Live from pier three in san francisco, welcome to "bloomberg west." our focus is on innovation, technology, and the future of business.
The seattle seahawks blew away the broncos for the first super bowl win ever.
It's the first time a team owned by tech billionaire, microsoft cofounder, has won the big game.
Besides seattle, who are the other one is?
Fox says the game was the fifth highest rated ever in the top tv markets, down slightly from that year.
The ads cost $4 million for 30 seconds for it which company scored with their commercials and which ones did not.
? i did not see a game that was so got close to be so entertaining.
Yes, it was an entertaining game but it was a thorough but kicking.
I feel bad for peyton manning.
The nfc is so much better than the afc.
It made the commercials more of a talking point.
We all have our favorites.
I have been part of this discussion for the last 15 years.
The web addresses shut up and thedot coms tried to be part of this conversation with a super bowl.
What we really saw is the marketers tried to use the super bowl ads as a way to get more eyeball time off the screen.
They were on youtube earlier than ever and you saw expanded ads.
I think the budweiser ad was gripping television.
Budweiser with the puppy love was my favorite.
It was so cute.
Let's watch it again.
? ? # best buds.
Have you ever been to a puppy mill?
I also like cap videos.
I don't even like dogs.
Tummy something you like.
It was cute and that's what it did what the marketers wanted it to do.
And the got millions of views on youtube before it aired.
I thought the bud light ad show the problem with a super bowl as were it was piles of money to be spent because they were going to buy super bowl ads and i had to do something stupendous.
I don't know that it told a great story about the brand.
It was so contrived.
I think we have that one, let's play it.
He's in the limo.
How are you?
What's your name?
We disagree almost everything.
Arnold schwarzenegger shows up in their playing table tennis?
I just thought a lot of the ads did not take the opportunity.
A couple took an opportunity to introduce a new brand.
The super high-end luxury car ads like the maserati was good.
It introduced a brandon made people think of something differently and taking advantage of the big stage without acknowledging the stage itself.
We agree on one thing because i like that one, too -- let's look at that.
The world is full of giants.
They have always been here.
Lumbering in the schoolyards, limping through the alleys.
Then you hear the engine at the end.
It was like a short movie.
I was thinking of the david and goliath look.
It is the notion of how that fantasy or that notion is very important to our culture.
I thought that tapped into that really well.
It took the moment to introduce a brand and a very big way.
We are not experts, so let's bring in an expert to discuss this.
He is the ceo and founder of bright world.
Things for having a. . what were is your favorite?
It was how the traditional male stereotype advertises traded that in and served up ads that were across the entire demographic of male and female.
There was not a lot of sex.
Those are usually the staples of those kind of ads.
We did not have thego daddy danica patrick ads.
I am fine with that.
What did you think of the go dady ad?
It was taking a real person and having her quit her job on the air?
I thought it was pretty bold and effective.
It showed the power of owning your own domain and business.
Let's talk about the people who choose to pursue the dreams.
Like gwen, a machine engineer from new york trade she is a real person with a real dream of starting her very own business.
She's got a message for her boss, ted.
Who is watching the game right now.
Hi ted, i quit.
She just quit her job.
In front of 100 million people.
The reality is that women own or run 60% of small and medium businesses which is why i love that add so much.
I think it makes a lot of sense.
Think about the entire audience.
In general, how do you think super bowl advertising compared this year to years past?
The apple 1980 four ad is still considered one of the best ads and no one has been able to top that.
People can take the one example of a huge at but let's look at the numbers -- 100 million people all in one place, $35 per.
They are trying to get more eyeball time.
The bud light ad tried hard to do that.
Who do you think was using social media in the best way?
Some of the ads, the previews -- the bud light three minute preview might have been better than the actual ad.
There were many techniques of trying to get a conversation going through the -- during the event.
We saw innovations we have not seen before.
What about jcpenney?
I wish there had been a bigger message there other than selling mittens.
They definitely did something interesting and pushed the limit.
It was not just a matter of throwing up twitter but trying to get people from the tv and get more time with them.
Is the multiplier, does that work in advertising?
I think it does.
I was live tweeting during the program yesterday i got treats back from wonderful pistachios and go daddy.
Are people going to shop at jcpenney?or just talking about it it is hard to get attention and attention matters.
It's hard to know for sure.
Another twitter moment was hillary clinton.
It may have been referring to the fact that the game was on fox or referring to the bill o'reilly-obama interview before the game.
