Blog

CEO and co-founder of Facebook Mark Zuckerberg poses next to Facebook head of global policy communications and former UK deputy prime minister Nick Clegg (L) prior to a meeting with French President at the Elysee Palace in Paris, on May 10, 2019.Yoah Valat | AFP | Getty ImagesAround the world, lawmakers are writing the new rules of the internet. In Europe, India, Australia, the UK and elsewhere, laws are being proposed governing everything from privacy and content, to the size and competitiveness of technology companies and how data is held, shared and used at scale.This is a good thing — regulation is overdue. For too long, many of these important issues have been left to private companies to deal with alone. Far from resisting regulation, Facebook has advocated it in a number of areas for some time now. President Biden has called for a global alliance of “techno-democracies,” but efforts to regulate tech in Washington have stalled. Much of the domestic debate is devoted to whether to break up big tech companies, but not on the fundamental societal issues at stake — like rules around privacy, safety, content, and data sharing — which can only be fixed by regulation. This is a pivotal moment. As policymakers begin drafting laws, it’s increasingly clear there are contrasting visions of what the internet should be. The open, accessible and global internet we use today has been shaped by American companies and American values like free expression, transparency, accountability and the encouragement of innovation and entrepreneurship. But these values can’t be taken for granted. The Chinese internet model — segregated from the wider internet and subject to extensive surveillance — presents a risk to the open internet. Other countries, including Vietnam, Russia and Turkey, have taken steps in a similar direction.Even in many open democratic societies, there is talk of “data sovereignty” and moves to clamp down on American companies and the sharing of data. Seamless data flows are the life blood of an open internet. But European court rulings have thrown data transfers between the E.U. and U.S. into doubt. Protecting our economies by ensuring the free flow of data between the E.U. and U.S. should be an urgent priority on both sides of the Atlantic. In India, the world’s largest democracy, regulators have published rules that expand the government’s ability to direct social media platforms to trace and take down content, including private messages. The U.S. risks becoming a nation that exports incredible technologies, but fails to export its values. To make progress, we need to break the gridlock in DC. While there are substantial disagreements between Democrats and Republicans, no one wants the status quo and there’s much both sides agree on. I’m an outsider to both Silicon Valley and Washington. My background is in British and European politics. As the Deputy Prime Minister in the U.K.’s first coalition government for generations, I led a naturally center-left party into a constructive governing arrangement with a center-right one. It worked because we focused on making progress on the things we agreed on. Here are four areas where I believe progress could be made quickly with a bipartisan approach. First, reform of Section 230. People of all political persuasions want large companies to take responsibility for combating illegal content and activity on their platforms. And when they remove harmful content, people want them to do so fairly and transparently. Congress could start there. Platforms should only be granted continued protection from liability for the content they carry if they can demonstrate that they have robust practices for identifying illegal content and quickly removing it. While it would be impractical to hold them liable if a particular piece of content evades detection — there are billions of posts every day — they should be required to follow industry best practices. Congress could also bring more transparency, accountability, and oversight to the processes by which large internet companies make and enforce rules about what users can do or say on their services. Second, Congress could do more to protect against influence operations. Companies can and do take steps to root out organized networks seeking to mislead people and undermine public trust. But Congress can create deterrence that no industry effort can match. Our teams have published recommended principles for regulation in this space, with a focus on imposing cost on the people behind these campaigns, and creating clarity on the boundary between deception and advocacy. Congress could act now to mandate platform transparency, enable lawful information sharing and impose liability directly on the people and organizations behind malicious influence operations. Congress could also update the rules around the use of social media in elections — rules which haven’t changed meaningfully to account for the internet era. For example, we’ve supported regulation like the Honest Ads Act and the Deter Act to prevent election interference. Third, Congress can break the deadlock on federal privacy legislation. The U.S. is watching from the sidelines as others write the global playbook on privacy, with significant implications for American values, competitiveness and national security. But there’s much Democrats and Republicans agree on. By looking for a sensible middle ground Congress could make real progress, for example by establishing strong regulatory enforcement, and giving businesses certainty to operate. Fourth, Congress should set out clear rules on data portability to better enable people to move their data between services and “vote with their feet.” It could also create rules to govern how platforms should share data for the public good. As society grapples with how to address misinformation, harmful content, and rising polarization, Facebook research could provide insights that help design evidence-based solutions. But to do that, there needs to be a clear regulatory framework for data research that preserves individual privacy. Finally, to address these issues and more, the U.S. could create a new digital regulator. Not only would a new regulator be able to navigate the competing trade-offs in the digital space, it would be able to join the dots between issues like content, data, and economic impact — much like the Federal Communications Commission has successfully exercised regulatory oversight over telecoms and media. By focusing on the areas where there is agreement on both sides, Congress can break the deadlock and create the most comprehensive internet legislation in a generation. In doing so, it can help to preserve the American values at the heart of the global internet. Nick Clegg is vice president of global affairs at Facebook, former deputy prime minister of the United Kingdom and former member of the European Parliament.

