running? pres. daly: i will separate these two things. they get pushed together in a way i do not think about them. there is monetary policy about the goals congress gave us, full employment and price stability. we raise and lower the funds rates to do those types that work. this gets conflated more easily because we have a balance sheet policy. we use the asset purchase for both -- for two functions, market dysfunction and quantitative easing to put additional policy accommodation in. we have both. they cannot actually persist separately. let's take the bt fp. the bt fp did not change monetary policy. we saw some stress in the banking sector with the backstop from the treasury opened the bt fp facility,

i unpack those things. i hear about the fed. we have tools that can be used in tools we use for financial dislocation are different than the tools we use for monetary policy and both can occur. we should not have to give up our promise to the american people to achieve our mandated goals and bring inflation back down the price stability because we have some dysfunction in the market. i do not see dysfunction. i see prices have gone up. yields has gone up. 10 year and other rates look similar to what we might have penciled in for how much we're going to hold at rates higher for longer because of the inflation. i think the response at the data come in -- i think markus had a better sense now although i cannot be sure -- marketa have a

better sense now although i cannot be sure. there is more of an understanding of the fed reaction and bit more the reaction function understanding that seem to be missing we want to get inflation down to 2%. in our farc has come up we did not see coming down to 2% like that. to keep it coming down there to keep rates restrictive to bring the economy more into balance and inflation down to two. lisa: with respect to agility, you want it to be to take policy according to what you are seeing in markets and one think have this speculating -- when people talk about what you said in your speech which is as inflation falls, as growth slows, the policy rate, even by not moving, is a policy action.

it was tightening policy. how agile should the fed to be to make adjustment to the rate so the restrictive level is the same, that might be lowering rates, but not because of financial distress, not because of weakness? pres. daly: that is a terrific question. i would argue we are entering into the hardest phases of policymaking. i think phase one is the one we completed. we completed it earlier this year. rates are too low, inflation too high. there is only one direction, north. everybody can agree. nobody is confused. it is a matter of how quickly can you get to restrictive territory without causing any concerning disruptions. we accomplish that. phase one was an easy phase. you just have to communicate were going go that way. the biggest concern i had during phase one was how fast can we go without distressing things and

how it we communicate we are doing that. those are the two things i was worried about. so we do not lose credibility. i was worried about the inflation expectation. phase two is fine-tuning were read maintain peak rate and phase 3 is trying to bring it down to 2%. right now, in the s&p if the inflation forecast holds and inflation forecasts you see, policy growing more restrictive, so -- i think this because it is challenging to get the super court inflation down. we have the easy ones behind us. goods inflation has come down a lot. we have to keep watching it. that super core is going to need persistent work. if we -- labor market is strong. where doing this against a very

strong labor market. good consumer spending. good gdp growth. there's nothing about the economy faltering. if that should change, we could adjust rates, so we keep a level of restriction it right for the economy we have. i do not really want to try to tell you what that is going to be because that is what the whole speech about. we have to tolerate our uncertainty of not knowing what going to do next year but what elements we have and how would we react to whatever situation unfolds. nobody likes uncertainty. we all want to know exactly what is going to happen. but i think right now projecting to confidently what will happen is actually a policy mistake. then you end up with surprising people. i think is important we stick to conveying are reaction function, conveying how we trade off and

balance things, how we approach the uncertainty, as we get more information, then we will of course see what to do next. lisa: he talk about the labor market. how strong the labor market is and i know you have done research in the worker and labor market. through that lens, how do you view some of the labor strikes? what is going on in detroit, kaiser health system, the hollywood srtikes. pres. daly: the picture of the labor market is broader than just the strikes. in general, we have seen a rebalancing of the labor relationships with firms. that is a common occurrence in a extremely tight labor market. demand for worker outstrip

supply of workers, that means workers have more power to say i want to live here, do this, have this. workers who are not in unions do not have regularly scheduled contracts. they can make those adjustments continuous. if you are an employer in 2022 and even late 2021, you really saw wage demands rise, special circumstances, i want to live here and work there, and i did not want to come back to the office. there was relative demand shock for low wage workers that move restaurant workers and hotel workers to delivery drivers and other things. that whole work situation was changed. i see the labor actions recently

as they are on wrigley negotiated contract schedules and the schedules came up and they say we got to -- a lot has changed negotiated the last contract. pandemic. wage rates have risen. with not -- we have not been in continuous negotiations and we want to get into better negotiations to ensure we have some shared responsibility for that rapidly rising inflation, rapidly rising changes in labor market. i think this is completely predictable given the imbalance we have had between demand and supply for workers and there are going to beat some renegotiations, either continuous space like we have been seeing, or when contracts become for negotiation, you have to renegotiate the terms of employment. lisa: what is a difference between renegotiating the terms of your employment and wage price spiral? pres. daly: that is a huge difference.

