>>Welcome everyone to the cubes presentation of the AWS startup showcase open cloud innovations. This is season two episode one of the ongoing series and we're covering exciting and innovative startups from the AWS ecosystem. Today. We're going to focus on the open source community. I'm your host, Dave Vellante. And right now we're going to talk about open source security and mitigating risk in light of a recent discovery of a zero day flaw in log for J a Java logging utility and a related white house executive order that points to the FTC pursuing companies that don't properly secure consumer data as a result of this vulnerability and with me to discuss this critical issue and how to more broadly address software supply chain risk is Don Fisher. Who's the CEO of tide lift. Thank you for coming on the program, Donald. >>Thanks for having me excited to be here. Yeah, pleasure. >>So look, there's a lot of buzz. You open the news, you go to your favorite news site and you see this, you know, a log for J this is an, a project otherwise known as logged for shell. It's this logging tool. My understanding is it's, it's both ubiquitous and very easy to exploit. Maybe you could explain that in a little bit more detail. And how do you think this vulnerability is going to affect things this year? >>Yeah, happy to, happy to dig in a little bit in orient around this. So, you know, just a little definitions to start with. So log for J is a very widely used course component that's been around for quite a while. It's actually an amazing piece of technology log for J is used in practically every serious enterprise Java application over the last 10 going on 20 years. So it's, you know, log for J itself is fantastic. The challenge that organization organizations have been facing relate to a specific security vulnerability that was discovered in log for J and that has been given this sort of brand's name as it happens these days. Folks may remember Heartbleed around the openness to sell vulnerability some years back. This one has been dubbed logged for shell. And the reason why it was given that name is that this is a form of security vulnerability that actually allows attackers. >>You know, if a system is found that hasn't been patched to remediate it, it allows hackers to get full control of a, of a system of a server that has the software running on it, or includes this log for J component. And that means that they can do anything. They can access, you know, private customer data on that system, or really do anything and so-called shell level access. So, you know, that's the sort of definitions of what it is, but the reason why it's important is in the, in the small, you know, this is a open door, right? It's a, if, if organizations haven't patched this, they need to respond to it. But one of the things that's kind of, you know, I think important to recognize here is that this log for J is just one of literally thousands of independently created open source components that flow into the applications that almost every organization built and all of them all software is going to have security vulnerabilities. And so I think that log for J is, has been a catalyst for organizations to say, okay, we've got to solve this specific problem, but we all also have to think ahead about how is this all gonna work. If our software supply chain originates with independent creators across thousands of projects across the internet, how are we going to put a better plan in place to think ahead to the next log for J log for shell style incident? And for sure there will be more >>Okay. So you see this incident as a catalyst to maybe more broadly thinking about how to secure the, the digital supply chain. >>Absolutely. Yeah, it's a, this is proving a point that, you know, a variety of folks have been making for a number of years. Hey, we depend, I mean, honestly these days more than 70% of most applications, most custom applications are comprised of this third party open source code. Project's very similar in origin and governance to log for J that's just reality. It's actually great. That's an amazing thing that the humans collaborating on the internet have caused to be possible that we have this rich comments of open source software to build with, but we also have to be practical about it and say, Hey, how are we going to work together to make sure that that software as much as possible is vetted to ensure that it meets commercial standards, enterprise standards ahead of time. And then when the inevitable issues arise like this incident around the log for J library, that we have a great plan in place to respond to it and to, you know, close the close the door on vulnerabilities when they, when they show up. >>I mean, you know, when you listen to the high level narrative, it's easy to point fingers at organizations, Hey, you're not doing enough now. Of course the U S government has definitely made attempts to emphasize this and, and shore up in, in, in, in, in push people to shore up the software supply chain, they've released an executive order last may, but, but specifically, I mean, it's just a complicated situation. So what steps should organizations really take to make sure that they don't fall prey to these future supply chain attacks, which, you know, are, as you pointed out are inevitable. >>Yeah. I mean, it's, it's a great point that you make that the us federal government has taken proactive steps starting last year, 2021 in the fallout of the solar winds breach, you know, about 12 months ago from the time that we're talking, talking here, the U S government actually was a bit ahead of the game, both in flagging the severity of this, you know, area of concern and also directing organizations on how to respond to it. So the, in May, 2021, the white house issued an executive order on cybersecurity and it S directed federal agencies to undertake a whole bunch of new measures to ensure the security of different aspects of their technology and software supply chain specifically called out open source software as an area where they put, you know, hard requirements around federal agencies when they're acquiring technology. And one of the things that the federal government that the white house cybersecurity executive order directed was that organizations need to start with creating a list of the third-party open source. >>That's flowing into their applications, just that even have a table of contents or an index to start working with. And that's, that's called a, a software bill of materials or S bomb is how some people pronounce that acronym. So th the federal government basically requires federal agencies to now create Nessbaum for their applications to demand a software bill of materials from vendors that are doing business with the government and the strategy there has been to expressly use the purchasing power of the us government to level up industry as a whole, and create the necessary incentives for organizations to, to take this seriously. >>You know, I, I feel like the solar winds hack that you mentioned, of course it was widely affected the government. So we kind of woke them up, but I feel like it was almost like a stuck set Stuxnet moment. Donald were very sophisticated. I mean, for the first time patches that were supposed to be helping us protect, now we have to be careful with them. And you mentioned the, the bill of its software, bill of materials. We have to really inspect that. And so let's get to what you guys do. How do you help organizations deal with this problem and secure their open source software supply chain? >>Yeah, absolutely happy to tell you about, about tide lift and, and how we're looking to help. So, you know, the company, I co-founded the company with a couple of colleagues, all of whom are long-term open source folks. You know, I've been working in around commercializing open source for the last 20 years that companies like red hat and, and a number of others as have my co-founders the opportunity that we saw is that, you know, while there have been vendors for some of the traditional systems level, open source components and stacks like Linux, you know, of course there's red hat and other vendors for Linux, or for Kubernetes, or for some of the databases, you know, there's standalone companies for these logs, for shell style projects, there just hasn't been a vendor for them. And part of it is there's a challenge to cover a really vast territory, a typical enterprise that we inspect has, you know, upwards of 10,000 log for shell log for J like components flowing into their application. >>So how do they get a hand around their hands around that challenge of managing that and ensuring it needs, you know, reasonable commercial standards. That's what tide lifts sets out to do. And we do it through a combination of two elements, both of which are fairly unique in the market. The first of those is a purpose-built software solution that we've created that keeps track of the third-party open source, flowing into your applications, inserts itself into your DevSecOps tool chain, your developer tooling, your application development process. And you can kind of think of it as next to the point in your release process, where you run your unit test to ensure the business logic in the code that your team is writing is accurate and sort of passes tests. We do a inspection to look at the state of the third-party open source packages like Apache log for J that are flowing into your, into your application. >>So there's a software element to it. That's a multi-tenant SAS service. We're excited to be partnered with, with AWS. And one of the reasons why we're here in this venue, talking about how we are making that available jointly with AWS to, to drink customers deploying on AWS platforms. Now, the other piece of the, of our solution is really, really unique. And that's the set of relationships that Tyler has built directly with these independent open source maintainers, the folks behind these open source packages that organizations rely on. And, you know, this is where we sort of have this idea. Somebody is making that software in the first place, right? And so would those folks be interested? Could we create a set of aligned incentives to encourage them, to make sure that that software meets a bunch of enterprise standards and areas around security, like, you know, relating to the log for J vulnerability, but also other complicated parts of open source consumption like licensing and open source license, accuracy, and compatibility, and also maintenance. >>Like if somebody looking after the software going forward. So just trying to basically invite open source creators, to partner with us, to level up their packages through those relationships, we get really, really clean, clear first party data from the folks who create, maintain the software. And we can flow that through the tools that I described so that end organizations can know that they're building with open source components that have been vetted to meet these standards, by the way, there's a really cool side effect of this business model, which is that we pay these open source maintainers to do this work with us. And so now we're creating a new income stream around what previously had been primarily a volunteer activity done for impact in this universe of open source software. We're helping these open source maintainers kind of GoPro on an aspect of what they do around open source. And that means they can spend more time applying more process and tools and methodology to making that open source software even better. And that's good for our customers. And it's good for everyone who relies on open source software, which is really everyone in society these days. That's interesting. I >>Was going to ask you what's their incentive other than doing the right thing. Can you give us an example of, of maybe a example of an open source maintainer that you're working with? >>Yeah. I mean, w we're working with hundreds of open source maintainers and a few of the key open source foundations in different areas across JavaScript, Java PHP, Ruby python.net, and, you know, like examples of categories of projects that we're working with, just to be clear, are things like, you know, web frameworks or parser libraries or logging libraries, like a, you know, log for J and all the other languages, right? Or, you know, time and date manipulation libraries. I mean, they, these are sort of the, you know, kind of core building blocks of applications and individually, they, you know, they may seem like, you know, maybe a minor, a minor thing, but when you multiply them across how many applications these get used in and log for J is a really, really clarifying case for folks to understand this, you know, what can seemingly a small part of your overall application estate can have disproportionate impact on, on your operations? As we saw with many organizations that spent, you know, a weekend or a week, or a large part of the holidays, scrambling to patch and remediate this, a single vulnerability in one of those thousands of packages in that case log. >>Okay, got it. So you have this two, two headed, two vectors that I'm going to call it, your ecosystem, your relationship with these open source maintainers is kind of a, that just didn't happen overnight, and it develop those relationships. And now you get first party data. You monetize that with a software service that is purpose built as the monitor of the probe that actually tracks that third, third party activity. So >>Exactly right. Got it. >>Okay. So a lot of companies, Donald, I mean, this is, like I said before, it's a complicated situation. You know, a lot of people don't have the skillsets to deal with this. And so many companies just kind of stick their head in the sand and, you know, hope for the best, but that's not a great strategy. What are the implications for organizations if they don't really put the tools and processes into place to manage their open source, digital supply chain. >>Yeah. Ignoring the problem is not a viable strategy anymore, you know, and it's just become increasingly clear as these big headline incidents that happened like Heartbleed and solar winds. And now this logged for shell vulnerability. So you can, you can bet on that. Continuing into the future and organizations I think are, are realizing the ones that haven't gotten ahead of this problem are realizing this is a critical issue that they need to address, but they have help, right. You know, the federal government, another action beyond that cybersecurity executive order that was directed at federal agencies early last year, just in the last week or so, the FTC of the U S federal trade commission has made a much more direct warning to private companies and industry saying that, you know, issues like this log for J vulnerability risk exposing private, you know, consumer data. That is one of the express mandates of the FTC is to avoid that the FTC has said that this is, you know, bears on both the federal trade commission act, as well as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley act, which relates to consumer data privacy. >>And the FTC just came right out and said it, they said they cited the $700 million settlements that Equifax was subject to for their data breach that also related to open source component, by the way, that that had not been patched by, by Equifax. And they said the FTC intents to use its full legal authority to pursue companies that failed to take reasonable steps, to protect consumer data from exposure as a result of log for J or similar known vulnerabilities in the future. So the FTC is saying, you know, this is a critical issue for consumer privacy and consumer data. We are going to enforce against companies that do not take reasonable precautions. What are reasonable precautions? I think it's kind of a mosaic of solutions, but I'm glad to say tide lift is contributing a really different and novel solution to the mix that we hope will help organizations contend with this and avoid that kind of enforcement action from FTC or other regulators. >>Well, and the good news is that you can tap a tooling like tide lift in the cloud as a service and you know, much easier today than it was 10 or 15 years ago to, to resolve, or at least begin to demonstrate that you're taking action against this problem. >>Absolutely. There's new challenges. Now I'm moving into a world where we build on a foundation of independently created open source. We need new solutions and new ideas, and that's a, you know, that's part of what we're, we're, we're showing up with from the tide lift angle, but there's many other elements that are going to be necessary to provide the full solution around securing the open source supply chain going forward. >>Well, Donald Fisher of tide lift, thanks so much for coming to the cube and best of luck to your organization. Thanks for the good work that you guys do. >>Thanks, Dave. Really appreciate your partnership on this, getting the word out and yeah, thanks so much for today. >>Very welcome. And you are watching the AWS startup showcase open cloud innovations. Keep it right there for more action on the cube, your leader in enterprise tech coverage.

(upbeat music) >> Welcome to this CUBE Conversation. This is part of the second season of the AWS startup showcase, season two, episode one. I'm Dave Nicholson, and I am joined with a very special guest, CEO and co-founder of Tidelift, Mr. Donald Fischer. Donald, welcome to the CUBE. >> Thanks David. Really glad to be here. >> So, first and foremost, tell us about Tidelift. >> Happy to, yeah, so, at Tidelift we're on a mission. Our mission is to make open source software work better for everyone, and when we say that, we mean, make it work better for all the organizations and governments and everybody that depends on open source software to build the applications that we all rely on. But also part of our mission, is making open source work better for the creators of open source. The independent open source maintainers, who are behind so many of those building blocks, technology building blocks that our commerce industry and society is comprised of these days. They've got a hard task to hold up all of that stuff and make sure that it meets, you know, professional grade standards and that we can all rely on it. And so, we want to do our part to help both sides of that equation. >> Fantastic, well, I want to double click on a few of the things that you said, but I think I want to format this by starting out with a little role play between the two of us, if you don't mind. I know you're CEO, but for the sake of this, you're going to be the CIO and I'm going to be the CEO, and we're going to play off some recent events here. So, hey Donald, come on in, sit down. Listen, I want to talk to you about this whole log shell, log for something, or another thing that's going on. So, let me get this straight. Our multinational Fortune 500 company is dependent upon software, that's free, and somehow we've been running this and the people who maintain it, do it for free, we don't pay for it, but somehow this has opened us up to a threat from people who can log into a system we're using to keep track of stuff, and then, what's going on? By the way, you're fired, but I want to know if, I want to know if you can stay on for the next 90 days to train your replacement, but, explain to me what's going on with this whole open-source nonsense? >> Yeah. Don't panic boss. Only about 70 or 80% of the software in our enterprise that is third-party open source software. So, there's definitely, like 20 or 30% that's not, and we're on top of it. Now, yeah, I think it's a, you know, you're right to say, we are completely dependent on this software, that's being created by these, you know, amazing folks on the internet. Boss, you told me that we had to have a global corporation here with modern digital customer experience. We're not going to be able to do it using Microsoft front page from 1997, and there's no other path to take than to build with modern building blocks. And today in, you know, the modern era, that means building on open source packages and technologies across a whole slew of language, ecosystems, like JavaScript and Java PHP, Ruby, Python, .NET, Rust, Go, we use all of it here, boss, and, we don't get to have a business unless we do. >> Okay, so, I didn't understand a word that you just said, but it was enough to convince me to let you keep your job. So, end-scene, we're not getting paid scale wages to do this, Donald, so I think we can go back to our normal personas. So, how does Tidelift play into all of this? I'd really want to hear about this concept of what an open source maintainer is, because these are largely volunteers, aren't they, in terms of the maintenance that they're doing? >> Yeah, so, I mean, open source, there's a lot of different models for open source software development. There certainly are a number of foundational open source projects, certainly at the infrastructure level, like operating systems, databases and things like that, that tend to be, you know, predominantly driven by vendors, software vendors, you know, like you can think of Red Hat, VMware organizations like that. But when you get up to the application development world, teams, building, you know, websites, web applications, mobile applications, most of the building blocks at that tier in these a programming language ecosystems, most of the software there is actually being created, that enterprise organizations use, is being created by individual, independent, open source maintainers, where it's not their day job, it's a side hustle for them. And it's a really interesting question, like, how did we get here? You know, why are these folks doing it? It sort of rhymes with the question I asked myself years ago, like, who's typing all this stuff into Wikipedia, and why? Like, it's amazing resource, I'm so glad it's there, but why are they doing this, right? And it turns out that there's a bunch of motivations there's some cynical motivations for the open source maintainers that people attribute that are practical too, you know, people say your GitHub repository is your resume in as a modern developer, things like that helps you get a reputation, you can use that to get a job. But, when we've talked to the maintainers of the most widely used open source packages, and by that, I mean, thousands of packages that every major organization that builds software relies on, the main reason why they do it is actually impact. We find we've actually done direct surveys of this audience and the reason why they spend their nights and weekends and carve out time, where they could be, you know, getting paid to do something else or going skiing or going to the beach, is it really feels good to have this activity that they put out into the world, and, you know, they know that folks use this stuff and rely on it, and there's a pride in their work and the impact that they're making. But the challenge with this model is that when it's only an impact and pride, and sort of a, you know, a good feeling driven effort, it means that maybe all of the things that organizations might want their standards that organizations might want their software to meet doesn't get done, right? Like it's one thing, if you've got a job as a software engineer, building corporate software, or even as a, you know, a maintainer at a corporate open source company, and you have a checklist of, you know, standard enterprise software development, commercial grade software development tasks that you need to be completing, if you're doing it as a side hustle for good reasons, like impact and, you know, releasing your creative juice, you might not get to some of the more boring aspects of commercial software engineering, like security engineering and some of the documentation and release engineering and, you know, making sure there's structured metadata around all the elements of it. And then that's the gap that we're really trying to fill at Tidelift, by connecting these two audiences. >> Yeah. How? How? You want to fill the gap, you want to connect the audiences, but, how do you do that? >> Yeah, perfect, so, we do it by paying the maintainers, paying the open source maintainers, actual dollars, or the currency of their preference, and what we're paying them for is not just to sort of hack on their projects, or hack on their projects more, we're asking them to help us ensure that the software that the organizations that we work with depend on meets certain specific concrete enterprise standards, and those standards fall into three categories, security, licensing, and maintenance. So, on the security front, you know, a baseline standard, there is making sure that we have known versions of the open source packages that are free of known defects, right? So there's like a catalog of known security defects that the industry uses called the National Vulnerability Database, you may have seen the terminology CVE referred to in passing, that's the identifier for these things. So, we work with the open-source maintainers to make sure that we've figured out, mapped out, which versions of software packages are impacted by known security vulnerabilities. And then we also look forward and make sure that we have a plan in place for what happens in the future when there are security vulnerabilities. So, you know, traditional commercial software, there's a security response team, who's kind of standing by 24/7, ready to respond, and then there's a defined protocol of what's going to happen, in terms of what's called responsible disclosure, telling the right folks in the right sequence, that there is a vulnerability causing there to be a patch version of the software available, communicating that through, you know, traditional commercial software vendors for, you know, years have been doing that internally, that doesn't exist by default for volunteer, you know, part-time open source, independent open source maintainers. So we fill that gap and we pre-wire that with them to make sure that that first track security is can be buttoned up. >> So, you're paying them, are you and your co-founders wealthy philanthropists that are just doing this, or what's the business model here? Now you're pulling these people who were doing it for free, they're happy, but how does that translate into a business model for Tidelift. >> Perfect, so, the work that they're doing, you know, I talked a little bit about security, we also do similar things on those other attributes, like licensing, making sure that the licenses are completely accurate, and we kind of know who wrote the software, et cetera, and then maintenance, is it being proactively cared for going forward? Is somebody still on the case with these projects? Now, the result of all of that work, is we create a vetted catalog of known good open source releases that we've vetted with the experts, often the individuals and teams that wrote the code in the first place, usually, we vet that it meets these enterprise standards. That's a really useful tool for organizations that are building with that. So, the way that we convey that to organizations that are building software in a useful way is we have a SAS service software, that as a service platform, that's what Tidelift is, and basically, the teams that use this stuff, they plug us into their software development process, typically alongside other tools that they might have, like CI/CD tools that are running tests on their application logic, they'll plug in Tidelift into their release process to ensure that those, the 70 or 80% of the software that they ship, that comes from GitHub, comes from the Python package index, or NPM, or the Maven Central Repository for Java, we're vetting that that meets their enterprise standards and ensuring that the ingredients, the building blocks that go into their applications are known good and vetted to these concrete standards. And they are, you know, this is an unsolved problem for almost every serious organization. There's a couple of, you know, over-performing organizations, like Google has done some amazing internal work on this, Amazon has an incredible dedicated team that does this internally for Amazon developers, very few other organizations, even some of the largest multinational companies have a dedicated internal function doing this comprehensively and systematically. Tidelift is that function that these organizations can use. They can work with us and our network, our unique network of hundreds of these independent open source maintainers, to ensure that there is a feed of known good vetted packages to go into their applications. >> So, were maintainers going in and auditing, and editing, and vetting software that was essentially created by others? That's one question, and then the other question that kind of goes along with that is, are you vetting a gold copy of something and saying, this software meets certain criteria, you should feel okay using it, that's one thing. Validating that the actual distribution, you know, the actual code that's being executed in their enterprise is secure and hasn't been tampered with is another thing. So where do you sit in that distribution channel or that supply chain? >> Sure, so, on the distribution front, you can think of us, we're sort of a GPS system that your application developers can use to know which versions of software are going to meet your enterprise standards. We don't create a separate world where we have our own, you know, side copy of the entire development ecosystem. It's not what these organizations want. They don't want to use some weird enterprise world set of open source packages, they want to just, you know, type NPM install have the, you know, software flow into their organization, but they also want it to not have no insecurity vulnerabilities in it, and they don't want to get bitten two weeks or two years later with a license violation, because there was kind of fuzzy, or incomplete data around the open source license. So what we do is, we help them consume the open source software, you know, knowing that it's been vetted to these standards. And then we also work with the open source community to cause the software to be changed to meet those standards, right? So back to the first part of your question, We work with a lot of projects with the prime maintainers, often the authors, as I said, and we've actually been extending our model over the years to work with these open source maintainers to cover not just their own project, but, some of those neighboring projects, right? Like the core projects that their project depends on, other projects that are co-used with them, they have a lot of expertise, and also, you know, relationships with the surrounding open source community there. So, they're working with us as curators, if you will, our ambassadors that help us get on the community and cover as much of the landscape as possible. >> And, so, what's the relationship with AWS? This is, you know, we're talking here as part of the AWS startup showcase season two, episode one, which is, that's actually pretty cool. So we need to, you know, the challenge here is, season one was awesome, much like Ted Lasso, season two, we have big shoes to fill here, Donald. So, what's the-- >> We got to up our game. >> (laughs) What's the relationship with AWS? And, I mean, why would they call you out as someone interesting for us to talk to? >> Yeah, so, we've had a great relationship that we've been investing in, and working on together with AWS. So, every one of AWS's customers faces this challenge around the software workloads that they're deploying on AWS. You know, it's just, you can't argue against the fact that the vast majority of the application software in the modern world is comprised majority of this third-party open source software. And so, it's really important whether it's running on a device, you know, an Edge device, or whether it's running in a Cloud data center, that those applications meet these standards, especially on the security front. So, AWS recognizes this need and opportunity for their customers, and so we've been working really well jointly with them. We're glad to say that we're an ISV, and AWS ISV accelerate partner now, which gives us the ability to co-engage with AWS and work together to solve mutual customers challenges, and we've had a great time working with the AWS team to help scale up our efforts to get the word word out around this important area, and then more importantly, give organizations the tools to address it and make sure that they have a comprehensive strategy for managing their open source in place. >> Fantastic, Donald, we're up against time, but I do have a 10 second answer I'd like from you. Tidelift, is that a reference to a rising tide lifting all boats, or is it an admonishment not to build a house on the beach in Malibu? >> It's the former, you know, think about this network of independent open source maintainers, working together, a rising tide lifts all boats. >> Eight seconds, that was like four seconds. Perfect. Donald Fischer, from Tidelift, thank you so much. For me, Dave Nicholson here at the CUBE. This has been a CUBE Conversation, as part of AWS's startup showcase, season two, episode one. Come to the CUBE for the best in tech coverage. (soft music)

>>Hey, welcome back everyone to the cubes coverage of eaters reinvent 2021. So our third day wall-to-wall coverage. I'm my coach, Dave Alonzo. He we're getting all the action two sets in person. It's also a virtual hybrid events with a lot of great content online, bringing you all the fresh voices, all the knowledge, all the news and all the action and got great guests here today. As your renderer, managing director of AWS is Europe, middle east, and Africa also known as EMIA. Welcome to the cube. Welcome, >>Welcome. Thanks for coming on. Lovely to be here. >>So Europe is really hot. Middle east Africa. Great growth. The VC culture in Europe specifically has been booming this year. A lot of great action. We've done many cube gigs out there talking to folks, uh, entrepreneurship, cloud, native growth, and then for us it's global. It's awesome. So first question got to ask you is, is you're new to AWS? What brought you here? >>Yeah, no, John, thank you so much. I've been here about three and a half months now, actually. Um, so what brought me here? Um, I have been in and around the tech world since I was a baby. Um, my father was an entrepreneur. I sold fax machines and microfilm equipment in my early days. And then my career has spanned technology in some form or the other. I was at EMC when we bought VMware. Uh, I was a Colt when we did a FinTech startup joined Schneider in my background, which is industrial tech. So I guess I'm a bit of a tech nerd, although I'm not an engineer, that's for sure. The other thing is I've spent a huge part of my career advising clients. And so while I was at McKinsey on business transformation and cloud keeps coming up, especially post pandemic, huge, huge, huge enabler, right of transformation. So when I got the call from AWS, I thought here's my opportunity to finally take what companies are wrestling with, bring together a pioneer in cloud with our enterprise and start-up and SMB clients connect those dots between business and technology and make things happen. So it real magic. So that's what brought me here. And I guess the only other thing to say is I'd heard a lot of other culture, customer mash, obsession, and leadership principles. >>That's why I'm here. It's been a great success. I got to ask you too, now that your new ostium McKinsey, even seeing the front lines, all the transformation, the pandemic has really forced everybody globally to move faster. Uh, things like connect were popular in EMEA. How, how is that going out? There's at the same kind of global pressure on the digital transformation with cloud? What are you seeing out there? >>I've been traveling since I joined, uh, around 10 of the countries already. So Ben planes, trains, automobiles, and what you definitely see is massive acceleration. And I think it's around reinvention of the business. So people are adopting cloud because it's obviously there's cost reasons. There's MNA reasons. There's really increasingly more about innovating. How do I innovate my business? How do I reinvent my business? So you see that constantly. Um, and whether you're a enterprise company or you're a startup, they're all adopting cloud in different, different ways. Um, I mean, I want to tell a core to stack because it's really interesting. And Adam mentioned this in his keynote five to 15% only of workloads have moved to the cloud. So there's a tremendous runway ahead of us. Um, and the three big things on people's minds helped me become a tech company. So it doesn't matter who you are, you're retail, whether you're life sciences or healthcare. You've probably heard about the Roche, uh, work that we're doing with Roche around accelerating R and D with data, or if you're a shoes Addie desk, how do you accelerate again, your personalized experiences? So it doesn't matter who you have helped me become a tech company, give me skills, digital skills, and then help me become a more sustainable company. Those are the three big things I'm thinking of. >>So a couple of things to unpack there. So think about it. Transformation. We still have a long way to go to your point, whatever 10, 15%, depending on which numbers you look at. We've been talking a lot in the cube about the next decade around business transformation, deeper business integration, and the four smarts to digital. And the woke us up to that, accelerated that as you say, so as you travel around to customers in AMEA, what are you hearing with regard to that? I mean, many customers maybe didn't have time to plan. Now they can sit back and take what they've learned. What are you hearing? >>Yeah. And it's, it's a little bit different in different places, right? So, I mean, if you start, if you look at, uh, you know, our businesses, for example, in France, if you look at our businesses in Iberia or Italy, a lot of them are now starting they're on the, at least on the enterprise front, they are now starting to adopt cloud. So they stepping back and thinking about their overall strategy, right? And then the way that they're doing it is actually they're using data as the first trigger point. And I think that makes it easier to migrate because if you, if you look at large enterprises and if you think of the big processes that they've got and all the mainframes and everything that they need to do, if you S if you look at it as one big block, it's too difficult. But when you think about data, you can actually start to aggregate all of your data into one area and then start to analyze and unpack that. >>So I think what I'm seeing for sure is in those countries, data is the first trigger. If you go out to Israel, well that you've got all, it's really start up nation as you know, right. And then we've got more of the digital natives and they want to, you know, absorb all of the innovation that we're throwing at them. And you've heard a lot here at reinvent on some of the things, whether it's digital twins or robotics, or frankly, even using 5g private network, we've just announcement. They are adopting innovation and really taking that in. So it really does differ, but I think the one big message I would leave you with is bringing industry solutions to business is critical. So rather than just talking it and technology, we've got to be able to bring some of what we've done. So for example, the Goldman Sachs financial cloud, bring that to the rest of financial services companies and the media, or if you take the work we're doing on industrials and IOT. So it's really about connecting what industry use cases with. >>What's interesting about the Goldman Dave and I were commenting. I think we coined the term, the story we wrote on Thursday last week, and then PIP was Sunday superclouds because you look at the rise of snowflake and Databricks and Goldman Sachs. You're going to start to see people building on AWS and building these super clouds because they are taking unique platform features of AWS and then sacrificing it for their needs, and then offering that as a service. So there's kind of a whole nother tier developing in the natural evolution of clouds. So the partners are on fire right now because the creativity, the market opportunities are there to be captured. So you're seeing this opportunity recognition, opportunity, capture vibe going on. And it's interesting. I'd love to get your thoughts on how you see that, because certainly the VCs are here in force. I did when I saw all the top Silicon valley VCs here, um, and some European VCs are all here. They're all seeing this. >>So pick up on two things you mentioned that I think absolutely spot on. We're absolutely seeing with our partners, this integration on our platform is so important. So we talk about the power of three, which is you bring a JSI partner, you bring an ISV partner, you bring AWS, you create that power of three and you take it to our customers. And it doesn't matter which industry we are. Our partner ecosystem is so rich. The Adam mentioned, we have a hundred thousand partners around the world, and then you integrate that with marketplace. Um, and the AWS marketplace just opens the world. We have about 325,000 active customers on marketplace. So sassiphy cation integration with our platform, bringing in the GSI and the NSIs. I think that's the real power to, to, to coming back to your point on transformation on the second one, the unicorns, you know, it's interesting. >>So UK France, um, Israel, Mia, I spent a lot of time, uh, recently in Dubai and you can see it happening there. Uh, Africa, Nigeria, South Africa, I mean all across those countries, you're saying huge amount of VC funding going in towards developers, towards startups to at scale-ups more and more of a, um, our startup clients, by the way, uh, are actually going IPO. You know, initially it used to be a lot of M and a and strategic acquisitions, but they have actually bigger aspirations and they're going IPO and we've seen them through from when they were seed or pre-seed all the way to now that they are unicorns. Right? So that there's just a tremendous amount happening in EMEA. Um, and we're fueling that, you know, you know, I mean, born in the cloud is easy, right? In terms of what AWS brings to the table. >>Well, I've been sacred for years. I always talked to Andy Jassy about this. Cause he's a big sports nut. When you bring like these stadiums to certain cities that rejuvenates and Amazon regions are bringing local rejuvenation around the digital economies. And what you see with the startup culture is the ecosystems around it. And Silicon valley thrives because you have all the service providers, you have all the fear of failure goes away. There's support systems. You start to see now with AWS as ecosystem, that same ecosystem support the robustness of it. So, you know, it's classic, rising tide floats all boats kind of vibe. So, I mean, we don't really have our narrative get down on this, but we're seeing this ecosystem kind of play going on. Yeah. >>And actually it's a real virtuous circle, or we call flywheel right within AWS because a startup wants to connect to an enterprise. An enterprise wants to connect to a startup, right? A lot of our ISV partners, by the way, were startups. Now they've graduated and they're like very large. So what we are, I see our role. And by the way, this is one of the other reasons I came here is I see our role to be able to be real facilitators of these ecosystems. Right. And, you know, we've got something that we kicked off in EMEA, which I'm really proud of called our EMEA startup loft accelerator. And we launched that a web summit. And the idea is to bring startups into our space virtually and physically and help them build and help them make those connections. So I think really, I really do think, and I enterprise clients are asking us all the time, right? Who do I need to involve if I'm thinking IOT, who do I need to involve if I want to do something with data. And that's what we do. Super connectors, >>John, you mentioned the, the Goldman deal. And I think it was Adam in his keynote was talking about our customers are asking us to teach them how to essentially build a Supercloud. I mean, our words. But so with your McKinsey background, I would imagine there's real opportunities there, especially as you, I hear you talk about IMIA going around to see customers. There must be a lot of, sort of non-digital businesses that are now transforming to digital. A lot of capital needs there, but maybe you could talk about sort of how you see that playing out over the next several years in your role and AWS's role in affecting that transfer. >>Yeah, no, absolutely. I mean, you're right actually. And I, you know, maybe I will, from my past experience pick up on something, you know, I was in the world of industry, uh, with Schneider as an example. And, you know, we did business through the channel. Um, and a lot of our channel was not digitized. You know, you had point of sale, electrical distributors, wholesalers, et cetera. I think all of those businesses during the pandemic realized that they had to go digital and online. Right. And so they started from having one fax machine in a store. Real literally I'm not kidding nothing else to actually having to go online and be able to do click and collect and various other things. And we were able with AWS, you can spin up in minutes, right. That sort of service, right. I love the fact that you have a credit card you can get onto our cloud. >>Right. That's the whole thing. And it's about instances. John Adam talked about instances, which I think is great. How do businesses transform? And again, I think it's about unpacking the problem, right? So what we do a lot is we sit down with our customers and we actually map a migration journey with them, right? We look across their core infrastructure. We look at their SAP systems. For example, we look at what's happening in the various businesses, their e-commerce systems, that customer life cycle value management systems. I think you've got to go business by business by business use case by use case, by use case, and then help our technology enable that use case to actually digitize. And whether it's front office or back office. I think the advantages are pretty clear. It's more, I think the difficulty is not technology anymore. The difficulty is mindset, leadership, commitment, the operating model, the organizational model and skills. And so what we have to do is AWS is bringing not only our technology, but our culture of innovation and our digital innovation teams to help our clients on that journey >>Technology. Well, we really appreciate you taking the time coming on the cube. We have a couple more minutes. I do want to get into what's your agenda. Now that you're got you're in charge, got the landscape and the 20 mile stare in front of you. Cloud's booming. You got some personal passion projects. Tell us what your plans are. >>So, um, three or four things, right? Three or four, really big takeaways for me is one. I, I came here to help make sure our customers could leverage the power of the cloud. So I will not feel like my job's been done if I haven't been able to do that. So, you know, that five to 15% we talked about, we've got to go 50, 60, 70%. That that's, that's the goal, right? And why not a hundred percent at some point, right? So I think over the next few years, that's the acceleration we need to help bring in AMEA Americas already started to get there as you know, much more, and we need to drive that into me. And then eventually our APJ colleagues are going to do the same. So that's one thing. The other is we talked about partners. I really want to accelerate and expand our partner ecosystem. >>Um, we have actually a huge growth by the way, in the number of partners signing up the number of certifications they're taking, I really, really want to double down on our partners and actually do what they ask us for, which is join. Co-sell joined marketing globalization. So that's two, I think the third big thing is when you mentioned industry industry industry, we've got to bring real use cases and solutions to our customers and not only talk technology got to connect those two dots. And we have lots of examples to bring by the way. Um, and then for hire and develop the best, you know, we've got a new LP as you know, to strive to be at its best employer. I want to do that in a Mia. I want to make sure we can actually do that. We attract, we retain and we grow and we develop that. >>And the diversity has been a huge theme of this event. It's front and center in virtually every company. >>I am. I'm usually passionate about diversity. I'm proud actually that when I was back at Schneider, I launched something called the power women network. We're a network of a hundred senior women and we meet every month. I've also got a podcast out there. So if anyone's listening, it's called power. Women's speak. It is, I've done 16 over the pandemic with CEOs of women podcast, our women speak >>Or women speak oh, >>And Spotify and >>Everything else. >>And, um, you know, what I love about what we're doing is AWS on diversity and you heard Adam onstage, uh, talk to this. We've got our restock program where we really help under employed and unemployed to get a 12 week intensive course and get trained up on thought skills. And the other thing is, get it helping young girls, 12 to 15, get into stem. So lots of different things on the whole, but we need to do a lot more of course, on diversity. And I look forward to helping our clients through that as well. >>Well, we had, we had the training VP on yesterday. It's all free trainings free. >>We've got such a digital skills issue that I love that we've said 29 million people around the world, free cloud training. >>Literally the th the, the gap there between earnings with cloud certification, you can be making six figures like with cloud training. So, I mean, it's really easy. It's free. It's like, it's such a great thing. >>Have you seen the YouTube video on Charlotte Wilkins? Donald's fast food. She changed her mind. She wanted to take Korea. She now has a tech career as a result of being part of restock. Awesome. >>Oh, really appreciate. You got a lot of energy and love, love the podcast. I'm subscribing. I'm going to listen. We love doing the podcast as well. So thanks for coming on the >>Queue. Thank you so much for having me >>Good luck on anemia and your plans. Thank you. Okay. Cube. You're watching the cube, the leader in global tech coverage. We go to the events and extract the signal from the noise. I'm John furrier with Dave, a lot to here at re-invent physical event in person hybrid event as well. Thanks for watching.

