sponsored by -- >> this week on "press here", long time silicon valley entrepreneur, best known for seble systems, he thought long and hard what will make his next billions and sharing it with you. vice chairman on the nasdaq and start ups in the tech company. our reporters from the tech blog and john schwartz from "usa today" on "press here."

good morning, everyone, i'm scott mcgrew. one of its tires was low and cars are part of the internet of things. gadgets that can communicate with users and other devices, cars refrigerator and thermostats and that thing you can talk to, all part of the internet of things but that's not where the money is. the internet of things is going to be huge but the money is not going to be in talking toasters, it's going to be in industrial devices. the less glamorous motors and switches and machinery factory for instance is filled with sensors and transmitters every part of the assembly line telling the foreman's iphone when it needs maintenance. this is where the money is according to tom who knows a little bit about making money. best known for his first company seible systems, a less pronounceable but equally

promising company deals with the internet of thing. he's joined by sara lacy and john schwartz of usa today. let's talk of the internet of things and how you fit into it. you're not going to make the sensors and we can have factories make sensors, you're not going to do the software but look at the data coming out of these devices. >> if we look at the general issue such as internet of things has always valued change, utilities and manufacturing and consumer package goods and health care and financial services, all of the devices are being upgraded so they are becoming machine addressable. c30 t we built a software platform that allows to deploy and operate very large scale -- >> there will be these devices in let's say factory, although you started in energy, right? >> we did. >> who sort of devices in the

energy industry are sending out information? >> great question. if you think about the grid, the grid value chain consists of generation transmission, distribution, metering and consumpti consumption. as it existed at the beginning of the century, largely designed by thomas edison and george westinghouse, all of the devices are being upgrade so they are becoming remotely addressable, transformers, substations and nuclear reactors, some of these sensors are sending out signals sometimes four times an hour, sometimes 60 times a second. so all of the data can be aggregated and analyzed and processed called machine learning to basically increase the safety, increase the reliability and lower the cost and lower the environmental impact of power generation -- >> that's where c3iot comes in.

to this decade $2 trillion is being spent to update the energy channel. >> are you competing with general electric? how do you fit in this sphere of so many competitors and devices? >> we're four or five organizations who purport to build platforms for building iot operations. the general electric has spent i think 4 or $5 billion in the last two years, spending hundreds and millions of dollars on advertising for the platform for operations. to my knowledge as of today, i'm unaware if they have a product or one customer in production -- >> doesn't ge, when they make -- they make the turbines right? would they build those into the energy products they make and

speak a language? they are sort of like apple, aren't they. >> the world's greatest 19th century company, pumps and turbines and. >> and they speak their language. >> they have some teleom tri associated with these devices, report on temperature. >> what if they don't let you in and it is not readable -- could they or would they do that? >> all of the data from all of these devices are -- they are basically accessible through every manufacturer. >> i'm curious why you wanted to do something and i'm curious why this was the thing you wanted to do. you're an incredibly wealthy man, one of the great hits of the hayday of the enterprise software era. it was also a pretty intense public battle particularly towards the end. why did you want to jump back in the building of company and why

not do what dave duckfield did, i'm going to go against larry elleson again. >> if you look at the research from mckin zee and company or research published in harvard business review, iot is an entire replacement market -- >> i'm going to interrupt for one second. i'm sorry to have broken your stream of consciousness for the viewer who is like what? >> iot internet of things, this software, this is an entire replacement market for the existing enterprise software staff provided today by sat schneider and oracle and others. this is directly in the face of enterprise application software. why did we do it? when we built siebel systems there was a big step function of technology that had become available, the internet, a small

form factor in computer and broad based communications and high speed graphic cal use r interfaces in windows 95. >> we invented the market as known today. fast forward to 2010, new step function of technology that's become available, elastic cloud computing and big data, machine learning and very importantly, social human computer interaction models. it's about taking that step function in technology and pointing at the value chains of health care and financial services and power generation, whatever it may be, to allow them to design and develop and deploy large scale internet of things application. >> kind of an extension of what you did at siebel and how do you compare the opportunity here versus what you had done before? do you think it's on a scale

much larger or much more challenging? >> this is -- our first effort was starting with larry ellison, that was pretty big. the second effort was proven to be pretty large. i think the internet of things software market is most certainly order of magnitude lower -- >> should oracle have gotten into it, beating them to it? >> or raquel will get into it. in 2025, you'll be delivering software that addresses the opportunities of the internet of things or not be in the cell phone business. >> we're talking with tom siebel this morning. we'll be back in just a moment.