GUANGZHOU, China — Qin Jiahao has been working at Chinese e-commerce giant JD.com’s logistics operations for around six years. Now a huge amount of his work has become automated.”In the past, almost all the work is manual. After automation, nearly half of our workers’ job is done by machine. It reduces our work intensity,” Qin told CNBC.”In the past, I was responsible for collecting goods and putting them on shelves … Now, after the goods get here, the automation equipment will put goods at a designated place, and then put them on shelves. This whole process is done by automation.”Walking around JD.com’s 500,000 square meter logistics park in Dongguan, south China, you will see huge machines helping to automate tasks like packing and shelving.Qin’s situation highlights a broader trend in China — the push toward automating jobs. The labor market in the world’s second-largest economy faces some big challenges, including an aging population and rising wages.  “It’s still rapidly evolving that aging population is a reality … China’s now facing the challenge of potentially getting old before it gets rich,” Jonathan Woetzel, senior partner at McKinsey, told CNBC.An automated machine stacks packages at Chinese e-commerce giant JD.com’s huge logistics center in Dongguan, China.Arjun Kharpal | CNBCChina’s working age population shrunk by more than 5 million people in the last decade as births dropped, according to the country’s National Bureau of Statistics. The country is still feeling the effects of the one-child policy enacted in the late 1970s to control its rapidly-growing population.Between the 1940s and the 1980s, the country’s population doubled in size, from over 500 million people to more than 1 billion, according to official figures. Over the next 40 years, that growth slowed to 40%. Today, the country’s population is 1.4 billion — more than four times the size of the U.S.However, the proportion of China’s working age population is falling.Automation is seen as one way to help solve some of these issues.”Automation, of course, is one of those big opportunities,” Woetzel said. “And by that we include digitization, both to the customer, and more importantly … up the chain back to suppliers. That is really going to be the driver of increasing all of that productivity.””In the financial sector, about 10 years ago, if you looked at the average productivity of a financial worker in China, compared to say Europe, it was maybe 20%. Now it’s closer to 40%, or 50%. So still lagging, but to have that degree of change, in the course of almost … five years is almost unheard of.”Driverless car pushBut automation is moving beyond obvious places such as factories or warehouses.China is pushing forward in technologies such as driverless cars which use artificial intelligence, an area that Beijing hopes to dominate in its broader technology battle with the U.S.The southern Chinese city of Guangzhou has become a major testing hub for autonomous vehicles. One start-up called WeRide is developing technology for driverless cars and buses.WeRide’s self-driving robobus is stationed at the company’s headquarters in Guangzhou, China.Arjun Kharpal | CNBCAutonomous vehicles could replace jobs such as taxi drivers. Tony Han, CEO of WeRide, sees autonomous cars as a way to solve some of the issues around an aging population.”One (of the issues) is the shortage of labor, especially in the concept of aging society. In China, and also in U.S., in most of the … developed countries, human labor are getting more and more expensive. People need better pay, need more welfare,” Han said.”Think about if you want to get a chauffeur, you want to get a driver, it’s entirely expensive and call a taxi sometimes in a more metropolis city … also quite expensive. Can we find a cost-effective way to supply this kind of transportation service to everybody?”Job displacementIncreasing automation, however, could also lead to job losses.Between 2018 and 2030, up to 220 million Chinese workers or 30% of the workforce may need to transition between occupations, McKinsey estimates.”That, of course, is a massive challenge for the employer, but the employee, but also for government and for society as a whole,” Woetzel.