>>From the Bellagio hotel in Las Vegas. It's the cube covering UI path forward for brought to you by UI path. >>Good morning. Welcome to the cubes coverage of UI path forward for day two. Live from the Bellagio in Las Vegas. I'm Lisa Martin with Dave Velante, Dave. We had a great action packed day yesterday. We're going to have another action packed day today. We've got the CEO coming on. We've got customers coming on, but there's been a lot in the news last 24 hours. Facebook, what are your thoughts? >>Yeah, so wall street journal today, headline Facebook hearing fuels call for rain in on big tech. All right, everybody's going after big tech. Uh, for those of you who missed it, 60 minutes had a, uh, an interview with the whistleblower. Her name is, uh, Francis Haugen. She's very credible, just a little background. I'll give you my take. I mean, she was hired to help set Facebook straight and protect privacy of individuals, of children. And I really feel like, again, she, she didn't come across as, as bitter or antagonistic, but, but I feel as though she feels betrayed, right, I think she was hired to do a job. They lured her in to say, Hey, this is again, just my take to say, Hey, we want your help in earnest to protect the privacy of our users, our citizens, et cetera. And I think she feels betrayed because she's now saying, listen, this is not cool. >>You hired us to do a job. We in earnest, went in and tried to solve this problem. And you guys kind of ignored it and you put profit ahead of safety. And I think that is the fundamental crux of this. Now she made a number of really good points in her hearing yesterday and I'll, and we'll try to summarize, I mean, there's a lot of putting advertising revenue ahead of children's safety and, and, and others. The examples they're using are during the 2020 election, they shut down any sort of negative conversations. They would be really proactive about that, but after the election, they turned it back on and you know, we all know what happened on January 6th. So there's sort of, you know, the senators are trying that night. Um, the second thing is she talked about Facebook as a wall garden, and she made the point yesterday at the congressional hearings that Google actually, you can data scientists, anybody can go download all the data that Google has on you. >>You and I can do that. Right? There's that website that we've gone to and you look at all the data Google has and you kind of freak out. Yeah, you can't do that with Facebook, right? It's all hidden. So it's kind of this big black box. I will say this it's interesting. The calls for breaking up big tech, Bernie Sanders tweeted something out yesterday said that, uh, mark Zuckerberg was worth, I don't know. I think 9 billion in 2007 or eight or nine, whatever it was. And he's worth 122 billion today, which of course is mostly tied up in Facebook stock, but still he's got incredible wealth. And then Bernie went on his red it's time to break up big tech. It's time to get people to pay their fair share, et cetera. I'm intrigued that the senators don't have as much vigilance around other industries, whether it's big pharma, food companies addicting children to sugar and the like, but that doesn't let Facebook. >>No, it doesn't, but, but you ha you bring up a good point. You and I were chatting about this yesterday. What the whistleblower is identifying is scary. It's dangerous. And the vast majority, I think of its users, don't understand it. They're not aware of it. Um, and why is big tech being maybe singled out and use as an example here, when, to your point, you know, the addiction to sugar and other things are, uh, have very serious implications. Why is big tech being singled out here as the poster child for what's going wrong? >>Well, and they're comparing it to big tobacco, which is the last thing you want to be compared to as big tobacco. But the, but the, but the comparison is, is valid in that her claim, the whistleblower's claim was that Facebook had data and research that it knew, it knows it's hurting, you know, you know, young people. And so what did it do? It created, you know, Instagram for kids, uh, or it had 600,000. She had another really interesting comment or maybe one of the senators did. Facebook said, look, we scan our records and you know, kids lie. And we, uh, we kicked 600,000 kids off the network recently who were underaged. And the point was made if you have 600,000 people on your network that are underage, you have to go kill. That's a problem. Right? So now the flip side of this, again, trying to be balanced is Facebook shut down Donald Trump and his nonsense, uh, and basically took him off the platform. >>They kind of thwarted all the hunter Biden stuff, right. So, you know, they did do some, they did. It's not like they didn't take any actions. Uh, and now they're up, you know, in front of the senators getting hammered. But I think the Zuckerberg brings a lot of this on himself because he put out an Instagram he's on his yacht, he's drinking, he's having fun. It's like he doesn't care. And he, you know, who knows, he probably doesn't. She also made the point that he owns an inordinate percentage and controls an inordinate percentage of the stock, I think 52% or 53%. So he can kind of do what he wants. And I guess, you know, coming back to public policy, there's a lot of narrative of, I get the billionaires and I get that, you know, the Mo I'm all for billionaires paying more taxes. >>But if you look at the tax policies that's coming out of the house of representatives, it really doesn't hit the billionaires the way billionaires can. We kind of know the way that they protect their wealth is they don't sell and they take out low interest loans that aren't taxed. And so if you look at the tax policies that are coming out, they're really not going after the billionaires. It's a lot of rhetoric. I like to deal in facts. And so I think, I think there's, there's a lot of disingenuous discourse going on right now at the same time, you know, Facebook, they gotta, they gotta figure it out. They have to really do a better job and become more transparent, or they are going to get broken up. And I think that's a big risk to the, to their franchise and maybe Zuckerberg doesn't care. Maybe he just wants to give it a, give it to the government, say, Hey, are you guys are on? It >>Happens. What do you think would happen with Amazon, Google, apple, some of the other big giants. >>That's a really good question. And I think if you look at the history of the us government, in terms of ant anti monopolistic practices, it spent decade plus going after IBM, you know, at the end of the day and at the same thing with Microsoft at the end of the day, and those are pretty big, you know, high profiles. And then you look at, at T and T the breakup of at T and T if you take IBM, IBM and Microsoft, they were slowed down by the U S government. No question I've in particular had his hands shackled, but it was ultimately their own mistakes that caused their problems. IBM misunderstood. The PC market. It gave its monopoly to Intel and Microsoft, Microsoft for its part. You know, it was hugging windows. They tried to do the windows phone to try to jam windows into everything. >>And then, you know, open source came and, you know, the world woke up and said, oh, there's this internet that's built on Linux. You know, that kind of moderated by at T and T was broken up. And then they were the baby bells, and then they all got absorbed. And now you have, you know, all this big, giant telcos and cable companies. So the history of the U S government in terms of adjudicating monopolistic behavior has not been great at the same time. You know, if companies are breaking the law, they have to be held accountable. I think in the case of Amazon and Google and apple, they, a lot of lawyers and they'll fight it. You look at what China's doing. They just cut right to the chase and they say, don't go to the, they don't litigate. They just say, this is what we're doing. >>Big tech, you can't do a, B and C. We're going to fund a bunch of small startups to go compete. So that's an interesting model. I was talking to John Chambers about this and he said, you know, he was flat out that the Western way is the right way. And I believe in, you know, democracy and so forth. But I think if, to answer your question, I think they'll, they'll slow it down in courts. And I think at some point somebody's going to figure out a way to disrupt these big companies. They always do, you know, >>You're right. They always do >>Right. I mean, you know, the other thing John Chambers points out is that he used to be at 1 28, working for Wang. There is no guarantee that the past is prologue that because you succeeded in the past, you're going to succeed in the future. So, so that's kind of the Facebook break up big tech. I'd like to see a little bit more discussion around, you know, things like food companies and the, like >>You bring up a great point about that, that they're equally harmful in different ways. And yet they're not getting the visibility that a Facebook is getting. And maybe that's because of the number of users that it has worldwide and how many people depend on it for communication, especially in the last 18 months when it was one of the few channels we had to connect and engage >>Well. And, and the whistleblower's point, Facebook puts out this marketing narrative that, Hey, look at all this good we're doing in reality. They're all about the, the, the advertising profits. But you know, I'm not sure what laws they're breaking. They're a public company. They're, they're, they have a responsibility to shareholders. So that's, you know, to be continued. The other big news is, and the headline is banks challenge, apple pay over fees for transactions, right? In 2014, when apple came up with apple pay, all the banks lined up, oh, they had FOMO. They didn't want to miss out on this. So they signed up. Now. They don't like the fact that they have to pay apple fees. They don't like the fact that apple introduced its own credit card. They don't like the fact that they have to pay fees on monthly recurring charges on your, you know, your iTunes. >>And so we talked about this and we talk about it a lot on the cube is that, that in, in, in, in his book, seeing digital David, Michelle, or the author talked about Silicon valley broadly defined. So he's including Seattle, Microsoft, but more so Amazon, et cetera, has a dual disruption agenda. They're not only trying to disrupt horizontally the technology industry, but they're also disrupting industry. We talked about this yesterday, apple and finances. The example here, Amazon, who was a bookseller got into cloud and is in grocery and is doing content. And you're seeing these a large companies, traverse industry value chains, which have historically been very insulated right from that type of competition. And it's all because of digital and data. So it's a very, pretty fascinating trends going on. >>Well, from a financial services perspective, we've been seeing the unbundling of the banks for a while. You know, the big guys with B of A's, those folks are clearly concerned about the smaller, well, I'll say the smaller FinTech disruptors for one, but, but the non FinTech folks, the apples of the world, for example, who aren't in that industry who are now to your point, disrupting horizontally and now going after individual specific industries, ultimately I think as consumers we want, whatever is going to make our lives easier. Um, do you ever, ever, I always kind of scratch my nose when somebody doesn't take apple pay, I'm like, you don't take apple pay so easy. It's so easy to make this easy for me. >>Yeah. Yeah. So it's, it's going to be really interesting to see how this plays out. I, I do think, um, you know, it begs the question when will banks or Willbanks lose control of the payment systems. They seem to be doing that already with, with alternative forms of payment, uh, whether it's PayPal or Stripe or apple pay. And then crypto is, uh, with, with, with decentralized finance is a whole nother topic of disruption and innovation, >>Right? Well, these big legacy institutions, these organizations, and we've spoke with some of them yesterday, we're going to be speaking with some of them today. They need to be able to be agile, to transform. They have to have the right culture in order to do that. That's the big one. They have to be willing. I think an open to partner with the broader ecosystem to unlock more opportunities. If they want to be competitive and retain the trust of the clients that they've had for so long. >>I think every industry has a digital disruption scenario. We used to always use the, don't get Uber prized example Uber's coming on today, right? And, and there isn't an industry, whether it's manufacturing or retail or healthcare or, or government that isn't going to get disrupted by digital. And I think the unique piece of this is it's it's data, data, putting data at the core. That's what the big internet giants have done. That's what we're hearing. All these incumbents try to do is to put data. We heard this from Coca-Cola yesterday, we're putting data at the core of our company and what we're enabling through automation and other activities, uh, digital, you know, a company. And so, you know, can these, can these giants, these hundred plus year old giants compete? I think they can because they don't have to invent AI. They can work with companies like UI path and embed AI into their business and focused on, on what they do best. Now, of course, Google and Amazon and Facebook and Microsoft there may be going to have the best AI in the world. But I think ultimately all these companies are on a giant collision course, but the market is so huge that I think there's a lot of, >>There's a tremendous amount of opportunity. I think one of the things that was exciting about talking to one, the female CIO of Coca-Cola yesterday, a hundred plus old organization, and she came in with a very transformative, very different mindset. So when you see these, I always appreciate when I say legacy institutions like Coca-Cola or Merck who was on yesterday, blue cross blue shield who's on today, embracing change, cultural change going. We can't do things the way we used to do, because there are competitors in that review mirror who are smaller, they're more nimble, they're faster. They're going to be, they're going to take our customers away from us. We have to deliver this exceptional customer and employee experience. And Coca-Cola is a great example of one that really came in with CA brought in a disruptor in order to align digital with the CEO's thoughts and processes and organization. These are >>Highly capable companies. We heard from the head of finance at, at applied materials today. He was also coming on. I was quite, I mean, this is a applied materials is really strong company. They're talking about a 20 plus billion dollar company with $120 billion market cap. They supply semiconductor equipment and they're a critical component of the semiconductor supply chain. And we all know what's going on in semiconductors today with a huge shortage. So they're a really important company, but I was impressed with, uh, their finance leaders vision on how they're transforming the company. And it was not like, you know, 10 years out, these were not like aspirational goals. This is like 20, 19, 20, 22. Right. And, and really taking costs out of the business, driving new innovation. And, and it's, it was it's, it's refreshing to me Lisa, to see CFOs, you know, typically just bottom line finance focused on these industry transformations. Now, of course, at the end of the day, it's all about the bottom line, but they see technology as a way to get there. In fact, he put technology right in the middle of his stack. I want to ask him about that too. I actually want to challenge him a little bit on it because he had that big Hadoop elephant in the middle and this as an elephant in the room. And that picture, >>The strategy though, that applied materials had, it was very well thought out, but it was also to your point designed to create outcomes year upon year upon year. And I was looking at some of the notes. I took that in year one, alone, 274 automations in production. That's a lot, 150,000 in annual work hours automated 124 use cases they tackled in one year. >>So I want to, I want to poke at that a little bit too. And I, and I did yesterday with some guests. I feel like, well, let's see. So, um, I believe it was, uh, I forget what guests it was, but she said we don't put anything forward that doesn't hit the income statement. Do you remember that? Yes, it was Chevron because that was pushing her. I'm like, well, you're not firing people. Right. And we saw from IDC data today, only 13% of organizations are saying, or, or, or the organizations at 13% of the value was from reduction in force. And a lot of that was probably in plan anyway, and they just maybe accelerated it. So they're not getting rid of headcount, but they're counting hours saved. So that says to me, there's gotta be an normally or often CFOs say, well, it's that soft dollars because we're redeploying folks. But she said, no, it hits the income statement. So I don't, I want to push a little bit and see how they connect the dots, because if you're going to save hours, you're going to apply people to new work. And so either they're generating revenue or cutting costs somewhere. So, so there's another layer that I want to appeal to understand how that hits the income state. >>Let's talk about some of that IDC data. They announced a new white paper this morning sponsored by UI path. And I want to get your perspectives on some of the stats that they talked about. They were painting a positive picture, an optimistic picture. You know, we can't talk about automation without talking about the fear of job loss. They've been in a very optimistic picture for the actual gains over a few year period. What are your thoughts about that? Especially when we saw that stat 41% slowed hiring. >>Yeah. So, well, first of all, it's a sponsored study. So, you know, and of course the conferences, so it's going to be, be positive, but I will say this about IDC. IDC is a company I would put, you know, forest they're similar. They do sponsored research and they're credible. They don't, they, they have the answer to their audience, so they can't just out garbage. And so it has to be defensible. So I give them credit there that they won't just take whatever the vendor wants them to write and then write it. I've used to work there. And I, and I know the culture and there's a great deal of pride in being able to defend what you do. And if the answer doesn't come out, right, sorry, this is the answer. You know, you could pay a kill fee or I dunno how they handle it today. >>But, but, so my point is I think, and I know the people who did that study, many of them, and I think they're pretty credible. I, I thought by the way, you, to your 41% point. So the, the stat was 13% are gonna reduce head count, right? And then there were two in the middle and then 41% are gonna reduce or defer hiring in the future. And this to me, ties into the Erik Brynjolfsson and, and, and, uh, and, and McAfee work. Andy McAfee work from MIT who said, look, initially actually made back up. They said, look at machines, have always replaced humans. Historically this was in their book, the second machine age and what they said was, but for the first time in history, machines are replacing humans with cognitive functions. And this is sort of, we've never seen this before. It's okay. That's cool. >>And their, their research suggests that near term, this is going to be a negative economic impact, sorry, negative impact on jobs and salaries. And we've, we've generally seen this, the average salary, uh, up until recently has been flat in the United States for years and somewhere in the mid fifties. But longterm, their research shows that, and this is consistent. I think with IDC that it's going to help hiring, right? There's going to be a boost buddy, a net job creator. And there's a, there's a, there's a chasm you've got across, which is education training and skill skillsets, which Brynjolfsson and McAfee focused on things that humans can do that machines can't. And you have this long list and they revisited every year. Like they used to be robots. Couldn't walk upstairs. Well, you see robots upstairs all the time now, but it's empathy, it's creativity. It's things like that. >>Contact that humans are, are much better at than machines, uh, even, even negotiations. And, and so, so that's, those are skills. I don't know where you get those skills. Do you teach those and, you know, MBA class or, you know, there's these. So their point is there needs to be a new thought process around education, public policy, and the like, and, and look at it. You can't protect the past from the future, right? This is inevitable. And we've seen this in terms of economic activity around the world countries that try to protect, you know, a hundred percent employment and don't let competition, they tend to fall behind competitively. You know, the U S is, is not of that category. It's an open market. So I think this is inevitable. >>So a lot about upskilling yesterday, and the number of we talked with PWC about, for example, about what they're doing and a big focus on upscaling. And that was part of the IDC data that was shared this morning. For example, I'll share a stat. This was a survey of 518 people. 68% of upscaled workers had higher salaries than before. They also shared 57% of upskilled workers had higher roles and their enterprises then before. So some, again, two point it's a sponsored study, so it's going to be positive, but there, there was a lot of discussion of upskilling yesterday and the importance on that education, because to your point, we can't have one without the other. You can't give these people access to these tools and not educate them on how to use it and help them help themselves become more relevant to the organization. Get rid of the mundane tasks and be able to start focusing on more strategic business outcome, impacting processes. >>We talked yesterday about, um, I use the example of, of SAP. You, you couldn't have predicted SAP would have won the ERP wars in the early to mid 1990s, but if you could have figured out who was going to apply ERP to their businesses, you know what, you know, manufacturing companies and these global firms, you could have made a lot of money in the stock market by, by identifying those that were going to do that. And we used to say the same thing about big data, and the reason I'm bringing all this up is, you know, the conversations with PWC, Deloitte and others. This is a huge automation, a huge services opportunity. Now, I think the difference between this and the big data era, which is really driven by Hadoop is it was big data was so complicated and you had a lack of data scientists. >>So you had to hire these services firms to come in and fill those gaps. I think this is an enormous services opportunity with automation, but it's not because the software is hard to get to work. It's all around the organizational processes, rethinking those as people process technology, it's about the people in the process, whereas Hadoop and the big data era, it was all about the tech and they would celebrate, Hey, this stuff works great. There are very few companies really made it through that knothole to dominate as we've seen with the big internet giants. So you're seeing all these big services companies playing in this market because as I often say, they like to eat at the trough. I know it's kind of a pejorative, but it's true. So it's huge, huge market, but I'm more optimistic about the outcomes for a broader audience with automation than I was with, you know, big data slash Hadoop, because I think the software as much, as much more adoptable, easier to use, and you've got the cloud and it's just a whole different ball game. >>That's certainly what we heard yesterday from Chevron about the ease of use and that you should be able to see results and returns very quickly. And that's something too that UI path talks about. And a lot of their marketing materials, they have a 96, 90 7% retention rate. They've done a great job building their existing customers land and expand as we talked about yesterday, a great use case for that, but they've done so by making things easy, but hearing that articulated through the voice of their customers, fantastic validation. >>So, you know, the cube is like a little, it's like a interesting tip of the spirits, like a probe. And I will tell you when I, when we first started doing the cube and the early part of the last decade, there were three companies that stood out. It was Splunk service now and Tableau. And the reason they stood out is because they were able to get customers to talk about how great they were. And the light bulb went off for us. We were like, wow, these are three companies to watch. You know, I would tell all my wall street friends, Hey, watch these companies. Yeah. And now you see, you know, with Frank Slootman at snowflake, the war, the cat's out of the bag, everybody knows it's there. And they're expecting, you know, great things. The stock is so priced to perfection. You could argue, it's overpriced. >>The reason I'm bringing this up is in terms of customer loyalty and affinity and customer love. You're getting it here. Absolutely this ecosystem. And the reason I bring that up is because there's a lot of questions in the, in the event last night, it was walking around. I saw a couple of wall street guys who came up to me and said, Hey, I read your stuff. It was good. Let's, let's chat. And there's a lot of skepticism on, on wall street right now about this company. Right? And to me, that's, that's good news for you. Investors who want to do some research, because the words may be not out. You know, they, they, they gotta prove themselves here. And to me, the proof is in the customer and the lifetime value of that customer. So, you know, again, we don't give stock advice. We, we kind of give fundamental observations, but this stock, I think it's trading just about 50. >>Now. I don't think it's going to go to 30, unless the market just tanks. It could have some, you know, if that happens, okay, everything will go down. But I actually think, even though this is a richly priced stock, I think the future of this company is very bright. Obviously, if they continue to execute and we're going to hear from the CEO, right? People don't know Daniel, Denise, right? They're like, who is this guy? You know, he started this company and he's from Eastern Europe. And we know he's never have run a public company before, so they're not diving all in, you know? And so that to me is something that really pay attention to, >>And we can unpack that with him later today. And we've got some great customers on the program. You mentioned Uber's here. Spotify is here, applied materials. I feel like I'm announcing something on Saturday night. Live Uber's here. Spotify is here. All right, Dave, looking forward to a great action packed today. We're going to dig more into this and let's get going. Shall we let's do it. All right. For David Dante, I'm Lisa Martin. This is the cube live in Las Vegas. At the Bellagio. We are coming to you presenting UI path forward for come back right away. Our first guest comes up in just a second.