>> welcome back to "press here" we're talking with tom siebel, best known for siebel systems and john schwartz from usa today. >> i wanted to step back given your experience in the valley and assess where you think the value is now. also during a political season because it's become more politicized with what trump has said about various people in tech. what i'm wondering is, how has silicon valley changed and do you thinks much more political? >> i think it probably has

become more political certainly today than it was in the '80s and 90s. the people over on the googles and facebooks of the world are much more politically active than the people who uged used to run oracle and hewlett-packard. you guys fought, you were scrappy, scott mcneilly would thrown down in front of cameras. everyone always wants to be friend. elon is the last fighter. even you, this is a tom siebel 2.0, you haven't said anything wise cracking or thrown anyone under the bus in the five minutes we've been on. >> we're kind of disappointing in that. >> john and i are valley old timers in a world where people have been blogging about the valley for six months. when last we covered you, there was a scrappy young upstart picketing your user conferences. i think a lot of people didn't expect to become the billionaire

he is today and a lot of people thought crm was too small the big winner out of the big wave. are you surprised what's become of sales force and how he has developed into that role? >> i think sales force is executed very well and built a fine company. i have with the greatest respect, done a fine job. >> you had said to fortune magazi magazine, i'm not 21 and not out of stanford talking up an ipo. we're trying to build a real company. do you have thoughts about kids coming up and trying to build up an ipo? >> i think if you haven't spend the day going to like a y con event, i recommend it. it's very much about trying to start up something very quick and flip it to google and make a fast buck as opposed to the old days, the david packards and larry ellisons and andy groves,

these people were into building long-term successful companies and that's what we tried to do at siebel systems. >> let me ask you a naive question, what is the advantage of building -- convince me. i could sell to google and exit and then start another one. i like starting up companies. what is the advantage to being the siebel of siebel systems, building it that big? >> i think you can take great satisfaction in making the world a better place, improving health care and making places safer and people more productive and making lives better. you can take great satisfaction in creating jobs all around the world and contributing to the economy. how important really is making money. i think in the big scale of things, it's relatively

unimportant. how much satisfaction is that really in starting a startup and making a fast buck by funneling to yahoo! for a billion dollars. >> is that part of the reflection of the short attention span culture we have, not just how we use technology but maybe in the approach -- >> success by young people today is very much perceived as making a fast buck, starting a company and flipping to google and being the -- whose the guy who had a basketball time and sold to google? >> mark cuban. >> a company with no revenue and no customers and sold it for how many billion dollars? >> 7. >> about what yahoo! -- >> twice what they are worth today. how much satisfaction is there in that really? if you're creating jobs, you're changing people's lives. i mean -- >> tom, do you think this is a structural change or cyclecal change. we have ended a year where there

were more companies created with billion dollar valuation than we've seen ever in venture capital. right now uber is the highest valued private company in silicon valley history. a lot has to do with the ipo being pushed off. >> how much of this is that we're in a fast money point in the cycle versus a structural change in the valley. >> we're in a crazy bubble and particularly as it relates to private company valuations and this bubble like the others we've seen will pop. when it pops, the damages will be significant and the blame will be widespread. >> tom siebel -- going to commercial on that. thank you for being here. the kind of follow-up to this is up next vice chairman of the nasdaq when "press here" returns.

welcome back, i want to take you to the theater in new york city in times square, not hamilton, that's a couple of blocks away on west 46th. this theater, the nasdaq market site. there are a few hamiltons here as well. yes it's a stock market but it's also theater. mostly theater what you're seeing. each morning lots of sound effects and confetti as real people launch a virtual market.

there's actually no trading here in this location on the nasdaq. vice chairman of the nasdaq and president of the nasdaq entrepreneurial center in san francisco. thanks for being with us. i want to start with the concept of how well you do this and how compelling at 5:30, 6:30 our time on west coast, how interesting it is, thr dogs and kids and there's confetti and nasdaq takes place in computer servers. there is no place where the stocks are traded. >> changes take place in the computer system -- >> these days, right. how does that help you? >> really set up it's there to celebrate the companies. a lot of times they are launching a new company or product. they've got an acquisition or transfer from another market and showed scripts networks and there's a lot of people to celebrate. >> there are fewer reasons to celebrate this year. there's been a lot of

consternation that venture capital hasn't shaken out as much as people expected and there's still huge deals getting done and companies getting higher evaluations and one of the worst years for tech ipos in history. there's a sense something has to give here. >> what is your take on it? >> worst ipos in general. year to date that's 31 on nasdaq, we feel good about the numbers we have. we had a very strong 2014, 2015. it's been a volatile year and that has slowed down the ipo. >> some of those companies are not going public -- there was a time on the nasdaq in particular companies would go public super early -- >> 18 months in. >> and shouldn't have been -- they shouldn't -- much less public companies. can we see that? is there fewer ipos this year, see that as well, companies are maturing and being much more careful. we see the positive side of

that. >> the jobs act occurred and that really -- to stay private longer. institutional money and a lot of different accesses to capital in prior markets exist today that didn't exist years ago. that's changing the environment of when companies go public and with the jobs act it used to be if you had 500 investors, sharp reporting in your financials, base beingalically have to go p. the ability to stay private longer and determine when you want to go public has really changed. >> is that still the end game? there's a lot of ceos who would love to permanently disintermediate and find russian ally garks to give them money. a lot of companies do cash out.