i love that kind of question. [laughter] pres. daly: labor renegotiations, i am looking at what i had to deal with as an employee. a lot of it is i got this wage and inflation is going up. my real wages falling. there was something commonly happening in two in u.s. -- 2022 in u.s. they are losing purchasing power. that is what labor negotiation -- also in health care, hours worked, schedules, etc. the wage price spiral is that people get wage growth and then produce -- firm selling pass that along to consumers, that causes inflation to go up, and then they see inflation and ask for wage growth. you see this high correlation.

a fact worth looking at, a vertical plot and it tells you why we are not in wage price spiral now, prior to 1985, correlation between wage growth and price growth was about .85. that broke down after the volker disinflation and it is now .25. you do not have that one for one. even now, you see wage growth moderating and i also look at inflation expectations. short run inflation expectations come down. as they come down, research has shown short run inflation expectations are what people are using when they go into negotiating wages and so it is -- as those come down to get release of wage pressures. their worries about wage price spiral, people worried about it in 2022 and who did that very seriously. we asked how that was going. at this point, those have abated and we are at the point of getting the wage growth rate to

be balance in the economy, bring labor market into balance, -- keep pace of the labor force growth. tomorrow's labor market report will tell us whether we make more progress or sort of in that same place we have been in. that's how it is different. one keeps me up at night, one is just a natural part of the economy. lisa: i love when we are speaking a head of this, we are talking about anecdotal data and i said sociology of markets and any of those are important and you said i do not view them as anecdote. they are qualitative data. what is the qualitative data or endnotes -- pres. daly: anecdotes is

what i talk about in the grocery store. people trade anecdotes all the time. at the fed, the regional fed president, one of the big benefits of having the regional fed, i think they thought this would happen and it does happen. regional fed president and the teams we are in our districts collecting qualitative information by talking to many people like you, have a roundtables, but didn't beaver it up so the difference in anecdote and qualitative information, we quantify the information. if one person says it, it is not mean it is a things to take on a spike but if 50 people say the same thing, that is an early warning side or some flavor that helps us flush out what the aggregate data are telling us. qualitative below are telling me many things but i will tell you a few. at the beginning of this year, i would say most of my

conversations when i asked what is your biggest concern, they said recession. then it switch to stagflation. they thought were going to have high inflation forever, low growth like we did before the pandemic. now i say what is her biggest worry and this is really remarkable, they say i am really worried about genitive a.i. and how it changes my business in 10 years. i'm worried we are not educating our population enough to keep the pace with the jobs we are creating. by my focusing all those because those are of concerns which means the anxiety they have about short-term business has gone down and be replaced with the things that should keep business leaders up at night. how's going to transform my business? do i have the workforce i need today -- not today but 10 years from now? when do i need to do in my community to ensure we are doable? that's been the change and when you drove down like with commercial real estate

leaders they are thinking hard about. i have this property. what is the future? the attitude , across-the-board, they're going to be losses, but they're going to be opportunities. but i'm trying to do in my business when i went around to each of them is say i am trying to minimize the losses and maximize my ability to see and take the opportunities. i see that as a positive change in the environment we are in and it is why i said in the speech that recession appears to be replaced by soft landing. soft landing is just in the description something that happens, it is not break the economy, bring all their attention to how i manage a significant downturn. i am not seeing that when i take.the temperature on that i'm thinking talking about the longer-term issues they are grappling with. lisa: does that mean there hoarding labor?

because even if there is slow down, there's going to be a brighter future ahead with not that many qualified employees available to do the jobs? pres. daly: i have the benefit of having done this work for a while. i've been a labor economist my whole career. i would like to broaden that part out. it is very common when employers go through big shocks that that carries over into the behavior. in the financial crisis, employers had to cut nominal wages. they hate putting nominal wages. it demoralizes employees. that had a long tail. they had to fire a lot of workers. for lots of employers if you're not the largest employer in the country, you're letting go of people you know each and every member of your team.

then you had to cut nominal wages. it is extremely painful. they hire slowly and kept working people over time. just so they did not have to be in a situation where they would have to let go of workers in another shock cut. i'm in the opposite of this. in the pen to make, people lost workers because they were afraid to come to work or they decided to take early retirement or they moved away. now, employers are like i better keep people. i think that a certain amount of the behavior we are seeing to that but the other part -- another benefit of doing this for a while -- the way it works in most cycles, the very first thing that happens is hiring slows. the second thing that happens is layoff occurs. when i'm looking at metrics for what i think is happening to the labor market, i'm looking at hiring statistics, you might have postings out there, but you