(upbeat music) >> Hello and welcome to today's session of the 2021 AWS Global Public Sector Partner Awards Program. This session's award is going to be profiling the Most Customer Obsessed Mission-based Win in the education domain. I'm your host, Donald Klein, with theCUBE. And today we are joined by Fernando Castillo. He's the Business Development Manager at CloudHesive, and then also Luis Muñoz, who's the Information Director at the Unibersidad de Los Lagos. >> Okay, everyone. Welcome to today's session. All right. Fernando, thanks for taking some time out and joining us today. Wanted to start with you and wanted to hear a little bit of background about CloudHesive. Obviously, you're a company that had won an award last year, but you're back on this year, again. Want you give us some a little bit of the story of CloudHesive, and what kind of services you provide? (speaking in foreign language) >> Translator: Thank you very much, Donald. Yes, CloudHesive is a managed consulting service provider in the cloud. We are AWS Partner and since 2014 we have been providing solutions focusing on security, trustability, and scalability in the cloud. Accompany companies to their main objective, which is reducing operational costs and increasing their productivity as they move forward in the adaption of cloud services. >> Very good. Okay. And then Luis, I'm going to turn to you now, want you talk to us a little bit about your role there at the Unibersidad de Los Lagos, and how you started this project? (speaking in foreign language) >> Translator: Good afternoon. I belong to the academic department of the engineering department at the University of Los Lagos and the director of the IT of this school. For several years, for about five years, we've been analyzing the deployment of these automation at universities of Chile. Since it's not a common item in the country, we've done several benchmarking worldwide, especially in Spain, Mexico, Columbia, and places where it's more developed. And eventually, we have to take some demos that allowed us to make some decisions. This topic was not going to be considered in 2020, but it happened because of a political situation, social political in Chile in 2019. So we have to move forward the process, but we had already made a global analysis and this was one of the reasons why we have to get closer to AWS Partners and this allowed us to move this process forward within the university. >> Okay. Very good. All right. Well then, what I'm going to do now is I'm going to come back to you, Fernando, and I want you to talk a little bit about the overall goal of what you were trying to help the university with. (speaking in foreign language) >> Translator: Well, within the main objectives we had in the project was to have a platform that would support a concurrent load of thousands of students, especially in University of Los Lagos. They had requested to have around 15,000 students and the main complication or the main challenge was to keep a virtual attendance, which is now known as learning management system, but also having the possibility of having video classes in two days, something similar to what we are doing today, but with 50 or up to 100 students. This was one of the main objectives of the project. >> Okay, understood. So the goal is here to deploy this platform and open source platform and make it available for about 15,000 students. Okay. Now coming back to you, Luis, there was a time constraint here, correct? You needed to get the system going very quickly. Maybe you could explain why you needed to accelerate this program so quickly. (speaking in foreign language) >> Translator: Well, literally, the pandemic conditions in the country started to be more evident and more severe since the first week of March in 2020. And so we have to make the decision, the double-sided decision of choosing an infrastructure that we could not buy at that time, given the emergency, logistic emergency of the pandemic at the server's room and to keep a stable platform for that number of users, student and professors of university. So we started conversations to make this scale up and move everything to the cloud. This was the first decision. So we decided to use Amazon and with CloudHesive, we were able to organize the academics charter in the same platform. So as to move no longer than three weeks so that we could give classes, online classes with the students while we were learning this new normal, which was virtual distance education. This was very difficult of every morning, afternoon, and evening of work, but this allowed us not to fall behind in the first semester of the educational needs of the students. With this modality, we have around 5% more students that we used to last year in 2020, in March 2020. And this allowed us to have a more visible structure for those who were questioning this new modality and we were applied to take this new modality in the end. >> Okay. So because of the pandemic, you had to accelerate the deployment of this learning management system very quickly. And you had to learn how to manage the system at the same time that you were deploying it. Okay. Understood. So a lot of challenges there. All right. So then maybe coming back to you, Fernando. Wanted you talk about your role and how CloudHesive helped with this sort of this very rapid deployment of this LMS system. (speaking in foreign language) >> Translator: Well, talking about the challenges and how we were able to get to the objective, within the plan, deployment and development have to accompany the University of Los Lagos not only with the use of the platform, but also how to change management. One of the biggest challenges was to do a security audit, the deployment of scalable infrastructures. And one of the main topics was, one of the main challenges for CloudHesive that we can now talk about and obtained objective was to do the tests from the point of view of scalability and security getting into 15,000 students, concurrent students, stimulating the workload of the university, keeping 99.5 availability of the platform. Going back to the challenges, it's not only the scalability and stability. Nowadays, the University of Los Lagos platform can continue to grow, as Luis mentioned, without the need to look for new resources. But with our implementation, deployment and development, we already have a scalable resource as they increase the number of professors and students to their university. >> Okay. Understood, understood. Now, maybe talk a little bit just to continue with that point. Maybe talk for a minute about how you leverage the AWS platform in order to be able to accelerate this project. What aspects of your partnership with AWS enabled you to deploy the system so quickly? (speaking in foreign language) >> Translator: Well, talking about that, we based on a referential architecture of AWS, which is an open source middle platform, and within these competencies and within things, they belong to the education. We also have the problems, the presence of (indistinct), which allows us to deploy new solution and new integrations. So this allowed us as the team to, within weeks, to develop new features that would allow us to deal with each of the requirements of the universities, specifically. So within the first week, the University of Los Lagos had the connectivity with the academic sector. On the second week, they had the infrastructure to support out two-way videos. And on the third week, they already had the platform completely deployed with all the security safeguards that we already have in all of our products and services. So having worked hand-in-hand with AWS allowed us to have success in time with this platform. >> Wow. So that's fantastic. You were able to deploy this entire system from the connection with the academics to the video infrastructure to actually getting all the security implementations in place. You were able to do that in a three week cycle, is that correct? >> Yeah, that's correct. >> Fantastic. Okay. So Luis, coming back to you then, so working with CloudHesive as a partner to help deploy the platform on AWS gave you fantastic speed and agility to get the system working. Maybe talk a little bit now about the challenges of getting students and educators to adapt the system, and what kind of successes you had? (speaking in foreign language) >> Translator: First of all, they have to, we need to need to know the geography, the landscape of the university. The geography is very varied. We have mountains and lakes and so forth, and connectivity concepts are very difficult in this area. In addition, University of Los Lagos has the characteristic of receiving students from very poor sectors within the region. So this means that more than 80% have a free education, as there are few universities that exist in the country. So one of the technological challenges was for these students to receive the mechanisms and technology to have the connectivity they needed. After that, we had a very big training plan with the deployment company, CloudHesive, with the permissions, and eventually together, we were able to go beyond students and professors. And I remember we had 50% students and professors logged in to the platform, and nowadays, we have 100% students and professors logged in having classes in the platform. But most importantly, nowadays, we have an analytical control because of an integration with CloudHesive, with certain tools that allow us to gather data in real time. And we can do a follow-up of the student that is closer actually from the previous situation when we didn't have this technology. If the student is not logged in, we can reach them directly or indirectly to know, what is happening with his meeting, which is the kind of support, academic, social or economic support that they need. Before, it was harder to get this. So we have a communion between technology and social services that we can provide as a university. And of course, the adaptability of CloudHesive in as much as most of the requirements that we needed. So as to have a good response, they've been very providing, they provided a very robust service in this terms. >> Fantastic. So you were able to reach 100% percent of your target audience very quickly. Is that correct? Great. >> Yes. >> And maybe just to kind of follow up one more. Just talk a little bit about the future of your program. Now that you've worked so hard to establish the system and to connect your students and your teachers and to optimize the system, what is your plan to use it going forward? Are you looking to expand it? What would you say are your goals? (speaking in foreign language) >> Translator: First of all, for better or for worse, this modality came here to stay. The pandemic may end, but it generated opportunities that nationwide, it moved forward at least seven or eight times faster, these kinds of possibilities. So it's hard to use or waste this opportunity with the face-to-face classes. The university nowadays, thanks to the platform and the work done by CloudHesive and AWS, the university won ministry projects from the Ministry of Education in the country, have a strengthening plans for other kinds of services that were not incorporated before, like the idea of virtual library, research work, academic development work, of training and cultural transformation as well. But eventually, they are happening in this virtually environments. And the university won this possibility through the ministry, bridging the gap between the academic sector and the students. And in order to elaborate a little bit more from the previous question, we did a survey last year and ended not long ago. And most professors said that 80%, more than 80% said that the virtual environment was considered as good or very good. So we have a very good assessment in order to participate in this project that were won by the university and they are nowadays being applied. So this generates development in the academic sector, in research, in library, in content creation, global communication, working together with other universities with work postgraduate courses and other universities without the need of getting out of home. So this is a very competitive advantage that we didn't have before. And since 2020, we were able to develop. >> Fantastic. Well, congratulations on a really well put together program. And I'm excited to hear that you've won an award in your country and that you're planning to expand the system more broadly. I think that's a fantastic success story. So maybe just to wrap this up here with you Fernando, why don't you talk a little bit about, so obviously, you guys were very critical in helping this system be deployed very quickly, but very securely at the same time. How do you see your role going forward in enabling these types of situations, this distance learning type formats? (speaking in foreign language) >> Translator: Well, just as Luis said, taking this project with the University of Los Lagos, this showed the importance of looking at technological advances and to improve the universities and research centers and how to focus on innovation and bringing the future education down. For us, the data generated in this virtual interactions are very valuable and having a clear perspective, so as to organize this data for, to make more effective decisions that allow us to act in real time. This is what we are focusing on right now. So as to keep, I mean, prove, and being able to provide new tools, the research centers and universities to operate quickly, safely, and cost effectively. >> Okay, fantastic. So really, the real lesson learned here is by working with a partner like yourself, you were able take an open source learning management system and then deploy it very quickly, manage it, and then secure it in a way that allowed the university then to do their work. So I think that's a really great end-to-end delivery story. So I think, maybe if you want to make one last comment, Fernando, about your role in any kind of future expansion for this type of work. (speaking in foreign language) >> Translator: Yes, of course. I would like to thank Amazon and University of Los Lagos, of course for giving us the chance to work together and develop this project successfully. And answering your question, I would like to say that this is a good incentive to build more robust solutions, as long as we have our focus on our clients, when working and as a final comment, I would just would like to thank you and hope to see you again with a new project. >> Okay, well, congratulations to you both on winning this award. And for CloudHesive, this is your second year in a row of winning a Public Sector Award. So with that, I'm going to sign off today and I'm going to thank you both for attending. Today, we've had Fernando Castillo, the Business Development Manager from CloudHesive and then Luis Muñoz, the Information Director at the Uniberisdad de Los Lagos, and thank you both for attending. This is Donald Klein for theCUBE, until next time. (bright music)

>> Narrator: From theCUBE studios in Palo Alto in Boston, connecting with thought leaders all around the world. This is a CUBE conversation. >> As you know by now, Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon, is stepping aside from his CEO role and AWS CEO, Andy Jassy, is being promoted to head all of Amazon. Bezos, of course, is going to remain executive chairman. Now, 15 years ago, next month, Amazon launched it's simple storage service, which was the first modern cloud offering. And the man who wrote the business plan for AWS, was Andy Jassy, and he's navigated the meteoric rise and disruption that has seen AWS grow into a $45 billion company that draws off the vast majority of Amazon's operating profits. No one in the media has covered Jassy more intimately and closely than John Furrier, the founder of SiliconANGLE. And John joins us today to help us understand on theCUBE this move and what we can expect from Jassy in his new role, and importantly what it means for AWS. John, thanks for taking the time to speak with us. >> Hey, great day. Great to see you as always, we've done a lot of interviews together over the years and we're on our 11th year with theCUBE and SiliconANGLE. But I got to be excited too, that we're simulcasters on Clubhouse, which is kind of cool. Love Clubhouse but not since the, in December. It's awesome. It's like Cube radio. It's like, so this is a Cube talk. So we opened up a Clubhouse room while we're filming this. We'll do more live hits in studio and syndicate the Clubhouse and then take questions after. This is a huge digital transformation moment. I'm part of the digital transformation club on Clubhouse which has almost 5,000 followers at the moment and also has like 500 members. So if you're not on Clubhouse, yet, if you have an iPhone go check it out and join the digital transformation club. Android users you'll have to wait until that app is done but it's really a great club. And Jeremiah Owyang is also doing a lot of stuff on digital transformation. >> Or you can just buy an iPhone and get in. >> Yeah, that's what people are doing. I can see all the influences are on there but to me, the digital transformation, it's always been kind of a cliche, the consumerization of IT, information technology. This has been the boring world of the enterprise over the past, 20 years ago. Enterprise right now is super hot because there's no distinction between enterprise and society. And that's clearly the, because of the rise of cloud computing and the rise of Amazon Web Services which was a side project at AWS, at Amazon that Andy Jassy did. And it wasn't really pleasant at the beginning. It was failed. It failed a lot and it wasn't as successful as people thought in the early days. And I have a lot of stories with Andy that he told me a lot of the inside baseball and we'll share that here today. But we started covering Amazon since the beginning. I was as an entrepreneur. I used it when it came out and a huge fan of them as a company because they just got a superior product and they have always had been but it was very misunderstood from the beginning. And now everyone's calling it the most important thing. And Andy now is becoming Andy Jassy, the most important executive in the world. >> So let's get it to the, I mean, look at, you said to me over holidays, you thought this might have something like this could happen. And you said, Jassy is probably in line to get this. So, tell us, what can you tell us about Jassy? Why is he qualified for this job? What do you think he brings to the table? >> Well, the thing that I know about Amazon everyone's been following the Amazon news is, Jeff Bezos has a lot of personal turmoil. They had his marriage fail. They had some issues with the smear campaigns and all this stuff going on, the run-ins with Donald Trump, he bought the Washington post. He's got a lot of other endeavors outside of Amazon cause he's the second richest man in the world competing with Elon Musk at Space X versus Blue Origin. So the guy's a billionaire. So Amazon is his baby and he's been running it as best he could. He's got an executive team committee they called the S team. He's been grooming people in the company and that's just been his mode. And the rise of AWS and the business performance that we've been documenting on SiliconANGLE and theCUBE, it's just been absolutely changing the game on Amazon as a company. So clearly Amazon Web Services become a driving force of the new Amazon that's emerging. And obviously they've got all their retail business and they got the gaming challenges and they got the studios and the other diversified stuff. So Jassy is just, he's just one of those guys. He's just been an Amazonian from day one. He came out of Harvard business school, drove across the country, very similar story to Jeff Bezos. He did that in 1997 and him and Jeff had been collaborating and Jeff tapped him to be his shadow, they call it, which is basically technical assistance and an heir apparent and groomed him. And then that's how it is. Jassy is not a climber as they call it in corporate America. He's not a person who is looking for a political gain. He's not a territory taker, but he's a micromanager. He loves details and he likes to create customer value. And that's his focus. So he's not a grandstander. In fact, he's been very low profile. Early days when we started meeting with him, he wouldn't meet with press regularly because they weren't writing the right stories. And everyone is, he didn't know he was misunderstood. So that's classic Amazon. >> So, he gave us the time, I think it was 2014 or 15 and he told us a story back then, John, you might want to share it as to how AWS got started. Why, what was the main spring Amazon's tech wasn't working that great? And Bezos said to Jassy, going to go figure out why and maybe explain how AWS was born. >> Yeah, we had, in fact, we were the first ones to get access to do his first public profile. If you go to the Google and search Andy Jassy, the trillion dollar baby, we had a post, we put out the story of AWS, Andy Jassy's trillion dollar baby. This was in early, this was January 2015, six years ago. And, we back then, we posited that this would be a trillion dollar total addressable market. Okay, people thought we were crazy but we wrote a story and he gave us a very intimate access. We did a full drill down on him and the person, the story of Amazon and that laid out essentially the beginning of the rise of AWS and Andy Jassy. So that's a good story to check out but really the key here is, is that he's always been relentless and competitive on creating value in what they call raising the bar outside Amazon. That's a term that they use. They also have another leadership principle called working backwards, which is like, go to the customer and work backwards from the customer in a very Steve Job's kind of way. And that's been kind of Jobs mentality as well at Apple that made them successful work backwards from the customer and make things easier. And that was Apple. Amazon, their philosophy was work backwards from the customer and Jassy specifically would say it many times and eliminate the undifferentiated heavy lifting. That was a key principle of what they were doing. So that was a key thesis of their entire business model. And that's the Amazonian way. Faster, cheaper, ship it faster, make it less expensive and higher value. While when you apply the Amazon shipping concept to cloud computing, it was completely disrupted. They were shipping code and services faster and that became their innovation strategy. More announcements every year, they out announced their competition by huge margin. They introduced new services faster and they're less expensive some say, but in the aggregate, they make more money but that's kind of a key thing. >> Well, when you, I was been listening to the TV today and there was a debate on whether or not, this support tends that they'll actually split the company into two. To me, I think it's just the opposite. I think it's less likely. I mean, if you think about Amazon getting into grocery or healthcare, eventually financial services or other industries and the IOT opportunity to me, what they do, John, is they bring in together the cloud, data and AI and they go attack these new industries. I would think Jassy of all people would want to keep this thing together now whether or not the government allows them to do that. But what are your thoughts? I mean, you've asked Andy this before in your personal interviews about splitting the company. What are your thoughts? >> Well, Jon Fortt at CNBC always asked the same question every year. It's almost like the standard question. I kind of laugh and I ask it now too because I liked Jon Fortt. I think he's an awesome dude. And I'll, it's just a tongue in cheek, Jassy. He won't answer the question. Amazon, Bezos and Jassy have one thing in common. They're really good at not answering questions. So if you ask the same question. They'll just say, nothing's ever, never say never, that's his classic answer to everything. Never say never. And he's always said that to you. (chuckles) Some say, he's, flip-flopped on things but he's really customer driven. For example, he said at one point, no one should ever build a data center. Okay, that was a principle. And then they come out and they have now a hybrid strategy. And I called them out on that and said, hey, what, are you flip-flopping? You said at some point, no one should have a data center. He's like, well, we looked at it differently and what we meant was is that, it should all be cloud native. Okay. So that's kind of revision, but he's cool with that. He says, hey, we'll revise based on what customers are doing. VMware working with Amazon that no one ever thought that would happen. Okay. So, VMware has some techies, Raghu, for instance, over there, super top notch. He worked with Jassy, directly in his team Sanjay Poonen when they went to business school together, they cut a deal. And now Amazon essentially saved VMware, in my opinion. And Pat Gelsinger drove that deal. Now, Pat Gelsinger, CEO, Intel, and Pat told me that directly in candid conversation off theCUBE, he said, hey, we have to make a decision either we're going to be in cloud or we're not going to be in cloud, we will partner. And I'll see, he was Intel. He understood the Intel inside mentality. So that's good for VMware. So Jassy does these kinds of deals. He's not afraid he's got a good stomach for business and a relentless competitor. >> So, how do you think as you mentioned Jassy is a micromanager. He gets deep into the technology. Anybody who's seen his two hour, three hour keynotes. No, he has a really fine grasp of the technology across the entire stack. How do you think John, he will approach things like antitrust, the big tech lash of the unionization of the workforce at Amazon? How do you think Jassy will approach that? >> Well, I think one of the things that emerges Jassy, first of all, he's a huge sports fan. And many people don't know that but he's also progressive person. He's very progressive politically. He's been on the record and off the record saying things like, obviously, literacy has been big on, he's been on basically unrepresented minorities, pushing for that, and certainly cloud computing in tech, women in tech, he's been a big proponent. He's been a big supporter of Teresa Carlson. Who's been rising star at Amazon. People don't know who Teresa Carlson is and they should check out her. She's become one of the biggest leaders inside Amazon she's turned around public sector from the beginning. She ran that business, she's a global star. He's been a great leader and he's been getting, forget he's a micromanager, he's on top of the details. I mean, the word is, and nothing gets approved without Andy, Andy seeing it. But he's been progressive. He's been an Amazon original as they call it internally. He's progressive, he's got the business acumen but he's perfect for this pragmatic conversation that needs to happen. And again, because he's so technically strong having a CEO that's that proficient is going to give Amazon an advantage when they have to go in and change how DC works, for instance, or how the government geopolitical landscape works, because Amazon is now a global company with regions all over the place. So, I think he's pragmatic, he's open to listening and changing. I think that's a huge quality >> Well, when you think of this, just to set the context here for those who may not know, I mean, Amazon started as I said back in 2006 in March with simple storage service that later that year they announced EC2 which is their compute platform. And that was the majority of their business, is still a very large portion of their business but Amazon, our estimates are that in 2020, Amazon did 45 billion, 45.4 billion in revenue. That's actually an Amazon reported number. And just to give you a context, Azure about 26 billion GCP, Google about 6 billion. So you're talking about an industry that Amazon created. That's now $78 billion and Amazon at 45 billion. John they're growing at 30% annually. So it's just a massive growth engine. And then another story Jassy told us, is they, he and Jeff and the team talked early on about whether or not they should just sort of do an experiment, do a little POC, dip their toe in and they decided to go for it. Let's go big or go home as Michael Dell has said to us many times, I mean, pretty astounding. >> Yeah. One of the things about Jassy that people should know about, I think there's some compelling relative to the newest ascension to the CEO of Amazon, is that he's not afraid to do new things. For instance, I'll give you an example. The Amazon Web Services re-invent their annual conference grew to being thousands and thousands of people. And they would have a traditional after party. They called a replay, they'd have a band like every tech conference and their conference became so big that essentially, it was like setting up a live concert. So they were spending millions of dollars to set up basically a one night concert and they'd bring in great, great artists. So he said, hey, what's been all this cash? Why don't we just have a festival? So they did a thing called Intersect. They got LA involved from creatives and they basically built a weekend festival in the back end of re-invent. This was when real life was, before COVID and they turned into an opportunity because that's the way they think. They like to look at the resources, hey, we're already all in on this, why don't we just keep it for the weekend and charge some tickets and have a good time. He's not afraid to take chances on the product side. He'll go in and take a chance on a new market. That comes from directly from Bezos. They try stuff. They don't mind failing but they put a tight leash on measurement. They work backwards from the customer and they are not afraid to take chances. So, that's going to board well for him as he tries to figure out how Amazon navigates the contention on the political side when they get challenged for their dominance. And I think he's going to have to apply that pragmatic experimentation to new business models. >> So John I want you to take on AWS. I mean, despite the large numbers, I talked about 30% growth, Azure is growing at over 50% a year, GCP at 83%. So despite the large numbers and big growth the growth rates are slowing. Everybody knows that, we've reported it extensively. So the incoming CEO of Amazon Web Services has a TAM expansion challenge. And at some point they've got to decide, okay, how do we keep this growth engine? So, do you have any thoughts as to who might be the next CEO and what are some of their challenges as you see it? >> Well, Amazon is a real product centric company. So it's going to be very interesting to see who they go with here. Obviously they've been grooming a lot of people. There's been some turnover. You had some really strong executives recently leave, Jeff Wilkes, who was the CEO of the retail business. He retired a couple of months ago, formerly announced I think recently, he was probably in line. You had Mike Clayville, is now the chief revenue officer of Stripe. He ran all commercial business, Teresa Carlson stepped up to his role as well as running public sector. Again, she got more power. You have Matt Garman who ran the EC2 business, Stanford grad, great guy, super strong on the product side. He's now running all commercial sales and marketing. And he's also on the, was on Bezos' S team, that's the executive kind of team. Peter DeSantis is also on that S team. He runs all infrastructure. He took over for James Hamilton, who was the genius behind all the data center work that they've done and all the chip design stuff that they've innovated on. So there's so much technical innovation going on. I think you still going to see a leadership probably come from, I would say Matt Garman, in my opinion is the lead dog at this point, he's the lead horse. You could have an outside person come in depending upon how, who might be available. And that would probably come from an Andy Jassy network because he's a real fierce competitor but he's also a loyalist and he likes trust. So if someone comes in from the outside, it's going to be someone maybe he trusts. And then the other wildcards are like Teresa Carlson. Like I said, she is a great woman in tech who's done amazing work. I've profiled her many times. We've interviewed her many times. She took that public sector business with Amazon and changed the game completely. Outside the Jedi contract, she was in competitive for, had the big Trump showdown with the Jedi, with the department of defense. Had the CIA cloud. Amazon set the standard on public sector and that's directly the result of Teresa Carlson. But she's in the field, she's not a product person, she's kind of running that group. So Amazon has that product field kind of structure. So we'll see how they handle that. But those are the top three I think are going to be in line. >> So the obvious question that people always ask and it is a big change like this is, okay, in this case, what is Jassy going to bring in? And what's going to change? Maybe the flip side question is somewhat more interesting. What's not going to change in your view? Jassy has been there since nearly the beginning. What are some of the fundamental tenets that he's, that are fossilized, that won't change, do you think? >> I think he's, I think what's not going to change is Amazon, is going to continue to grow and develop their platform business and enable more SaaS players. That's a little bit different than what Microsoft's doing. They're more SaaS oriented, Office 365 is becoming their biggest application in terms of revenue on Microsoft side. So Amazon is going to still have to compete and enable more ecosystem partners. I think what's not going to change is that Bezos is still going to be in charge because executive chairman is just a code word for "not an active CEO." So in the corporate governance world when you have an executive chairman, that's essentially the person still in charge. And so he'll be in charge, will still be the boss of Andy Jassy and Jassy will be running all of Amazon. So I think that's going to be a little bit the same, but Jassy is going to be more in charge. I think you'll see a team change over, whether you're going to see some new management come in, Andy's management team will expand, I think Amazon will stay the same, Amazon Web Services. >> So John, last night, I was just making some notes about notable transitions in the history of the tech business, Gerstner to Palmisano, Gates to Ballmer, and then Ballmer to Nadella. One that you were close to, David Packard to John Young and then John Young to Lew Platt at the old company. Ellison to Safra and Mark, Jobs to Cook. We talked about Larry Page to Sundar Pichai. So how do you see this? And you've talked to, I remember when you interviewed John Chambers, he said, there is no rite of passage, East coast mini-computer companies, Edson de Castro, Ken Olsen, An Wang. These were executives who wouldn't let go. So it's of interesting to juxtapose that with the modern day executive. How do you see this fitting in to some of those epic transitions that I just mentioned? >> I think a lot of people are surprised at Jeff Bezos', even stepping down. I think he's just been such the face of Amazon. I think some of the poll numbers that people are doing on Twitter, people don't think it's going to make a big difference because he's kind of been that, leader hand on the wheel, but it's been its own ship now, kind of. And so depending on who's at the helm, it will be different. I think the Amazon choice of Andy wasn't obvious. And I think a lot of people were asking the question who was Andy Jassy and that's why we're doing this. And we're going to be doing more features on the Andy Jassy. We got a tons, tons of content that we've we've had shipped, original content with them. We'll share more of those key soundbites and who he is. I think a lot of people scratching their head like, why Andy Jassy? It's not obvious to the outsiders who don't know cloud computing. If you're in the competing business, in the digital transformation side, everyone knows about Amazon Web Services. Has been the most successful company, in my opinion, since I could remember at many levels just the way they've completely dominated the business and how they change others to be dominant. So, I mean, they've made Microsoft change, it made Google change and even then he's a leader that accepts conversations. Other companies, their CEOs hide behind their PR wall and they don't talk to people. They won't come on Clubhouse. They won't talk to the press. They hide behind their PR and they feed them, the media. Jassy is not afraid to talk to reporters. He's not afraid to talk to people, but he doesn't like people who don't know what they're talking about. So he doesn't suffer fools. So, you got to have your shit together to talk to Jassy. That's really the way it is. And that's, and he'll give you mind share, like he'll answer any question except for the ones that are too tough for him to answer. Like, are you, is facial recognition bad or good? Are you going to spin out AWS? I mean these are the hard questions and he's got a great team. He's got Jay Carney, former Obama press secretary working for him. He's been a great leader. So I'm really bullish on, is a good choice. >> We're going to jump into the Clubhouse here and open it up shortly. John, the last question for you is competition. Amazon as a company and even Jassy specifically I always talk about how they don't really focus on the competition, they focus on the customer but we know that just observing these folks Bezos is very competitive individual. Jassy, I mean, you know him better than I, very competitive individual. So, and he's, Jassy has been known to call out Oracle. Of course it was in response to Larry Ellison's jabs at Amazon regarding database. But, but how do you see that? Do you see that changing at all? I mean, will Amazon get more publicly competitive or they stick to their knitting, you think? >> You know this is going to sound kind of a weird analogy. And I know there's a lot of hero worshiping on Elon Musk but Elon Musk and Andy Jassy have a lot of similarities in the sense of their brilliance. They got both a brilliant people, different kinds of backgrounds. Obviously, they're running different things. They both are builders, right? If you were listening to Elon Musk on Clubhouse the other night, what was really striking was not only the magic of how it was all orchestrated and what he did and how he interviewed Robin Hood. He basically is about building stuff. And he was asked questions like, what advice do you give startups? He's like, if you need advice you shouldn't be doing startups. That's the kind of mentality that Jassy has, which is, it's not easy. It's not for the faint of heart, but Elon Musk is a builder. Jassy builds, he likes to build stuff, right? And so you look at all the things that he's done with AWS, it's been about enabling people to be successful with the tools that they need, adding more services, creating things that are lower price point. If you're an entrepreneur and you're over the age of 30, you know about AWS because you know what, it's cheaper to start a business on Amazon Web Services than buying servers and everyone knows that. If you're under the age of 25, you might not know 50 grand to a hundred thousand just to start something. Today you get your credit card down, you're up and running and you can get Clubhouses up and running all day long. So the next Clubhouse will be on Amazon or a cloud technology. And that's because of Andy Jassy right? So this is a significant executive and he continue, will bring that mindset of building. So, I think the digital transformation, we're in the digital engine club, we're going to see a complete revolution of a new generation. And I think having a new leader like Andy Jassy will enable in my opinion next generation talent, whether that's media and technology convergence, media technology and art convergence and the fact that he digs music, he digs sports, he digs tech, he digs media, it's going to be very interesting to see, I think he's well-poised to be, and he's soft-spoken, he doesn't want the glamorous press. He doesn't want the puff pieces. He just wants to do what he does and he puts his game do the talking. >> Talking about advice at startups. Just a quick aside. I remember, John, you and I when we were interviewing Scott McNealy former CEO of Sun Microsystems. And you asked him advice for startups. He said, move out of California. It's kind of tongue in cheek. I heard this morning that there's a proposal to tax the multi-billionaires of 1% annually not just the one-time tax. And so Jeff Bezos of course, has a ranch in Texas, no tax there, but places all over. >> You see I don't know. >> But I don't see Amazon leaving Seattle anytime soon, nor Jassy. >> Jeremiah Owyang did a Clubhouse on California. And the basic sentiment is that, it's California is not going away. I mean, come on. People got to just get real. I think it's a fad. Yeah. This has benefits with remote working, no doubt, but people will stay here in California, the network affects beautiful. I think Silicon Valley is going to continue to be relevant. It's just going to syndicate differently. And I think other hubs like Seattle and around the world will be integrated through remote work and I think it's going to be much more of a democratizing effect, not a win lose. So that to me is a huge shift. And look at Amazon, look at Amazon and Microsoft. It's the cloud cities, so people call Seattle. You've got Google down here and they're making waves but still, all good stuff. >> Well John, thanks so much. Let's let's wrap and let's jump into the Clubhouse and hear from others. Thanks so much for coming on, back on theCUBE. And many times we, you and I've done this really. It was a pleasure having you. Thanks for your perspectives. And thank you for watching everybody, this is Dave Vellante for theCUBE. We'll see you next time. (soft ambient music)

>>Yeah, yeah, hello again and welcome to our last session of the day before we head to the meat. The experts roundtables how T Mobile is building a data driven organization with thought spot and whip prone. Today we'll hear how T Mobile is leaving Excel hell by enabling all employees with self service analytics so they can get instant answers on curated data. We're lucky to be closing off the day with these two speakers. Evo Benzema, manager of business intelligence services at T Mobile Netherlands, and Sanjeev Chowed Hurry, lead architect AT T Mobile, Netherlands, from Whip Chrome. Thank you both very much for being with us today, for today's session will cover how mobile telco markets have specific dynamics and what it waas that T Mobile was facing. We'll also go over the Fox spot and whip pro solution and how they address T mobile challenges. Lastly, but not least, of course, we'll cover Team Mobil's experience and learnings and takeaways that you can use in your business without further ado Evo, take us away. >>Thank you very much. Well, let's first talk a little bit about T Mobile, Netherlands. We are part off the larger deutsche Telekom Group that ISS operating in Europe and the US We are the second largest mobile phone company in the Netherlands, and we offer the full suite awful services that you expect mobile landline in A in an interactive TV. And of course, Broadbent. Um so this is what the Mobile is appreciation at at the moment, a little bit about myself. I'm already 11 years at T Mobile, which is we part being part of the furniture. In the meantime, I started out at the front line service desk employee, and that's essentially first time I came into a touch with data, and what I found is that I did not have any possibility of myself to track my performance. Eso I build something myself and here I saw that this need was there because really quickly, roughly 2020 off my employer colleagues were using us as well. This was a little bit where my efficient came from that people need to have access to data across the organization. Um, currently, after 11 years running the BR Services Department on, I'm driving this transformation now to create a data driven organization with a heavy customer focus. Our big goal. Our vision is that within two years, 8% of all our employees use data on a day to day basis to make their decisions and to improve their decision. So over, tuition Chief. Now, thank >>you. Uh, something about the proof. So we prize a global I T and business process consulting and delivery company. Uh, we have a comprehensive portfolio of services with presents, but in 61 countries and maybe 1000 plus customers. As we're speaking with Donald, keep customers Region Point of view. We primary look to help our customers in reinventing the business models with digital first approach. That's how we look at our our customers toe move to digitalization as much as possible as early as possible. Talking about myself. Oh, I have little over two decades of experience in the intelligence and tell cope landscape. Calico Industries. I have worked with most of the telcos totally of in us in India and in Europe is well now I have well known cream feed on brownfield implementation off their house on big it up platforms. At present, I'm actively working with seminal data transform initiative mentioned by evil, and we are actively participating in defining the logical and physical footprint for future architectures for criminal. I understand we are also, in addition, taking care off and two and ownership off off projects, deliveries on operations, back to you >>so a little bit over about the general telco market dynamics. It's very saturated market. Everybody has mobile phones already. It's the growth is mostly gone, and what you see is that we have a lot of trouble around customer brand loyalty. People switch around from provider to provider quite easily, and new customers are quite expensive. So our focus is always to make customer loyal and to keep them in the company. And this is where the opportunities are as well. If we increase the retention of customers or reduce what we say turned. This is where the big potential is for around to use of data, and we should not do this by only offering this to the C suite or the directors or the mark managers data. But this needs to be happening toe all employees so that they can use this to really help these customers and and services customers is situated. This that we can create his loyalty and then This is where data comes in as a big opportunity going forward. Yeah. So what are these challenges, though? What we're facing two uses the data. And this is, uh, these air massive over our big. At least let's put it like that is we have a lot of data. We create around four billion new record today in our current platforms. The problem is not everybody can use or access this data. You need quite some technical expertise to add it, or they are pre calculated into mawr aggregated dashboard. So if you have a specific question, uh, somebody on the it side on the buy side should have already prepared something so that you can get this answer. So we have a huge back lock off questions and data answers that currently we cannot answer on. People are limited because they need technical expertise to use this data. These are the challenges we're trying to solve going forward. >>Uh, so the challenge we see in the current landscape is T mobile as a civil mentioned number two telco in Europe and then actually in Netherlands. And then we have a lot of acquisitions coming in tow of the landscape. So overall complexity off technical stack increases year by year and acquisition by acquisition it put this way. So we at this time we're talking about Claudia Irureta in for Matic Uh, aws and many other a complex silo systems. We actually are integrated where we see multiple. In some cases, the data silos are also duplicated. So the challenge here is how do we look into this data? How do we present this data to business and still ensure that Ah, mhm Kelsey of the data is reliable. So in this project, what we looked at is we curated that around 10% off the data of us and made it ready for business to look at too hot spot. And this also basically help us not looking at the A larger part of the data all together in one shot. What's is going to step by step with manageable set of data, obviously manages the time also and get control on cost has. >>So what did we actually do and how we did? Did we do it? And what are we going to do going forward? Why did we chose to spot and what are we measuring to see if we're successful is is very simply, Some stuff I already alluded to is usual adoption. This needs to be a tool that is useable by everybody. Eso This is adoption. The user experience is a major key to to focus on at the beginning. Uh, but lastly, and this is just also cold hard. Fact is, it needs to save time. It needs to be faster. It needs to be smarter than the way we used to do it. So we focused first on setting up the environment with our most used and known data set within the company. The data set that is used already on the daily basis by a large group. We know what it's how it works. We know how it acts on this is what we decided to make available fire talksport this cut down the time around, uh, data modeling a lot because we had this already done so we could go right away into training users to start using this data, and this is already going on very successfully. We have now 40 heavily engaged users. We go went life less than a month ago, and we see very successful feedback on user experience. We had either yesterday, even a beautiful example off loading a new data set and and giving access to user that did not have a training for talk sport or did not know what thoughts, what Waas. And we didn't in our he was actively using this data set by building its own pin boards and asking questions already. And this shows a little bit the speed off delivery we can have with this without, um, much investments on data modeling, because that's part was already done. So our second stage is a little bit more ambitious, and this is making sure that all this information, all our information, is available for frontline uh, employees. So a customer service but also chills employees that they can have data specifically for them that make them their life easier. So this is performance KP ice. But it could also be the beautiful word that everybody always uses customer Terry, 60 fuse. But this is giving the power off, asking questions and getting answers quickly to everybody in the company. That's the big stage two after that, and this is going forward a little bit further in the future and we are not completely there yet, is we also want Thio. Really? After we set up the government's properly give the power to add your own data to our curated data sets that that's when you've talked about. And then with that, we really hope that Oh, our ambition and our plan is to bring this really to more than 800 users on a daily basis to for uses on a daily basis across our company. So this is not for only marketing or only technology or only one segment. This is really an application that we want to set in our into system that works for everybody. And this is our ambition that we will work through in these three, uh, steps. So what did we learn so far? And and Sanjeev, please out here as well, But one I already said, this is no which, which data set you start. This is something. Start with something. You know, start with something that has a wide appeal to more than one use case and make sure that you make this decision. Don't ask somebody else. You know what your company needs? The best you should be in the driver seat off this decision. And this is I would be saying really the big one because this will enable you to kickstart this really quickly going forward. Um, second, wellness and this is why we introduce are also here together is don't do this alone. Do this together with, uh I t do this together with security. Do this together with business to tackle all these little things that you don't think about yourself. Maybe security, governance, network connections and stuff like that. Make sure that you do this as a company and don't try to do this on your own, because there's also again it's removes. Is so much obstacles going forward? Um, lastly, I want to mention is make sure that you measure your success and this is people in the data domain sometimes forget to measure themselves. Way can make sure everybody else, but we forget ourselves. But really try to figure out what makes its successful for you. And we use adoption percentages, usual experience, surveys and and really calculations about time saved. We have some rough calculations that we can calculate changes thio monetary value, and this will save us millions in years. by just automating time that is now used on, uh, now to taken by people on manual work. So, do you have any to adhere? A swell You, Susan, You? >>Yeah. So I'll just pick on what you want to mention about. Partner goes live with I t and other functions. But that is a very keating, because from my point of view, you see if you can see that the data very nice and data quality is also very clear. If we have data preparing at the right level, ready to be consumed, and data quality is taken, care off this feel 30 less challenges. Uh, when the user comes and questioned the gator, those are the things which has traded Quiz it we should be sure about before we expose the data to the Children. When you're confident about your data, you are confident that the user will also get the right numbers they're looking for and the number they have. Their mind matches with what they see on the screen. And that's where you see there. >>Yeah, and that that that again helps that adoption, and that makes it so powerful. So I fully agree. >>Thank you. Eva and Sanjeev. This is the picture perfect example of how a thought spot can get up and running, even in a large, complex organization like T Mobile and Sanjay. Thank you for sharing your experience on how whip rose system integration expertise paved the way for Evo and team to realize value quickly. Alright, everyone's favorite part. Let's get to some questions. Evil will start with you. How have your skill? Data experts reacted to thought spot Is it Onley non technical people that seem to be using the tool or is it broader than that? You may be on. >>Yes, of course, that happens in the digital environment. Now this. This is an interesting question because I was a little bit afraid off the direction off our data experts and are technically skilled people that know how to work in our fight and sequel on all these things. But here I saw a lot of enthusiasm for the tool itself and and from two sides, either to use it themselves because they see it's a very easy way Thio get to data themselves, but also especially that they see this as a benefit, that it frees them up from? Well, let's say mundane questions they get every day. And and this is especially I got pleasantly surprised with their reaction on that. And I think maybe you can also say something. How? That on the i t site that was experienced. >>Well, uh, yeah, from park department of you, As you mentioned, it is changing the way business is looking at. The data, if you ask me, have taken out talkto data rather than looking at it. Uh, it is making the interactivity that that's a keyword. But I see that the gap between the technical and function folks is also diminishing, if I may say so over a period of time, because the technical folks now would be able to work with functional teams on the depth and coverage of the data, rather than making it available and looking at the technical side off it. So now they can have a a fair discussion with the functional teams on. Okay, these are refute. Other things you can look at because I know this data is available can make it usable for you, especially the time it takes for the I t. G. When graduate dashboard, Uh, that time can we utilize toe improve the quality and reliability of the data? That's yeah. See the value coming. So if you ask me to me, I see the technical people moving towards more of a technical functional role. Tools such as >>That's great. I love that saying now we can talk to data instead of just looking at it. Um Alright, Evo, I think that will finish up with one last question for you that I think you probably could speak. Thio. Given your experience, we've seen that some organizations worry about providing access to data for everyone. How do you make sure that everyone gets the same answer? >>Yes. The big data Girlfriends question thesis What I like so much about that the platform is completely online. Everything it happens online and everything is terrible. Which means, uh, in the good old days, people will do something on their laptop. Beirut at a logic to it, they were aggregated and then they put it in a power point and they will share it. But nobody knew how this happened because it all happened offline. With this approach, everything is transparent. I'm a big I love the word transparency in this. Everything is available for everybody. So you will not have a discussion anymore. About how did you get to this number or how did you get to this? So the question off getting two different answers to the same question is removed because everything happens. Transparency, online, transparent, online. And this is what I think, actually, make that question moot. Asl Long as you don't start exporting this to an offline environment to do your own thing, you are completely controlling, complete transparent. And this is why I love to share options, for example and on this is something I would really keep focusing on. Keep it online, keep it visible, keep it traceable. And there, actually, this problem then stops existing. >>Thank you, Evelyn. Cindy, That was awesome. And thank you to >>all of our presenters. I appreciate your time so much. I hope all of you at home enjoyed that as much as I did. I know a lot of you did. I was watching the chat. You know who you are. I don't think that I'm just a little bit in awe and completely inspired by where we are from a technological perspective, even outside of thoughts about it feels like we're finally at a time where we can capitalize on the promise that cloud and big data made to us so long ago. I loved getting to see Anna and James describe how you can maximize the investment both in time and money that you've already made by moving your data into a performance cloud data warehouse. It was cool to see that doubled down on with the session, with AWS seeing a direct query on Red Shift. And even with something that's has so much scale like TV shows and genres combining all of that being able to search right there Evo in Sanjiv Wow. I mean being able to combine all of those different analytics tools being able to free up these analysts who could do much more important and impactful work than just making dashboards and giving self service analytics to so many different employees. That's incredible. And then, of course, from our experts on the panel, I just think it's so fascinating to see how experts that came from industries like finance or consulting, where they saw the imperative that you needed to move to thes third party data sets enriching and organizations data. So thank you to everyone. It was fascinating. I appreciate everybody at home joining us to We're not quite done yet. Though. I'm happy to say that we after this have the product roadmap session and that we are also then going to move into hearing and being able to ask directly our speakers today and meet the expert session. So please join us for that. We'll see you there. Thank you so much again. It was really a pleasure having you.