he has never taken the company public and raised secondary to cash people out. at the end of the day does everyone still have to go public or are we working our way to a solution where that isn't the case? >> there's a lot of reasons companies go public, valuation is one. liquidity, the ability to acquire other companies and credibility. those are kind of primary reasons we see companies go public today. we do think companies will still go public. as long as those exist. but we also believe in the nasdaq private market, which launched a couple of years ago. companies are exercising liquidity for a whole host of reasons to clean up cap table, to allow the employees to have some liquidity pre-ipo. >> sonos is one. >> explain like a 5-year-old whags the private market. >> so the private market is really -- it's with jobs act you have the ability to sell to credit investors, the ability to

trade shares on a platform. we operate that platform and we've had very successful liquidity programs where companies may say if you've vested shares and want to liquid date your shares to buy a house or car, then you have the ability to execute that on the private market. >> people who are credited investors can come and buy those shares. >> exactly. >> it's sort of a little private club inside the nasdaq. >> it's not like public markets when you have quarterly earnings -- >> much higher risk. >> are you cautiously optimistic that there might be more tech ipos this year? the reason why i'm asking, when the public reads about nasdaq, it's always identified as tech heavy or tech laden market. the last couple of times we've written about secure works and we know how that worked out. are you optimistic we might see something, anything? >> tom siebel pounded his fist

on the table -- >> we're on the precipice of a bubble. markets like certainty, hopefully we have certainty over the next several months. we have great companies on file that want to go public. looking to access the u.s. markets. we have a very strong backbone of companies that do want access and there are a lot of tech and biotech and still think the ipo market will be led by health care and by tech. so we're optimistic. this year is going to be an interesting year because you have -- not sure what's -- you also have the election. you have a lot of uncertainty that could keep those windows to be very tight. we'll see how the year plays out but we do see a huge pipeline of companies that want access to markets. >> you're very kind when you said the nasdaq had 31 ipos this year. you didn't say because you're a question is that the nyse -- that was -- why do i choose the nasdaq over the nyse?

i'm ready to go public and i assume the salesman or woman comes knocking on the door, choose nasdaq. why? >> we're very proud of our win rate, 74% of all ipos and 190 ips last year. they are growth companies, look at health care. we do extremely well in health care, 95% of all biotech listed on nasdaq and a lot of diseases that need cures. >> we are known for health care and growth. we're known for innovation. we look at -- we have a brand of all of these entrepreneurs that start great companies and go public. we're known for growth innovation. vice chairman of the nasdaq, let's hope we get stability. >> we hope so too. >> or not, it's fun to right about. >> we'll be back in just a minute.

welcome back to "press here", we've been talking to sara lacy and john schwartz of "usa today" starting a television show. >> won't be as big as press here but a correspondent for tech on a show on the discovery channel that will start later this year or early next year, not quite clear yet. it's going to be co-hosted by espn's marcellus wiley and it's about philanthropy and we'll talk to people who do philanthropic things in the world of tech. >> the nice thing about it -- >> billionaires who give money or startups that create -- >> billionaires, startups, it will be technology, it will be the people. there will be 12 episodes, shot a pilot which will be appearing or showing probably in the fall. >> that's fantastic. >> can you tell us the name yet? >> i think the running title is world changers but it might

change. world changers might change. >> one of the titles kicked around for this show was sand hill road which i really like. we felt it didn't get across -- if you didn't know what sand hill road was it sounded like it was some sort of soap opera. >> or a real estate show. >> sara has a podcast. >> and a new book. both of which are about motherhood and entrepreneurship. i started pando after my job at tech crunch was given away while i was in labor. and so i used my maternity leave raising 2.5 million and starting a rival company four years ago and it's been a pretty rocky insane journey over that time. ultimately i felt like in my 20s and most of my 30s i was lied to about what mothers are. i thought i had bought it was a disability and make you weaker

and motherhood -- i would have never had the courage to start my own company before my children or recivsilience yens, four years after having kids and starting a company, i'm more intense and ambitious and more focused and aggressive. all of the things that i thought would be things taken away from me because of motherhood. on the podcast, it allows people to listen in on my reporter over the next six months while i finish my book. every episode we have incredibly powerful woman who's a mother and also building a company and it's a shameless time, tell me cute stories about their kids and talk about their business. >> this week it's jessica haren. >> yes. >> available on itunes as well. >> yes, the one we have coming up, it's lynn jxts uritch who took sun run public while she was going into labor. >> and took the baby to the nasdaq.

i remember that. >> you heard from tom siebel working on the internet of things. we're back to a regular schedule so we will see you next week. thank you for making us part of your sunday morning.

i'm damian trujillo and today we have some very powerful interviews that we've conducted over the years here on the show, from george lopez, to little joe y la familia, to vicente fox, on your "comunidad del valle." male announcer: nbc bay area presents "comunidad del valle" with damian truijillo. damian: we begin today with an interview we conducted with a very powerful woman nationwide. our exclusive with dolores huerta. dolores huerta: when i started the union, we were both, you know, young, in our 30s. and i remember when cesar called me to his house, we were both working in los angeles at the time with the community service organization. and cesar called me to his house, and there in helen--his wife, helen's kitchen, he said to me, "you know the farmworkers will never have a union unless you and i do it."