She tweeted it's more fun to watch fox when someone else is getting blitzed.
It is the notion that it was the great american event that politicians are trying to get into the game.
I missed the interview with obama so i cannot relate to it herself but she is capitalizing on this.
How crucial was that tweet?
Good for her for actually tweeting something.
It seemed a little bit manufactured.
The best thing about twitter in my opinion is when you can see real people being authentic.
Granted, she is busy and does not have a lot of time to tweet but if you're going to, i feel like you have to tweet yourself.
Everyone wants to play the game and there is a large audience but you have to be relevant.
Are we going to see if the at cap beforehand, it loses the immediacy?
I was surprised how many release -- have many were released beforehand.
People are already getting into the next big events like the olympics.
I blew through a lot of the as.
I put the game on hold and cook dinner and fast forwarded through most of the advertising.
I saw the halftime show.
I can now relate to that problem.
Thanks for being with us.
I don't really hate puppy dog.
I have one.
Coming up, t-mobile ceo john leger was talking a lot of trash during the game last night.
You can watch us on bloomberg television, streaming on your phone, your tablet, and bloomberg.com.
? welcome back.
Tim tivo was the breakout star of the super bowl who was not on the field.
His got a lot of attention.
Ceo john leger was anything but quiet as his home tim blitzed the competition.
He teased at&t and sprint about their new family plan.
He tweeted -- there are the same number of broncos getting into the end zone -- his tweets may seem silly, this is a sign of a very serious price war brewing between the phone carriers.
Let me bring in john butler.
He joins usvia skype from new jersey.
What do you think of his trash talking?
I think it is nothing short of brilliant.
When you think about what this man has done with t mobile, he has taken this carrier from relative -- i will call it complete obscurity about two years ago to now gaining share from industry giants like at&t. he has done it by being very self-promotional.
It is by drawing attention to himself and he is drawing attention to t mobile and people are listening.
Let's talk about the new at&t family plan and what is significant about them.
With the latest family plan, they are trying to protect the high-end.
Every carrier wants to rope in families because you're obviously not just having one subscriber or one device, you're getting a group of subscribers and adding multiple devices.
The new 10 gigabit plan is aimed at protecting that high-end from defecting to t mobile.
On the sprint side come out much trouble are they in?
Softbank owns it big portion and a market valuation is dropped by $25 billion over the last nine days in part because of the stake in sprint.
I think they have been through this before.
The ceo went into the sprint deal with both eyes open and he knew that it was a work in progress.
Sprint has made very good progress in my view.
They have a ways to go.
They are still struggling with network quality and coverage but they're out there and upgrading the network and getting lte out there.
I think they are a work in progress and have had a little catching up to do once the network is in shape.
I would not count them out.
He supposedly will meet with the head of the fcc to talk about the idea of the sprint and t-mobile merger.
If the sec was not a plan of at&t and t-mobile merger, what makes this sprint and t-mobile out merger any different?
I don't think the regulators will sign off on it.
When you look at what t mobile is doing and their success, it is exactly with the regulators wanted.
They wanted prices to come down.
They want a competitive market.
Further concentration in the form of t mobile and sprint getting together is not good in their eyes.
Frankly, t mobile is on a roll.
I think a merger could upset that role.
I think the regulators are keen on that.
I don't want to take sides one way or the other but i think this will be top of the mind for the regulators.
Generally, the proposal that has been discussed with sprint buying t mobile but some have floated the idea of t mobile buying sprint.
I spoke with john leger the ceo recently about the possibility of a merger.
Take a listen to this.
We are all going to need better scale and capability.
The question starts to be, how do you take the maverick and supercharge it?
We either need more spectrum and capability, a lot more investment, or we need consolidation and there is a lot of from paths to get there.
He also seems to be indicating the possibility of him running this t mobile/sprint joining forces.
He is a rare talent.
I have likened him in a way to steve jobs in the sense that he really understands this customer.
Just like steve jobs understood how people related to technology and electronics, legere understands that people relate to wireless and how they had contracts and phone service, utilities, gas, these are emotional purchases.
We have to make them and he is leveraging that to his advantage.
I think to lose that vision and make you may chief operating officer or chief marketing officer would really be a shame.
I think he is in a good position to run any company, particularly emerged t mobile and sprint.
You are looking at pictures of john leger with the wrapper macklemore who is from seattle and t mobile recently posted a concert.
Thank you, john butler.
Also, t mobile is letting tim tebow take over their twitter handle at 4 p.m. so you can ask him your own questions on twitter.