>>from around the globe. It's the Cube with digital coverage of AWS Public Sector online brought to you by Amazon Web services. Oven Welcome back to the cubes. Virtual coverage of Amazon Web services. Eight. Of his public sector summit online. We couldn't be there in person, but we're doing remote interviews. I'm John Curry. Your host of the Cube got a great segment from Asia Pacific on the other side of the world from California about social impact, transforming, teaching and learning with cloud technology. Got three great guests. You go. Richard is the CEO and co founder of Guys Tech and Jean Te'o, CEO and founder of Solve Education Founders and CEOs of startups is great. This is squad was the AIPAC regional head. Education, health care, not for profit and research. Ray Ws, he head start big program Vincent. Thanks for coming on, Janine. And you go Thank you for joining. >>Thanks for having us, John. >>We're not there in person. We're doing remote interviews. I'm really glad to have this topic because now more than ever, social change is happening. Um, this next generation eyes building software and applications to solve big problems. And it's not like yesterday's problems there. Today's problems and learning and mentoring and starting companies are all happening virtually digitally and also in person. So the world's changing. So, um, I gotta ask you, Vincent, we'll start with you and Amazon. Honestly, big started builder culture. You got two great founders here. CEO is doing some great stuff. Tell us a little bit what's going on. A pack, >>A lot of >>activity. I mean, reinvent and some it's out. There are really popular. Give us an update on what's happening. >>Thank you. Thank you for the question, John. I think it's extremely exciting, especially in today's context, that we are seeing so much activities, especially in the education technology sector. One of the challenges that we saw from our education technology customers is that they are always looking for help and support in many off the innovation that they're trying to develop the second area off observation that we had waas, that they are always alone with very limited resources, and they usually do not know where to look for in terms, off support and in terms off who they can reach out to. From a community standpoint, that is actually how we started and developed this program called A W s. At START. It is a program specifically for education technology companies that are targeting delivering innovative education solutions for the education sector. And we bring specific benefits to these education technology companies when they join the program. Aws ed start. Yeah, three specific areas. First one is that we support them with technical support, which is really, really key trying to help them navigate in the various ranges off A W S services that allows them to develop innovative services. The second area is leaking them and building a community off like minded education technology founders and linking them also to investors and VCs and lastly, off course, in supporting innovation. We support them with a bit off AWS cop credits promotional credits for them so that they can go on experiment and develop innovations for their customers. >>That's great stuff. And I want to get into that program a little further because I think that's a great example of kind of benefits AWS provides actually free credits or no one is gonna turn away free credits. We'll take the free credits all the time all day long, but really it's about the innovation. Um, Jean, I want to get your thoughts. How would solve education? Born? What problems were you solving? What made you start this company and tell us your story? >>Thank you so much for the question. So, actually, my co founder was invited to speak at an African innovation forum a couple of years back on the topic that he was sharing with. How can Africa skip over the industrialization face and go direct to the knowledge economy? Onda, the discussion went towards in orderto have access to the knowledge economy, unique knowledge. And how do you get knowledge Well through education. So that's when everybody in the conference was a bit stuck right on the advice waas. In order to scale first, we need to figure out a way to not well, you know, engaging the government and schools and teachers, but not depend on them for the successful education initiated. So and that's was what pain walk away from the conference. And when we met in in Jakarta, we started talking about that also. So while I'm Singaporean, I worked in many developing countries on the problem that we're trying to solve this. It might be shocking to you, but UNESCO recently published over 600 million Children and you are not learning on. That is a big number globally right on out of all the SDG per se from U N. Education. And perhaps I'm biased because I'm a computer engineer. But I see that education is the only one that can be solved by transforming bites. But since the other stg is like, you know, poverty or hunger, right, actually require big amount of logistic coordination and so on. So we saw a very, um, interesting trend with mobile phones, particularly smartphones, becoming more and more ubiquitous. And with that, we saw a very, uh, interesting. Fortunately for us to disseminate education through about technology. So we in self education elevate people out of poverty, true, providing education and employment opportunities live urging on tech. And we our vision is to enable people to empower themselves. And what we do is that we do an open platform that provides everyone effected education. >>You could How about your company? What problem you're you saw And how did it all get started? Tell us your vision. >>Thanks, John. Well, look, it all started. We have a joke. One of the co founder, Matthew, had a has a child with severe learning disorder and dyslexia, and he made a joke one day about having another one of them that would support those those kids on Duh. I took the joke seriously, So we're starting sitting down and, you know, trying to figure out how we could make this happen. Um, so it turns out that the dyslexia is the most common learning disorder in the world, with an estimated 10 to 20% off the worldwide population with the disorder between context between 750 million, up to 1.5 billion individual. With that learning disorder on DSO, where we where we sort of try and tackle. The problem is that we've identified that there's two key things for Children with dyslexia. The first one is that knowing that it is dislikes. Yeah, many being assessed. And the second is so what? What do we do about it? And so given or expertise in data science and and I, we clearly saw, unfortunately off, sort of building something that could assess individual Children and adults with dyslexia. The big problem with the assessment is that it's very expensive. We've met parents in the U. S. Specifically who paid up to 6000 U. S. Dollars for for diagnosis within educational psychologist. On the other side, we have parents who wait 12 months before having a spot. Eso What we so clearly is that the observable symptom of dyslexia are reading and everyone has a smartphone and you're smart. Smartphone is actually really good to record your voice. Eso We started collecting order recording from Children and adults who have been diagnosed with dyslexia, and we then trying a model to recognize the likelihood of this lecture by analyzing audio recording. So in theory, it's like diagnosed dyslexic, helping other undiagnosed, dyslexic being being diagnosed. So we have now an algorithm that can take about 10 minutes, which require no priors. Training cost $20. Andi, anyone can use it. Thio assess someone's likelihood off dyslexia. >>You know, this is the kind of thing that really changes the game because you also have learning progressions that air nonlinear and different. You've got YouTube. You got videos, you have knowledge bases, you've got community. Vincent mentioned that Johnny and you mentioned, you know making the bits driver and changing technology. So Jeannine and Hugo, please take a minute to explain, Okay? You got the idea. You're kicking the tires. You're putting it together. Now you gotta actually start writing code >>for us. We know education technology is not you. Right? Um, education games about you. But before we even started, we look at what's available, and we quickly realize that the digital divide is very real. Most technology out there first are not designed for really low and devices and also not designed for people who do not have Internet at hope so way. So with just that assessment, we quickly realized we need toe do something about on board, but something that that that problem is one eyes just one part of the whole puzzle. There's two other very important things. One is advocacy. Can we prove that we can teach through mobile devices, And then the second thing is motivation it again. It's also really obvious, but and people might think that, you know, uh, marginalized communities are super motivated to learn. Well, I wouldn't say that they are not motivated, but just like all of us behavioral changes really hard right. I would love to work out every day, but, you know, I don't really get identity do that. So how do we, um, use technology to and, um, you know, to induce that behavioral change so that date, so that we can help support the motivation to learn. So those are the different things that we >>welcome? >>Yeah. And then the motivated community even more impactful because then once the flywheel gets going and it's powerful, Hugo, your reaction to you know, you got the idea you got, You got the vision you're starting to put. Take one step in front of the other. You got a W s. Take us through the progression, understand the startup. >>Yeah, sure. I mean, what Jane said is very likely Thio what we're trying to do. But for us, there's there's free key things that in order for us to be successful and help as much people as we can, that is free things. The first one is reliability. The second one is accessibility, and the other one is affordability. Eso the reliability means that we have been doing a lot of work in the scientific approach as to how we're going to make this work. And so we have. We have a couple of scientific publications on Do we have to collect data and, you know, sort of published this into I conferences and things like that. So make sure that we have scientific evidence behind us that that support us. And so what that means that we had Thio have a large amount of data >>on and >>put this to work right on the other side. The accessibility and affordability means that, Julian said. You know it needs to be on the cloud because if it's on the cloud, it's accessible for anyone with any device with an Internet connection, which is, you know, covering most of the globe, it's it's a good start on DSO the clock. The cloud obviously allow us to deliver the same experience in the same value to clients and and parent and teacher and allied health professionals around the world. Andi. That's why you know, it's it's been amazing to to be able to use the technology on the AI side as well. Obviously there is ah lot of benefit off being able to leverage the computational power off off the cloud to to make better, argue with them and better training. >>We're gonna come back to both of you on the I question. I think that's super important. Benson. I want to come back to you, though, because in Asia Pacific and that side of the world, um, you still have the old guard, the incumbents around education and learning. But there is great penetration with mobile and broadband. You have great trends as a tailwind for Amazon and these kinds of opportunity with Head Start. What trends are you seeing that are now favoring you? Because with co vid, you know the world is almost kind of like been a line in the sand is before covert and after co vid. There's more demand for learning and education and community now than ever before, not just for education, the geopolitical landscape, everything around the younger generation. There's, um, or channels more data, the more engagement. How >>are you >>looking at this? What's your vision of these trends? Can you share your thoughts on how that's impacting learning and teaching? >>So there are three things that I want to quickly touch on number one. I think government are beginning to recognize that they really need to change the way they approach solving social and economic problems. The pandemic has certainly calls into question that if you do not have a digital strategy, you can't You can find a better time, uh, to now develop and not just developed a digital strategy, but actually to put it in place. And so government are shifting very, very quickly into the cloud and adopting digital strategy and use digital strategy to address some of the key problems that they are facing. And they have to solve them in a very short period of time. Right? We will talk about speed, three agility off the cloud. That's why the cloud is so powerful for government to adult. The second thing is that we saw a lot of schools closed down across the world. UNESCO reported what 1.5 billion students out of schools. So how then do you continue teaching and learning when you don't have physical classroom open? And that's where education, technology companies and, you know, heroes like Janine's Company and others there's so many of them around our ableto come forward and offer their services and help schools go online run classrooms online continue to allow teaching and learning, you know, online and and this has really benefited the overall education system. The third thing that is happening is that I think tertiary education and maybe even catch off education model will have to change. And they recognize that, you know, again, it goes back to the digital strategy that they got to have a clear digital strategy. And the education technology companies like, what? Who we have here today, just the great partners that the education system need to look at to help them solve some of these problems and get toe addressing giving a solution very, very quickly. >>Well, I know you're being kind of polite to the old guard, but I'm not that polite. I'll just say it. There's some old technology out there and Jenny and you go, You're young enough not to know what I t means because you're born in the cloud. So that's good for you. I remember what I t is like. In fact, there's a There's a joke here in the United States that with everyone at home, the teachers have turned into the I T department, meaning they're helping the parents and the kids figure out how to go on mute and how toe configure a network adds just translation. If they're routers, don't work real problems. I mean, this was technology. Schools were operating with low tech zooms out there. You've got video conferencing, you've got all kinds of things. But now there's all that support that's involved. And so what's happening is it's highlighting the real problems of the institutional technology. So, Vincent, I'll start with you. Um, this is a big problem. So cloud solves that one. You guys have pretty much helped. I t do things that they don't want to do any more by automation. This >>is an >>opportunity not necessary. There's a problem today, but it's an opportunity tomorrow. You just quickly talk about how you see the cloud helping all this manual training and learning new tools. >>We are all now living in a cloud empowered economy. Whether we like it or not, we are touching and using services. There are powered by the cloud, and a lot of them are powered by the AWS cloud. But we don't know about it. A lot of people just don't know, right Whether you are watching Netflix, um Well, in the old days you're buying tickets and and booking hotels on Expedia or now you're actually playing games on epic entertainment, you know, playing fortnight and all those kind of games you're already using and a consumer off the cloud. And so one of the big ideas that we have is we really want to educate and create awareness off club computing for every single person. If it can be used for innovation and to bring about benefits to society, that is a common knowledge that everyone needs to happen. So the first big idea is want to make sure that everyone actually is educated on club literacy? The second thing is, for those who have not embarked on a clear cloud strategy, this is the time. Don't wait for for another pandemic toe happen because you wanna be ready. You want to be prepared for the unknown, which is what a lot of people are faced with, and you want to get ahead of the curve and so education training yourself, getting some learning done, and that's really very, very important as the next step to prepare yourself toe face the uncertainty and having programs like AWS EC start actually helps toe empower and catalyzed innovation in the education industry that our two founders have actually demonstrated. So back to you Join. >>Congratulations on the head. Start. We'll get into that real quickly. Uh, head start. But let's first get the born in the cloud generation, Janine. And you go, You guys were competing. You gotta get your APS out there. You gotta get your solutions. You're born in the cloud. You have to go compete with the existing solutions. How >>do you >>view that? What's your strategy? What's your mindset? Janine will start with you. >>So for us, way are very aware that we're solving a problem that has never been solved, right? If not, we wouldn't have so many people who are not learning. So So? So this is a very big problem. And being able to liberate on cloud technology means that we're able to just focus on what we do best. Right? How do we make sure that learning is sufficient and learning is, um, effective? And how do we keep people motivated and all those sorts of great things, um, leveraging on game mechanics, social network and incentives. And then while we do that on the outside way, can just put almost out solved everything to AWS cloud technology to help us not worry about that. And you were absolutely right. The pandemic actually woke up a lot of people and hands organizations like myself. We start to get queries from governments on brother, even big NGOs on, you know, because before cove it, we had to really do our best to convince them until our troops are dry and way, appreciate this opportunity and and also we want to help people realized that in order to buy, adopting either blended approach are a adopting technology means that you can do mass customization off learning as well. And that's what could what we could do to really push learning to the next level. So and there are a few other creative things that we've done with governments, for example, with the government off East Java on top of just using the education platform as it is andare education platform, which is education game Donald Civilization. Um, they have added in a module that teaches Cove it because, you know, there's health care system is really under a lot of strain there, right and adding this component in and the most popular um mitigate in that component is this This'll game called hopes or not? And it teaches people to identify what's fake news and what's real news. And that really went very popular and very well in that region off 25 million people. So tech became not only just boring school subjects, but it can be used to teach many different things. And following that project, we are working with the federal government off Indonesia to talk about anti something and even a very difficult topic, like sex education as well. >>Yeah, and the learning is nonlinear, horizontally scalable, its network graft so you can learn share about news. And this is contextual data is not just learning. It's everything is not like, you know, linear learning. It's a whole nother ballgame, Hugo. Um, your competitive strategy. You're out there now. You got the covert world. How are you competing? How is Amazon helping you? >>Absolutely. John, look, this is an interesting one, because the current competitors that we have, uh, educational psychologist, they're not a tech, So I wouldn't say that we're competing against a competitive per se. I would say that we're competing against the old way of doing things. The challenge for us is to, um, empower people to be comfortable. We've having a machine, you know, analyzing your kids or your recording and telling you if it's likely to be dislikes. Yeah, and in this concept, obviously, is very new. You know, we can see this in other industry with, you know, you have the app that stand Ford created to diagnose skin cancer by taking a photo of your skin. It's being done in different industry. Eso The biggest challenge for us is really about the old way of doing things. What's been really interesting for us is that, you know, education is lifelong, you know, you have a big part in school, but when you're an adult, you learn on Did you know we've been doing some very interesting work with the Justice Department where, you know, we look at inmate and you know, often when people go to jail, they have, you know, some literacy difficulty, and so we've been doing some very interesting working in this field. We're also doing some very interesting work with HR and company who want to understand their staff and put management in place so that every single person in the company are empowered to do their job and and and, you know, achieve success. So, you know, we're not competing against attack. And often when we talk to other ethnic company, we come before you know, we don't provide a learning solution. We provide a assessment solution on e assessment solution. So, really, John, what we're competing against is an old way of doing things. >>And that's exactly why clouds so successful. You change the economics, you're actually a net new benefit. And I think the cloud gives you speed and you're only challenges getting the word out because the economics air just game changing. Right, So that's how Amazon does so well, um, by the way, you could take all our recordings from the Cube, interviews all my interviews and let me know how ideo Okay, so, um, got all the got all the voice recordings from my interview. I'm sure the test will come back challenging. So take a look at that e. I wanna come back to you. But I wanna ask the two founders real quick for the folks watching. Okay on Dhere about Amazon. They know the history. They know the startups that started on Amazon that became unicorns that went public. I mean, just a long list of successes born in the cloud You get big pay when you're successful. Love that business model. But for the folks watching that were in the virtual garages, air in their houses, innovating and building out new ideas. What does Ed start mean for them? How does it work? Would you would recommend it on what are some of the learnings that you have from work with Head Start? >>But our relationship X s start is almost not like client supplier relationship. It's almost like business partners. So they not only help us with protect their providing the technology, but on top of that, they have their system architect to work with my tech team. And they have, you know, open technical hours for us to interact. And on top of that, they do many other things, like building a community where, you know, people like me and Google can meet and also other opportunities, like getting out the word out there. Right. As you know, all of their, uh, startups run on a very thin budget. So how do we not pour millions of dollars into getting out without there is another big benefit as well. So, um definitely very much recommend that start. And I think another big thing is this, right? Uh, what we know now that we have covert and we have demand coming from all over the place, including, like, even a lot of interest, Ally from the government off Gambia, you know? So how do we quickly deploy our technology right there? Or how do we deploy our technology from the the people who are demanding our solution in Nigeria? Right. With technology that is almost frameless. >>Yeah. The great enabling technology ecosystem to support you. And they got the region's too. So the region's do help. I love we call them Cube Region because we're on Amazon. We have our cloud, Hugo, um, and start your observations, experience and learnings from working with aws. >>Absolutely. Look, this is a lot to say, so I'll try and making sure for anyone, but but also for us on me personally, also as an individual and as a founder, it's really been a 365 sort of support. So like Johnny mentioned, there's the community where you can connect with existing entrepreneur you can connect with expert in different industry. You can ask technical expert and and have ah, you know office our every week. Like you said Jenny, with your tech team talking to cloud architect just to unlock any problem that you may have on day and you know, on the business side I would add something which for us has been really useful is the fact that when we when we've approached government being able to say that we have the support off AWS and that we work with them to establish data integrity, making sure everything is properly secured and all that sort of thing has been really helpful in terms off, moving forward with discussion with potential plant and and government as well. So there's also the business aspect side of things where when people see you, there's a perceived value that you know, your your entourage is smart people and and people who are capable of doing great things. So that's been also really >>helpful, you know, that's a great point. The APP SEC review process, as you do deals is a lot easier. When here on AWS. Vincent were a little bit over time with a great, great great panel here. Close us out. Share with us. What's next for you guys? You got a great startup ecosystem. You're doing some great work out there and education as well. Healthcare. Um, how's your world going on? Take a minute, Thio. Explain what's going on in your world, >>John, I'm part of the public sector Team Worldwide in AWS. We have very clear mission statements on by the first is you know, we want to bring about destructive innovation and the AWS Cloud is really the platform where so many off our techs, whether it's a text, healthtech golf text, all those who are developing solutions to help our governments and our education institutions or health care institutions to really be better at what they do, we want to bring about those disruptive innovations to the market as fast as possible. It's just an honor on a privilege for us to be working. And why is that important? It's because it's linked to our second mission, which is to really make the world a better place to really deliver. Heck, the kind of work that Hugo and Janina doing. You know, we cannot do it by ourselves. We need specialists and really people with brilliant ideas and think big vision to be able to carry out what they are doing. And so we're just honored and privileged to be part off their work And in delivering this impact to society, >>the expansion of AWS out in your area has been phenomenal growth. I've been saying to Teresa Carlson, Andy Jassy in the folks that aws for many, many years, that when you move fast with innovation, the public sector and the private partnerships come together. You're starting to see that blending. And you've got some great founders here, uh, making a social impact, transforming, teaching and learning. So congratulations, Janine and Hugo. Thank you for sharing your story on the Cube. Thanks for joining. >>Thank you. Thank >>you, John. >>I'm John Furry with the Cube. Virtual were remote. We're not in person this year because of the pandemic. You're watching a divest Public sector online summit. Thank you for watching

(upbeat music) >> Facilitator: From theCUBE studios in Palo Alto in Boston, connecting with other leaders all around the world. This is a CUBE conversation. >> Java is the world's most popular programming language. And it remains the leading application development platform. But what's the status of Java? What a customers doing? And very importantly, what is Oracle's and the community strategy with respect to Java? Welcome everybody to this Java power panel on theCUBE. I'm your host, Dave Vellante. Manish Gupta here, he's the Vice President of Global Marketing at Java for Oracle, Donald Smith is also on the panel, and he's the Senior Director of Product Management at Oracle and we're joined by David Floyd who is a CTO of Wikibon Research and has done a number of research activities on this very topic. Gentlemen, welcome to theCUBE, great to see you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Manish, I want to start with you. Can you help us understand really what dig into Oracle strategy with respect to Java. The technology, the licensing, the support. How has that evolved over time? Take us through that. >> Dave, with 51 billion JVMs deployed worldwide, Java has truly cemented its position as the language of innovation and the technology world. There's no question about that. In fact, I like to say it's really the language of empowerment. Given the the impact it has had numerous applications ranging from the Mars Rover to genomics and everything in between. As Oracle acquired sign over 10 years ago, it's really kept it front of mind, two aspects of what we want to do with the technology and the platform. The first one was to ensure there was broad accessibility to the technology and the platform for anybody that wanted to benefit from it. And the second one was to ensure that the ecosystem remained vibrant and thriving throughout. I managed to do both. And underpinning these two objectives were really three pillars of our strategy. The first one was around trust, ensuring that openness and transparency of the technology was as was before continued to be the case going forward. The second element of that within the trust pillar was to ensure that as enterprises invested in the technology that investment was protected, it was not, you invest and you lose over a period of time in a backward compatibility, interoperability, certifications, were all foundational to the platform itself to the features, to the innovation moving forward. And more recently as we have rethought to the support, the licensing and the overall structure of the pricing that we have ensured that ultimately the trust comes along in those dimensions as well. So the launch of the Java subscription came along with, pay as you go model, it's a transparent pricing structure and discuss structure published on the website. So you can go and see what it would cost for the desktop on servers or cloud deployment. So those were the things that made kind of the first pillar happen. The second one was Dunno innovation. Over the last 25 years, Java has stood the test of time. It has delivered the needs of today while preparing for the future. And that remains the case. It is not something that has sort of focused on the fat of the day and the hot thing for the day, but really more important that it is prepared to deal with the mission critical, massive scale deployments that can run for years, for decades, in some cases. And keeping that in mind, Oracle has continued to put more and more technology into the open source world with every release that comes out, you can see 80 plus percent of the contributions come from Oracle. So that's the second pillar around innovation. And the third piece of the strategy has been around predictability. Ensuring that Java, the technology and platform perform as advertised, and that goes into the feature releases, it goes into the release process, it goes into the fact that you were broadly within the open JDK environment for developing and executing the roadmap. From a CIO standpoint, it's important to know that the technology used to develop your applications has talent around. And your, if you're going to develop something like Java, you'll find the right Java engineers to do the job. That is not a question, right? And so that's part of predictability. And finally, again with the change in the six months release cadence that came about three years ago, with the release of Java 10, we've really made sure that it's not, no, a bunch of things come about. You don't know when they're going to be released, but you know, like clockwork, you'll have a new Java list every six months. And that's been the case every March and September, since Java 10, you've had a new release of Java with certain features that come up and we just launched Java 15. So trust innovation predictability, have really been the three pillars on which we've executed the strategy for Java. >> Excellent, thank you for that intro, and we're going to get into it now. I'm glad you mentioned the sun acquisition. I said at the time that Java was the linchpin of that acquisition, many people, of course, we looked at the integration piece with the hardware, but it was really Java and the capabilities that it brings. And of course, a lot of Oracle software written in Java and not the least of which is a fusion. But now let's get into the components of this. And I want to talk a little bit about the methodology of this and going to call on you David Floyer. But essentially my understanding is that Wikibon went through and David, you led this, you did a technical deep dive, which you always do, did a number of in depth interviews with Java customers. And then of course you also did a web survey and then you built from that data and economic model. So you can try to understand the sort of dimensions of the financials if you will. So what were your key findings there? >> So the key findings were that Java was in a good state that people were happy with the Java. The second key finding is that the business case itself for using the Oracle services, the subscription services was good. It didn't mean to say that that wasn't for every company, the right way to do it, but there was a very good return on that. And the third area was that there was a degree of confidence that the new way of doing things, the six-month cycle, as opposed to the three-year cycle was overall a benefit to the rate of change, the ability for them to introduce new features quickly. >> Okay, well, I mean, you know, and I read that research. And to me my takeaways where I saw the continued relevance of Java, which is kind of goes without saying, but a lot of times it gets lost in the headlines. That subscription piece is key. We're going to get into some of the economics as to how that affects customers and it saves you money. And the other piece was the roadmap becoming more transparent. And I don't want to dig into that a little bit, but before we do, let's get into that innovation component Manish, mentioned that several times, but Don, I want to go to you guys. We have a slide on the various components of the innovation. If you would bring this up and Don I wonder if you could talk to this and give us some examples if you would. >> Yeah, sure. So we were the number one development platform for the last 25 years. We want to be the number one development platform for the next 25 years. And in order to do that, we have to be constantly innovating and constantly innovating not only the business side in terms of the subscription and the support offerings and commercial features like Manish was talking about, but also the platform in general. And so the way we like to talk about innovation as we break it down by these pillars that you can see on the slide. And so the first pillar is continuous improvements to the language. So this is watching developers trying to write the same piece of code over and over again, and us asking, can we make you more efficient? Can we give you more language features that reduce the amount of boilerplate that you have to write? The second pillar is a project that we just announced a few months ago called Leyden. And the idea with Leyden is addressing the longterm pinpoints of Java slow startup time and time to peak performance. So if you go back 10 years ago, everybody knows about Java as an enterprise platform, Java EE application servers. They all had the notion of being very long lived. And so Java at that time would be optimized towards long lived applications, startup, and performance. Where if it took a little while to get there, it didn't matter as long as when it got there, it was super fast. And so we're trying to get that peak performance faster in the world of microservices. In a similar vein with project loom, we're looking at making concurrency simple again, looking at how developers are doing more reactive style programming and realizing that the threading model needs to be rethought from the ground up, that project is looking really, really good. Then we have project Panama. Project Panama is all about making it easier to connect Java with native libraries. Valhalla is all about improving, there's a couple of benefits, but it's all about improving memory density and being able to access and iterate and operate over primitive data types at super fast speeds by better optimizing how that information is stored in memory. And then the other pillar of the final pillar that we have been working on from an innovation perspective is ZGC. We introduced a new garbage collector technology a few years ago, G1GCE a generational garbage collector with the eye towards making garbage collection in Java pause lists. So if you, again, if you go back in time and look at the history of Java, memory management is awesome, but there's always that cost and risk of a garbage collection cycle, taking a bit of time away from a critical application. And ZGC is all about getting rid of that. So lots of innovation, lots of different pillars going on right now. >> Awesome, I'm impressed. There's something after Valhalla. I thought that was Nirvana. (laughing) But now, and these are all open source projects, right? And you guys obviously provide committers, there are other people in the open source world who provide that, is that correct Don? >> Yeah, that's correct. We have about 80% of the contributions in open JDK. We are the stewards of open JDK and lead the project. Most of the pillars I talked about here are you know Oracle folks working on that. >> Awesome. Okay, let's get into some of the data. David, I want to come back to you and talk about some of the survey results guys, if you bring up that next slide. Why David, why do people upgrade? What are the drivers? It's really talks to the large companies and what's different from the small company or mid-size companies? What are the takeaways here? >> David: Well, so this is interesting, and as you might expect, large enterprises, have very concerned about application stability. Whereas midsize or enterprises are much more concerned about the performance, making sure that the performance is good. They are both concerned about reliable performance and security, but it's interesting that from a regulation point of view, mid-size companies really want to make sure that they are obeying the regulations, that they are meeting those. Whereas larger organizations usually have their own security and regulation functions looking very hard at these things. So that looking less to the platform to provide those than their own people. >> Yeah, I think you're right. I think the midsize organizations don't have as many people running around taking care of security and it's harder for them to keep up with the edicts of the organization. So they want to stay more current. Don, I wonder if you can add anything to this data from an innovation standpoint. >> Yeah, well, and from a product management standpoint, and what we see here is when you look at just going from fortune 500 to global 2000, you see things that are important to one or less so than the other. You can extrapolate that all the way down to a small company or a startup. And that's why providing the most flexibility in terms of an offering to allow people to decide what, when, where, and how they would be going to upgrade their software so they can do it when they want, and on their own terms. You can see that that becomes really important. And also making sure that we're providing innovation in a broad way so that it'll appeal both to the enterprise and again extrapolating that forward down to even very small startups. >> You know, David, the other thing that struck me in the data, if we bring up that other piece is the upgrade strategy, and there was a stark difference between large enterprises and midsize organizations. Talk to this data, if you would. >> Yes, this is again, a pretty stark difference between them. When you're looking at large enterprises, they really wants stability and they don't want to upgrade so often. Whereas mid-size enterprises, are much more willing to both upgrade on a regular cadence and really have a much more up-to-date, or have always have the latest software. They're driving smaller applications, but they're much more agile about their approach to it. Again, emphasizing what Don was saying about the smaller enterprises wanting a different strategy and a different way of doing things than large enterprises. >> So Manish this says to me that you got it right from a strategy standpoint. I mean, any color you can add here. >> Yeah, it's very intuitive that whether you're a large organization, a mid-sized enterprise or a small business, right? You face competitive pressures, your dynamics are unique. What you're able to do with the resources, what you desire to do at the pace that is appropriate for your environment, are really unique to you, and to try to force one model across any one size or across any set of dynamics is just not appropriate. So we've always felt that giving the enterprises and the organization, the ability to move at the pace of their business is the right approach. And so when we designed the Oracle Java SE subscription, we truly have that front and center in our thought process. And that structure seems to be working well. >> David, what I like about the way you do research is you actually build an economic model. A lot of these business value projects. I know this well, having been in the business a long time, they'll go out to ask the customer what they got, and then the customer said, "Well, I got a 111% ROI, and boom, that's what it is. You actually construct an economic model, you bring in rules of thumb, it allows you to do what ifs you can test that model and calibrate it against the real world. So I commend you on that. You've done a lot of hard work there, but bottom line at forests, I mean, let's bring up the economics. I mean, that's what people ultimately want to know. Does this save me money? What's the bottom line here? >> Yeah. Yes, that's a very important question. And the way we go about it is to ask the questions so that we can extract from those questions, how much effort it took, for example, to upgrade things, how much effort it took for important applications and not so important applications. So we have a very detailed model driven by the survey itself and in the back of the research, I'm a great believer that you should be able to follow exactly what the research said, what the survey said and how it was applied to the model. So, and what were you focused on was, what was the return of using the Java subscription service or taking an upgrade every six months? Those were the two ways that we looked at it. And for large enterprises, the four-year costs for the enterprise was $11 million, but for taking the additional subscription service, and this was well well covered, the payback is within a year, well covered by the lower costs of managing in a lot of systems and environment. And we found a very similar result on those midsize services. There, it was 3 million, and again, they got that back the year in terms of payback. So, but that's one alternative. There is another alternative that may be worthwhile the extra money if you really want to be up-to-date and or if you want to drive a much more aggressive strategy for your organization. >> So these are huge numbers. I mean, he's talking about 30% savings on average for large and mid-sized enterprises in the percentage terms, but the absolute dollars are actually enormous. So, you know, large companies here, we're talking about $20 billion enterprises with 500 or more Java applications. And mid-size is, you're talking about a couple, two, $3 billion companies. Manish, what are you saying in the customer base in terms of the economics? >> Yeah, you know anytime an organization is looking at an offering and a solution, they want to make sure just giving them the value. And we all know that the priorities of businesses have, they want to focus on that. Managing the Java estate is important, but is it the thing where they want to invest the dollars? And if they are investing the dollars, are they getting the return? We find that if you can give the enterprises an ability where they can see the return, the cost is right for them. And if you can mirror that and you can map it also with reduce risk, then you put the right formula. And with the subscription, they're able to not only see the cost savings that the model indicates clearly, but they're also able to reduce the risk in terms of security protection and other things. So it's a really, really good combination for the enterprises. >> Well, thank you, I wonder Manish, if you could bring us home here and just kind of summarize from your thoughts, everything you've heard today, what are the key takeaways? >> You know Java has been around for 25 years, and we certainly believe it's really positioned well for what's required today. And perhaps more importantly, what is needed for the next decade and for the next 25 years. Having now served thousands of customers with the Java subscription, it's clear that it is meeting the needs of fortune 10 organizations all the way down to a 5% development house, for example. What we're hearing from across the board is really Java has been the go to platform and it continues to be the go to platform for mission critical development and deployment. However, the complexity as the Java estate becomes large when you've got tens to hundreds, in some cases over a thousand applications running across the enterprise, that complexity can be daunting. And the Java subscription is really serving the needs in three ways. One, it's getting them the best of class support from Oracle, which is a steward of Java, the company that is generating over 80% of innovation with every single release. The second thing they're getting the business flexibility. So they can move at the pace that works for them. And therapies is as a business model as indicated that they're getting it at a lower cost while having your list. So the combination of these things is the reason why we're seeing very high renewal rates, why we're seeing thousands of organization take it over. And I want to wrap it up by saying one final thing, that you can count on Oracle to be the transparent, to be the right steward or both technology innovation, as well as to ensuring the support for the vast ecosystem whether it's libraries, frameworks, user groups, educational services and so on. So Java is here, has been here for the enterprise, large and small, and it's ready for the next generation as well. >> Great, thank you for that. Well, one more question. What's the call to action? If I'm a mid-sized company or a large company, I've made investments in Java, what, what should I do next? >> I would say, take a look at the Oracle subscription. It will reduce your rates. It'll save you a cost and it'll give you a lower risk parameter for your organization. >> Great, nice and crisp, I like it. If you like, if you guys don't object, I'm going to give you my summary. I've been taking notes this whole time and so, we've explored two options. Customers can do it yourself or go with the subscription on a regular cadence. It's very clear to me that that Java remains relevant as we set up top. It's the world's most popular programming language we know about all that. The ecosystem is really moving fast. Of course, with the stewardship of Oracle cloud microservices, the development of, of modern applications. I think that the directional changes that Manish you guys and, and Don and Oracle have made were really the right call. The research that David you did, shows that it's serving customers better. It lowers costs, it's cutting down risk particularly for the mid-sized companies that maybe are, or don't have the security infrastructure and the talent to go chase those problems. And I love the roadmap piece. The more transparent roadmap really is going to give the industry and the community much more confidence to invest and move forward. So guys, thanks very much for coming on this CUBE Java power panel. It was great to have you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right, I thank you for watching everybody. This is Dave Vellante, for theCUBE, and we'll see you next time. (soft music)