In this articleWBATheranos founder Elizabeth Holmes leaves the Robert F. Peckham Federal Building with her defense team in downtown San Jose, Calif., on Tuesday, May 4, 2021.MediaNews Group/The Mercury News via Getty Images | MediaNews Group | Getty ImagesJurors in the trial of Elizabeth Holmes will hear evidence about her extravagant lifestyle as Theranos CEO but with some limitations.That’s the ruling issued by U.S. District Court Judge Edward Davila late Saturday as part of a 100 page response to motions in Holmes’ upcoming criminal trial.The judge granted in part Holmes’ motion to exclude evidence referencing her extravagant lifestyle outside of her position as chief executive of the blood-testing start-up.”The Government may introduce evidence that Holmes enjoyed a lifestyle as Theranos CEO that is comparable to those of other tech company CEOs. This includes salary, travel, celebrity, and other perks and benefits commensurate with the position,” Davila wrote in the filing.However, “references to specific purchases or details reflecting branding of clothing, hotels, or other personal items is not relevant, and the prejudicial effect of that evidence outweighs any probative value,” the judge added.The ruling is a partial victory for Holmes as prosecutors cannot introduce details about Holmes’ specific purchases and personal items outside of her position as CEO. Holmes lived in an expensive rental home, traveled by private jet, stayed at luxury hotels and employed Theranos-paid assistants to run her lavish shopping sprees.”Each time Holmes made an extravagant purchase, it is reasonable to infer that she knew her fraudulent activity allowed her to pay for those items,” Davila wrote. “While the benefits of these purchases are not as directly tied to the fraud…it may still be probative of Holmes’ scienter.”The ruling comes two weeks after Holmes battled it out with prosecutors in court over whether details of her wealth, lifestyle and perks she attained as CEO would be relevant to jurors in her trial.At the height of Theranos, the start-up was valued at $9 billion and Holmes was touted as the world’s youngest self-made woman billionaire. The company collapsed in 2018 following a Wall Street Journal investigation that revealed failings in the blood-testing technology.Davila ruled on more than 20 dueling motions on what jurors can hear in her trial, scheduled to begin on Aug. 30.A motion by the government to admit business-related text messages between Holmes and her co-defendant Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani was denied by Davila.Prosecutors say the messages show the two top executives knew how much trouble Theranos was in before it collapsed. In a November 2014 text to Holmes, Balwani describes one Theranos lab as a “f*cking disaster zone,” adding he would “work on fixing this.”Holmes and Balwani have both pled not guilty to a dozen criminal wire fraud charges in connection with deceiving investors, patients and doctors.

In this articleMTCHBMBLDating apps are creating badges displaying vaccination status and offering vaccinated Americans free premium benefits.TinderThe largest dating apps in the U.S. are banding together in support of Covid-19 vaccines, in the hopes that it’ll be a hot vax summer. For the uninitiated, hot vax summer plays on the idea that once single Americans get their coronavirus vaccines, there will be a surge in dating, hookups and overall social opportunities due to all the pent-up demand. (You may also know it as shot girl summer.)Match Group’s Hinge, Tinder, OKCupid, BLK, Chispa, Match and Plenty of Fish users will be able to share their vaccine status and get some premium benefits. Bumble and Badoo will also be able to note whether they’re vaccinated, and receive some complementary credits. Bumble’s and Match Group’s latest earnings reports already indicated what all of the social media anecdotes are saying — people want to hook up again. Though, Match executives put it another way in its letter to shareholders, calling this the “summer of love.”In its earnings release, Match said it anticipates total revenue of $680 million to $690 million in the second quarter. That would represent 22% to 24% year-over-year growth. Additionally, the company expects EBITDA of $255 million to $260 million this next quarter.”The vaccination rates and control over the Covid cases these last few months have resulted in our users feeling more confident about their dating lives,” Match CEO Shar Dubey said in a call with investors.Bumble estimates total revenue in the range of $175 million to $178 million for the second quarter, up 31% year-over-year at the midpoint of the range. That’s also slightly better than analysts surveyed by Refinitiv expected, though some analysts considered it overly cautious. It also anticipates full year revenue in the range of $724 million to $734 million, raising its guidance.Bumble CEO Whitney Wolfe Herd told investors the company was seeing “meaningful pent-up demand as economic and health improvements approve across regions.”