Go to the t mobile twitter handle at 4 p.m. coming up, bill gates may step down as chairman of microsoft but that does not mean he is leaving for good.
In fact, he might we getting more involved.
We will look at what his future is, next.
? welcome back.
Some tragic news just today out of hollywood, oscar-winning actor philip seymour hoffman was found dead in his new york city apartment with a needle in his arm.
It was so sad.
He has three young kids.
We went to college together.
My phone has been blowing up since yesterday morning.
This touched a lot of people.
I think his work touched a lot of people because it was so personal and quirky.
There is serious business obligations as well.
It points to some of the interesting things going on in hollywood.
I want to ask you about this ,john.
He was a different kind of actor but " fast and furious" faced a different issue.
Philip was working on the "hunger games" sequel and paul walker was working on "fast and furious." what does this tell us about the business of hollywood?
Let's start with philip seymour hoffman and the lions gate film franchise.
You are right, this is an actor who probably will be remembered for a lot of the non-blockbuster films but he was in mission impossible 3 and is part of a film franchise that continues to generate huge amounts of money at the box office.
The first two films i think earned $1.5 billion and he was a key part of the second film and now they are getting close to the end of production on these two final movies in the series.
What is coming out this november and next one comes out in november of 2015. our understanding is that while most of his filming is done for that, there are still about seven days of shooting that was left in his schedule.
For any big franchise, to have to make changes to the story when there is a lot of money riding on it, they might tell us that it will affect the film release schedule.
We know with paul walker and "fast and furious," he is a main character in a movie.
How big is the philip seymour hoffman role in the "hunger games" movie?
How much of him does that involve?
There are clearly some scenes where it sounds like they will be able to find another character to tell that scene are part of the story with.
Going back to the paul walker example, they were earlier on in the process of shooting and you could argue he has a loader -- he has a larger role in a film but they got back on track.
I think that tells you that there is a lot of money riding on these films and they were up -- they will power i had.
Thank you, jon erlichman.
We will have more of "bloomberg west" after this.
? bloomberg tv is "on the markets." the markets are down across the board.
We are looking at very substantial drops.
It gets worse and worse with the s&p 500 off about two percent and the dow is that debt down about 250 points in the nasdaq is down 2.5%. a couple of individual movers -- joseph a banks, the men's clothing store, they are talking with eddie bauer about a possible acquisition.
Let's take a look also atarth rocare.
We are "on the markets" again 30 minutes.
You are watching "bloomberg west." high-speed internet could soon be coming to more u.s. schools and libraries.
The fcc is doubly spending on a program to bring faster internet to those locations to $2 billion for the changes will not result in higher fees for wireless phone customers who already pay a small portion of their monthly bill in the program.
Apple is facing as much as $840 million in state and consumer antitrust claims over its ebook program.
The plaintiffs say they are entitled to triple rewards.
They say apple conspired to fix ebook prices.
Apple is appealing.
A new report of tablet sales says he grew 65% in the fourth quarter hitting more than 76 million units shipped.
The report says apple shipped 26 million ipads and the apple's share of the tablet market increased from 27-34%. samsung was in second place.
Bill gates may be stepping down as the microsoft chairman but his day-to-day role could actually grow.
The microsoft board is waiting finding a new chairman, he is reportedly considering going back to work at microsoft at least one day per week.
For more on what his role would be, let's go to our roundtable.
What do we know about how much time bill gates will be spending at the company and what will he be doing?
It's pretty cloudy at this point.
We know he will have -- if he was to step up as chairman, he would refocus his efforts from the administrative duties to doing what is best that probably and enjoys the most which is products.
It is not clear how much time -- we have heard at least one day per week -- but i think the importance of it is that this is a man -- it's impossible to understate his role there.
The minute he is in the room, people are very much on their game and they are very much -- he is enormously admired their.
It is cultural.
What do you think about this move?
Is this a good move?
Yes, i think it could be a good move.
I think the maneuver that you have to get your head around is saachi needs to be able to be the leader of the company.
Or whoever it is.
To capitalize on the bill gates expertise, you want to be able to deploy him in very measured ways.
I think that can be very much i roll up your sleeves, pretty a product review work.
It does not necessarily need to be very broad or being tied up in the administrative things that a chairman can do.
That is probably the worst and you want to do.
You might want to have bill gates help the company in specific areas.
It sounds like you're suggesting employment of limited nuclear weapons.
It is the founder and largest individual shareholder of the company.