(upbeat music) >> Facilitator: From theCUBE studios in Palo Alto in Boston, connecting with other leaders all around the world. This is a CUBE conversation. >> Java is the world's most popular programming language. And it remains the leading application development platform. But what's the status of Java? What a customers doing? And very importantly, what is Oracle's and the community strategy with respect to Java? Welcome everybody to this Java power panel on theCUBE. I'm your host, Dave Vellante. Manish Gupta here, he's the Vice President of Global Marketing at Java for Oracle, Donald Smith is also on the panel, and he's the Senior Director of Product Management at Oracle and we're joined by David Floyd who is a CTO of Wikibon Research and has done a number of research activities on this very topic. Gentlemen, welcome to theCUBE, great to see you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Manish, I want to start with you. Can you help us understand really what dig into Oracle strategy with respect to Java. The technology, the licensing, the support. How has that evolved over time? Take us through that. >> Dave, with 51 billion JVMs deployed worldwide, Java has truly cemented its position as the language of innovation and the technology world. There's no question about that. In fact, I like to say it's really the language of empowerment. Given the the impact it has had numerous applications ranging from the Mars Rover to genomics and everything in between. As Oracle acquired sign over 10 years ago, it's really kept it front of mind, two aspects of what we want to do with the technology and the platform. The first one was to ensure there was broad accessibility to the technology and the platform for anybody that wanted to benefit from it. And the second one was to ensure that the ecosystem remained vibrant and thriving throughout. I managed to do both. And underpinning these two objectives were really three pillars of our strategy. The first one was around trust, ensuring that openness and transparency of the technology was as was before continued to be the case going forward. The second element of that within the trust pillar was to ensure that as enterprises invested in the technology that investment was protected, it was not, you invest and you lose over a period of time in a backward compatibility, interoperability, certifications, were all foundational to the platform itself to the features, to the innovation moving forward. And more recently as we have rethought to the support, the licensing and the overall structure of the pricing that we have ensured that ultimately the trust comes along in those dimensions as well. So the launch of the Java subscription came along with, pay as you go model, it's a transparent pricing structure and discuss structure published on the website. So you can go and see what it would cost for the desktop on servers or cloud deployment. So those were the things that made kind of the first pillar happen. The second one was Dunno innovation. Over the last 25 years, Java has stood the test of time. It has delivered the needs of today while preparing for the future. And that remains the case. It is not something that has sort of focused on the fat of the day and the hot thing for the day, but really more important that it is prepared to deal with the mission critical, massive scale deployments that can run for years, for decades, in some cases. And keeping that in mind, Oracle has continued to put more and more technology into the open source world with every release that comes out, you can see 80 plus percent of the contributions come from Oracle. So that's the second pillar around innovation. And the third piece of the strategy has been around predictability. Ensuring that Java, the technology and platform perform as advertised, and that goes into the feature releases, it goes into the release process, it goes into the fact that you were broadly within the open JDK environment for developing and executing the roadmap. From a CIO standpoint, it's important to know that the technology used to develop your applications has talent around. And your, if you're going to develop something like Java, you'll find the right Java engineers to do the job. That is not a question, right? And so that's part of predictability. And finally, again with the change in the six months release cadence that came about three years ago, with the release of Java 10, we've really made sure that it's not, no, a bunch of things come about. You don't know when they're going to be released, but you know, like clockwork, you'll have a new Java list every six months. And that's been the case every March and September, since Java 10, you've had a new release of Java with certain features that come up and we just launched Java 15. So trust innovation predictability, have really been the three pillars on which we've executed the strategy for Java. >> Excellent, thank you for that intro, and we're going to get into it now. I'm glad you mentioned the sun acquisition. I said at the time that Java was the linchpin of that acquisition, many people, of course, we looked at the integration piece with the hardware, but it was really Java and the capabilities that it brings. And of course, a lot of Oracle software written in Java and not the least of which is a fusion. But now let's get into the components of this. And I want to talk a little bit about the methodology of this and going to call on you David Floria. But essentially my understanding is that Wikibon went through and David, you led this, you did a technical deep dive, which you always do, did a number of in depth interviews with Java customers. And then of course you also did a web survey and then you built from that data and economic model. So you can try to understand the sort of dimensions of the financials if you will. So what were your key findings there? >> So the key findings were that Java was in a good state that people were happy with the Java. The second key finding is that the business case itself for using the Oracle services, the subscription services was good. It didn't mean to say that that wasn't for every company, the right way to do it, but there was a very good return on that. And the third area was that there was a degree of confidence that the new way of doing things, the six-month cycle, as opposed to the three-year cycle was overall a benefit to the rate of change, the ability for them to introduce new features quickly. >> Okay, well, I mean, you know, and I read that research. And to me my takeaways where I saw the continued relevance of Java, which is kind of goes without saying, but a lot of times it gets lost in the headlines. That subscription piece is key. We're going to get into some of the economics as to how that affects customers and it saves you money. And the other piece was the roadmap becoming more transparent. And I don't want to dig into that a little bit, but before we do, let's get into that innovation component Manish, mentioned that several times, but Don, I want to go to you guys. We have a slide on the various components of the innovation. If you would bring this up and Don I wonder if you could talk to this and give us some examples if you would. >> Yeah, sure. So we were the number one development platform for the last 25 years. We want to be the number one development platform for the next 25 years. And in order to do that, we have to be constantly innovating and constantly innovating not only the business side in terms of the subscription and the support offerings and commercial features like Manish was talking about, but also the platform in general. And so the way we like to talk about innovation as we break it down by these pillars that you can see on the slide. And so the first pillar is continuous improvements to the language. So this is watching developers trying to write the same piece of code over and over again, and us asking, can we make you more efficient? Can we give you more language features that reduce the amount of boilerplate that you have to write? The second pillar is a project that we just announced a few months ago called Leyden. And the idea with Leyden is addressing the longterm pinpoints of Java slow startup time and time to peak performance. So if you go back 10 years ago, everybody knows about Java as an enterprise platform, Java EE application servers. They all had the notion of being very long lived. And so Java at that time would be optimized towards long lived applications, startup, and performance. Where if it took a little while to get there, it didn't matter as long as when it got there, it was super fast. And so we're trying to get that peak performance faster in the world of microservices. In a similar vein with project loom, we're looking at making concurrency simple again, looking at how developers are doing more reactive style programming and realizing that the threading model needs to be rethought from the ground up, that project is looking really, really good. Then we have project Panama. Project Panama is all about making it easier to connect Java with native libraries. Valhalla is all about improving, there's a couple of benefits, but it's all about improving memory density and being able to access and iterate and operate over primitive data types at super fast speeds by better optimizing how that information is stored in memory. And then the other pillar of the final pillar that we have been working on from an innovation perspective is ZGC. We introduced a new garbage collector technology a few years ago, G1GCE a generational garbage collector with the eye towards making garbage collection in Java pause lists. So if you, again, if you go back in time and look at the history of Java, memory management is awesome, but there's always that cost and risk of a garbage collection cycle, taking a bit of time away from a critical application. And ZGC is all about getting rid of that. So lots of innovation, lots of different pillars going on right now. >> Awesome, I'm impressed. There's something after Valhalla. I thought that was Nirvana. (laughing) But now, and these are all open source projects, right? And you guys obviously provide committers, there are other people in the open source world who provide that, is that correct Don? >> Yeah, that's correct. We have about 80% of the contributions in open JDK. We are the stewards of open JDK and lead the project. Most of the pillars I talked about here are you know Oracle folks working on that. >> Awesome. Okay, let's get into some of the data. David, I want to come back to you and talk about some of the survey results guys, if you bring up that next slide. Why David, why do people upgrade? What are the drivers? It's really talks to the large companies and what's different from the small company or mid-size companies? What are the takeaways here? >> David: Well, so this is interesting, and as you might expect, large enterprises, have very concerned about application stability. Whereas midsize or enterprises are much more concerned about the performance, making sure that the performance is good. They are both concerned about reliable performance and security, but it's interesting that from a regulation point of view, mid-size companies really want to make sure that they are obeying the regulations, that they are meeting those. Whereas larger organizations usually have their own security and regulation functions looking very hard at these things. So that looking less to the platform to provide those than their own people. >> Yeah, I think you're right. I think the midsize organizations don't have as many people running around taking care of security and it's harder for them to keep up with the edicts of the organization. So they want to stay more current. Don, I wonder if you can add anything to this data from an innovation standpoint. >> Yeah, well, and from a product management standpoint, and what we see here is when you look at just going from fortune 500 to global 2000, you see things that are important to one or less so than the other. You can extrapolate that all the way down to a small company or a startup. And that's why providing the most flexibility in terms of an offering to allow people to decide what, when, where, and how they would be going to upgrade their software so they can do it when they want, and on their own terms. You can see that that becomes really important. And also making sure that we're providing innovation in a broad way so that it'll appeal both to the enterprise and again extrapolating that forward down to even very small startups. >> You know, David, the other thing that struck me in the data, if we bring up that other piece is the upgrade strategy, and there was a stark difference between large enterprises and midsize organizations. Talk to this data, if you would. >> Yes, this is again, a pretty stark difference between them. When you're looking at large enterprises, they really wants stability and they don't want to upgrade so often. Whereas mid-size enterprises, are much more willing to both upgrade on a regular cadence and really have a much more up-to-date, or have always have the latest software. They're driving smaller applications, but they're much more agile about their approach to it. Again, emphasizing what Don was saying about the smaller enterprises wanting a different strategy and a different way of doing things than large enterprises. >> So Manish this says to me that you got it right from a strategy standpoint. I mean, any color you can add here. >> Yeah, it's very intuitive that whether you're a large organization, a mid-sized enterprise or a small business, right? You face competitive pressures, your dynamics are unique. What you're able to do with the resources, what you desire to do at the pace that is appropriate for your environment, are really unique to you, and to try to force one model across any one size or across any set of dynamics is just not appropriate. So we've always felt that giving the enterprises and the organization, the ability to move at the pace of their business is the right approach. And so when we designed the Oracle Java SE subscription, we truly have that front and center in our thought process. And that structure seems to be working well. >> David, what I like about the way you do research is you actually build an economic model. A lot of these business value projects. I know this well, having been in the business a long time, they'll go out to ask the customer what they got, and then the customer said, "Well, I got a 111% ROI, and boom, that's what it is. You actually construct an economic model, you bring in rules of thumb, it allows you to do what ifs you can test that model and calibrate it against the real world. So I commend you on that. You've done a lot of hard work there, but bottom line at forests, I mean, let's bring up the economics. I mean, that's what people ultimately want to know. Does this save me money? What's the bottom line here? >> Yeah. Yes, that's a very important question. And the way we go about it is to ask the questions so that we can extract from those questions, how much effort it took, for example, to upgrade things, how much effort it took for important applications and not so important applications. So we have a very detailed model driven by the survey itself and in the back of the research, I'm a great believer that you should be able to follow exactly what the research said, what the survey said and how it was applied to the model. So, and what were you focused on was, what was the return of using the Java subscription service or taking an upgrade every six months? Those were the two ways that we looked at it. And for large enterprises, the four-year costs for the enterprise was $11 million, but for taking the additional subscription service, and this was well well covered, the payback is within a year, well covered by the lower costs of managing in a lot of systems and environment. And we found a very similar result on those midsize services. There, it was 3 million, and again, they got that back the year in terms of payback. So, but that's one alternative. There is another alternative that may be worthwhile the extra money if you really want to be up-to-date and or if you want to drive a much more aggressive strategy for your organization. >> So these are huge numbers. I mean, he's talking about 30% savings on average for large and mid-sized enterprises in the percentage terms, but the absolute dollars are actually enormous. So, you know, large companies here, we're talking about $20 billion enterprises with 500 or more Java applications. And mid-size is, you're talking about a couple, two, $3 billion companies. Manish, what are you saying in the customer base in terms of the economics? >> Yeah, you know anytime an organization is looking at an offering and a solution, they want to make sure just giving them the value. And we all know that the priorities of businesses have, they want to focus on that. Managing the Java estate is important, but is it the thing where they want to invest the dollars? And if they are investing the dollars, are they getting the return? We find that if you can give the enterprises an ability where they can see the return, the cost is right for them. And if you can mirror that and you can map it also with reduce risk, then you put the right formula. And with the subscription, they're able to not only see the cost savings that the model indicates clearly, but they're also able to reduce the risk in terms of security protection and other things. So it's a really, really good combination for the enterprises. >> Well, thank you, I wonder Manish, if you could bring us home here and just kind of summarize from your thoughts, everything you've heard today, what are the key takeaways? >> You know Java has been around for 25 years, and we certainly believe it's really positioned well for what's required today. And perhaps more importantly, what is needed for the next decade and for the next 25 years. Having now served thousands of customers with the Java subscription, it's clear that it is meeting the needs of fortune 10 organizations all the way down to a 5% development house, for example. What we're hearing from across the board is really Java has been the go to platform and it continues to be the go to platform for mission critical development and deployment. However, the complexity as the Java estate becomes large when you've got tens to hundreds, in some cases over a thousand applications running across the enterprise, that complexity can be daunting. And the Java subscription is really serving the needs in three ways. One, it's getting them the best of class support from Oracle, which is a steward of Java, the company that is generating over 80% of innovation with every single release. The second thing they're getting the business flexibility. So they can move at the pace that works for them. And therapies is as a business model as indicated that they're getting it at a lower cost while having your list. So the combination of these things is the reason why we're seeing very high renewal rates, why we're seeing thousands of organization take it over. And I want to wrap it up by saying one final thing, that you can count on Oracle to be the transparent, to be the right steward or both technology innovation, as well as to ensuring the support for the vast ecosystem whether it's libraries, frameworks, user groups, educational services and so on. So Java is here, has been here for the enterprise, large and small, and it's ready for the next generation as well. >> Great, thank you for that. Well, one more question. What's the call to action? If I'm a mid-sized company or a large company, I've made investments in Java, what, what should I do next? >> I would say, take a look at the Oracle subscription. It will reduce your rates. It'll save you a cost and it'll give you a lower risk parameter for your organization. >> Great, nice and crisp, I like it. If you like, if you guys don't object, I'm going to give you my summary. I've been taking notes this whole time and so, we've explored two options. Customers can do it yourself or go with the subscription on a regular cadence. It's very clear to me that that Java remains relevant as we set up top. It's the world's most popular programming language we know about all that. The ecosystem is really moving fast. Of course, with the stewardship of Oracle cloud microservices, the development of, of modern applications. I think that the directional changes that Manish you guys and, and Don and Oracle have made were really the right call. The research that David you did, shows that it's serving customers better. It lowers costs, it's cutting down risk particularly for the mid-sized companies that maybe are, or don't have the security infrastructure and the talent to go chase those problems. And I love the roadmap piece. The more transparent roadmap really is going to give the industry and the community much more confidence to invest and move forward. So guys, thanks very much for coming on this CUBE Java power panel. It was great to have you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right, I thank you for watching everybody. This is Dave Vellante, for theCUBE, and we'll see you next time. (soft music)

(upbeat electronic music) >> Narrator: From theCUBE studios in Palo Alto and Boston, connecting with thought leaders all around the world, this is a CUBE conversation. >> Okay, hello everyone. I'm John Furrier with theCUBE. We're here with Meet the Analysts segment Sunday morning. We've got everyone around the world here to discuss a bit of the news around the EU killing the privacy deal, striking it down, among other topics around, you know, data privacy and global commerce. We got great guests here, Ray Wang, CEO of Constellation Research. Bill Mew, founder and CEO of Cyber Crisis Management from the Firm Crisis Team. And JD, CEO of Spearhead Management. JD, I can let you say your name because I really can't pronounce it. How do I (laughs) pronounce it, doctor? >> I wouldn't even try it unless you are Dutch, otherwise it will seriously hurt your throat. (Ray laughing) So, JD works perfect for me. >> Doctor Drooghaag. >> And Sarbjeet Johal, who's obviously an influencer, a cloud awesome native expert. Great, guys. Great to have you on, appreciate it, thanks for comin' on. And Bill, thank you for initiating this, I appreciate all your tweets. >> Happy Sunday. (Bill laughing) >> You guys have been really tweeting up a storm, I want to get everyone together, kind of as an analyst, Meet the Analyst segment. Let's go through with it. The news is the EU and U.S. Privacy Shield for data struck down by the court, that's the BBC headline. Variety of news, different perspectives, you've got an American perspective and you've got an international perspective. Bill, we'll start with you. What does this news mean? I mean, basically half the people in the world probably don't know what the Privacy Shield means, so why is this ruling so important, and why should it be discussed? >> Well, thanks to sharing between Europe and America, it's based on a two-way promise that when data goes from Europe to America, the Americans promise to respect our privacy, and when data goes form America to Europe, the Europeans promise to respect the American privacy. Unfortunately, there are big cultural differences between the two blocks. The Europeans have a massive orientation around privacy as a human right. And in the U.S., there's somewhat more of a prioritization on national security, and therefore for some time there's been a mismatch here, and it could be argued that the Americans haven't been living up to their promise because they've had various different laws, and look how much talk about FISA and the Cloud Act that actually contravene European privacy and are incompatible with the promise Americans have given. That promise, first of all, was in the form of a treaty called Safe Harbor. This went to court and was struck down. It was replaced by Privacy Shield, which was pretty much the same thing really, and that has recently been to the court as well, and that has been struck down. There now is no other means of legally sharing data between Europe and America other than what are being called standard contractual clauses. This isn't a broad treaty between two nations, these are drawn by each individual country. But also in the ruling, they said that standard contractual clauses could not be used by any companies that were subject to mass surveillance. And actually in the U.S., the FISA courts enforce a level of mass surveillance through all of the major IT firms, of all major U.S. telcos, cloud firms, or indeed, social media firms. So, this means that for all of the companies out there and their clients, business should be carrying on as usual apart from if you're one of those major U.S. IT firms, or one of their clients. >> So, why did this come about? Was there like a major incident? Why now, was it in the court, stuck in the courts? Were people bitchin' and moanin' about it? Why did this go down, what's the real issue? >> For those of us who have been following this attentively, things have been getting more and more precarious for a number of years now. We've had a situation where there are different measures being taken in the U.S., that have continued to erode the different protections that there were for Europeans. FISA is an example that I've given, and that is the sort of secret courts and secret warrants that are issued to seize data without anyone's knowledge. There's the Cloud Act, which is a sort of extrajudicial law that means that warrants can be served in America to U.S. organizations, and they have to hand over data wherever that data resides, anywhere in the world. So, data could exist on a European server, if it was under the control of an American company, they'd have to hand that over. So, whilst FISA is in direct conflict with the promises that the Americans made, things like the Cloud Act are not only in controversion with the promise they've made, there's conflicting law here, because if you're a U.S. subsidiary of a big U.S. firm, and you're based in Europe, who do you obey, the European law that says you can't hand it over because of GDPR, or the American laws that says they've got extrajudicial control, and that you've got to hand it over. So, it's made things a complete mess. And to say has this stuff, hasn't really happened? No, there's been a gradual erosion, and this has been going through the courts for a number of years. And many of us have seen it coming, and now it just hit us. >> So, if I get you right in what you're saying, it's basically all this mishmash of different laws, and there's no coherency, and consistency, is that the core issue? >> On the European side you could argue there's quite a lot of consistency, because we uphold people's privacy, in theory. But there have been incidents which we could talk about with that, but in theory, we hold your rights dear, and also the rights of Europeans, so everyone's data should be safe here from the sort of mass surveillance we're seeing. In the U.S., there's more of a direct conflict between everything, including there's been a, in his first week in the White House, Donald Trump signed an executive order saying that the Privacy Act in the U.S., which had been the main protection for people in the U.S., no longer applied to non-U.S. citizens. Which was, if you wanted try and cause a storm, and if you wanted to try and undermine the treaty, there's no better way of doing it than that. >> A lot of ways, Ray, I mean simplify this for me, because I'm a startup, I'm hustlin', or I'm a big company, I don't even know who runs the servers anymore, and I've got data stored in multiple clouds, I got in regions, and Oracle just announced more regions, you got Amazon, a gazillion regions, I could be on-premise. I mean bottom line, what is this about? I mean, and -- >> Bill's right, I mean when Max Schrems, the Austrian. Bill's right, when Max Schrems the Austrian activist actually filed his case against Facebook for where data was being stored, data residency wasn't as popular. And you know, what it means for companies that are in the cloud is that you have to make sure your data's being stored in the region, and following those specific region rules, you can't skirt those rules anymore. And I think the cloud companies know that this has been coming for some time, and that's why there's been announced in a lot of regions, a lot of areas that are actually happening, so I think that's the important part. But going back to Bill's earlier point, which is important, is America is basically the Canary Islands of privacy, right? Privacy is there, but it isn't there in a very, very explicit sense, and I think we've been skirting the rules for quite some time, because a lot of our economy depends on that data, and the marketing of the data. And so we often confuse privacy with consent, and also with value exchange, and I think that's part of the problem of what's going on here. Companies that have been building their business models on free data, free private data, free personally identifiable data information are the ones that are at risk! And I think that's what's going on here. >> It's the classic Facebook issue, you're the product, and the data is your product. Well, I want to get into what this means, 'cause my personal take away, not knowing the specifics, and just following say, cyber security for instance, one of the tenets there is that data sharing is an invaluable, important ethos in the community. Now, everyone has their own privacy, or security data, they don't want to let everyone know about their exploits but, but it's well known in the security world that sharing data with each other, different companies and countries is actually a good thing. So, the question that comes in my mind, is this really about data sharing or data privacy, or both? >> I think it's about both. And actually what the ruling is saying here is, all we're asking from the European side is please stop spying on us and please give us a level of equal protection that you give to your own citizens. Because data comes from America to Europe, whatever that data belongs to, a U.S. citizen or a European citizen, it's given equal protection. It is only if data goes in the other direction, where you have secret courts, secret warrants, seizure of data on this massive scale, and also a level of lack of equivalence that has been imposed. And we're just asking that once you've sorted out a few of those things, we'd say everything's back on the table, away we go again! >> Why don't we merge the EU with the United States? Wouldn't that solve the problem? (Bill laughing) >> We just left Europe! (laughs heartily) >> Actually I always -- >> A hostile takeover of the UK maybe, the 52nd state. (Bill laughing loudly) >> I always pick on Bill, like Bill, you got all screaming loud and clear about all these concerns, but UKs trying to get out of that economic union. It is a union at the end of the day, and I think the problem is the institutional mismatch between the EU and U.S., U.S. is old democracy, bigger country, population wise, bigger economy. Whereas Europe is several countries trying to put together, band together as one entity, and the institutions are new, like you know, they're 15 years old, right? They're maturing. I think that's where the big mismatch is and -- >> Well, Ray, I want to get your thoughts on this, Ray wrote a book, I forget what year it was, this digital disruption, basically it was digital transformation before it was actually a trend. I mean to me it's like, do you do the process first and then figure out where the value extraction is, and this may be a Silicon Valley or an American thing, but go create value, then figure out how to create process or understand regulations. So, if data and entrepreneurship is going to be a new modern era of value, why wouldn't we want to create a rule based system that's open and enabling, and not restrictive? >> So, that's a great point, right? And the innovation culture means you go do it first, and you figure out the rules later, and that's been a very American way of getting things done, and very Silicon Valley in our perspective, not everyone, but I think in general that's kind of the trend. I think the challenge here is that we are trading privacy for security, privacy for convenience, privacy for personalization, right? And on the security level, it's a very different conversation than what it is on the consumer end, you know, personalization side. On the security side I think most Americans are okay with a little bit of "spying," at least on your own side, you know, to keep the country safe. We're not okay with a China level type of spying, which we're not sure exactly what that means or what's enforceable in the courts. We look like China to the Europeans in the way we treat privacy, and I think that's the perspective we need to understand because Europeans are very explicit about how privacy is being protected. And so this really comes back to a point where we actually have to get to a consent model on privacy, as to knowing what data is being shared, you have the right to say no, and when you have the right to say no. And then if you have a value exchange on that data, then it's really like sometimes it's monetary, sometimes it's non-monetary, sometimes there's other areas around consensus where you can actually put that into place. And I think that's what's missing at this point, saying, you know, "Do we pay for your data? Do we explicitly get your consent first before we use it?" And we haven't had that in place, and I think that's where we're headed towards. And you know sometimes we actually say privacy should be a human right, it is in the UN Charter, but we haven't figured out how to enforce it or talk about it in the digital age. And so I think that's the challenge. >> Okay, people, until they lose it, they don't really understand what it means. I mean, look at Americans. I have to say that we're idiots on this front, (Bill chuckling) but you know, the thing is most people don't even understand how much value's getting sucked out of their digital exhaust. Like, our kids, TikTok and whatnot. So I mean, I get that, I think there's some, there's going to be blow back for America for sure. I just worry it's going to increase the cost of doing business, and take away from the innovation for citizen value, the people, because at the end of the day, it's for the people right? I mean, at the end of the day it's like, what's my privacy mean if I lose value? >> Even before we start talking about the value of the data and the innovation that we can do through data use, you have to understand the European perspective here. For the European there's a level of double standards and an erosion of trust. There's double standards in the fact that in California you have new privacy regulations that are slightly different to GDPR, but they're very much GDPR like. And if the boot was on the other foot, to say if we were spying on Californians and looking at their personal data, and contravening CCPA, the Californians would be up in arms! Likewise if we having promised to have a level of equality, had enacted a local rule in Europe that said that when data from America's over here, actually the privacy of Americans counts for nothing, we're only going to prioritize the privacy of Europeans. Again, the Americans would be up in arms! And therefore you can see that there are real double standards here that are a massive issue, and until those addressed, we're not going to trust the Americans. And likewise, the very fact that on a number of occasions Americans have signed up to treaties and promised to protect our data as they did with Safe Harbor, as they did with Privacy Shield, and then have blatantly, blatantly failed to do so means that actually to get back to even a level playing field, where we were, you have a great deal of trust to overcome! And the thing from the perspective of the big IT firms, they've seen this coming for a long time, as Ray was saying, and they sought to try and have a presence in Europe and other things. But the way this ruling has gone is that, I'm sorry, that isn't going to be sufficient! These big IT firms based in the U.S. that have been happy to hand over data, well some of them maybe more happy than others, but they all need to hand over data to the NSA or the CIA. They've been doing this for some time now without actually respecting this data privacy agreement that has existed between the two trading blocks. And now they've been called out, and the position now is that the U.S. is no longer trusted, and neither are any of these large American technology firms. And until the snooping stops and equality is introduced, they can now no longer, even from their European operations, they can no longer use standard contractual clauses to transfer data, which is going to be a massive restriction on their business. And if they had any sense, they'd be lobbying very, very hard right now to the Senate, to the House, to try and persuade U.S. lawmakers actually to stick to some these treaties! To stop introducing really mad laws that ride roughshod over other people's privacy, and have a certain amount of respect. >> Let's let JD weigh in, 'cause he just got in, sorry on the video, I made him back on a host 'cause he dropped off. Just, Bill, real quick, I mean I think it's like when, you know, I go to Europe there's the line for Americans, there's the line for EU. Or EU and everybody else. I mean we might be there, but ultimately this has to be solved. So, JD, I want to let you weigh in, Germany has been at the beginning forefront of privacy, and they've been hardcore, and how's this all playing out in your perspective? >> Well, the first thing that we have to understand is that in Germany, there is a very strong law for regulation. Germans panic as soon as they know regulation, so they need to understand what am I allowed to do, and what am I not allowed to do. And they expect the same from the others. For the record I'm not German, but I live in Germany for some 20 years, so I got a bit of a feeling for them. And that sense of need for regulation has spread very fast throughout the European Union, because most of the European member states of the European Union consider this, that it makes sense, and then we found that Britain had already a very good framework for privacy, so GDPR itself is very largely based on what the United Kingdom already had in place with their privacy act. Moving forward, we try to find agreement and consensus with other countries, especially the United States because that's where most of the tech providers are, only to find out, and that is where it started to go really, really bad, 2014, when the mass production by Edward Snowden came out, to find out it's not data from citizens, it's surveillance programs which include companies. I joined a purchasing conference a few weeks ago where the purchase of a large European multinational, where the purchasing director explicitly stated that usage of U.S. based tech providers for sensitive data is prohibited as a result of them finding out that they have been under surveillance. So, it's not just the citizens, there's mass -- >> There you have it, guys! We did trust you! We did have agreements there that you could have abided by, but you chose not to, you chose to abuse our trust! And you're now in a position where you are no longer trusted, and unless you can lobby your own elected representatives to actually recreate a level playing field, we're not going to continue trusting you. >> So, I think really I -- >> Well I mean that, you know, innovation has to come from somewhere, and you know, has to come from America if that's the case, you guys have to get on board, right? Is that what it -- >> Innovation without trust? >> Is that the perspective? >> I don't think it's a country thing, I mean like, it's not you or them, I think everybody -- >> I'm just bustin' Bill's chops there. >> No, but I think everybody, everybody is looking for what the privacy rules are, and that's important. And you can have that innovation with consent, and I think that's really where we're going to get to. And this is why I keep pushing that issue. I mean, privacy should be a fundamental right, and how you get paid for that privacy is interesting, or how you get compensated for that privacy if you know what the explicit value exchange is. What you're talking about here is the surveillance that's going on by companies, which shouldn't be happening, right? That shouldn't be happening at the company level. At the government level I can understand that that is happening, and I think those are treaties that the governments have to agree upon as to how much they're going to impinge on our personal privacy for the trade off for security, and I don't think they've had those discussions either. Or they decided and didn't tell any of their citizens, and I think that's probably more likely the case. >> I mean, I think what's happening here, Bill, you guys were pointing out, and Ray, you articulated there on the other side, and my kind of colorful joke aside, is that we're living a first generation modern sociology problem. I mean, this is a policy challenge that extends across multiple industries, cyber security, citizen's rights, geopolitical. I mean when would look, and even when we were doing CUBE events overseas in Europe, in North American companies we'd call it abroad, we'd just recycle the American program, and we found there's so much localization value. So, Ray, this is the digital disruption, it's the virtualization of physical for digital worlds, and it's a lot of network theory, which is computer science, a lot of sociology. This is a modern challenge, and I don't think it so much has a silver bullet, it's just that we need smart people working on this. That's my take away! >> I think we can describe the ideal endpoint being somewhere we have meaningful protection alongside the maximization of economic and social value through innovation. So, that should be what we would all agree would be the ideal endpoint. But we need both, we need meaningful protection, and we need the maximization of economic and social value through innovation! >> Can I add another axis? Another axis, security as well. >> Well, I could -- >> I put meaningful protection as becoming both security and privacy. >> Well, I'll speak for the American perspective here, and I won't speak, 'cause I'm not the President of the United States, but I will say as someone who's been from Silicon Valley and the east coast as a technical person, not a political person, our lawmakers are idiots when it comes to tech, just generally. (Ray laughing) They're not really -- (Bill laughing loudly) >> They really don't understand. They really don't understand the tech at all! >> So, the problem is -- >> I'm not claiming ours are a great deal better. (laughs) >> Well, this is why I think this is a modern problem. Like, the young people I talk to are like, "Why do we have this rules?" They're all lawyers that got into these positions of Congress on the American side, and so with the American JEDI Contract you guys have been following very closely is, it's been like the old school Oracle, IBM, and then Amazon is leading with an innovative solution, and Microsoft has come in and re-pivoted. And so what you have is a fight for the digital future of citizenship! And I think what's happening is that we're in a massive societal transition, where the people in charge don't know what the hell they're talkin' about, technically. And they don't know who to tap to solve the problems, or even shape or frame the problems. Now, there's pockets of people that are workin' on it, but to me as someone who looks at this saying, it's a pretty simple solution, no one's ever seen this before. So, there's a metaphor you can draw, but it's a completely different problem space because it's, this is all digital, data's involved. >> We've got a lobbyists out there, and we've got some tech firms spending an enormous amount of lobbying. If those lobbyists aren't trying to steer their representatives in the right direction to come up with law that aren't going to massively undermine trade and data sharing between Europe and America, then they're making a big mistake, because we got here through some really dumb lawmaking in the U.S., I mean, there are none of the laws in Europe that are a problem here. 