‘Growing momentum with reopening’With a busy summer in mind, dating companies, like Match, Bumble and Grindr, are able to reap the benefits.”We got a kick out of hot vax summer,” Grindr’s Director of Marketing Alex Black told CNBC. “Activity is definitely up and we definitely expect that to increase going into the summer.”It’s not that people didn’t use dating apps while isolating at home this past year. Despite the pandemic keeping people from in-person meetups, dating apps saw a jump in usage during lockdowns. Dating companies were able to shift their businesses to put an emphasis on virtual dating during the pandemic, so people could fill up their evenings with Zoom dates and phone calls.It seemed to pay off.Bumble’s first quarter revenue increased year-over-year to $170.7 million, up from $79.1 million for the first quarter of 2020. Analysts were expecting $164.6 million. Total paying users also increased 30% to 2.8 million.For its first quarter, Match reported adjusted earnings per share of 57 cents on revenue of $668 million. Analysts expected 40 adjusted EPS of 40 cents on revenue of $651 million. Average subscribers increased 12% to 11.1 million, up from 9.9 million in the prior year quarter.Daily average swipes were up 24%, daily average messages gained 19%, and conversations were 32% longer compared to the baseline period before Covid, Match said. Hinge is on pace to double its revenue in 2021.”Stronger than expected 1Q21 results show growing momentum with reopening,” Truist Securities analysts wrote in a recent note on dating apps.Hinge screenshotA reacceleration of the economy and a willingness to meet up with strangers again will likely push companies’ growth even further, Jordana Abraham, co-host of the popular dating podcast “U Up?” told CNBC.Now that more than 270 million vaccine doses have been administered in the U.S., the people who took breaks from dating over the pandemic (tired of endless swiping or remote dating) are ready to get back out there. Often, an app is behind meet ups.”People have felt this fear of being in physical contact with people, this fear of going out and meeting anyone new,” Abraham said. “And as people across the country start to get vaccinated, there’s like something in the air. It’s the sense of hopefulness, in the sense of, you know, the idea that they’re going to be able to get back to that physical intimacy which so many people have been craving.”Bumble told investors that it was already seeing signs of increased engagement in the U.S. People who had opted out of the app during the pandemic are starting to come back, and people who stayed are engaging even more.”Of course people who took a break are definitely coming back,” Grindr’s Black said. The company is seeing growth among new users and a return of those who are logging back in for the first time in a while.Kathryn, a 27-year-old from Chicago, said she’s been on-and-off of Hinge and Bumble since the pandemic restricted nearly all of the ways to meet people in person. (As she put it: “at bars, at work, Uber Pools, the wine section of Target, etc.”). Now that she’s vaccinated, she’s comfortable going on more dates that aren’t virtual and is looking for casual relationships.”I’m not looking to immediately reenter the world and settle into a serious relationship,” Kathryn told CNBC in an email, asking that her last name not be used so she could speak freely about her dating life. “I don’t know if that’s the common sentiment though. A lot of people may have realized after all this time alone at home that they’d like someone stable to be there if and when something like this happens again.”Bumble screenshotIt’s a similar story for Jordan, a 24-year-old from Boston. She’s been using Hinge and Bumble, and had been seeking out a serious relationship before the pandemic. However, after spending a year living alone and becoming fully vaccinated, she said she’s leaning more toward casual relationships, wanting to meet more people.Most places also still haven’t returned to normal, so people are relying on apps to continue meeting people.”Since my area is still re-opening, it feels like I’m in limbo, where I can go places but can’t necessarily go to the types of events/activities where I usually meet people (ex. bars, concerts) or COVID restrictions limit socialization at the places I can go (ex. local outdoor events, museums, gym),” she said in an email.Bumble’s Wolfe Herd told CNBC’s “TechCheck” that as people come out of the pandemic, they’ve realized what they’re looking for.Grindr is ramping up its marketing and advertising spend in anticipation of a return to normal. The company is also planning a handful of in-person events for later in the summer, going off of local health guidelines. Bumble may also boost its marketing spend, depending on pandemic recovery.Of course, it all depends on whether pandemic conditions continue to improve. