Tech Stocks Bounce Back and Tony Fadell's Advice

numbers come Wednesday? We'll discuss plus Elon Mosk says banning former President Trump on Twitter was quote flat out stupid and but he'll reverse it. And Tony Fidel's unorthodox advice to founders in these times of market turmoil, so called father of the iPod and co found of Nest, talks about the most and least exciting inventions coming out of

Silicon Valley today. That's later this hour. I want to dive into this ongoing volatility, especially in the tech sector, where we've seen a big sell off since the start of the year. I'm joined out by Ellen Hazen. She's the chief market strategist at Putnam Investment. Ellen, thank you so much for joining us. So, look, what do you make of this sell off? Especially when it comes to tech. How we hit bottom or is there more to come?

There's probably more to come. It makes sense that tech stocks have pulled back so far because we saw tech stocks do so well in the last three years, particularly with the pull forward that we saw due to COVID of all the stay at home names, but that was also really exacerbated by the easy money policies that the

Federal Reserve is pursuing. And as the Fed begins to pull back, a lot of tech is dominated, as you know and as your viewers know, by those companies that have very little cash flow now, and the market has been betting on Ashlands pretty far out into the future. We have looked at the tech sector as bifurcated between those companies that have dominant market positions, a strong runway for growth and cash flow now and those that were

really hopes and dreams. And I think that Ladder group may not come back for a long time, if at all. But the former group has come in quite a bit as well, and we think those are where the opportunities are. So inflation numbers coming out in twenty four hours, how is that going to affect this broader story? Certainly if inflation remains high, and we think it will probably peak

sometime in the second quarter. But if we see a high inflation print tomorrow, that's very bad for those long duration tech stocks because that will give the Federal Reserve license to raise rates even faster. Real rates are going to continue to increase, and that hurts those cash floads that you're discounting for a lot of the far outgrows names. So when you say there's more to come, just how

much more? How low can we go? Uh? It depends on the company, of course, but we wouldn't be surprised to see another five time percent down and a lot of the larger names and some of the smaller names, it's really hard to say where they could go, particularly

those that are that are less profitable. A lot of the excess has been wrung out of the bigger names, though, and so if you look at some of the largest tech names and the outperformance that they had had going into two, a lot of that performance has been given back, and so we think the larger names are are pretty

close to bottoming out here. Um. Of course, one can never say never, and it's hard to predict day to day, but they're getting to be pretty attractively valued um, but some of the smaller and less profitable companies it could be a while. So let's talk about big tech earnings. We've seen a number of companies miss their marks this quarter. Do you see that happening again in the current quarter

and the next quarter? A lot of that is going to depend on what happens with underlying economic growth right now. It does come back to the consumer and corporate strength. The consumer remains strong. We still have that two and a half trillion of excess savings on the consumer balance sheets. Consumers have pretty good wage growth, and they all have jobs for the most part. We saw the unemployment come in last week at a very low three point six.

So as long as the consumer keeps spending and therefore the economy keeps going, then we think that they're the company's top lines will be okay. I think the biggest question is whether or not that slows down materially from here. And then the second question is whether or not wage pressures are going to catch up and cause big tech

to have to pay more to their workers. If we see inflation take hold in wages, not just in tech workers but across the board, then that can really slow the economy down and keep inflation high and cause the FED to move even faster and harder than they were before. But if the FED is able to engineer a soft landing, then we think the large cap tech companies are going to remain more or less okay. But it does depend on the degree of pull forward that has been seen,

and that's very much accompanied by company evaluation. Now, there's certainly a lot of factors that are just out of their control, including China's COVID policy, you know, continuing to keep Shanghai on lockdown. We know the Tesla factory, for example, has experienced a lot of disruptions. We know Apple has some big warnings about supply constraints and the impact it will have on their quarter to the tune of billions

of dollars. How much of an impact do you think China's COVID policy specifically is having on this broader slowdown. It's clearly a factor, and particularly on the hardware side, as you point out, because so much hardware, including some means but other um other assemblies take place in China, and so the zero COVID policy is definitely having an effect. I think the question becomes not what effect is it having today, but what effect is it going to have

in one or two more quarters? And does the government have the wherewithal and the plan to continue with this type of very very sharp lockdown for an indefinite period of time. If they ease up on it, either because the case numbers get better or it becomes untenable, then we can see a lot of those tech products begin to flow again. So a lot of it's going to

depend on the on the policy itself. But if the case numbers get better and or the COVID zero COVID policy is effective at keeping it um contained in certain areas, I do think there will be a relief rally as we see a lot of the exports begin to come back online. Well, and of course we need to see how committed China is to that zero COVID policy. Look, what's your advice for tech investors right now? Are there any safe havens where should they be putting their money?