'Cause GDPR isn't a great difference, a great deal different from some of the laws that we have already in California and elsewhere. >> Bill, Bill. >> The laws that are at issue here -- >> Bill, Bill! You have to like, back up a little bit from that rhetoric that EU is perfect and U.S. is not, that's not true actually. >> I'm not saying we're perfect! >> No, no, you say that all the time. >> But I'm saying there's a massive lack of innovation. Yeah, yeah. >> I don't, I've never said it! >> Arm wrestle! >> Yes, yes. >> When I'm being critical of some of the dumb laws in the U.S, (Sarbjeet laughing) I'm not saying Europe is perfect. What we're trying to say is that in this particular instance, I said there was an equal balance here between meaningful protection and the maximization of economic and social value. On the meaningful protection side, America's got it very wrong in terms of the meaningful protection it provides to civil European data. On the maximization of economic and social value, I think Europe's got it wrong. I think there are a lot of things we could do in Europe to actually have far more innovation. >> Yeah. >> It's a cultural issue. The Germans want rules, that's what they crave for. America's the other way, we don't want rules, I mean, pretty much is a rebel society. And that's kind of the ethos of most tech companies. But I think you know, to me the media, there's two things that go on with this tech business. The company's themselves have to be checked by say, government, and I believe in not a lot of regulation, but enough to check the power of bad actors. Media so called "checking power", both of these major roles, they don't really know what they're talking about, and this is back to the education piece. The people who are in the media so called "checking power" and the government checking power assume that the companies are bad. Right, so yeah, because eight out of ten companies like Amazon, actually try to do good things. If you don't know what good is, you don't really, (laughs) you know, you're in the wrong game. So, I think media and government have a huge education opportunity to look at this because they don't even know what they're measuring. >> I support the level of innovation -- >> I think we're unreeling from the globalization. Like, we are undoing the globalization, and that these are the side effects, these conflicts are a side effect of that. >> Yeah, so all I'm saying is I support the focus on innovation in America, and that has driven an enormous amount of wealth and value. What I'm questioning here is do you really need to spy on us, your allies, in order to help that innovation? And I'm starting to, I mean, do you need mass surveillance of your allies? I mean, I can see you may want to have some surveillance of people who are a threat to you, but wait, guys, we're meant to be on your side, and you haven't been treating our privacy with a great deal of respect! >> You know, Saudi Arabia was our ally. You know, 9/11 happened because of them, their people, right? There is no ally here, and there is no enemy, in a way. We don't know where the rogue actors are sitting, like they don't know, they can be within the walls -- >> It's well understood I think, I agree, sorry. it's well understood that nation states are enabling terrorist groups to take out cyber attacks. That's well known, the source enables it. So, I think there's the privacy versus -- >> I'm not sure it's true in your case that it's Europeans that's doing this though. >> No, no, well you know, they share -- >> I'm a former officer in the Royal Navy, I've stood shoulder to shoulder with my U.S. counterparts. I put my life on the line on NATO exercises in real war zones, and I'm now a disabled ex-serviceman as a result of that. I mean, if I put my line on the line shoulder to shoulder with Americans, why is my privacy not respected? >> Hold on -- >> I feel it's, I was going to say actually that it's not that, like even the U.S., right? Part of the spying internally is we have internal actors that are behaving poorly. >> Yeah. >> Right, we have Marxist organizations posing as, you know, whatever it is, I'll leave it at that. But my point being is we've got a lot of that, every country has that, every country has actors and citizens and people in the system that are destined to try to overthrow the system. And I think that's what that surveillance is about. The question is, we don't have treaties, or we didn't have your explicit agreements. And that's why I'm pushing really hard here, like, they're separating privacy versus security, which is the national security, and privacy versus us as citizens in terms of our data being basically taken over for free, being used for free. >> John: I agree with that. >> That I think we have some agreement on. I just think that our governments haven't really had that conversation about what surveillance means. Maybe someone agreed and said, "Okay, that's fine. You guys can go do that, we won't tell anybody." And that's what it feels like. And I don't think we deliberately are saying, "Hey, we wanted to spy on your citizens." I think someone said, "Hey, there's a benefit here too." Otherwise I don't think the EU would have let this happen for that long unless Max had made that case and started this ball rolling, so, and Edward Snowden and other folks. >> Yeah, and I totally support the need for security. >> I want to enter the -- >> I mean we need to, where there are domestic terrorists, we need to stop them, and we need to have local action in UK to stop it happening here, and in America to stop it happening there. But if we're doing that, there is absolutely no need for the Americans to be spying on us. And there's absolutely no need for the Americans to say that privacy applies to U.S. citizens only, and not to Europeans, these are daft, it's just daft! >> That's a fair point. I'm sure GCHQ and everyone else has this covered, I mean I'm sure they do. (laughs) >> Oh, Bill, I know, I've been involved, I've been involved, and I know for a fact the U.S. and the UK are discussing I know a company called IronNet, which is run by General Keith Alexander, funded by C5 Capital. There's a lot of collaboration, because again, they're tryin' to get their arms around how to frame it. And they all agree that sharing data for the security side is super important, right? And I think IronNet has this thing called Iron Dome, which is essentially like they're saying, hey, we'll just consistency around the rules of shared data, and we can both, everyone can have their own little data. So, I think there's recognition at the highest levels of some smart people on both countries. (laughs) "Hey, let's work together!" The issue I have is just policy, and I think there's a lot of clustering going on. Clustered here around just getting out of their own way. That's my take on that. >> Are we a PG show? Wait, are we a PG show? I just got to remember that. (laughs) (Bill laughing) >> It's the internet, there's no regulation, there's no rules! >> There's no regulation! >> The European rules or is it the American rules? (Ray laughing) >> I would like to jump back quickly to the purpose of the surveillance, and especially when mass surveillance is done under the cover of national security and terror prevention. I worked with five clients in the past decade who all have been targeted under mass surveillance, which was revealed by Edward Snowden, and when they did their own investigation, and partially was confirmed by Edward Snowden in person, they found out that their purchasing department, their engineering department, big parts of their pricing data was targeted in mass surveillance. There's no way that anyone can explain me that that has anything to do with preventing terror attacks, or finding the bad guys. That is economical espionage, you cannot call it in any other way. And that was authorized by the same legislation that authorizes the surveillance for the right purposes. I'm all for fighting terror, and anything that can help us prevent terror from happening, I would be the first person to welcome it. But I do not welcome when that regulation is abused for a lot of other things under the cover of national interest. I understand -- >> Back to the lawmakers again. And again, America's been victim to the Chinese some of the individual properties, well documented, well known in tech circles. >> Yeah, but just 'cause the Chinese have targeted you doesn't give you free right to target us. >> I'm not saying that, but its abuse of power -- >> If the U.S. can sort out a little bit of reform, in the Senate and the House, I think that would go a long way to solving the issues that Europeans have right now, and a long way to sort of reaching a far better place from which we can all innovate and cooperate. >> Here's the challenge that I see. If you want to be instrumenting everything, you need a closed society, because if you have a free country like America and the UK, a democracy, you're open. If you're open, you can't stop everything, right? So, there has to be a trust, to your point, Bill. As to me that I'm just, I just can't get my arms around that idea of complete lockdown and data surveillance because I don't think it's gettable in the United States, like it's a free world, it's like, open. It should be open. But here we've got the grids, and we've got the critical infrastructure that should be protected. So, that's one hand. I just can't get around that, 'cause once you start getting to locking down stuff and measuring everything, that's just a series of walled gardens. >> So, to JD's point on the procurement data and pricing data, I have been involved in some of those kind of operations, and I think it's financial espionage that they're looking at, financial security, trying to figure out a way to track down capital flows and what was purchased. I hope that was it in your client's case, but I think it's trying to figure out where the money flow is going, more so than trying to understand the pricing data from competitive purposes. If it is the latter, where they're stealing the competitive information on pricing, and data's getting back to a competitor, that is definitely a no-no! But if it's really to figure out where the money trail went, which is what I think most of those financial analysts are doing, especially in the CIA, or in the FBI, that's really what that probably would have been. >> Yeah, I don't think that the CIA is selling the data to your competitors, as a company, to Microsoft or to Google, they're not selling it to each other, right? They're not giving it to each other, right? So, I think the one big problem I studied with FISA is that they get the data, but how long they can keep the data and how long they can mine the data. So, they should use that data as exhaust. Means like, they use it and just throw it away. But they don't, they keep mining that data at a later date, and FISA is only good for five years. Like, I learned that every five years we revisit that, and that's what happened this time, that we renewed it for six years this time, not five, for some reason one extra year. So, I think we revisit all these laws -- >> Could be an election cycle. >> Huh? >> Could be an election cycle maybe. (laughs) >> Yes, exactly! So, we revisit all these laws with Congress and Senate here periodically just to make sure that they are up to date, and that they're not infringing on human rights, or citizen's rights, or stuff like that. >> When you say you update to check they're not conflicting with anything, did you not support that it was conflicting with Privacy Shield and some of the promises you made to Europeans? At what point did that fail to become obvious? >> It does, because there's heightened urgency. Every big incident happens, 9/11 caused a lot of new sort of like regulations and laws coming into the picture. And then the last time, that the Russian interference in our election, that created some sort of heightened urgency. Like, "We need to do something guys here, like if some country can topple our elections, right, that's not acceptable." So, yeah -- >> And what was it that your allies did that caused you to spy on us and to downgrade our privacy? >> I'm not expert on the political systems here. I think our allies are, okay, loose on their, okay, I call it village politics. Like, world is like a village. Like it's so only few countries, it's not millions of countries, right? That's how I see it, a city versus a village, and that's how I see the countries, like village politics. Like there are two camps, like there's Russia and China camp, and then there's U.S. camp on the other side. Like, we used to have Russia and U.S., two forces, big guys, and they managed the whole world balance somehow, right? Like some people with one camp, the other with the other, right? That's how they used to work. Now that Russia has gone, hold on, let me finish, let me finish. >> Yeah. >> Russia's gone, there's this void, right? And China's trying to fill the void. Chinese are not like, acting diplomatic enough to fill that void, and there's, it's all like we're on this imbalance, I believe. And then Russia becomes a rogue actor kind of in a way, that's how I see it, and then they are funding all these bad people. You see that all along, like what happened in the Middle East and all that stuff. >> You said there are different camps. We thought we were in your camp! We didn't expect to be spied on by you, or to have our rights downgraded by you. >> No, I understand but -- >> We thought we were on your side! >> But, but you have to guys to trust us also, like in a village. Let me tell you, I come from a village, that's why I use the villager as a hashtag in my twitter also. Like in village, there are usually one or two families which keep the village intact, that's our roles. >> Right. >> Like, I don't know if you have lived in a village or not -- >> Well, Bill, you're making some great statements. Where's the evidence on the surveillance, where can people find more information on this? Can you share? >> I think there's plenty of evidence, and I can send some stuff on, and I'm a little bit shocked given the awareness of the FISA Act, the Cloud Act, the fact that these things are in existence and they're not exactly unknown. And many people have been complaining about them for years. I mean, we've had Safe Harbor overturned, we've had Privacy Shield overturned, and these weren't just on a whim! >> Yeah, what does JD have in his hand? I want to know. >> The Edward Snowden book! (laughs) >> By Edward Snowden, which gives you plenty. But it wasn't enough, and it's something that we have to keep in mind, because we can always claim that whatever Edward Snowden wrote, that he made it up. Every publication by Edward Snowden is an avalanche of technical confirmation. One of the things that he described about the Cisco switches, which Bill prefers to quote every time, which is a proven case, there were bundles of researchers saying, "I told you guys!" Nobody paid attention to those researchers, and Edward Snowden was smart enough to get the mass media representation in there. But there's one thing, a question I have for Sabjeet, because in the two parties strategy, it is interesting that you always take out the European Union as part. And the European Union is a big player, and it will continue to grow. It has a growing amount of trade agreements with a growing amount of countries, and I still hope, and I think think Bill -- >> Well, I think the number of countries is reducing, you've just lost one! >> Only one. (Bill laughing loudly) Actually though, those are four countries under one kingdom, but that's another point. (Bill chortling heartily) >> Guys, final topic, 5G impact, 'cause you mentioned Cisco, couldn't help think about -- >> Let me finish please my question, John. >> Okay, go ahead. How would you the United States respond if the European Union would now legalize to spy on everybody and every company, and every governmental institution within the United States and say, "No, no, it's our privilege, we need that." How would the United States respond? >> You can try that and see economically what happens to you, that's how the village politics work, you have to listen to the mightier than you, and we are economically mightier, that's the fact. Actually it's hard to swallow fact for, even for anybody else. >> If you guys built a great app, I would use it, and surveil all you want. >> Yeah, but so this is going to be driven by the economics. (John laughing) But the -- >> That's exactly what John said. >> This is going to be driven by the economics here. The big U.S. cloud firms are got to find this ruling enormously difficult for them, and they are inevitably going to lobby for a level of reform. And I think a level of a reform is needed. Nobody on your side is actually arguing very vociferously that the Cloud Act and the discrimination against Europeans is actually a particularly good idea. The problem is that once you've done the reform, are we going to believe you when you say, "Oh, it's all good now, we've stopped it!" Because with Crypto AG scandal in Switzerland you weren't exactly honest about what you were doing. With the FISA courts, so I mean FISA secret courts, the secret warrants, how do we know and what proof can we have that you've stopped doing all these bad things? And I think one of the challenges, A, going to be the reform, and then B, got to be able to show that you actually got your act together and you're now clean. And until you can solve those two, many of your big tech companies are going to be at a competitive disadvantage, and they're going to be screaming for this reform. >> Well, I think that, you know, General Mattis said in his book about Trump and the United states, is that you need alliances, and I think your point about trust and executing together, without alliances, it really doesn't work. So, unless there's some sort of real alliance, (laughs) like understanding that there's going to be some teamwork here, (Bill laughing) I don't think it's going to go anywhere. So, otherwise it'll continue to be siloed and network based, right? So to the village point, if TikTok can become a massively successful app, and they're surveilling, so and then we have to decide that we're going to put up with that, I mean, that's not my decision, but that's what's goin' on here. It's like, what is TikTok, is it good or bad? Amazon sent out an email, and they've retracted it, that's because it went public. I guarantee you that they're talkin' about that at Amazon, like, "Why would we want infiltration by the Chinese?" And I'm speculating, I have no data, I'm just saying, you know. They email those out, then they pull it back, "Oh, we didn't mean to send that." Really, hmm? (laughs) You know, so this kind of -- >> But the TRA Balin's good, you always want to get TRA Balin out there. >> Yeah, exactly. There's some spying going on! So, this is the reality. >> So, John, you were talking about 5G, and I think you know, the role of 5G, you know, the battle between Cisco and Huawei, you just have to look at it this way, would you rather have the U.S. spy on you, or would you rather have China? And that's really your binary choice at this moment. And you know both is happening, and so the question is which one is better. Like, the one that you're in alliance with? The one that you're not in alliance with, the one that wants to bury you, and decimate your country, and steal all your secrets and then commercialize 'em? Or the one kind of does it, but doesn't really do it explicitly? So, you've got to choose. (laughs) >> It's supposed to be -- >> Or you can say no, we're going to create our own standard for 5G and kick both out, that's an option. >> It's probably not as straightforward a question as, or an answer to that question as you say, because if we were to fast-forward 50 years, I would argue that China is going to be the largest trading nation in the world. I believe that China is going to have the upper hand on many of these technologies, and therefore why would we not want to use some of their innovation, some of their technology, why would we not actually be more orientated around trading with them than we might be with the U.S.? I think the U.S. is throwing its weight around at this moment in time, but if we were to fast-forward I think looking in the longterm, if I had to put my money on Huawei or some of its competitors, I think given its level of investments in research and whatever, I think the better longterm bet is Huawei. >> No, no, actually you guys need to pick a camp. It's a village again. You have to pick a camp, you can't be with both guys. >> Global village. >> Oh, right, so we have to go with the guys that have been spying on us? >> How do you know the Chinese haven't been spying on you? (Ray and John laughing loudly) >> I think I'm very happy, you find a backdoor in the Huawei equipment and you show it to us, we'll take them to task on it. But don't start bullying us into making decisions based on what-ifs. >> I don't think I'm, I'm not qualified to represent the U.S., but what we would want to say is that if you look at the dynamics of what's going on, China, we've been studying that as well in terms of the geopolitical aspects of what happens in technology, they have to do what they're doing right now. Because in 20 years our population dynamics go like this, right? You've got the one child policy, and they won't have the ability to go out and fight for those same resources where they are, so what they're doing makes sense from a country perspective and country policy. But I think they're going to look like Japan in 20 years, right? Because the xenophobia, the lack of immigration, the lack of inside stuff coming in, an aging population. I mean, those are all factors that slow down your economy in the long run. And the lack of bringing new people in for ideas, I mean that's part of it, they're a closed system. And so I think the longterm dynamics of every closed system is that they tend to fail versus open systems. So, I'm not sure, they may have better technology along the way. But I think a lot of us are probably in the camp now thinking that we're not going to aid and abet them, in that sense to get there. >> You're competing a country with a company, I didn't say that China had necessarily everything rosy in its future, it'll be a bigger economy, and it'll be a bigger trading partner, but it's got its problems, the one child policy and the repercussions of that. But that is not one of the things, Huawei, I think Huawei's a massively unlimited company that has got a massive lead, certainly in 5G technology, and may continue to maintain a lead into 6G and beyond. >> Oh yeah, yeah, Huawei's done a great job on the 5G side, and I don't disagree with that. And they're ahead in many aspects compared to the U.S., and they're already working on the 6G technologies as well, and the roll outs have been further ahead. So, that's definitely -- >> And they've got a great backer too, the financer, the country China. Okay guys, (Ray laughing) let's wrap up the segment. Thanks for everyone's time. Final thoughts, just each of you on this core issue of the news that we discussed and the impact that was the conversation. What's the core issue? What should people think about? What's your solution? What's your opinion of how this plays out? Just final statements. We'll start with Bill, Ray, Sarbjeet and JD. >> All I'm going to ask you is stop spying on us, treat us equally, treat us like the allies that we are, and then I think we've got to a bright future together! >> John: Ray? >> I would say that Bill's right in that aspect in terms of how security agreements work, I think that we've needed to be more explicit about those. I can't represent the U.S. government, but I think the larger issue is really how do we view privacy, and how we do trade offs between security and convenience, and you know, what's required for personalization, and companies that are built on data. So, the sooner we get to those kind of rules, an understanding of what's possible, what's a consensus between different countries and companies, I think the better off we will all be a society. >> Yeah, I believe the most important kind of independence is the economic independence. Like, economically sound parties dictate the terms, that's what U.S. is doing. And the smaller countries have to live with it or pick the other bigger player, number two in this case is China. John said earlier, I think, also what JD said is the fine balance between national security and the privacy. You can't have, you have to strike that balance, because the rogue actors are sitting in your country, and across the boundaries of the countries, right? So, it's not that FISA is being fought by Europeans only. Our internal people are fighting that too, like how when you are mining our data, like what are you using it for? Like, I get concerned too, when you can use that data against me, that you have some data against me, right? So, I think it's the fine balance between security and privacy, we have to strike that. Awesome. JD? I'll include a little fake check, fact check, at the moment China is the largest economy, the European Union is the second largest economy, followed directly by the USA, it's a very small difference, and I recommend that these two big parties behind the largest economy start to collaborate and start to do that eye to eye, because if you want to balance the economical and manufacturing power of China, you cannot do that as being number two and number three. You have to join up forces, and that starts with sticking with the treaties that you signed, and that has not happened in the past, almost four years. So, let's go back to the table, let's work on rules where from both sides the rights and the privileges are properly reflected, and then do the most important thing, stick to them! >> Yep, I think that's awesome. I think I would say that these young kids in high school and college, they need to come up and solve the problems, this is going to be a new generational shift where the geopolitical landscape will change radically, you mentioned the top three there. And new alliances, new kinds of re-imagination has to be there, and from America's standpoint I'll just say that I'd like to see lawmakers have, instead of a LinkedIn handle, a GitHub handle. You know, when they all go out on campaign talk about what code they've written. So, I think having a technical background or some sort of knowledge of computer science and how the internet works with sociology and societal impact will be critical for our citizenships to advance. So, you know rather a lawyer, right so? (laughs) Maybe get some law involved in that, I mean the critical lawyers, but today most people are lawyers in American politics, but show me a GitHub handle of that congressman, that senator, I'd be impressed. So, that's what we need. >> Thanks, good night! >> Ray, you want to say something? >> I wanted to say something, because I thought the U.S. economy was 21 trillion, the EU is sittin' at about 16, and China was sitting about 14, but okay, I don't know. >> You need to do math man. >> Hey, we went over our 30 minutes time, we can do an hour with you guys, so you're still good. (laughs) >> Can't take anymore. >> No go on, get in there, go at it when you've got something to say. >> I don't think it's immaterial the exact size of the economy, I think that we're better off collaborating on even and fair terms, we are -- >> We're all better off collaborating. >> Yeah. >> Gentlemen -- >> But the collaboration has to be on equal and fair terms, you know. (laughs) >> How do you define fair, good point. Fair and balanced, you know, we've got the new -- >> We did define fair, we struck a treaty! We absolutely defined it, absolutely! >> Yeah. >> And then one side didn't stick to it. >> We will leave it right there, and we'll follow up (Bill laughing) in a later conversation. Gentlemen, you guys are good. Thank you. (relaxing electronic music)

>> Announcer: From the Cube Studios in Palo Alto in Boston, connecting with thought leaders all around the world, this is The Cube Conversation. >> Everyone welcome to this special live stream here in The Cube Studios. I'm John Furrier, your host. We've got a great panel discussion here for one hour, sponsored by Lumina PR, not sponsored but organized by Lumina PR. An authentic conversation around professionals in the news media, and communication professionals, how they can work together. As we know, pitching stories to national media takes place in the backdrop in today's market, which is on full display. The Coronavirus, racial unrest in our country and a lot of new tech challenges from companies, their role in society with their technology and of course, an election all make for important stories to be developed and reported. And we got a great panel here and the purpose is to bridge the two worlds. People trying to get news out for their companies in a way that's relevant and important for audiences. I've got a great panelists here, Gerard Baker Editor at Large with the Wall Street Journal, Eric Savitz, Associate Editor with Barron's and Brenna Goth who's a Southwest Staff Correspondent with Bloomberg Publications. Thanks for joining me today, guys, appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> So we're going to break this down, we got about an hour, we're going to probably do about 40 minutes. I'd love to get your thoughts in this power panel. And you guys are on the front lines decades of experience, seeing these waves of media evolve. And now more than ever, you can't believe what's happening. You're seeing the funding of journalism really challenging at an all time high. You have stories that are super important to audiences and society really changing and we need this more than ever to have more important stories to be told. So this is really a challenge. And so I want to get your thoughts on this first segment. The challenge is around collecting the data, doing the analysis, getting the stories out, prioritizing stories in this time. So I'd love to get your thoughts. We'll start with you, Brenna, what's your thoughts on this as you're out there in Arizona. Coronavirus on the worst is one of the states there. What are your challenges? >> I would say for me, one of the challenges of the past couple months is just the the sheer influx of different types of stories we've had and the amount of news coming out. So I think one of the challenging things is a lot of times we'll get into a bit of a routine covering one story. So early on maybe the Coronavirus, and then something else will come up. So I personally have been covering some of the Coronavirus news here in Arizona and in the Southwest, as well as some of the protests we've seen with the Black Lives Matter movement. And prioritizing that is pretty difficult. And so one thing that I I've been doing is I've noticed that a lot of my routine projects or things I've been working on earlier in the year are off the table, and I'll get back to them when I have time. But for now, I feel like I'm a little bit more on breaking news almost every day in a way that I wasn't before. >> Gerard, I want to get your thoughts on this. Wall Street Journal has been since I could remember when the web hit the scene early on very digital savvy. Reporting, it's obviously, awesome as well. As you have people in sheltering in place, both journalists and the people themselves and the companies, there's an important part of the digital component. How do you see that as an opportunity and a challenge at the same time because you want to get data out there, you want to be collecting and reporting those stories? How do you see that opportunity, given the challenge that people can't meet face to face? >> First of all, thank you very much for having me. I think as we've all discovered in all fields of endeavor in the last three months, it's been quite a revelation, how much we can do without using without access to the traditional office environment. I think one of the things that Coronavirus, this crisis will have done we all agree I think is that it will have fundamentally changed the way people work. There'll be a lot more people quite a bit more working from home. They'll be a lot more remote working. Generally, there'll be a lot less travel. So on the one hand, it's been eye opening. actually how relatively easy, I use that word carefully. But how we've managed, and I think it's true of all news organizations, how we've managed surprisingly well, I think, without actually being at work. At the Wall Street Journal, we have a big office, obviously in midtown Manhattan, as well as dozens of bureaus around the world. Nobody has really been in that office since the middle of March. And yet we've put out a complete Wall Street Journal product, everything from the print edition, obviously, through every aspect of digital media, the website, all of the apps, video, everything, audio, podcasts. We've been able to do pretty well everything that we could do when we were all working in the office. So I think that will be an important lesson and that will clearly induce some change, some long term changes, I think about the way we work. That said, I'd point to two particular challenges that I think we have not properly overcome. Or if you like that we have, the two impediments, that the crisis has produced for us. One is, as you said, the absence of face to face activity, the hive process, which I think is really important. I think that a lot of the best ideas, a lot of the best, the best stories are developed through conversations between people in an office which don't necessarily we can't necessarily replicate through the online experience through this kind of event or through the Zoom meetings that we've all been doing. I think that has inhibited to some extent, some of the more creative activity that we could have done. I think the second larger problem which we all must face with this is that being essentially locked up in our homes for more than three months, which most of us has been I think accentuates a problem that is already that has been a problem in journalism for a long time, which is that journalists tend to cluster in the major metropolitan areas. I think, a couple of years ago, I read a study which said, I think that more than three quarters of journalists work for major news organizations, print, digital TV, radio, whatever, live and work in one of four major metropolises in the US. That's the New York area, the Washington DC area, the San Francisco area and the LA area. And that tends to create a very narrow worldview, unfortunately, because not enough people either come from those areas, but from outside those areas or spend enough time talking to people from outside those areas. And I think the Coronavirus has accentuated that. And I think in terms of coverage, I'm here in New York. I've been in New York continuously for three and a half months now which is quite unusual, I usually travel a lot. And so my reporting, I write columns now, mainly, but obviously I talk to people too. But the reporting, the editing that we're doing here is inevitably influenced by the experience that we've had in New York, which has obviously been, frankly, devastating. New York has been devastated by Coronavirus in a way that no where else in the country has. And I think to some extent, that does, perhaps have undue influence on the coverage. We're all locked up. We're all mindful of our own health. We're all mindful of people that we know who've gone to hospital or have been very, very sick or where we are, we are heavily influenced by our own immediate environment. And I think that has been a problem if we had been, imagine if the journalists in the country, instead of being clustered in New York and LA and San Francisco had been sort of spread over Texas and Missouri and Florida, things like that. I think you'd have a very different overall accounting of this story over the last three months. So I think it's just, it's accentuated that phenomenon in journalism, which I think we're mindful of, and which we all need to do a better job of addressing. >> It's really interesting. And I want to come back to that point around, who you're collaborating with to get this, now we have virtual ground truth, I guess, how you collaborate. But decision making around stories is, you need an open mind. And if you have this, I guess, I'll call it groupthink or clustering is interesting, now we have digital and we have virtual, it opens up the aperture but we still have the groupthink. But I want to get Eric's take first on his work environment, 'cause I know you've lived on both sides of New York and San Francisco area, as well as you've worked out in the field for agencies, as well on the other side, on the storytelling side. How has this current news environment, journalism environment impacted your view and challenges and your opportunities that you're going after the news? >> Well, so there's there's a few elements here. So one, Barron's Of course, covers the world, looks at the world through a financial lens. We cover the stock market every day. The stock market is not the center of story, but it is an important element of what's been unfolding over the last few months and the markets have been incredibly volatile, we change the way that we approach the markets. Because everything, the big stories are macro stories, huge swings in stock prices, huge swings in the price of oil, dramatic moves in almost every financial security that you can imagine. And so there's a little bit of a struggle for us as we try and shift our daily coverage to be a little more focused on the macro stories as we're still trying to tell what's happening with individual stocks and companies, but these bigger stories have changed our approach. So even if you look at say the covers of our magazine over the last few months, typically, we would do a cover on a company or an investor, that sort of thing. And now they're all big, thematic stories, because the world has changed. And world is changing how it looks at the financial markets. I think one thing that that Gerard touched on is the inability to really leave your house. I'm sitting in my little home office here, where I've been working since March, and my inability to get out and talk to people in person to have some, some interface with the companies and people that I cover, makes it tougher. You get story ideas from those interactions. I think Gerard said some of it comes from your interactions with your colleagues. But some of that also just comes from your ability to interact with sources and that is really tougher to do. It's more formalistic if you do it online. It's just not the same to be on a Zoom call as to be sitting in a Starbucks with somebody and talking about what's going on. I think the other elements of this is that there's, we have a lot of attempts, trying new things trying to reach our readers. We'll do video sessions, we'll do all sorts of other things. And it's one more layer on top of everything else is that there's a lot of demands on the time for the people who are working in journalism right now. I would say one other thing I'll touch on, John, which is, you mentioned, I did use, I worked for public communications for a while, and I do feel their pain because the ability to do any normal PR pitching for new products, new services, the kinds of things that PR people do every day is really tough. It's just really hard to get anybody's attention for those things right now. And the world is focused on these very large problems. >> Well, we'll unpack the PR comms opportunities in the next section. But I want to to just come back to this topic teased out from Gerard and Brenna when you guys were getting out as well. This virtual ground truth, ultimately, at the end of the day, you got to get the stories, you got to report them, they got to be distributed. Obviously, the Wall Street Journal is operating well, by the way, I love the Q&A video chats and what they got going on over there. So the format's are evolving and doing a good job, people are running their business. But as journalists and reporters out there, you got to get the truth and the ground truth comes from interaction. So as you have an aperture with digital, there's also groupthink on, say, Twitter and these channels. So getting in touch with the audience to have those stories. How are you collecting the data? How are you reporting? Has anything changed or shifted that you can point to because ultimately, it's virtual. You still got to get the ground truth, you still got to get the stories. Any thoughts on this point? >> I think in a way what we're seeing is in writ large actually is a problem again, another problem that I think digital journalism or the digital product digital content, if you like, actually presents for us today, which is that it's often said, I think rightly, that one of the, as successful as a lot of digital journalism has been and thank you for what you said about the Wall Street Journal. And we have done a tremendous job and by the way, one of the things that's been a striking feature of this crisis has been the rapid growth in subscriptions that we've had at the Journal. I know other news organizations have too. But we've benefited particularly from a hunger for the quality news. And we've put on an enormous number subscriptions in the last three months. So we've been very fortunate in that respect. But one of the challenges that people always say, one of the one of the drawbacks that people always draw attention to about digital content is that there's a lack of, for want of a better words, serendipity about the experience. When you used to read a newspaper, print newspapers, when may be some of us are old enough to remember, we'd get a newspaper, we'd open it up, we'd look at the front page, we look inside, we'd look at what other sections they were. And we would find things, very large number of things that we weren't particularly, we weren't looking for, we weren't expecting to, we're looking for a story about such. With the digital experience, as we know, that's a much it's a much less serendipitous experience. So you tend to a lot of search, you're looking, you find things that you tend to be looking for, and you find fewer things that, you follow particular people on social media that you have a particular interest in, you follow particular topics and have RSS feeds or whatever else you're doing. And you follow things that, you tend to find things that you were looking for. You don't find many things you weren't. What I think that the virus, the being locked up at home, again, has had a similar effect. That we, again, some of the best stories that I think anybody comes across in life, but news organizations are able to do are those stories that you know that you come across when you might have been looking for something else. You might have been working on a story about a particular company with a particular view to doing one thing and you came across somebody else. And he or she may have told you something actually really quite different and quite interesting and it took you in a different direction. That is easier to do when you're talking to people face to face, when you're actually there, when you're calling, when you're tasked with looking at a topic in the realm. When you are again, sitting at home with your phone on your computer, you tend to be more narrowly so you tend to sort of operate in lanes. And I think that we haven't had the breadth probably of journalism that I think you would get. So that's a very important you talk about data. The data that we have is obviously, we've got access broadly to the same data that we would have, the same electronically delivered data that we would have if we'd been sitting in our office. The data that I think in some ways is more interesting is the non electronically delivered data that is again, the casual conversation, the observation that you might get from being in a particular place or being with someone. The stimuli that arise from being physically in a place that you just aren't getting. And I think that is an important driver of a lot of stories. And we're missing that. >> Well, Gerard, I just want to ask real quick before I go to Brenna on her her take on this. You mentioned the serendipity and taking the stories in certain directions from the interactions. But also there's trust involved. As you build that relationship, there's trust between the parties, and that takes you down that road. How do you develop trust as you are online now? Is there a methodology or technique? Because you want to get the stories out fast, it's a speed game. But there's also the development side of it where a trust equation needs to build. What's your thoughts on that piece? Because that's where the real deeper stories come from. >> So I wasn't sure if you're asking me or Gerard. >> Gerard if he wants can answer that is the trust piece. >> I'll let the others speak to that too. Yeah, it is probably harder to... Again, most probably most people, most stories, most investigative stories, most scoops, most exclusives tend to come from people you already trust, right? So you've developed a trust with them, and they've developed a trust with you. Perhaps more importantly, they know you're going to treat the story fairly and properly. And that tends to develop over time. And I don't think that's been particularly impaired by this process. You don't need to have a physical proximity with someone in order to be able to develop that trust. My sources, I generally speak to them on the phone 99% of the time anyway, and you can still do that from home. So I don't think that's quite... Obviously, again, there are many more benefits from being able to actually physically interact with someone. But I think the level of, trust takes a long time to develop, let's be honest, too, as well. And I think you develop that trust both by developing good sources. and again, as I said, with the sources understanding that you're going to do the story well. >> Brenna, speed game is out there, you got to get stories fast. How do you balance speed and getting the stories and doing some digging into it? What's your thoughts on all this? >> I would say, every week is looking different for me these days. A lot of times there are government announcements coming out, or there are numbers coming out or something that really does require a really quick story. And so what I've been trying to do is get those stories out as quick as possible with maybe sources I already have, or really just the facts on the ground I can get quickly. And then I think in these days, too, there is a ton of room for following up on things. And some news event will come out but it sparks another idea. And that's the time to that when I'm hearing from PR people or I'm hearing from people who care about the issue, right after that first event is really useful for me to hear who else is thinking about these things and maybe ways I can go beyond the first story for something that more in depth and adds more context and provides more value to our readers. >> Awesome. Well, guys, great commentary and insight there on the current situation. The next section is with the role of PR, because it's changing. I've heard