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said fully vaccinated people no longer need to wear a face mask or stay six feet away from others in most settings, whether outdoors or indoors, which is a huge vote of confidence for singles.A safe hot vax summerPeople don’t want to just be protected against the coronavirus. A similar story has been playing out with U.S. condom sales this past quarter. Male condom sales dipped over the year, since fewer people were having sex, but now that restrictions are easing and people are vaccinated, sales are back up.Sales jumped 23.4% to $37 million during the four weeks ending April 18 compared year-over-year, according to the latest figures from market research firm IRI and reported by CNN.Trojan condom-maker Church & Dwight said 2021 could be “promising” for sales. Condoms are expected to deliver year-over-year growth as society opens up and consumers have greater mobility, the company’s CEO Matthew Farrell said on an April 29 call with investors.Durex-maker Reckitt Benckiser said in its April 28 earnings report the segment delivered double-digit revenue growth in the quarter, led by strong growth in China due to an easing of social distancing restrictions.”Looser ‘stay at home’ restrictions in China, compared to the first quarter of 2020, have for example, helped drive strong growth in our sexual wellbeing category. Over time, we would expect this recovery to be replicated in other markets where lockdowns have led to temporarily reduced demand,” the company said.Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.

In this articleDRHSignage for the AT&T Inc. WarnerMedia HBO Max streaming service is displayed on a smartphone in an arranged photograph taken in the Brooklyn Borough of New York, U.S., on Thursday, May 28, 2020.Gabby Jones | Bloomberg | Getty ImagesDuring its annual upfront presentation to advertisers this week, Fox ran a spoof pharmaceutical ad for what it called “Adbyva”: a product to alleviate ad buyers’ woes that so many viewers are watching on ad-free platforms. “Does the thought of another ad-free streamer behind a paywall give you the willies? Do you find yourself laughing hysterically because your [gross rating point] goals seem completely unreachable?” the ad began. “If so, you’re probably suffering from Max Plus syndrome, a condition plaguing many ad buyers today.” With so many eyeballs moving into streaming, networks want advertisers to flock to their ad-supported streaming offerings. That sentiment was especially obvious during this year’s television upfront presentations, which kick off a season where advertisers typically commit much of their yearly TV spending in deals. Comcast’s NBCUniversal, Fox, Discovery, Disney, AT&T’s WarnerMedia and ViacomCBS gave digital presentations to advertisers this week and put plenty of focus on ad-supported offerings like Peacock, Hulu and HBO Max with Ads. (And outside of the presentations, the real focus earlier this week was on the news that AT&T would combine its content unit WarnerMedia with Discovery in a $43 billion deal, which was briefly mentioned during introductory remarks but largely left out of the companies’ pre-recorded presentations). Ads in streaming Though streaming has been historically dominated by ad-free paid subscription platforms like Netflix, ad-supported services are gaining ground, according to eMarketer. In January 2021, 34% of U.S. households that had video streaming capability used ad-supported streaming services, up 6 percentage points from January 2020, according to Nielsen data. That applies both to ad-supported on-demand video platforms and linear streaming. “Cable networks are increasingly touting their streaming offerings as a way to reach viewers outside the pay TV bundle,” Wells Fargo analysts wrote in a note earlier this week. “Tubi was much of the focus at Fox’s Upfront presentation, with the company repeatedly making the point that its AVOD offering is free unlike some of its competitors. Similar to Fox, NBCU put the spotlight on Peacock.” But broadcasters are wary of turning off consumers with repetitive ads and long ad breaks. That’s why they’re looking for ways to switch up what a consumer might consider the typical TV ad break. During its presentation, for instance, WarnerMedia touted its forthcoming ad-supported service, promising light ad loads and less invasive ad types. Executives said the platform will use “pause ads,” an ad type already used on platforms like Peacock or Hulu, and “branded discovery,” a way for advertisers to show ads in places where consumers decide what to watch. Upfront digital video ad spending is expected to reach $6.88 billion in 2021, a 42.5% year-over-year bump, according a report released Friday from eMarketer for Insider Intelligence. It also estimates that advertisers will spend $19.9 billion during the upfronts, near pre-pandemic highs. But