Have a shopping list and come up with the names that you want for us, that's the large cap tech companies with big motes like Microsoft, like Google, like Apple. Stay away from companies whose competitive modes are being eroded either by regulatory scrutiny or by consumer preferences or COVID and stay at home ending and find companies that are

actually generating cash flow. Now. I do not think that the very low cash flow or negative cash flow companies are likely to come back, and I think that could really um be a losing trade going forward to try to buy some of those, even though they're down six seventy eight plus percent, It's probably not a good idea to chase those because unless the FED comes back with very easy money, I don't think we're going to see

those valuations again. All Right, have a shopping list. Advice from Ellen Hays and chief market strategist at fl Platinum. Thank you Ellen for joining us coming up. Elon Musk says he'll reverse the permanent ban of former President Trump if his deal to buy Twitter goes through. My Musk is still casting doubt on his ability to buy the platform next Mrs Bloomberg, I would reverse the perma ban, obviously,

I'm not. I don't own Twitter yet, so this is not like a thing that will definitely happen, because what if I don't own Twitter. He has publicly stated that he will not be coming back to Twitter um and that he will only be on truth social And this is the point that I'm trying to make, which is perhaps not getting across, is that is that fanning Trump from Twitter didn't end Trump voice. It will amplify it among the rights. And this is why it is morally

wrung and flat out stupid. Elon Musk, they're speaking at the Financial Times the Future of the Car summit his thoughts on the permanent ban a former President Trump on Twitter following the deadly attack at the US Capitol on January, Musk saying, reverse the ban if his four D four billion dollar bid to buy Twitter goes through. For more, I'm joined by our ad Ludlow, who helps cover Musk for US, as well as Bloomberg Sarah Fryer, who covers

Big tex So. Not only did he say he reversed the ban on former President Trump, he repeatedly said if if the deal goes through, casting some doubt on it going through at all. What did you make of that? Yeah, I mean he was couching or caveating that the deal is not yet closed, but he did reference at the

idea that it might not go through. You know, investors have speculated that he could walk away potentially, uh, you know that there would be some kind of challenge, as there has been a pension funders suit must to block it. The FDC, according to sources, is investigating it. But also mean it wasn't just about the ban reversing the band for Trump. He basically said banning doesn't work, and he cited Trump setting up Truth Social, his own social media

platform where his voice is essentially at Hans. It's a very right leaning platform, and he kind of used that as the basis of his argument that an out right band full stop just doesn't work on the Twitter platform. Musk confirming what he had hinted at before, saying that we should be cautious. Twitter should be cautious about permanent bands. That said Sarah. He has said he'd be okay censoring

some content and potentially banning some individuals. So aside from the case of President Trump, what exactly would be different when it comes to content moderation under Elon Musk, Well, you know, it's it's unclear because he he says he's a free speech absolutist, and then when it comes down to it, when you sort of drill into the details, in these conversations he's been having, he's totally open with some content moderation. He says he wants to get rid of the spam box, he wants to get rid of

the bitcoin spams that's happening on Twitter right now. There are some kinds of content that he's okay with with getting rid of. And he was speaking with the European Union Commissioner yesterday um about this very this very problem, and we expected there to be a lot of clashing there because the E one to have really strict content policy. Elon must said, Hey, we have no disagreement here. I'm totally on board with other things that you're saying, which

was very surprising to me. So it's unclear when he comes in what will be different besides perhaps a little bit more friendliness for the right. And explain Musk's line of argument that by removing Trump from Twitter, you amplify his voice elsewhere. Yeah, you know, it's it is a bit of a head scratcher. But essentially he put it in very simple terms that it was foolish to remove Trump from the platform. He used a range of words.