're not filling. if there was a significant downturn and businesses have to resize, but we are not seen that yet, even the layoffs we have seen have come in the tech sector with a got a little bit ahead of themselves on growth and had to rebalance their workforce to meet the actual growth they're going to have. i did not see anything out there that is rniging an alarm bell about the workforce. i think of it as we are always fighting the last war and you fight the last war of we had to lay off a lot of people. you fight the last war of i lost a lot of people. you hang on tight. were in the tight labor market from employee perspective. they have to spend a lot of their time finding workers to replace workers who leave. if they were to open a new slide, that is expensive, so they want to hang on to many

people as possible. lisa: what do you think is the biggest misconception -- caroline: we live lisa abramowicz there with san francisco fed president mary daly talking about implications of genitive a.i., some of the labor relationships we have seen in hollywood. much more on life go if you want to be listening in to the perspective but stay with us on the right technology. we'll be back with much more to do with the labor market. this is bloomberg technology. ♪

caroline: been hearing from mary daly about the labor market. chief designed to connect and support negative leaders. the first conference in palm springs bringing hundreds of members together. we want to check in on what is being said by some of the key speakers they had across the tech world. we welcome chief ceo carolyn childers. what is the atmosphere like? how much resilience as their among women in executive roles out there? carolyn: thank you for having

us. it is exciting to join from our first ever conference in palm springs. the energy has just been magical. chief is the most powerful network of senior, executive woman and we both it under changing the face of leadership. we do that by building a great community that can come together and support each other and build the connections that are needed to tackle the loneliness and challenges th can come with senior executive leadership. it has been exciting to have a new experienc of chief x. bridging woman all over the u.s. and u.k. here to palm springs to deepen those relationships and have even more inspirational conversation. caroline: give us the backdrop of which some of the executives find themselves. we are seeing record participation of women in the

labor force but then there is no wants to it and studies -- mckinsey foundation looking at how perhaps woman are not managing to break into managerial roles. where seymour executive's levels but not at the lower following points. carolyn: chief focused on the senior executive woman, over 40% of our membership are c-suite and that is where you are starting to see some shifts. we have moved from 25% to 28 percent of c-suite positions held by women. even within c-suite, woman of colors are only 6%, and who have not seen any changes in those numbers. as you are pointing to, there is still very much this broken -- even as we start to see some progress in the c-suite, that investment really challenged

when we are still seeing a lot of progress in that middle management level. that is where, even though, you also see the ambition so much greater. women are more interested in participating in the workplace. people have greater ambition of want to go up the corporate ladder. flexibility being such a key part of allowing for that ambition to become reality. caroline: -- carolyn: companies putting people back into the workplace and removing some of that flexibility and is going to be a jane -- challenge for us. caroline: how much are you saying a lack facility or more in the tech sector? carolyn: i think you are seeing that a lot of companies are starting to pull back on a lot of those policies. i think some of that has to do

with, but the economy in a way somewhat reducing their workforce by saying some people opt out of that. but i think people are not keeping in mind, people who need the -- the most is women and underrepresented minorities. all of these companies who have also had these commitments to d.e.i. that is going to challenge them as a pull back on the possibility in the workplace. caroline: it is interesting how some of this focus on d.e.i. use with the economic reality we face as well. i'm adjusted in your reality. chief is eight unicorn last time we chatted.

how is your business growing? carolyn: we are 20,000 members strong at chief. it has been phenomenal to see the growth the last several years. they're still 5 million women in the u.s. who are be beat level and above so the opportunities for chief to become more powerful community, powerful network to creatively support and the change needed to change the face of leadership, there still so much opportunity for us. while i think there is this pressure, across ecosystem, where companies are pulling back on the commitment to d.e.i. and esg, what is needed more than ever as good leaders regardless of gender, regardless of race. they're still an investment that needs to be had and there is a place for chief to play that role and continuing to push companies who they made the

commitment when it was easy. how to make sure people are still holding to those statements and of the importance and the benefits. we all have grown to recognize exist for companies who have great diversity. caroline: carolyn childers, chief ceo. we thank you for your time. that does it for this edition of bloomberg technology. this is bloomberg. ♪

>> welcome to bloomberg markets. a quick check of the markets at this hour. we do see equity index selling off ahead of the nonfarm payroll support were expecting tomorrow at 8:30. you can see the s&p 500 4.239.