You look at some of the ways that steve jobs was able to create massive transformation at apple.
Why couldn't bill gates be used in a similar way, helping them think through a huge part of the company but that part of the company may have a transformational product.
I think tying up the gates in the administrative things that relate to business reviews and relate to understanding the global strategy, i think that's the kind of stuff you can have a very excellent executive doing but it's not taking advantage of his understanding of technology and where technology is going and where it has been.
Apple was going downhill and steve jobs was there and he sometimes got more in the way them helped.
Can bill gates or will he give them the time it takes to do the job he needs to do?
We will see.
Personally, i think it makes some sense.
You don't have many cases where you have a product guy getting put back in charge of a big tech company.
Typically what happens is where tech companies go wrong is they have the innovator in charge on the, with great products and then they put the sales guy in charge.
This is really an interesting move in that regard.
You look at microsoft, they have had a lot of the right strategy.
I was looking at the history of windows mobile.
They were working on that in 1990. they never got the product right.
Satya nadella is a product guy.
I thought one reason they chose him as bill gates felt more comfortable stepping away because a tech guy would be in charge.
He was perhaps as balanced as steve ballmer.
There were still a tech guy as the chairman.
I wonder how much of this is a little bit of spin.
Bill gates has said publicly he would be spending most of his time with his foundation, not at the company.
Let's listen to that.
My full-time work will be the foundation for the rest of my life.
My wife melinda and i enjoy that.
I get to do it in depth.
I'm not going to change that.
I will help out part-time.
What do you make of his comments?
He seems to minas.
-- mean it.
If they bring in sqatya think about what a leadership change it is.
You see ultimate high energy, it's a complete change in leadership.
They might want to send the message that there has been a lot of changes but bill gates is still in the room.
It has been the bill and steve show.
33 years, one chairman and two ceo's. it could be a seachange in everyone they meet.
What do you think about the issue of time and space and bill gates looking over satya nad ella's shoulder how much progress can be made?
They have a tremendous amount of hard work to do.
I will guarantee you that it bill gates comes in and looks over the shoulder of every decision thatsatya makes, chaos and calamity will ensue.
You cannot have someone whose lights -- whose lives work -- whose life''s work has transformed the present, i think it would be a disaster.
There has to be spin, there has to be a very thoughtful and somewhat tactical deployment of the great mind of bill gates.
Let them figure out the next chapter of their office strategy or the next chapter of their services strategy.
If you do something broader than that and start questioning, chaos will ensue.
Thank you both very much.
Coming up, could connected cars help reduce -- help reduce car accidents?
The department of transportation has high hopes for this emerging technology.
? welcome back.
We have breaking news -- facebook, google, microsoft of all release more information about the request, the security requests they are receiving from the federal government.
Let's go to peter cook in washington.
These companies that have been lobbying hard in washington to be able to disclose more information about when it is they are forced to turn over information to the federal government about their users, they now have been able to provide more information on some of those requests.
These are aggregate numbers, not the level of detail the companies ultimately hoped to provide to their users to reassure their customers that they're not handing over so much information to the federal government.
It is more information that they have been allowed to disclose up to this point.
With regard to yahoo!, in the six months between january 1 of last year to the end of june, the government made fewer than 1000 requests.
They cannot be more specific than that but it did not exceed 900 99 requests for specific information.
That included access to between 30,000-30,999 accounts.
It should be pointed out that someone could have multiple accounts.
Those don't represent unique users necessarily.
Microsoft had similar information.
They also provided between 0-999 specific requests for information on content from the federal government.
It was fear than 16,000 accounts that were ultimately access.
-- it was fewer than.
Google was similar and they say that fewer than 10,000 accounts are in question.
What's important is this is the most detailed information these companies have been allowed under the law to provide to the general public and to their users.
They make the case, google in particular, said while they appreciate this, they would like to disclose more.
Publishing these numbers is a step in the right direction and speaks to the principles of reform that they want to see.
They want everyone to better understand how surveillance laws work.
This will add more fuel to the debate in washington.
If the number is more than 1 -- 0-999 - at least 9000 accounts, if the numbers more than one, isn't that the problem right there and that will affect their low their global business?
That is the fear of a part of these companies unless they can provide more specific information to show this is a small fraction of their total user base, microsoft points that it has millions of users, millions of account holders.
You might be led to believe that this happens all the time on a daily and hourly basis at.
. the point these companies are trying to make with these numbers is that it does not happen all the time.
They cannot get as specific as they would like.