Trump set up his own social media platform, truth Social Truth social does not have the potential at least have as broader debating conversation as Twitter does. It Must's opinion, it is very right leaning. It amplifies Trump's voice with that section of American society in American politics, not stifles it. And he did display some frustration right because the moderator of that FT conference said, Okay, what's your position on reversing Trump's ban? Would you do it? Would you not

do it? His point is it's it's academic to a certain point that had we never done that, he may never have set up true social and that there would be a more moderated or at least bipartisan conversation on what Mask describes as the public town square. Right, that's what he wants Twitter to be. Now. Musk also go so far as to invoke Jack dorsey support, saying Jack Dorsey also supports this ban, uh, this unbanning of President Trump.

Take a listen to what he had to say. My opinion and Jack Dorsey, I want to be clear, shares this opinion is that we should not have perma bands. Um. Now, now, that doesn't mean that somebody gets to say whatever they wanted to say. If they say something that is illegal or um otherwise uh, just you know, just destructive as the world. Then then that there should be perhaps a time out, a temporary suspension, or that particular tweet should be uh made invisible or or have very limited attraction.

Now to be clear, former President Trump was banned from Twitter under Jack Dorsey's leadership. He responded to a tweet to that effect, uh, saying that he does agree there shouldn't be permanent bands. There are exceptions, but generally permanent bands are a failure of ours and don't work. Sarah, what do you make of Elon Musk invoking Jack Dorsey here? Um? And if Elon Musk is going to take over Twitter, is Jack Dorsey also going to be in the driver's seat or or the co pilot. Well, we know that

they're friends. They have a friendship that goes way back. What's strange though about what Jack Dorsey has been saying is who was the CEO of Twitter when Trump was banned? Who was the CEO of Twitter when they were making all these policies about who they needed to to moderate on the platform? It was Jack And and he's he's made some strange comments like this lately where he he talks about how Twitter's board has always been, the dysfunction of Twitter, the fact that it's a public company and

beholds into the markets. These are all big problems. Um, he was running the thing, so he could have changed a lot of these things while he was in charge. UM. I would love to hear more from Jack about why he feels like that was impossible. But I do think that he feels if Twitter is a private company that they might have more latitude to make certain changes that he didn't feel comfortable making as a public business, and Elon Musk could make that happen through his deal. Now.

Elon Musk has said he would be Twitter CEO at least for a time after this takeover. But is it, you know, at all possible that Jack Dorsey comes back as as CEO as well. Sure, I I think that's definitely possible. And then's it's one of the top names that have been speculated. You know, Elon Musk running it for a few months, um is maybe something to say to try to get investors on board with the plan. He has a bit of a mightas touch when it comes to the things that he says are going to

work out. He certainly has some lofty plans that he's put forth for Twitter. Um, but he has this cult of personality that when he takes charge of something, people really do listen and come on board. Maybe he could convince Jack to come back to run Twitter, or or maybe he has somebody else in mind. And what do you make of that thought, given how Elon Musk runs his other companies. Yeah, Look, he's not afraid to do

talent sharing. You look about the sort of software AI talent sharing materials, talent sharing that goes on between Tester and SpaceX. He's tweeted and commented a lot that Tester is principally a software company. He's talked about needing to fix at Twitter the underlying technology right open source in the algorithm. Also, he talks about Twitter's hardware, needing to

basically fix their computers to make the process better. Beyond that, his suggestions are straightforward, right, Sarah's just talked about them strip out the box. He accused Twitter of being slightly left leaning or liberal because it's based in San Francisco, and Sarah alluded to we've talked a little bit about true social Perhaps, you know, he feels that he wants to drag Twitter back into the center from a kind of content moderation policy standpoint is the only clue we

have to go on. But beyond that, you know, what today may clear is that he is not in favor of outright band a time out perhaps making invisible tweets that are dangerous or or breach a certain policy perhaps, but not outright band all right, So much TBD, Ed Ludlow, Sarah Fryar, thank you. A rough ride for Peloton, the company tumbling to a record low after deeper than expected losses in its latest earning to report, joined out by Bloomberg s Mark German, who covers Peloton for So, just

how quickly is this bike maker going downhill? Mark uh? As quickly as you can probably ride a Peloton bike with all your energy. This company at this point is an unmitigated disaster. I really, quite frankly, don't even know why they went public in right, They went public just a few months before the pandemic started, right, and that really kicked off their sales. So all their success has

really only been in this pandemic period. This is a company generating between three billion and four billion dollars per year. This is not the companies like Apple that generate maybe three or four billion dollars every week and a half, right, So I'm not sure what they see the point in being public and why they did that. Their numbers are disastrous.