the term earned media is a term that's been kicked around. Now we're all virtual, and we're all connected. The media is all virtual. It's all earned at this point. And that's not just a journalistic thing, there's storytelling. There's new voices emerging. You got these newsletter services, audiences are moving very quickly around trying to figure out what's real. So comms folks are trying to get out there and do their job and tell a story. And sometimes that story doesn't meet the cadence of say, news and/or reporting. So let's talk about that. Eric, you brought this up. You have been on both sides. You said you feel for the folks out there who are trying to do their job. How is the job changing? And what can they do now? >> The news cycle is so ferocious at the moment that it's very difficult to insert your weigh in on something that doesn't touch on the virus or the economy or social unrest or the volatility of the financial markets. So I think there's certain kinds of things that are probably best saved for another moment in time, If you're trying to launch new products or trying to announce new services, or those things are just tougher to do right now. I think that the most interesting questions right now are, If I'm a comms person, how can I make myself and my clients a resource to media who are trying to tell stories about these things, do it in a timely way, not overreach, not try insert myself into a story that really isn't a good fit? Now, every time one of these things happen, we got inboxes full of pitches for things that are only tangentially relevant and are probably not really that helpful, either to the reporter generally or to the client of the firm that is trying to pitch an idea. But I will say on the on this at the same time that I rely on my connections to people in corporate comms every single day to make connections with companies that I cover and need to talk to. And it's a moment when almost more than ever, I need immediacy of response, accurate information access to the right people at the companies who I'm trying to cover. But it does mean you need to be I think sharper or a little more pointed a little more your thinking about why am I pitching this person this story? Because the there's no time to waste. We are working 24 hours a day is what it feels like. You don't want to be wasting people's time. >> Well, you guys you guys represent big brands in media which is phenomenal. And anyone would love to have their company mentioned obviously, in a good way, that's their goal. But the word media relations means you relate to the media. If there's no media to relate to, the roles change, and there's not enough seats at the table, so to speak. So getting a clip on in the clip book that gets sent to management, look, "We're on Bloomberg." "Great, check." But is at it? So people, this is a department that needs to do more. Is there things that they can do, that isn't just chasing, getting on your franchises stories? Because it obviously would be great if we were all on Barron's Wall Street Journal, and Bloomberg, but they can't always get that. They still got to do more. They got to develop the relationships. >> John, one thing I would be conscious of here is that many of our publications, it's certainly true for journalists, true for us at Barron's and it's certainly true for Bloomberg. We're all multimedia publishers. We're doing lots of things. Barron's has television show on Fox. We have a video series. We have podcasts and newsletters, and daily live audio chats and all sorts of other stuff in addition to the magazine and the website. And so part of that is trying to figure out not just the right publication, but maybe there's an opportunity to do a very particular, maybe you'd be great fit for this thing, but not that thing. And having a real understanding of what are the moving parts. And then the other part, which is always the hardest part, in a way, is truly understanding not just I want to pitch to Bloomberg, but who do I want to pitch at Bloomberg. So I might have a great story for the Wall Street Journal and maybe Gerard would care but maybe it's really somebody you heard on the street who cares or somebody who's covering a particular company. So you have to navigate that, I think effectively. And even, more so now, because we're not sitting in a newsroom. I can't go yell over to somebody who's a few desks away and suggest they take a look at something. >> Do you think that the comm-- (talk over each other) Do you think the comms teams are savvy and literate in multimedia? Are they still stuck in the print ways or the group swing is they're used to what they're doing and haven't evolved? Is that something that you're seeing here? >> I think it varies. Some people will really get it. I think one of the things that that this comes back to in a sense is it's relationship driven. To Gerard's point, it's not so much about trusting people that I don't know, it's about I've been at this a long time, I know what people I know, who I trust, and they know the things I'm interested in and so that relationship is really important. It's a lot harder to try that with somebody new. And the other thing is, I think relevant here is something that we touched on earlier, which is the idiosyncratic element. The ability for me to go out and see new things is tougher. In the technology business, you could spend half your time just going to events, You could go to the conferences and trade shows and dinners and lunches and coffees all day long. And you would get a lot of good story ideas that way. And now you can't do any of that. >> There's no digital hallway. There are out there. It's called Twitter, I guess or-- >> Well, you're doing it from sitting in this very I'm still doing it from sitting in the same chair, having conversations, in some ways like that. But it's not nearly the same. >> Gerard, Brenna, what do you guys think about the comms opportunity, challenges, either whether it's directly or indirectly, things that they could do differently? Share your thoughts. Gerard, we'll start with you? >> Well, I would echo Eric's point as far as knowing who you're pitching to. And I would say that in, at least for the people I'm working with, some of our beats have changed because there are new issues to cover. Someone's taking more of a role covering virus coverage, someone's taking more of a role covering protests. And so I think knowing instead of casting a really wide net, I'm normally happy to try to direct pitches in the right direction. But I do have less time to do that now. So I think if someone can come to me and say, "I know you've been covering this, "this is how my content fits in with that." It'd grab my attention more and makes it easier for me. So I would say that that is one thing that as beats are shifting and people are taking on a little bit of new roles in our coverage, that that's something PR and marketing teams could definitely keep an eye on. >> I agree with all of that. And all everything everybody said. I'd say two very quick things. One, exactly as everybody said, really know who you are pitching to. It's partly just, it's going to be much more effective if you're pitching to the right person, the right story. But when I say that also make the extra effort to familiarize yourself with the work that that reporter or that editor has done. You cannot, I'm sorry to say, overestimate the vanity of reporters or editors or anybody. And so if you're pitching a story to a particular reporter, in a field, make sure you're familiar with what that person may have done and say to her, "I really thought you did a great job "on the reporting that you did on this." Or, "I read your really interesting piece about that," or "I listened to your podcast." It's a relatively easy thing to do that yields extraordinarily well. A, because it appeals to anybody's fantasy and we all have a little bit of that. But, B, it also suggests to the reporter or the editor or the person involved the PR person communications person pitching them, really knows this, has really done their work and has really actually takes this seriously. And instead of just calling, the number of emails I get, and I'm sure it's the same for the others too, or occasional calls out of the blue or LinkedIn messages. >> I love your work. I love your work. >> (voice cuts out) was technology. Well, I have a technology story for you. It's absolutely valueless. So that's the first thing, I would really emphasize that. The second thing I'd say is, especially on the specific relation to this crisis, this Coronavirus issue is it's a tricky balance to get right. On the one hand, make sure that what you're doing what you're pitching is not completely irrelevant right now. The last three months has not been a very good time to pitch a story about going out with a bunch of people to a crowded restaurant or whatever or something like that to do something. Clearly, we know that. At the same time, don't go to the other extreme and try and make every little thing you have seen every story you may have every product or service or idea that you're pitching don't make it the thing that suddenly is really important because of Coronavirus. I've seen too many of those too. People trying too hard to say, "In this time of crisis, "in this challenging time, what people really want to hear "about is "I don't know, "some new diaper "baby's diaper product that I'm developing or whatever." That's trying too hard. So there is something in the middle, which is, don't pitch the obviously irrelevant story that is just not going to get any attention through this process. >> So you're saying don't-- >> And at the same time, don't go too far in the other direction. And essentially, underestimate the reporter's intelligence 'cause that reporter can tell you, "I can see that you're trying too hard." >> So no shotgun approach, obviously, "Hey, I love your work." Okay, yeah. And then be sensitive to what you're working on not try to force an angle on you, if you're doing a story. Eric, I want to get your thoughts on the evolution of some of the prominent journalists that I've known and/or communication professionals that are taking roles in the big companies to be storytellers, or editors of large companies. I interviewed Andy Cunningham last year, who used to be With Cunningham Communications, and formerly of Apple, better in the tech space and NPR. She said, "Companies have to own their own story "and tell it and put it out there." I've seen journalists say on Facebook, "I'm working on a story of x." And then crowdsource a little inbound. Thoughts on this new role of corporations telling their own story, going direct to the consumers. >> I think to a certain extent, that's valuable. And in some ways, it's a little overrated. There are a lot of companies creating content on their websites, or they're creating their own podcasts or they're creating their own newsletter and those kinds of things. I'm not quite sure how much of that, what the consumption level is for some of those things. I think, to me, the more valuable element of telling your story is less about the form and function and it's more about being able to really tell people, explain to them why what they do matters and to whom it matters, understanding the audience that's going to want to hear your story. There are, to your point, there are quite a few journalists who have migrated to either corporate communications or being in house storytellers of one kind or another for large businesses. And there's certainly a need to figure out the right way to tell your story. I think in a funny way, this is a tougher moment for those things. Because the world is being driven by external events, by these huge global forces are what we're all focused on right now. And it makes it a lot tougher to try and steer your own story at this particular moment in time. And I think you do see it Gerard was talking about don't try and... You want to know what other people are doing. You do want to be aware of what others are writing about. But there's this tendency to want to say, "I saw you wrote a story about Peloton "and we too have a exercise story that you can, "something that's similar." >> (chuckles) A story similar to it. We have a dance video or something. People are trying to glam on to things and taking a few steps too far. But in terms of your original question, it's just tougher at the moment to control your story in that particular fashion, I think. >> Well, this brings up a good point. I want to get to Gerard's take on this because the Wall Street Journal obviously has been around for many, many decades. and it's institution in journalism. In the old days, if you weren't relevant enough to make the news, if you weren't the most important story that people cared about, the editors make that choice and you're on the front page or in a story editorially. And companies would say, "No, but I should be in there." And you'd say, "That's what advertising is for." And that's the way it seemed to work in the past. If you weren't relevant in the spirit of the decision making of important story or it needs to be communicated to the audience, there's ads for that. You can get a full page ad in the old days. Now with the new world, what's an ad, what's a story? You now have multiple omni-channels out there. So traditionally, you want to get the best, most important story that's about relevance. So companies might not have a relevant story and they're telling a boring story. There's no there, there, or they miss the story. How do you see this? 'Cause this is the blend, this is the gray area that I see. It's certainly a good story, depending on who you're talking to, the 10 people who like it. >> I think there's no question. We're in the news business, topicality matters. You're going to have a much better chance of getting your story, getting your product or service, whatever covered by the Wall Street Journal, Barron's or anywhere else for that matter, if it seems somehow news related, whether it's the virus or the unrest that we've been seeing, or it's to do with the economy. Clearly, you can have an effect. Newspapers, news organizations of all the three news organizations we represent don't just, are not just obviously completely obsessed with what happened this morning and what's going on right now. We are all digging into deeper stories, especially in the business field. Part of what we all do is actually try to get beyond the daily headlines. And so what's happening with the fortunes of a particular company. Obviously, they may be impacted by they're going to be impacted by the lockdown and Coronavirus. But they actually were doing some interesting things that they were developing over the long term, and we would like to look into that too. So again, there is a balance there. And I'm not going to pretend that if you have a really topical story about some new medical device or some new technology for dealing with this new world that we're all operating in, you're probably going to get more attention than you would if you don't have that. But I wouldn't also underestimate, the other thing is, as well as topicality, everybody's looking at the same time to be different, and every journalist wants to do something original and exclusive. And so they are looking for a good story that may be completely unrelated. In fact, I would also underestimate, I wouldn't underestimate either the desire of readers and viewers and listeners to actually have some deeper reported stories on subjects that are not directly in the news right now. So again, it's about striking the balance right. But I wouldn't say that, that there is not at all, I wouldn't say there is not a strong role for interesting stories that may not have anything to do what's going on with the news right now. >> Brenna, you want to add on your thoughts, you're in the front lines as well, Bloomberg, everyone wants to be on Bloomberg. There's Bloomberg radio. You guys got tons of media too, there's tons of stuff to do. How do they navigate? And how do you view the interactions with comms folks? >> It looks we're having a little bit of challenge with... Eric, your thoughts on comm professionals. The questions in the chats are everything's so fast paced, do you think it's less likely for reporters to respond to PR comms people who don't have interacted with you before? Or with people you haven't met before? >> It's an internal problem. I've seen data that talks about the ratio of comms people to reporters, and it's, I don't know, six or seven to one or something like that, and there are days when it feels like it's 70 to one. And so it is challenging to break through. And I think it's particularly challenging now because some of the tools you might have had, you might have said, "Can we grab coffee one day or something like that," trying to find ways to get in front of that person when you don't need them. It's a relationship business. I know this is a frustrating answer, but I think it's the right answer which is those relationships between media and comms people are most successful when they've been established over time. And so you're not getting... The spray and pray strategy doesn't really work. It's about, "Eric, I have a story that's perfect for you. "And here's why I think you you should talk to this guy." And if they really know me, there's a reasonable chance that I'll not only listen to them, but I'll at least take the call. You need to have that high degree of targeting. It is really hard to break through and people try everything. They try, the insincere version of the, "I read your story, it was great. "but here's another great story." Which maybe they read your story, maybe they didn't at least it was an attempt. Or, "if you like this company, you'll love that one." People try all these tricks to try and get get to you. I think the highest level of highest probability of success comes from the more information you have about not just what I covered yesterday, but what do I cover over time? What kinds of stories am I writing? What kinds of stories does the publication write? And also to keep the pitching tight, I was big believer when I was doing comms, you should be able to pitch stories in two sentences. And you'll know from that whether there's going to be connection or not, don't send me five or more pitches. Time is of the essence, keep it short and as targeted as possible. >> That's a good answer to Paul Bernardo's question in the chat, which is how do you do the pitch. Brenna, you're back. Can you hear us? No. Okay. We'll get back to her when she gets logged back in. Gerard, your thoughts on how to reach you. I've never met you before, if I'm a CEO or I'm a comms person, a company never heard of, how do I get your attention? If I can't have a coffee with you with COVID, how do I connect with you virtually? (talk over each other) >> Exactly as Eric said, it is about targeting, it's really about making sure you are. And again, it's, I hate to say this, but it's not that hard. If you are the comms person for a large or medium sized company or even a small company, and you've got a particular pitch you want to make, you're probably dealing in a particular field, a particular sector, business sector or whatever. Let's say it says not technology for change, let's say it's fast moving consumer goods or something like that. Bloomberg, Brenna is in an enormous organization with a huge number of journalist you deal and a great deal of specialism and quality with all kinds of sectors. The Wall Street Journal is a very large organization, we have 13, 1400 reporters, 13 to 1400 hundred journalist and staff, I should say. Barron's is a very large organization with especially a particularly strong field coverage, especially in certain sectors of business and finance. It's not that hard to find out A, who is the right person, actually the right person in those organizations who's been dealing with the story that you're trying to sell. Secondly, it's absolutely not hard to find out what they have written or broadcast or produced on in that general field in the course of the last, and again, as Eric says, going back not just over the last week or two, but over the last year or two, you can get a sense of their specialism and understand them. It's really not that hard. It's the work of an hour to go back and see who the right person is and to find out what they've done. And then to tailor the pitch that you're making to that person. And again, I say that partly, it's not purely about the vanity of the reporter, it's that the reporter will just be much more favorably inclined to deal with someone who clearly knows, frankly, not just what they're pitching, but what the journalist is doing and what he or she, in his or her daily activity is actually doing. Target it as narrowly as you can. And again, I would just echo what Eric and I think what Brenna was also saying earlier too that I'm really genuinely surprised at how many very broad pitches, again, I'm not directly in a relative role now. But I was the editor in chief of the Journal for almost six years. And even in that position, the number of extraordinarily broad pitches I get from people who clearly didn't really know who I was, who didn't know what I did, and in some cases, didn't even really know what Wall Street Journal was. If you can find that, if you actually believe that. It's not hard. It's not that hard to do that. And you will have so much more success, if you are identifying the organization, the people, the types of stories that they're interested in, it really is not that difficult to do. >> Okay, I really appreciate, first of all, great insight there. I want to get some questions from the crowd so if you're going to chat, there was a little bit of a chat hiccup in there. So it should be fixed. We're going to go to the chat for some questions for this distinguished panel. Talk about the new coffee. There's a good question here. Have you noticed news fatigue, or reader seeking out news other than COVID? If so, what news stories have you been seeing trending? In other words, are people sick and tired of COVID? Or is it still on the front pages? Is that relevant? And if not COVID, what stories are important, do you think? >> Well, I could take a brief stab at that. I think it's not just COVID per se, for us, the volatility of the stock market, the uncertainties in the current economic environment, the impact on on joblessness, these massive shifts of perceptions on urban lifestyles. There's a million elements of this that go beyond the core, what's happening with the virus story. I do think as a whole, all those things, and then you combine that with the social unrest and Black Lives Matter. And then on top of that, the pending election in the fall. There's just not a lot of room left for other stuff. And I think I would look at it a little bit differently. It's not finding stories that don't talk on those things, it's finding ways for coverage of other things whether it's entertainment. Obviously, there's a huge impact on the entertainment business. There's a huge impact on sports. There's obviously a huge impact on travel and retail and restaurants and even things like religious life and schooling. I have the done parents of a college, was about to be a college sophomore, prays every day that she can go back to school in the fall. There are lots of elements to this. And it's pretty hard to imagine I would say to Gerard's point earlier, people are looking for good stories, they're always looking for good stories on any, but trying to find topics that don't touch on any of these big trends, there's not a lot of reasons to look for those. >> I agree. Let me just give you an example. I think Eric's exactly right. It's hard to break through. I'll just give you an example, when you asked that question, I just went straight to my Wall Street Journal app on my phone. And of course, like every organization, you can look at stories by sections and by interest and by topic and by popularity. And what are the three most popular stories right now on the Wall Street Journal app? I can tell you the first one is how exactly do you catch COVID-19? I think that's been around since for about a month. The second story is cases accelerate across the United States. And the third story is New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, tell travelers from areas with virus rates to self isolate. So look, I think anecdotally, there is a sense of COVID fatigue. Well, we're all slightly tired of it. And certainly, we were probably all getting tired, or rather distressed by those terrible cases and when we've seen them really accelerate back in March and April and these awful stories of people getting sick and dying. I was COVID fatigued. But I just have to say all of the evidence we have from our data, in terms of as I said earlier, the interest in the story, the demand for what we're doing, the growth in subscriptions that we've had, and just as I said, little things like that, that I can point you at any one time, I can guarantee you that our among our top 10 most read stories, at least half of them will be COVID-19. >> I think it's safe to say general interest in that outcome of progression of that is super critical. And I think this brings up the tech angle, which we can get into a minute. But just stick with some of these questions I just want to just keep these questions flowing while we have a couple more minutes left here. In these very challenging times for journalism, do byline articles have more power to grab the editors attention in the pitching process? >> Well, I think I assume what the questioner is asking when he said byline articles is contributed. >> Yes. >> Contributed content. Barron's doesn't run a lot of contributing content that way in a very limited way. When I worked at Forbes, we used to run tons of it. I'm not a big believer that that's necessarily a great way to generate a lot of attention. You might get published in some publication, if you can get yourself onto the op ed page of The Wall Street Journal or The New York Times, more power to you. But I think in most cases-- >> It's the exception not the rule Exception not the rule so to speak, on the big one. >> Yeah. >> Well, this brings up the whole point about certainly on SiliconANGLE, our property, where I'm co founder and chief, we basically debate over and get so many pitches, "hey, I want to write for you, here's a contributed article." And it's essentially an advertisement. Come on, really, it's not really relevant. In some case we (talk over each other) analysts come in and and done that. But this brings up the question, we're seeing these newsletters like sub stack and these services really are funding direct journalism. So it's an interesting. if you're good enough to write Gerard, what's your take on this, you've seen this, you have a bit of experience in this. >> I think, fundamental problem here is that is people like the idea of doing by lines or contributed content, but often don't have enough to say. You can't just do, turn your marketing brochure into a piece of an 800 word with the content that that's going to be compelling or really attract any attention. I think there's a place for it, if you truly have something important to say, and if you really have something new to say, and it's not thinly disguised marketing material. Yeah, you can find a way to do that. I'm not sure I would over-rotate on that as an approach. >> No, I just briefly, again, I completely agree. At the Journal we just don't ever publish those pieces. As Eric says, you're always, everyone is always welcome to try and pitch to the op ed pages of the Journal. They're not generally going to I don't answer for them, I don't make those decisions. But I've never seen a marketing pitch run as an op ed effectively. I just think you have to know again, who you're aiming at. I'm sure it's true for Bloomberg, Barron's and the Journal, most other major news organizations are not really going to consider that. There might be organizations, there might be magazines, digital and print magazines. There might be certain trade publications that would consider that. Again, at the Journal and I'm sure most of the large news organizations, we have very strict rules about what we can publish. And how and who can get published. And it's essentially journal editorials, that journal news staff who can publish stories we don't really take byline, outside contribution. >> Given that your time is so valuable, guys, what's the biggest, best practice to get your attention? Eric, you mentioned keeping things tight and crisp. Are there certain techniques to get your attention? >> Well I'll mention just a couple of quick things. Email is better than most other channels, despite the volume. Patience is required as a result because of the volume. People do try and crawl over the transom, hit you up on LinkedIn, DM you on Twitter, there's a lot of things that people try and do. I think a very tightly crafted, highly personalized email with the right subject line is probably still the most effective way, unless it's somebody you actually, there are people who know me who know they have the right to pick up the phone and call me if they really think they have... That's a relationship that's built over time. The one thing on this I would add which I think came up a little bit before thinking about it is, you have to engage in retail PR, not not wholesale PR. The idea that you're going to spam a list of 100 people and think that that's really going to be a successful approach, it's not unless you're just making an announcement, and if you're issuing your earnings release, or you've announced a large acquisition or those things, fine, then I need to get the information. But simply sending around a very wide list is not a good strategy, in most cases, I would say probably for anyone. >> We got Brenna back, can you hear me? She's back, okay. >> I can hear you, I'm back. >> Well, let's go back to you, we missed you. Thanks for coming back in. We had a glitch on our end but appreciate it, bandwidth internet is for... Virtual is always a challenge to do live, but thank you. The trend we're just going through is how do I pitch to you? What's the best practice? How do I get your attention? Do bylines lines work? Actually, Bloomberg doesn't do that very often either as well as like the Journal. but your thoughts on folks out there who are really trying to figure out how to do a good job, how to get your attention, how to augment your role and responsibilities. What's your thoughts? >> I would say, going back to what we said a little bit before about really knowing who you're pitching to. If you know something that I've written recently that you can reference, that gets my attention. But I would also encourage people to try to think about different ways that they can be part of a story if they are looking to be mentioned in one of our articles. And what I mean by that is, maybe you are launching new products or you have a new initiative, but think about other ways that your companies relate to what's going on right now. So for instance, one thing that I'm really interested in is just the the changing nature of work in the office place itself. So maybe you know of something that's going on at a company, unlimited vacation for the first time or sabbaticals are being offered to working parents who have nowhere to send their children, or something that's unique about the current moment that we're living in. And I think that those make really good interviews. So it might not be us featuring your product or featuring exactly what your company does, but it still makes you part of the conversation. And I think it's still, it's probably valuable to the company as well to get that mention, and people may be looking into what you guys do. So I would say that something else we are really interested in right now is really looking at who we're quoting and the diversity of our sources. So that's something else I would put a plug in for PR people to be keeping an eye on, is if you're always putting up your same CEO who is maybe of a certain demographic, but you have other people in your company who you can give the opportunity to talk with the media. I'm really interested in making sure I'm using a diverse list of sources and I'm not just always calling the same person. So if you can identify people who maybe even aren't experienced with it, but they're willing to give it a try, I think that now's a really good moment to be able to get new voices in there. >> Rather than the speed dial person you go to for that vertical or that story, building out those sources. >> Exactly. >> Great, that's great insight, Everyone, great insights. And thank you for your time on this awesome panel. Love to do it again. This has been super informative. I love some of the engagement out there. And again, I think we can do more of these and get the word out. I'd like to end the panel on an uplifting note for young aspiring journalists coming out of school. Honestly, journalism programs are evolving. The landscape is changing. We're seeing a sea change. As younger generation comes out of college and master's programs in journalism, we need to tell the most important stories. Could you each take a minute to give your advice to folks either going in and coming out of school, what to be prepared for, how they can make an impact? Brenna, we'll start with you, Gerard and Eric. >> That's a big question. I would say one thing that has been been encouraging about everything going on right now as I have seen an increased hunger for information and an increased hunger for accurate information. So I do think it can obviously be disheartening to look at the furloughs and the layoffs and everything that is going on around the country. But at the same time, I think we have been able to see really big impacts from the people that are doing reporting on protests and police brutality and on responses to the virus. And so I think for young journalists, definitely take a look at the people who are doing work that you think is making a difference. And be inspired by that to keep pushing even though the market might be a little bit difficult for a while. >> I'd say two things. One, again, echoing what Brenna said, identify people that you follow or you admire or you think are making a real contribution in the field and maybe directly interact with them. I think all of us, whoever we are, always like to hear from young journalists and budding journalists. And again, similar advice to giving to the advice that we were giving about PR pitches. If you know what that person has been doing, and then contact them and follow them. And I know I've been contacted by a number of young journalists like that. The other thing I'd say is and this is more of a plea than a piece of advice. But I do think it will work in the long run, be prepared to go against the grain. I fear that too much journalism today is of the same piece. There is not a lot of intellectual diversity in what we're seeing There's a tendency to follow the herd. Goes back a little bit to what I was saying right at the opening about the fact that too many journalists, quite frankly, are clustered in the major metropolitan areas in this country and around the world. Have something distinctive and a bit different to say. I'm not suggesting you offer some crazy theory or a set of observations about the world but be prepared to... To me, the reason I went into journalism was because I was always a bit skeptical about whenever I saw something in any media, which especially one which seemed to have a huge amount of support and was repeated in all places, I always asked myself, "Is that really true? "Is that actually right? "Maybe there's an alternative to that." And that's going to make you stand out as a journalist, that's going to give you a distinctiveness. It's quite hard to do in some respects right now, because standing out from the crowd can get you into trouble. And I'm not suggesting that people should do that. Have a record of original storytelling, of reporting, of doing things perhaps that not, because look, candidly, there are probably right now in this country, 100,00 budding putative journalists who would like to go out and write about, report on Black Lives Matter and the reports on the problems of racial inequality in this country and the protests and all of that kind of stuff. The problem there is there are already 100,000 of those people who want to do that in addition to probably the 100,000 journalists who are already doing it. Find something else, find something different. have something distinctive to offer so that when attention moves on from these big stories, whether it's COVID or race or politics or the election or Donald Trump or whatever. Have something else to offer that is quite distinctive and where you have actually managed to carve out for yourself a real record as having an independent voice. >> Brenna and Gerard, great insight. Eric, take us home close us out. >> Sure. I'd say a couple things. So one is as a new, as a young journalist, I think first of all, having a variety of tools in your toolkit is super valuable. So be able to write long and write short, be able to do audio, blogs, podcast, video. If you can shoot photos and the more skills that you have, a following on social media. You want to have all of the tools in your toolkit because it is challenging to get a job and so you want to be able to be flexible enough to fill all those roles. And the truth is that a modern journalist is finding the need to do all of that. When I first started at Barron's many, many years ago, we did one thing, we did a weekly magazine. You'd have two weeks to write a story. It was very comfortable. And that's just not the way the world works anymore. So that's one element. And the other thing, I think Gerard is right. You really want to have a certain expertise if possible that makes you stand out. And the contradiction is, but you also want to have the flexibility to do lots of different stories. You want to get (voice cuts out) hold. But if you have some expertise, that is hard to find, that's really valuable. When Barron's hires we're always looking for people who have, can write well but also really understand the financial markets. And it can be challenging for us sometimes to find those people. And so I think there's, you need to go short and long. It's a barbell strategy. Have expertise, but also be flexible in both your approach and the things you're willing to cover. >> Great insight. Folks, thanks for the great commentary, great chats for the folks watching, really appreciate your valuable time. Be original, go against the grain, be skeptical, and just do a good job. I think there's a lot of opportunity. And I think the world's changing. Thanks for your time. And I hope the comms folks enjoyed the conversation. Thank you for joining us, everyone. Appreciate it. >> Thanks for having us. >> Thank you. >> I'm John Furrier here in the Cube for this Cube Talk was one hour power panel. Awesome conversation. Stay in chat if you want to ask more questions. We'll come back and look at those chats later. But thank you for watching. Have a nice day. (instrumental music)

(upbeat music) >> Hi, and welcome to theCUBE, the leading source for insights into the world of technology and innovation. I'm your host, Donald Klein and today's topic is the exploding software segment of Robotic Process Automation, where Automation Anywhere is one of the leading providers. To have that conversation today, I'm joined by Riadh Dridi, CMO of Automation Anywhere. Welcome to the show, Riadh. >> Thank you for having me. >> Great, okay so, look, you're relatively new to Automation Anywhere, is that correct? >> Yes, I've been there for about six months now. >> Excellent, so why don't you talk a little bit about your background and how you came to the world of RPA. >> Yes, so I've been in the IT industry for about 20 years, been in the hardware space and the software space and the cloud space more recently, so when I heard about Automation Anywhere in the RPA space, did my due diligence and find out how fast this technology was catching on in enterprises, I got really, really excited and then met the management team and then get even more excited and ended up, you know, taking the job. >> Well, congratulations. >> Thank you. >> It's an exploding segment, for sure. Why don't you talk to us a little bit about what you see happening in this market and how fast it's growing. >> Yeah, so there are many studies out there, and of course we have our own internal data, but the market right now, according to Gartner is growing about 63% year over year, is the fastest growing enterprise software market in the industry right now and is projected to continue to grow at that pace for the foreseeable future. >> Okay, and let's talk about, sort of for people who are not that familiar with RPA. It's obviously an acronym that's being, you know, tossed around a lot but, you know, talk to us about Robotic Process Automation and how you define that category. >> Right, so that was one of the challenges early on is to try to put the label on this segment, which is really about automating processes end-to-end as much as possible, and so the RPA category is where, you know, some of the analysts decided to focus on, and so what it does is really allow businesses to deploy software robots to business processes so that process can be handled by bots instead of humans. The mundane, repetitive tasks that humans do as part of the end-to-end process, whether it's a order to cash process or procure to pay process, any, frankly, business process that things, that humans should not be doing, should be better suited to do more creative work. That's when, you know, bots came into play and the whole category was named, Robotic Process Automation because the robots are taking the place of the humans, in that terms of process automation. >> Got it, okay, so (mumbles) of the bots, so creating bots, right, and what's kind of fascinating about this world is that, you know, for customers that deploy this type of solution, right, they're growing a whole library of bots, right (mumbles). Maybe just walk us through an example bot and what a bot does and why this technology is so unique. >> Right, so think about, first of all, the problem that those bots are solving, right? So today you have ERP applications, CRM applications, any sort of applications in businesses to really automate a process, like I said an order to cash process, procure to pay process. That's why people have bought the technology, but what the industry has realized is after twenty years or more of using the same technology, humans were still doing part of the process that should have been automated by the software. So when you look at the average enterprises, only 20% of the steps that should be automated are automated, 80% of it is done by humans, whether it's opening files, reading documents, cutting and pasting, filling out forms, you know, playing with excel and kind of loading data into systems, data entry, a lot of it is still done by humans. So what the bots do is go in and take that work away from the humans so they can really focus on better tasks. That's really what it is. >> And so, just so everybody's kind of clear, so what's really so intelligent about these capabilities, right, take something sort of like invoices, right? Any company, you know, receiving lots and lots of invoices, all these invoices are going to be formatted in different ways. >> Right. >> Correct? >> Right. >> And historically it's been up to a human to kind of look through that invoice, pull out the relevant pieces of information, right, and enter that into the system so that the system can then issue the PO or pay the PO, et cetera, right? >> Exactly. >> But what your bots can do, or what the space as a whole, right, is they can intelligently scan these documents, and look for the kind of pieces of information, and actually load those into the system, correct? >> That's exactly right. So what the bots are doing now with computer vision, they're able to look into applications, they're able to assess the data, they're able to assess the information from that data and then process it like humans would do. So they're able to, again, get in, look at invoices or any type of, frankly, unstructured data or semi-structured data, and take that data, analyze it, and then manipulate it like a human would do. >> Excellent. >> An exception is that they are, obviously, doing it 24/7, much faster, with less errors. >> Got it, right. So you're turning people who, previously may have been focused on kind of a data entry task, right, into kind of managing a process, right? >> Exactly. So basically, what we like to say is we are taking the robot out of humans and then giving it to the robots, who are supposed to be doing the work. >> Excellent. >> And that's kind of phase one, and then phase two is obviously making those robots more intelligent, so that they're not able to do the simplest of simplest tasks, but start to be a little bit more intelligent and use AI to do things that are a little bit more advanced and more complicated. >> Okay, excellent. So look, you guys have got some news, right? >> Yup. >> You've kind of just come out with a big new release of your platform. Why don't you just kind of talk us through what the news is and what you guys have released? >> Yeah, so if you think about what the space has done so far, is taking a process, that's usually a known process, like I said, an order to cash, or even a simpler process, right? And taking look at the different steps and tasks that people have to do, and say, let's now automate those tasks and that particular process. A lot of the time is spent on trying to figure out their process. I don't know about your company, but I know in a lot of companies that I've been at, a lot of processes are not documented. So what we've announced yesterday is a bot, we call this Discovery Bot, that allows us to discover the processes that people work with. So if you're, again, an agent or a knowledge worker in an organization, you're going through a certain number of steps. The bot is going to basically analyze all those different steps, map the process, allows you to understand the flow that you're going through, and let you know that if you automate those repetitive tasks within your process, you're going to be able to save a certain amount of time and energy and have a better process in place. And then the cool thing about what we announced yesterday, and this is unique in the industry today, is the ability to create bots automatically from analyzing that process. So again, the industry has matured into analyzing processes manually, or using certain tools, but then the work had to be done by a different platform to basically create the bots from these processes. We're the only provider today that can