It does not give you detailed information.
This is just a six-month period and we don't have the numbers for the second half of last year because there is a six-month delay.
The companies like to get rid of that delay and have more specificity and be able to say this does not happen all the time.
They want to say when i do it is only because the gore -- government forces us to do it.
What about the compromise of google accounts?
I don't know what to make of that.
It could be simply that someone has multiple accounts.
It's impossible to tell from this information.
The companies there provide perspective on the total number of users.
They try to make the point that someone might have multiple accounts and i might be a single individual who was targeted the government and the searches.
It's hard to tell from this information but it's easier than what they could provide before the president's speech.
Before now, all they were able to do was aggregate all of the requests from federal, state, and local government and talk in broad terms about what they were requesting.
This is more specific than they have been able to provide before.
They want to provide even more.
A little bit more information but many christians -- but many questions remaining.
U.s. regulators are getting closer to making talking cars a reality.
The national highway transportation administration says it will take steps to enable vehicle to vehicle mitigation technology for like vehicles.
They say the technology would improve safety by allowing cars to talk to each other and ultimately avoid many crashes by exchanging basic safety data like speed or position.
As you understand it, how would this work?
It sounds futuristic but it's not that far of a reach from what cars already do.
Most manufacturers have systems in place that will allow you to set your cruise control and regulate how far away you are from the car in front of you.
Everyone has gps these days.
These are technologies that we are used to.
It would be a good thing in that it would help you to avoid traffic.
Even better, it could help you avoid accidents.
For me, it raises all kinds of question about how much is the government or the car manufacturer or the nsa going to know about where my car is and how fast i am driving?
It seems like a slippery slope.
It's interesting to come out of after the breaking news story out of washington.
That probably helps them fight terrorism but there is a real concern about how present braid brother is in your car.
Protesters say this could make a car more vulnerable to hacking.
There is a study that shows this could prevent 80% of crashes.
When the driver is lose it, this could prevent 80% of crashes?
It's interesting that the carmakers are already rushing ahead with these technologies.
The sensors that help you back up in part that are were not bump into something and alert you -- in the automobile industry, is there a certain kind of experience or technology they can think of as a tipping point where it goes from alerting the driver to actually driving?
There is a utopian vision that this system will reduce traffic.
I hope to have that system in place or it.
They also have the technology for it to drive itself.
Google has people, at least 20 people, who are taking self driving cars to work every day.
I wrote in a cadillac at the gm proving grounds in michigan a few months ago that just drove itself around an oval track.
It would even slow down of theirs and other car in front of me or change lanes.
The only concern is who will know all the stuff about where i am and how i am driving?
Do you want someone to know all of that stuff?
You want to escape from someplace.
Only you would be escaping.
That hearing is happening in washington today.
Coming up, facebook just launched a new standalone app called paper.
? welcome back to "bloomberg west." facebook took the wraps off its new mobile app, paper.
It's a taken a modern social newsreader.
As part of facebook's attempt to find new ways for users to interact with facebook content.
You actually got advanced look and you have on your phone?
How does it work?
Facebook -- think about the way that when you have 1.2 billion users, you cannot change that app very much without scaring some guys away so this is a way to reimagine what facebook would look like if you are building it in mobile first.
Here is the newsfeed.
Notice how it is horizontal.
It's not just the newsfeed, you have all these sections you can add.
You might want to add sports.
I can go to that section and click on a link and take a look at the stories.
Is this all facebook content?
Most of it comes from an algorithm for how stories are shared on facebook.
The rest of it comes from a team of human editors who are deciding if this content is coming from the right sources.
Is it based on your facebook friends?
It's based on facebook overall.
It's curated into the sections.
This is a standalone app?
Do you have to log in as yourself?
Mark zuckerberg, it was said, said you don't have to sign in as yourself.
He is losing -- he is modifying his idea of what anonymity should be.
You can like something and comment on something and it will be accessed.
It's out today.
It is time for the one number that tells a whole lot.
Jon erlichman in lam cory is with me.
34%. ? what is that/ that is the market share that apple has achieved in the tablet business which is down from 38% one year ago.
The apple business grew 14% year-over-year but samsung, number 2, 19% market share with a big game, 85% more tablets sold outside the u.s.. is apple always going to be king of tablets?
If you listen to what tim cook says, he does not care as much about market share as profitability.
Thank you all for watching this edition of the show.
We will be back tomorrow.
? . . .
This text has been automatically generated. It may not be 100% accurate.