They've missed on their revenue numbers for Q three now in addition to last quarter Q two, they're projecting to miss on estimates for next quarter as well as for fiscal two they had to re guide yet again. So things are not going so well for new CEO Barry mccar. He came into the job on February nine, so just about three months ago, right, and at this point the

stock is down over since he took over. Now, if you compare that to the SNP five, I believe the Peloton stock is down four or five x the larger market. So clearly the problem is not only the market, but it's Peloton investor belief, analyst belief, and in some cases customer belief as well. So I'm sure Peloton would argue with the fact that it's only success came in the pandemic. You know, it did have a fairly strong brand name going into the pandemic, But now that we're out of it,

what is Barry McCarthy's turnaround plan. You know, John Foley, the former CEO, sold this vision of the pandemic teaching more people about Peloton and these numbers being able to continue. They completely failed with their ability to project supply and demand going out of the pandemic. Barry McCarthy's turnaround plan

is to hike the subscription fee. So it's gonna go from thirty nine months to forty four a month in the US starting on June one, so in a bit about three weeks from now, so we'll the impact that has on subscription margins and subscription revenue. He's also cut the prices of the treadmill and there are two major bikes, the regular bike and the bike plus from between a hundred and five dollars depending on which model you're getting.

That's obviously going to lower margins and lower revenue on hardware, and they're opening over the long term, combined with the leasing program that they'll have more you know, continuous revenue right coming from subscriptions and coming from people signing up on these monthly plans and maybe annual plans in the future. So there is a plan in place, but on the first three months of the job. It hasn't yet you know, resulted in you know, positive momentum. All right, we'll see

how Peloton tries to retake control. Bloomberg s, Mark German, thank you well, come back to Bloomware Technology and Emily changes San Francisco. Well, the recent tech sell off is alluding to massive valuation haircuts in public and private markets, with funding harder to raise in uncertain ten times, how

do founders keep building? Tony Fidel, one of the key players behind the iPod and the iPhone at Apple, and of course the co founder of Nest, is out with a new book, Build, an Unorthodox Guide to Making Things Worth Making. He joins us now with some advice for entrepreneurs today. Tony, It's always great to have you back here on the show and always appreciate hearing your unorthodox advice in times like this. Just what advice would you

give entrepreneurs batting down the hatches? Well, first, hopefully you didn't go into some craziness and overextend yourself. So the first thing was, I hope you didn't take a valuation you shouldn't have just because it looked great on paper. You know it was too high. But if you did You're going to have to write the ship. And the biggest thing is the UH is reminding your team that those numbers were all fabricated, those were all made up kind of things, and go back to the business of

working on your mission and achieving that. Also trimming the sales, so you have to go back and to first principles and stop, you know, thinking about this overinflated market had has changed, It has changed dramatically. It will it will levelize again. We're gonna swing in the pendulum, swinging one way, swinging the other way. But again, stay focused on the work. Go make your mission happen, but don't worry about all the craziness around it. We're going to take care of you.

The biggest thing is taking care of your team. So I'm sure we could talk about this next question for hours, but in a nutshell, what are some lessons you learned the hard way? Oh jeez, let me count um. I think the biggest one was understanding timing. You know you have you could have great technology, can have great things. Understanding timing, you know the market has to be ready or ready to listen to what the innovation you have.

The second thing I think is really understanding how you're telling your story, and you have to tell a story of why, why, why. That's what's in the book Build. It's all about the why. Too many times tech founders and engineers and people in the in the tech world worry about the what what what? It starts with the why? Why do customers need it? What pain are you solving? What do you need to do to get that message across? And make sure then your product delivers on that. Stop

worrying about the bits and bites. Start working on the story and making sure that story is a pain killer, not a vitamin. Now, Google bought one of the things you built, and that was Nest. It didn't necessarily go as planned. What's your take on what went wrong? Let's say there, well was in it was in the book, but i'll how can we put it this way? We spent six months trying to figure out the right way to work together and if this marriage what I called

was a marriage was going to work out. And so it was working okay for the first kind of two three quarters and then it was like the tindler swindler, Uh what we were sold as bill of goods? We were sold in this marriage all of a sudden turned to be blown up and it really boiled down to um. I thought that a something they would purchase for three point two billion would be something they would take in and cherish and be and understand that they have to