analyze processes with the tool, and then create the bots automatically, shrinking the time for process automation end-to-end. >> Fantastic. >> Okay, and now, but also part of this release, too, right, is your kind of cloud capabilities. You've really kind of ramped up your ability to scale for the kind of largest customers. Talk a little to us about how the application functions in the cloud, how it functions on-prem. How does that all work end-to-end? >> Right, so back in November we announced the new platform called Enterprise A2019. This was the first cloud native web-based platform in the industry. And the reason why cloud native is important is because it's what gives you the benefits, in terms of scaling, in terms of TCO, in terms of easy to use, and that platform is now the core platform for the company, and so the product announcement we had yesterday allows our customers to use the same platform, except now we add this Discovery Bot at the front-end to discover the process, prioritize them, and then use the platform we've announced to automate these processes. What's very interesting about the platform is that customers can use it on-prem, can use it in the cloud. The customers, obviously, that decide to use it in the cloud will have the ability to learn more from the platform because, you know, it's going to tackle a lot more data in the cloud. Then we're going to be able to use lots of data analysis tools to be able to get the customers to extract knowledge from it and then innovate a much faster way. The people who are going to be using it on-prem, typically, are regulated industries or customers who have systems of records that are, typically, on-prem and they would like the bots to run where the systems are. So the platform is available in the cloud. It's available on-prem. It's the customer's choice to decide how to use it, but the innovation that's backed into it is what's really exciting. >> So this is kind of, I think, a fundamental point, maybe people should understand, right? So what you're, this is kind of a brave new world, right? You're saying kind of cloud native app, right, which is now ready to be used on-prem, right? >> Right >> As opposed to maybe the older world where people develop applications that were primarily based for kind of a server architecture within the firewall, right? >> Exactly. >> And then they tried to migrate it to the cloud? >> Exactly. >> So in some sense, you've done the reverse. >> Exactly. So if you were to build an application today knowing, you know, microservices architecture, knowing Java, knowing web-based, that's how you would build it. And so the fact that you've built the architecture for a modern application and then offer the options to customers to use it, either on-prem or in the cloud, is what we've done. >> Got it, great. Okay, so then what's the advantage of being able to use, so you've got this application that can scale with microservices, right? It can handle the volume that a Fortune 500 company might need. What's the advantage for them being able to do it on-prem? What does that help? >> So for some customers, it's really about regulating industries. For example, if you're a bank, or if you're a healthcare institution, the data cannot travel through the cloud. So systems of records, whether it's a CRM, whether it's HRM with some other systems of records, an ERP, usually will be on-prem and the data can travel through the cloud. So for these customers, we're saying, use the product on-prem, you have the same benefit. It's still the cloud architecture, microservices-based. It's still web-based as far as the client interface is concerned. It's the lowest TCO you can get, but you don't have to worry about getting to the cloud if that's what you decide to do. >> So, in terms of enabling digital transformation, really the requirement here is to be able to enable that both in the cloud and on-prem and do it simultaneously. >> Correct, and again, some customers will do a hybrid of both and then say, for these workflows we'll have them in the cloud, for these we'll keep them on-prem. Some customers in regulated industries will say, we don't want to do anything in the cloud, we want everything on-prem. They'll have the choice to do that. >> Understood, okay, well look, final question here. Let's talk about kind of some of the upcoming events that Automation Anywhere has going on, right? You do events all across the globe, you're now a global company. Tell us what's happening on that front. >> Yeah, so we do lots of events, you know, cause our customers are global, where we have customers in 90 countries, we have offices in 45 countries, and so we have to go where our customers are. So we have four large conferences throughout the year, one upcoming in London, we have it in Vegas, in Tokyo, and in Bangalore, as well. And it's the largest gathering of RPA minds and experts in the industry today. So what's exciting about the one that's coming up is, obviously, Discovery Bot is going to be featured at that conference. People will be able to play with the product, they'll be able to understand, you know, the latest innovations from Automation Anywhere. We have sessions that are called Build a Bots where people will be able to build their bots on-site, and that's always a popular thing for people to do. And then we're going to have some amazing speakers and top leaders who will help customers understand, you know, what's happening in digital transformation, and how intelligent automation can accelerate that transformation. >> Okay, great, and so just to understand the timing of it, so you've got a show coming up in London in the very near future here, is that right? >> Yes, I believe it's in April and then we have another one in May in Las Vegas. >> Okay, so then the big one in North America is going to be Vegas this year? >> Correct, correct, it's in May. >> Okay, great. And then, what about the, so then you also talked about Bangalore, talk about -- >> Yeah, Bangalore, I don't have all the dates in my head, so I apologize, but I think Bangalore is, I believe, in August or September, and then Tokyo, I believe, it's in June, so I'll have to confirm all those dates -- >> But one of the unique things, right, is that Bangalore show has actually been one of your largest shows of the year. >> It's been amazing. So I literally missed that show by one week. When I joined the company, I was super excited about having the ability to go visit the customers and the partners within the show. I think last year they had 6000 people, so it's an amazing opportunity this year to go see it first-hand. I don't know what the audience is going to be like, I'm assuming it's going to be more than 6000, but feeling the energy and the excitement from attendees is what I'm really looking forward to. >> Well, that just shows, right, that the software industry, particularly cloud-enabled software industry, is now a global industry, right? >> It is, it is, absolutely, because again, cloud allows those barriers to entry for companies, wherever they are, to be lowered, and customers in different regions can have the latest, greatest directly from the cloud and they both use the product, you know, when it comes out, and so that's, obviously, a super big advantage. The other thing I should be (mumbles) if I didn't say, you know, because it's also available in the cloud, and it's web-based, it's easy to use, easy to access, a lot of our first-time customers are business users. They're not even IT people, so they just go in, start playing with the product, you know, automating a few processes, and then start to scale end-to-end, and then of course they build the COE, IT gets involved. So being able to start your automation journey as small, and then grow as you scale from any parts of the world is really what this opportunity gives us. >> Okay, well thank you for your time today, Riadh. I'm fascinated, everything you guys are doing. Super hot category for those folks out there that want to touch base with Automation Anywhere, shows in London, Vegas, Bangalore, and then where was the fourth one? >> I think Tokyo -- >> Tokyo. >> And then Bangalore after that, yes. >> Okay, fantastic. >> Yes. >> Thanks for joining us today. This is Donald Klein, I'm the host of theCUBE. I'll see you next time. (upbeat music)

(upbeat music) >> Hi, and welcome to theCUBE, the leading source for insights into the world of technology and innovation. I'm your host Donald Klein, and today's topic is the market for autonomous vehicles and the ecosystem suppliers looking to tap into this brave new world of autonomous capabilities in our daily commute. To have this conversation I'm joined by Rudy Burger, managing partner at Woodside Capital. Rudy, welcome to the show. >> Thanks Don, it's great to be here. >> Great, so look, why don't we start off Rudy, why don't you tell us a little bit about Woodside Capital and your role there? >> Great, so I founded Woodside Capital about 20 years ago having started five different companies of my own, one of which I took public. We are a specialist M&A advisor. We work with so-called growth stage often venture-backed companies and help them find buyers that are usually much larger public companies. Our clients are usually US or European companies and we find buyers in the US, Europe, or Asia. >> Excellent, excellent, okay. And why don't you talk a little bit about your kind of specialty areas? >> So I focused my career, and certainly the work at Woodside Capital, on imaging technologies and as an enabling technology, and the products and markets that are enabled by imaging and increasingly computer vision. So nowadays that is autonomous vehicles, consumer technology, security surveillance, and digital health. So enabling technologies, the computer vision is the theme that binds those together. >> Okay, well, the thing that's on everybody's mind these days is autonomous vehicles, when are we going to get them? Very high profile for sure. Before the show we talking about the kind of two key ingredients to making this happen, the AI software which is kind of the brains of the operation and then also the sensors which enable all of the AI. So why don't we talk about the sensor world first, okay? Lot of discussion about there, so sort of does the brave new world of vehicles need lidar? Does it not need lidar? Are there other types of sensors coming along? What's your sense of that market and how it's looking for all of the different players in it? >> So, Don, I look at it from a sort of fairly basic standpoint. Humans have two very capable image sensors and a very powerful processor, and the degree to which the automotive manufacturers and so-called Robo-Taxi developers have decided it's necessary to sprinkle every sensor known to man, and I'm talking lidar, radar, ultrasound, thermal, and of course cameras, is to some extent a degree to which, you know, image sensors are not as good as our eyes today. Now, there are some areas in which we will probably always have technology as a help. For example, humans are not very good at seeing in the dark whereas a thermal technology can do that very well. But my overall belief is that it's never a good idea to bet against an incumbent technology, and in this case I'm talking about so-called CMOS image sensors which are the sensor that goes into pretty much every camera in the world now. It's never a good idea to bet against the incumbent technology being able to scale into a new market. Every time people have done that, they've been wrong. Back in the early days the debate was whether CMOS image sensors would ever be good enough to replace CCDs as the sensor technology, and of course now, you know, everything uses CMOS image sensors. In other markets there was a long period of time in which people were thinking that LCD panels would never be large enough to replace, you know, for television, for example, 50 inch and so forth. It was never going to happen, so we needed plasma TVs, we needed rear-projection TVs. But slowly but surely the incumbent technology, LCDs, expanded to that market. So my belief is that CMOS image sensors will evolve to a point at which they will replace the need for lidar in most applications. >> Interesting, so that's a very controversial statement, right? Because you've certainly seen a lot of emphasis on the development of new generation lidar capability. >> Over 100 lidar companies started over the last three, four years, and of course many of them will not be happy to hear me say that. There are two distinct markets and one is the so-called Robo-Taxi market, and the other is more of the consumer vehicle ADAS market, and I think we need to think about those separately because the economics behind both are very different. If you look at the Robo-Taxi market, those vehicles tend to be much more expensive and are relatively price-insensitive. So if they can improve safety a little bit by putting a lidar on there, you know, great, let's do it, multiple lidars because these vehicles will be in operation 24 by seven, and if each vehicle costs 200,000, $250,000, fine. When we talk about the mass market for automobiles, type of car that you and I might go down and buy, very different thing. And, you know, auto makers sweat the pennies, and so putting a one or $200 lidar in a vehicle, big decision. And to the extent that they can replace the need for that lidar with a much less expensive camera system, that's what they'll do. Bear in mind that Mobileye, which has been the biggest success story, acquired by Intel for $13.5 billion, second largest acquisition Intel ever made, they for the most part still run on one camera, forward-looking camera. That's it, no radar, no lidar, no thermal, one camera. So the clever use of image processing, computer vision, and one image sensor can do a great deal. >> Interesting, okay. Well, so I want to talk about the software in just a second, but just to kind of finish this point, so if you were advising a sensor company that's developing some next gen capabilities, whether lidar or other related technologies, is the point you're making here that there are certain segments of this industry which are going to be more attractive to your technology than others? >> Absolutely, yes. I mean, the first thing to recognize is that the automotive industry has never really been a particularly comfortable fit with the economics and timeline of venture capital. VCs need to invest and recoup and redeploy back to their LPs on an eight-year cycle. But the automotive industry moves quite slowly, perhaps Tesla are excepted, and what the first piece of advice I would give these companies is it's probably going to be three, four, five years before, even if you have the right technology, before that technology really starts generating any significant volume and revenue. So for many venture-backed companies, that's too long. So the first piece of advice is find pockets of revenue, right, beachheads if you will, where you can land your technology and start generating revenue before you get to the automotive market. And many of these lidar companies we just talked about are not going to last long enough to get to the automotive market because not only does the automotive market move slowly but the autonomous vehicle market keeps on getting pushed out to the right as the industry realizes that this is a big, hairy problem. And so I would say, what is it that your technology can do an order of magnitude better than any other technology? Focus on that and find some opportunities for revenue outside the automotive industry that will sustain the company on its way to the holy grail. >> Interesting, yeah, so find that alternative revenue source to get you to base camp, and then when the market's ready, climb that Everest to-- >> I've seen so many companies basically go out of business because they've set their sights on either the automotive market, and it's go for broke. We're not interested in, all these other things are distractions. You know, entrepreneurs don't have a plan B. Or this. We're going to get our technology into a smartphone, that's it. And there are possibly some other opportunities but it takes so long and it's so difficult to get your technology into a smartphone that they go out of business before they ever get to that point. >> Interesting, okay. So good advice for people looking to kind of apply their technology in this kind of a very difficult market, right, very complicated market. All right, well, then let's switch to the other side of it. So we were kind of talking about the key ingredients, right? Sensors but also AI and the software around that, okay, and there are some very big players developing the software. Tesla's had their Autonomy Day where they've showcased their technology. You've obviously got Google with their capabilities developing software. How do you make sense of this overall landscape because we do see a lot of smaller providers also trying to develop software here. >> So the first thing that I find fascinating about the automotive industry is that for the most part there is no software market. There's perhaps one exception of any scale, that's BlackBerry that sells the QNX software. They found a point within the entertainment console where they can license their software. But for all of the development and capital invested into automotive software, nobody is actually generating revenue, making a living, by licensing software. And one of the main reasons for that is that, you know, the automotive market, really since inception, has been a hardware business. This is a business of bending sheet metal, internal combustion engines, and software has really not played that big a role up until relatively recently. So even those companies that do have software technology have ended up selling it into the automotive supply chain as a piece of silicon, embedded on a piece of silicon, not as, you know, here's my software on a USB stick, right? I think that the whole software licensing model hasn't so far fit well, fit comfortably, with the automotive industry. And the other reason is that there's no standard platform. If I were to develop a piece of software, I can, in the PC industry, I can develop for Windows, I can develop for Mac, I can develop for an iPhone. There's no such thing in the automotive industry, and particularly in this new world of autonomous vehicles there is no standard platform. There are many different processors, Nvidia has staked an early claim there. And the reason that most of the companies developing autonomous vehicle technology have developed the so-called full-stack solution, everything from code running on the processor, integrated through the sensors and so forth, is for that reason, there is no standard platform. So each company has developed the whole solution for themselves, and there are many of them around here that have raised hundreds of millions of dollars, some cases billions of dollars, for that purpose. So there is, today, no software market for automotive in the same way that we think about it in other industries. >> Understood, understood. But in terms of the companies that are actually pushing the envelope on these kind of capabilities, right, so we're taking the best of AI, we're applying it to big data sets, and then hopefully being able to extract that to create capabilities for these vehicles, right? What's your sense of how far that's come along in-- >> Well, it's come a long way but, here I'm going to push the boat out a little bit. I don't believe that the so-called deep learning technology, which is the current state of the art for AI, it's the technology that has allowed computers to beat humans at chess, at Go, I don't think that that flavor of AI, that approach to AI, is ever going to get us to safe enough autonomous vehicles. And that's because it works extremely well in fairly well-bounded rules, rule-bounded games or any scenario like that, but can you imagine trying to teach your 16-year-old how to drive by showing them images of every situation that they might encounter, right? Impossible. It's an infinite, it's not a well-bounded set. And that's so difficult because we really haven't developed the technology to allow computers to learn, to have things like common sense, to infer, you know, well, this happened, so this is likely to happen. So I think we are going to need a whole new breakthrough in AI before we get to what is generally considered safe enough vehicles. >> Interesting, well then, maybe if we kind of apply your previous thought about sort of Robo-Taxis as maybe being the segment where you're going to see the most use of these newer sensor technologies. >> Rudy: Near term, yes. >> Exactly, what about maybe, is that sort of the same rules apply there for maybe the AI providers, that they're-- >> I think so and that's why they're all focused on that. I mean, from Uber to Waymo, they've all made the same calculation which is if you're running a fleet of vehicles, and so for example in Uber's case, the driver takes 80% of the fare and only 20% goes back to Uber, but if you can replace the driver with a computer, you can keep that vehicle on the road 24 by seven and you can keep 100% of the revenue. You don't need to pay the computer. So that's the calculus that they're all going through. But I think that many of them are making a fundamental mistake and I predicted recently that I think Uber, my prediction for 2020 is that Uber is going to divest its autonomous vehicle business and get back to the business that it should be focused on. Uber generates about $14 billion a year in gross revenue, so 20% of that, which is the piece that Uber keeps after the drivers take their 80, is what, 2.8 billion. Uber should be able to be an extremely profitable business on 2.8 billion of net revenue, but they're spending a huge chunk of money every year on R&D. Now, I would argue that Hertz and Avis have successful businesses. They're in the service, they're in the transportation business, but they didn't decide that they had to build their own cars in order to be in that business. My view, personal view, is that what Uber should be doing is saying, that's not our business, right? We are the world's best at managing this sort of peer-to-peer network crowdsourced transportation, if you will. And when some company, some Silicon Valley startup, comes out with safe enough technology, great, we'll use it, but we don't have to develop that ourselves. >> Well then, maybe just to play devil's advocate here for a second, what about it's a Robo-Taxi-type technologies being applied in bounded areas within metropolitan areas where the rules-- >> That's where it will start. >> Could be more-- >> I think that's where it will start, but I think part of the problem is that we have, perhaps in part due to all of the media hype around autonomous vehicles, we've been misdirected to thinking about autonomous vehicles as a replacement for the car we drive to work every day and I think that's the wrong way to think about it. I think that autonomous vehicles are going to show up in the market as an extension of public transportation. Right, you know, I get off the train and there's an autonomous vehicle waiting to take me for the last couple of miles to my office. >> And those last couple of miles would be sort of a regulated space. >> Rudy: May well be. >> Where the AI is more than capable of functioning. >> Right, and that, you know, yes. And so it's better to think about autonomous vehicles as not being a revolutionary technology but much more of an evolutionary technology. And in fact, most of these technologies are showing up in so-called ADAS technologies which are designed to make driving your regular car safer, lane assist, keeping you a safe distance. >> Donald: Maybe just explain that word, ADAS, and what that means. >> So ADAS stands for automated driver-assistance systems. So one of the first was cruise control, right, everybody's familiar with cruise control. And so to some extent ADAS is just building on cruise control. In addition to maintaining a constant speed, you can now stay in the lane. In addition to maintaining a constant speed, it will now automatically slow down if you get too close to the car in front. And so you can see ADAS as, you know, collision avoidance and so forth, not full autonomy, still have to have a driver in the driver's seat, but evolving year by year until one year we wake up and, yep, my car will actually drive me all the way from home to work without me intervening. Right, it's going to happen in that way. >> So incremental improvements. >> Incremental improvement. >> To ADAS as opposed to kind of revolution of autonomy. >> An overnight sensation. >> Yeah, right, coming from nowhere. Okay, understood. Well then, let's pivot from that then, okay. So let's talk about the automotive industry as a whole and sort of your thoughts on how this is all going to play out. >> Yeah, so there are some very interesting dynamics playing out in the automotive industry. Firstly, as good news, as a result of all of this money and innovation in the automotive industry, Detroit's actually coming back. I go there once or twice a year and you can feel the economy coming back in Detroit, but it's not going to come back around, you know, bending sheet metal. And the challenge that the automotive companies have is so much of their infrastructure and expertise has been built on construction, building a car, production lines to bend the metal, install the engine, and the internal combustion engine itself. And by complete coincidence, to some extent, we've got this confluence of all of these autonomous technologies and electric vehicles happening at the same time. Electric vehicles are much easier to make than internal combustion engines. Far fewer parts. It's one of the reasons that China has spun up about 20 different electric vehicle companies recently. So I think that long term, my prediction is that the automobile industry will go the same way that the personal computer industry went. When the PC first, you know, it was born by IBM, or Apple in some sense before that. There were dozens of companies producing different PCs and it was very much, they were expensive products, and, you know, relatively unusual. As the industry matured, the supply chains matured, and it became apparent there were really only two companies that were making a lot of money out of the PC industry. The companies that developed the software, operating system, and the companies that developed the processor, and all of the manufacturing went over to, in the PC's case, in Taiwan, right? And I think that exactly the same thing is going to happen with the automotive industry. Tesla today still actually makes cars, but I don't see them long term being in the car business because they're really a technology company. It's the reason I don't think Apple is ever going to get into the car industry. They make fantastic margins selling computer products. The gross margin selling a car, it's miserable. It can be single digits or teens. That would completely tank Apple's blended gross margin. So my prediction for the industry is there will be a few small pockets of very profitable businesses, particularly around the operating system, by which I mean the intelligence or the AI intelligence, and then the processor, whether it's a Qualcomm processor or a Nvidia processor or an Intel processor. And as with the PC industry, most of the profit will go there and most of the manufacturing will end up getting outsourced because that's not the value-add, you know, bending metal and so forth. >> Interesting, well, so in the kind of compute market today, right, we have this notion of sort of cloud-native, right, okay, and that many of the companies that are developing apps as relying on cloud-native infrastructure have a kind of technology lead that's going to be hard for some of the legacy providers to actually catch up on. Now, other people say that that's not necessarily the case and et cetera, right? Can you make the same argument for the electric car market, that some of the electric-natives might have a kind of sustainable advantage here? >> I should've added, today the cloud infrastructure companies, cloud services, SaaS companies, in the PC world, you know, very profitable, and I can see a similar cloud services model developing for the automotive industry. However, other than Tesla, it's very difficult to change the automotive channel to support that. I'll give you one example. Everyone that owns a Tesla is very used to the idea that, sometimes on a daily basis, a new bunch of software, operating system software, is downloaded overnight to your vehicle. You wake up in the morning and some new feature's been turned on, right? Tesla can do that because they bypass the entire dealership channel that has a complete lock on the rest of the industry. So for example, if GM wants to do the same thing as Tesla and do sort of what's called over-the-air, OTA, updates, software updates, they can't do that because their contract with the dealership network states that if there is service to be done on the vehicle, the vehicle has to be brought back to the dealership, and the dealerships consider updating the software on the vehicle as service. So their contract with the dealers actually prevent them from doing something that basic. So it's not just a technology issue. The whole channel and way vehicles get sold is going to have to change. >> Interesting, so that's the advantage that some of the new generation of vehicle manufacturers-- >> I would say that Tesla has a five year lead, technology lead, because they, like Apple, are vertically integrated. They're doing everything from user interface, fit and function, all the way down to the semiconductor. They're developing their own semiconductors now. So they have become a fearsome competitor in the electronic vehicle space because they've been doing it for longer than the other major auto companies. They've figured out a lot of the, you know, tricks and techniques of how to extend mileage and so forth. And so they have a substantial lead in the industry at this point, despite the fact that over the next 12, 18 months, every automotive company is going to be coming out with their own flavor of electronic vehicle. >> So then it's more than just about having electric drivetrains, et cetera, right? It's about the whole suite of capabilities. >> It's a systems engineering challenge. >> Interesting, okay. All right, well Rudy, we're going to have to leave it there, okay, but I think everything you've told us is, it sounds like some good news for some of the Tesla stock holders at the moment. >> I think so. >> Okay, well. (laughs) We'll pass on making an opinion about that, but great conversation, thank you for your insights. Okay, this is Donald Klein, host of theCUBE, here with Rudy Burger, managing partner at Woodside Capital. >> Rudy: Great, thank you, Don. (upbeat music)

(upbeat music) >> Hi, and welcome to theCUBE, the leading source for insights into the world of technology and innovation. I'm your host, Donald Klein and today's topic is the exploding software segment of Robotic Process Automation, where Automation Anywhere is one of the leading providers. To have that conversation today, I'm joined by Riadh Dridi, CMO of Automation Anywhere. Welcome to the show, Riadh. >> Thank you for having me. >> Great, okay so, look, you're relatively new to Automation Anywhere, is that correct? >> Yes, I've been there for about six months now. >> Excellent, so why don't you talk a little bit about your background and how you came to the world of RPA. >> Yes, so I've been in the IT industry for about 20 years, been in the hardware space and the software space and the cloud space more recently, so when I heard about Automation Anywhere in the RPA space, did my due diligence and find out how fast this technology was catching on in enterprises, I got really, really excited and then met the management team and then get even more excited and ended up, you know, taking the job. >> Well, congratulations. >> Thank you. >> It's an exploding segment, for sure. Why don't you talk to us a little bit about what you see happening in this market and how fast it's growing. >> Yeah, so there are many studies out there, and of course we have our own internal data, but the market right now, according to Gartner is growing about 63% year over year, is the fastest growing enterprise software market in the industry right now and is projected to continue to grow at that pace for the foreseeable future. >> Okay, and let's talk about, sort of for people who are not that familiar with RPA. It's obviously an acronym that's being, you know, tossed around a lot but, you know, talk to us about Robotic Process Automation and how you define that category. >> Right, so that was one of the challenges early on is to try to put the label on this segment, which is really about automating processes end-to-end as much as possible, and so the RPA category is where, you know, some of the analysts decided to focus on, and so what it does is really allow businesses to deploy software robots to business processes so that process can be handled by bots instead of humans. The mundane, repetitive tasks that humans do as part of the end-to-end process, whether it's a order to cash process or procure to pay process, any, frankly, business process that things, that humans should not be doing, should be better suited to do more creative work. That's when, you know, bots came into play and the whole category was named, Robotic Process Automation because the robots are taking the place of the humans, in that terms of process automation. >> Got it, okay, so everybody talked about the addition of the bots, so creating bots, right, and what's kind of fascinating about this world is that, you know, for customers that deploy this type of solution, right, they're growing a whole library of bots, right you're doing things. Maybe just walk us through an example bot and what a bot does and why this technology is so unique. >> Right, so think about, first of all, the problem that those bots are solving, right? So today you have ERP applications, CRM applications, any sort of applications in businesses to really automate a process, like I said an order to cash process, procure to pay process. That's why people have bought the technology, but what the industry has realized is after twenty years or more of using the same technology, humans were still doing part of the process that should have been automated by the software. So when you look at the average enterprises, only 20% of the steps that should be automated are automated, 80% of it is done by humans, whether it's opening files, reading documents, cutting and pasting, filling out forms, you know, playing with excel and kind of loading data into systems, data entry, a lot of it is still done by humans. So what the bots do is go in and take that work away from the humans so they can really focus on better tasks. That's really what it is. >> And so, just so everybody's kind of clear, so what's really so intelligent about these capabilities, right, take something sort of like invoices, right? Any company, you know, receiving lots and lots of invoices, all these invoices are going to be formatted in different ways. >> Right. >> Correct? >> Right. >> And historically it's been up to a human to kind of look through that invoice, pull out the relevant pieces of information, right, and enter that into the system so that the system can then issue the PO or pay the PO, et cetera, right? >> Exactly. >> But what your bots can do, or what the space as a whole, right, is they can intelligently scan these documents, and look for the kind of pieces of information, and actually load those into the system, correct? >> That's exactly right. So what the bots are doing now with computer vision, they're able to look into applications, they're able to assess the data, they're able to assess the information from that data and then process it like humans would do. So they're able to, again, get in, look at invoices or any type of, frankly, unstructured data or semi-structured data, and take that data, analyze it, and then manipulate it like a human would do. >> Excellent. >> An exception is that they are, obviously, doing it 24/7, much faster, with less errors. >> Got it, right. So you're turning people who, previously may have been focused on kind of a data entry task, right, into kind of managing a process, right? >> Exactly. So basically, what we like to say is we are taking the robot out of humans and then giving it to the robots, who are supposed to be doing the work. >> Excellent. >> And that's kind of phase one, and then phase two is obviously making those robots more intelligent, so that they're not able to do the simplest of simplest tasks, but start to be a little bit more intelligent and use AI to do things that are a little bit more advanced and more complicated. >> Okay, excellent. So look, you guys have got some news, right? >> Yup. >> You've kind of just come out with a big new release of your platform. Why don't you just kind of talk us through what the news is and what you guys have released? >> Yeah, so if you think about what the space has done so far, is taking a process, that's usually a known process, like I said, an order to cash, or even a simpler process, right? And taking look at the different steps and tasks that people have to do, and say, let's now automate those tasks and that particular process. A lot of the time is spent on trying to figure out their process. I don't know about your company, but I know in a lot of companies that I've been at, a lot of processes are not documented. So what we've announced yesterday is a bot, we call this Discovery Bot, that allows us to discover the processes that people work with. So if you're, again, an agent or a knowledge worker in an organization, you're going through a certain number of steps. The bot is going to basically analyze all those different steps, map the process, allows you to understand the flow that you're going through, and let you know that if you automate those repetitive tasks within your process, you're going to be able to save a certain amount of time and energy and have a better process in place. And then the cool thing about what we announced yesterday, and this is unique in the industry today, is the ability to create bots automatically from analyzing that process. So again, the industry has matured into analyzing processes manually, or using certain tools, but then the work had to be done by a different platform to basically create the bots from these processes. We're the only provider today that can analyze processes with the tool, and then create the bots automatically, shrinking the time for process automation end-to-end. >> Fantastic. >> Okay, and now, but also part of this release, too, right, is your kind of cloud capabilities. You've really kind of ramped up your ability to scale for the kind of largest customers. Talk a little to us about how the application functions in the cloud, how it functions on-prem. How does that all work end-to-end? >> Right, so back in November we announced the new platform called Enterprise A2019. This was the first cloud native web-based platform in the industry. And the reason why cloud native is important is because it's what gives you the benefits, in terms of scaling, in terms of TCO, in terms of easy to use, and that platform is now the core platform for the company, and so the product announcement we had yesterday allows our customers to use the same platform, except now we add this Discovery Bot at the front-end to discover the process, prioritize them, and then use the platform we've announced to automate these processes. What's very interesting about the platform is that customers can use it on-prem, can use it in the cloud. The customers, obviously, that decide to use it in the cloud will have the ability to learn more from the platform because, you know, it's going to tackle a lot more data in the cloud. Then we're going to be able to use lots of data analysis tools to be able to get the customers to extract knowledge from it and then innovate a much faster way. The people who are going to be using it on-prem, typically, are regulated industries or customers who have systems of records that are, typically, on-prem and they would like the bots to run where the systems are. So the platform is available in the cloud. It's available on-prem. It's the customer's choice to decide how to use it, but the innovation that's backed into it is what's really exciting. >> So this is kind of, I think, a fundamental point, maybe people should understand, right? So what you're, this is kind of a brave new world, right? You're saying kind of cloud native app, right, which is now ready to be used on-prem, right? >> Right >> As opposed to maybe the older world where people develop applications that were primarily based for kind of a server architecture within the firewall, right? >> Exactly. >> And then they tried to migrate it to the cloud? >> Exactly. >> So in some sense, you've done the reverse. >> Exactly. So if you were to build an application today knowing, you know, microservices architecture, knowing Java, knowing web-based, that's how you would build it. And so the fact that you've built the architecture for a modern application and then offer the options to customers to use it, either on-prem or in the cloud, is what we've done. >> Got it, great. Okay, so then what's the advantage of being able to use, so you've got this application that can scale with microservices, right? It can handle the volume that a Fortune 500 company might need. What's the advantage for them being able to do it on-prem? What does that help? >> So for some customers, it's really about regulating industries. For example, if you're a bank, or if you're a healthcare institution, the data cannot travel through the cloud. So systems of records, whether it's a CRM, whether it's HRM with some other systems of records, an ERP, usually will be on-prem and the data can travel through the cloud. So for these customers, we're saying, use the product on-prem, you have the same benefit. It's still the cloud architecture, microservices-based. It's still web-based as far as the client interface is concerned. It's the lowest TCO you can get, but you don't have to worry about getting to the cloud if that's what you decide to do. >> So, in terms of enabling digital transformation, really the requirement here is to be able to enable that both in the cloud and on-prem and do it simultaneously. >> Correct, and again, some customers will do a hybrid of both and then say, for these workflows we'll have them in the cloud, for these we'll keep them on-prem. Some customers in regulated industries will say, we don't want to do anything in the cloud, we want everything on-prem. They'll have the choice to do that. >> Understood, okay, well look, final question here. Let's talk about kind of some of the upcoming events that Automation Anywhere has going on, right? You do events all across the globe, you're now a global company. Tell us what's happening on that front. >> Yeah, so we do lots of events, you know, cause our customers are global, where we have customers in 90 countries, we have offices in 45 countries, and so we have to go where our customers are. So we have four large conferences throughout the year, one upcoming in London, we have it in Vegas, in Tokyo, and in Bangalore, as well. And it's the largest gathering of RPA minds and experts in the industry today. So what's exciting about the one that's coming up is, obviously, Discovery Bot is going to be featured at that conference. People will be able to play with the product, they'll be able to understand, you know, the latest innovations from Automation Anywhere. We have sessions that are called Build a Bots where people will be able to build their bots on-site, and that's always a popular thing for people to do. And then we're going to have some amazing speakers and top leaders who will help customers understand, you know, what's happening in digital transformation, and how intelligent automation can accelerate that transformation. >> Okay, great, and so just to understand the timing of it, so you've got a show coming up in London in the very near future here, is that right? >> Yes, I believe it's in April and then we have another one in May in Las Vegas. >> Okay, so then the big one in North America is going to be Vegas this year? >> Correct, correct, it's in May. >> Okay, great. And then, what about the, so then you also talked about Bangalore, talk about -- >> Yeah, Bangalore, I don't have all the dates in my head, so I apologize, but I think Bangalore is, I believe, in August or September, and then Tokyo, I believe, it's in June, so I'll have to confirm all those dates -- >> But one of the unique things, right, is that Bangalore show has actually been one of your largest shows of the year. >> It's been amazing. So I literally missed that show by one week. When I joined the company, I was super excited about having the ability to go visit the customers and the partners within the show. I think last year they had 6000 people, so it's an amazing opportunity this year to go see it first-hand. I don't know what the audience is going to be like, I'm assuming it's going to be more than 6000, but feeling the energy and the excitement from attendees is what I'm really looking forward to. >> Well, that just shows, right, that the software industry, particularly cloud-enabled software industry, is now a global industry, right? >> It is, it is, absolutely, because again, cloud allows those barriers to entry for companies, wherever they are, to be lowered, and customers in different regions can have the latest, greatest directly from the cloud and they both use the product, you know, when it comes out, and so that's, obviously, a super big advantage. The other thing I should be remiss if I didn't say, you know, because it's also available in the cloud, and it's web-based, it's easy to use, easy to access, a lot of our first-time customers are business users. They're not even IT people, so they just go in, start playing with the product, you know, automating a few processes, and then start to scale end-to-end, and then of course they build the COE, IT gets involved. So being able to start your automation journey as small, and then grow as you scale from any parts of the world is really what this opportunity gives us. >> Okay, well thank you for your time today, Riadh. I'm fascinated, everything you guys are doing. Super hot category for those folks out there that want to touch base with Automation Anywhere, shows in London, Vegas, Bangalore, and then where was the fourth one? >> I think Tokyo -- >> Tokyo. >> And then Bangalore after that, yes. >> Okay, fantastic. >> Yes. >> Thanks for joining us today. This is Donald Klein, I'm the host of theCUBE. I'll see you next time. (upbeat music)