nurture it and and take care of it. They were making so much money, and they continue to make so much money. They went on to other and different things, and we were just yet another toy that was uh, you know, a period of time. So for us, what we thought was going to be a great marriage turned out to be like a fling for them, and for us we were kind of left hanging at the you know,

left hanging while they went and did other things. So it was really about focus and about leadership, um and and And that's what I think happened at the end of the day of why it didn't work out. Okay, speaking of another unorthodox marriage that that could happen between Elon Musk and Twitter, he's proposed, he said a few times today. You know it might not go through, But what do you make of that deal? Well, look, Elon's

an innovator, and he's a brash one at that. You have to give him credit for what he's manifested in this world, and how he's shamed the autumn industry to move and all these other things. I think, you know, we look at back in the days of the oil barons and what have you, and they bought media, right, they bought media to control, to share the story, shaped the message of what they were doing. I think you know that there's some echoes of that in in in

Elan are trying to purchase Twitter. But I also think that there are things that Twitter needs to solve and haven't solved for many years, um in terms of the algorithms, how they work, UM, some of some of the the innovations in terms of editing tweets, the leading tweets, UH content moderation that said, you know, you could go all the way the other way where there's no controls, where you remove everything and it becomes something that is reminiscent of a four chan or an eight chan or whatever

the latest toxic social media network or broadcast one too many platform is. So I hope that Ellen is able to actually look at this and say, I'm going to divorce the world of the algorithm and revenue from the tweet stream and amplifying messages that can have misinformation, ugly information, things that called genocide and all those those things. We need to separate the capital and that revenue from the

messages that are amplified by the algorithm. If they are tied like they have been, that's when we have the toxicity that that happens, because if it bleeds, it leads, As you know, and and I hope Ellen is going to be doing the right thing, even if he brings Trump back on Trump shouldn't be amplified for revenue gains. So let's talk about that for a moment. I want you to take a listen to what Ellen had to say about the banning of President Trump today. Take a listen.

Sure I would reverse the homavan. Obviously I'm not. I don't own Twitter yet, So this is not like a thing that will definitely happen, because what if I don't own Twitter. Is bringing Trump back on Twitter the right call. It depends on the algorithms, It depends on the other it depends on the environment that he's brought back in. So to me, if he can amplify and he can continue the misinformation and that he has been doing um and and then and that is for revenue purposes, then

it is wrong. Everyone could have freedom of speech, but it has to come with confidence consequences, and it cannot be tied to revenue. That says, the more, the more toxic it is, or the more you know entertainment value it is, you make more revenue. If that's the case, then he should not be allowed back onto the platform. Everyone should have a level playing field and it shouldn't be tied to your revenue dollars that you know that

is going to be seen by the company itself. Now, Apple today, just in time for you to join us, discontinued its last iPod model. And obviously the iPod led to two decades of of of innovation at Apple, led to the iPhone. But how do you reflect on kind of the end of an era for the iPod and the thing that you are the father of. Well look, um, at the end of the day, technology marches on. Okay,

the beat never stops. You know, you could I I remember I lamented the day when the Apple two was dead, But the Apple two died in the nineties, well past the date when you know the Mac took over and in the later eighties. Um, then again, you know, when we look at it. The iPod was already starting to be cannibalized or dying around the time of the iPhone. Right, it was always understood at some point, at some sometimes

that the cannibalization of the iPod would be complete. I can't believe that the iPod has lasted this long, actually, to tell you the truth. So you know, it's an the end of an era, but it is a cornerstone. It's an indelible piece of Apple history, of technology in general history, just like the Apple two was the Mac is and those things are going to live on well beyond. And then if it wasn't for the iPod, we wouldn't have the iPhone. So all of these things are stepping stones.

That's how technology works. So I can, you know, I can. I can think fondly of those days and those incredible times, and the Apple that we know today would not have existed without that development and that that crazy time, that fun time that was iPod. So how would you rate the innovation and building that's happening at Apple today again in a nutshell, especially how they're managing or navigating the supply chain issues. Well, you know the supply chain. Let's

put casts that aside. But if you look at innovation in general, and I think they're doing a great job on the supply chain given what we're hearing from other companies and those sides of things. So I think, you know, look at the quarterly results that just came out, so I think managing supply chain given the macro environment is really difficult, and they're doing a good job trying to thread that needle. But when you look at innovation at

Apple today, innovation at Apple today is very strong. It's not the same kind of innovation that the consumer of innovation, whether it was the iPod or iPhone or AirPods or what have you. When you look at the innovation, it's

happening all at the lowest levels. The sensor's face, I D touch, I D. We have things like um uh, the M one processor that has been an innovation that was born out of the two thousand and eight time frame when I was there and Bob Bansfield and I bought p A Semi and created the you know, the max silicon for or excusing the Apple silicon for the

iPhone and now is now the max silicon. It took a long time to get there, but those kinds of innovations are cement Apple into the future for more and more um for more and more transformation, more and more innovation. So we're seeing the hints of that. It's happening at the lowest levels, but it will come out in other products over time. Tony Fidel Future Shape Now you're an investment arm Tony. Always great to have you here on the show and to hear your thoughts on the broaderst

tech landscape. Thanks for joining us, and yeah, by the book build coming up. Stable Coins used to be the safe bet in crypto, but doesny won over world more? N xt r is Bloomberg. Stable Coins are serve a huge purpose in the crypto and the defied economy, and they're here to stay. And I think it will also help out um, you know, all activity on the on various chains, so I hope the regulators recognized that as well.

It is time now for our crypto report, and let's start with what came out of coin bases latest results. Our crypto contributor Sali Bossi here with more. Shanalie take it away, Emily, thank you so much. We have coin Basis down almost four after market after reporting earnings that have missed analysts estimates on Wall Street. You have them falling short on monthly transact users, falling by about two million from the prior quarter, even though it's higher than

a year ago. First quarter revenue also below analysts estimates. Remember this is already for a stock that is down more than seventy percent this year, more than sevent if you look at the last twelve months, there was an expectation that growth would slow, and they say coin based that is that growth would slow into this current quarter,

the second quarter of this year as well. You have coin Based CEO Brian Armstrong addressing analysts at this moment saying they will eventually be profitable, but they are guiding that they will still be unprofitable for this year. The question is will investors be patient with them as they make it through a very volatile time in bitcoin, as they seek to diversify away from just trading revenues into new products like that n f T marketplace and start

to work with more banks and institutions. Emily alright, Shanali, thank you. I want to turn out to algorithmic stable coins. This came up recently UH in a discussion with Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen. They're more traditional counterparts. Dollar backed stable coins as well, supposed to provide calm and the chaos of crypto. But the algorithm stable coin called terra USD plunge to sixty cents Monday instead of trading at a dollar as designed. It's now back around nineties cents. But

is this assign a trouble for stable coins? More broadly, I want to bring in Falconex's head of institutional coverage, Ia Kantorovich for her take on all this. Let's zoom in here on terra ile. What do you think this activity means? So? I think there's a couple of things that play here. The first is, uh, you know this is there is a difference between an algorithmic stable coin versus a stable coin that's backed one to one with

the US dollar. And so if you look at the comparison between USDC and us D T tether, us T is a blend of both Luna and ust, which is meanted and burned in order to maintain that one to one peg. What happened this weekend is we saw a large motivated seller go into the market and depressed that USD price and deep peg. The algorithmic stable coin, causing uh an initial drop down to it was roughly point eight cents on the dollar. And really, why is that concerning?

It's really concerning because the Luna Foundation Guard which manages all of these applications on top, also manages a yield pool called anchor. Uh An anchor has been generating over yields now eighteen percent yield for a number of personas

anywhere between retail two institutional. And so what happens is you had roughly seventeen billion of total value locked in anchor now drop significantly due to that deep pegging because people were getting liquidated once that peg was no longer one to one, and you saw the Luna Foundation have to engage in order to repeg that stable coin, and as you mentioned yesterday, saw that peg drop all the

way down to sixty cents on the dollar. Meantime, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen brought up Tara recently and talked about stable coins more broadly as a risk to financial stability. Take a listen to what Yellen had to say. Terra us Dum experienced to run and had declined in value and UM, well, so I think that simply illustrates that this is a rapidly growing a product and um that there there are risks to financial stability and we need

a framework that's that's appropriate. Hi, what's your response to that we need a framework to far more than just stable coins and crypto And I would say, you know, this strengthens the approach towards stable coins like us d C, which is now a forty billion in market cap, as well as us d T, which is eight billion in market cap. You've also seen other algorithmics stable coins like

tracks gain in traction. I think the largest question here is really, uh, whether or not it's algorithmic or it's one to one peg, and whether or not investors, uh, you know they have faith in the algorithmic stable coin.

But again going back to Anchor, if you look at where that seventeen billion now six earlier today, it was less than seven billion dollars left in Anchor still decreasing, really reflecting that I don't think the retail and institutional investors have much faith that that PEG maintain algorithmically in

a decentralized fashion. You know, there's a question here, and you do see ust dropping once again removing that peg even further at seventy nine cents according to coin based prices, So you still see that volatility into today, even when you see Bitcoin recovering a little bit. So I am wondering here what broader ramification is there, especially for defy

as the as the market starts to move forward. Here, I think the difference is really if you take for example, Maker and Die, you have a number of these potential runs happened historically, but the market has corrected and shown resilience through those market volatility terms. Overall crypto itself, as you mentioned Bitcoin eve, we've stayed relatively rangebound last week and will likely continue to be rangebound had it not

been uh this anchor run for the money. And so what we'll likely see is we'll likely see that capital go into other forms of yield generating assets. I think right now what we're hearing across the desk is all institutional clients want some level of yield and flat is the new up. And so if you can maintain a flat return relative to what's happening in public markets and crypto, that is what your LPs are looking for, and so they will find it either and swaps derivatives and structured products,

and and that's really where we're focused. All right. Falcon X is had of institutional coverage. I A. Kantorovitch along with Bloombergtionale Bastik. Thank you. Now to a quick update on Elon Musk's bid for Twitter. Apollo plans to lead a billion dollars in financing for that BIB. This adds to the long list of unusual investors that Musk has secured for his deal to buy Twitter, ranging from Larry Ellison to Sequoia and Andres and Horowitz, to the crypto

firm Finance, a Saudi Prince and more. It is time now for this week's teconomics segment in our spotlight is on solar panel energy. Rooftop solar is a surging sector, but only four percent of homes feature solar panels. However, investors from Lebron James Arnold Schwarzenegger believe pal Meadow can turn that around. I want to bring in Palmetto founder and CEO Chris Kemper. Chris, thank you, So, how have you gotten folks like Drake and Bono and Arnold Schwarzenegger

on board? Yeah? Well, thanks, Emily, appreciate having me Um I think that these types of investors see what we've seen him been working on since two thousand nine, which is, you know, linemate change and energy independence is a is a big problem um for Palmetto. You know, unlike peers in our space, we're primarily those firms are primarily focused on construction. We're focused on end end tech platform solving for solar delivery. And we can lay that on three

simple steps for you. So one is, whether it's an individual entrepreneur or a fortune company, we provide them with the tools to enable to sell the consumers to We then provide a seamless, delighted experience to the consumers which helps build our brand experience. And then thirdly, we provide full supply chain management, financing, quality control to our build partners to actually install the physical project in the market and that that that delivers about a seventy five net

promoter score. So now you and Jamath Polyhopatia have pitched a three trillion dollar investment by the US government to fund solar for the entire country. How exactly would this work? And have you got in any feedback from the White House. We haven't gotten feedback from the White House to a dress that point directly. We do believe that ultimately if you kind of look at benefits um you know out there that have passed perhaps three PPP or other things.

The only point trying to be made here is what would that quantum of capital, How would that actually impact climate change mitigation and energy independence if we were able to allocate that capital to by example, renewable specifically solar. So otherwise, how do you scale roof top solar without three trillion dollars from the government. How are we going to get there? Or is that the only way? We get there? Simply through three three main things best product,

best price, and great service to the customer. So back to our model. We specifically focus on distribution channels, provide them with the tools to acquire consumers. We automate the end to end delivery of solar to the customers home and then turn key it and then service it. The goal is is that you have such a great experience and you're saving monthly uh, saving money on a monthly basis that then you want to tell your friends and

then drive the basically the flywheel effect from there. Uh. And we've been doing this for about fourteen years now. So We're starting to see the momentum in the price draw that can grow total TAN. All right, pau Meado CEO Chris Kemper will keep our eye on you Andrew investors, of course, thank you. And that does it for this edition of Bloomberg Technology. Tomorrow we're gonna be joined by Rick Oster Loe Alphabet, Senior vice president of Hardware this

around Google Io, and Patrick Spence, CEO of Sons. We're also watching earnings from Disney and a big announcement coming from Airbnb. Don't forget to check out our new podcast. You can find it anywhere you get your podcasts. I'm Emily checking in San Francisco. This is Bloomberg Ran