with such a proliferation of streaming options, with even ad-supported options pulling in relatively high fees (HBO Max with Ads, launching in June, will cost $9.99, down from its ad-free price of $14.99 per month), it’s unclear how many services consumers will use.”This is going to be an absolutely fascinating study in consumer behavior over the next couple of years,” said Jim Nail, principal analyst for B2C Marketing at Forrester. “I think in the consumer’s mind, it’s like if I have to put up with ads it should be basically free. If I pay anything, I should not have to put up with ads. But again, that’s the rational analysis, that doesn’t necessarily reflect the reality of what they will do.” A different kind of upfront season The pandemic derailed the typical upfront process last year, with advertisers seeking shorter commitments and more flexible arrangements with TV companies.It set the tone for change in the way things have traditionally worked. During a CMO Exchange event for CNBC earlier this month, Procter & Gamble chief brand officer Marc Pritchard spoke about his desired changes to the upfront process, which he’s publicly called “antiquated.” He said the upfronts are an outdated system that result in price increases for advertisers, despite ratings declines, and said his company plans to continue having more direct engagement with broadcasters where it can. “We can plan out and build a plan based on the business needs for the year as opposed to trying to decide in one fell swoop, what we’re going to do,” to give the business more flexibility, he said.The eMarketer study cited figures from iSpot.TV, which said nearly two-thirds of advertisers surveyed said their upfront commitments would be more flexible this year. “It took a catastrophe like the pandemic to make them do it,” Nail explained. He previously said there had been few signs of change in the area of upfront commitments, but that TV companies had no choice but to adapt last year.”This year, it does feel like they’re at least willing to meet advertisers halfway and give them not the extreme flexibility they gave last year, but certainly give them more flexibility that they would not have had without that experience last year,” he said.Though the upfronts may change, they’re likely not going anywhere anytime soon. As long as so much video inventory is controlled by the major media players, advertisers still have the same incentives to buy upfront, like better pricing and the option to lock in certain dates, said Eric Haggstrom, an eMarketer senior forecasting analyst at Insider Intelligence.”It’ll still be very important moving onward, especially for these large advertisers sending hundreds of millions of dollars per year on video advertising,” he said. Disclosure: Comcast owns NBCUniversal, the parent company of CNBC.CNBC’s Michael Bloom contributed to this report. 

Tim Cook, chief executive officer of Apple Inc., center, arrives at U.S. district court in Oakland, California, on Friday, May 21, 2021.Nina Riggio | Bloomberg | Getty ImagesApple CEO Tim Cook faced sharp questioning on Friday from Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers about Apple’s App Store business model at the end of his testimony in the Epic Games v. Apple trial.The questioning gave a preview into Judge Rogers’ thinking before she decides whether Epic Games’ argument is strong enough to force Apple to allow it to install alternative app stores on the iPhone and avoid the App Store’s 30% fee on in-app purchases.Rogers asked Cook what his problem was with allowing iPhone users the choice of a lower-fee, through a web browser, specifically for games. Cook said that users have a choice between iPhones or Android devices.She followed up by asking about whether Apple has a problem with giving users information to get the same in-app purchases through a web browser, bypassing Apple’s 30% fee, suggesting a compromise where Apple would allow a company like Epic Games to link users to a web browser to make transactions, instead of forcing them to use Apple’s in-app purchase mechanism.”The gaming industry seems to be generating a disproportionate amount of money to the IP you’re giving them and everyone else,” Rogers said to Cook. “In essence, it’s almost like they are subsidizing everyone else.”Cook said that Apple faced fierce competition for developers and users.”You don’t have competition in those in-app purchases, though,” Rogers replied.Rogers also expressed doubt that Apple’s Small Business Program, which cut App Store fees in half for small developers, was made out of concern for small businesses during the Covid pandemic, as Cook testified on Friday.”That seemed to be the result of the pressure accrued because of investigations, of lawsuits,” Rogers said.Cook said that lawsuits were in the back of his head, but what triggered the program was worry over small businesses during Covid.Rogers remarked that she had seen a survey that 39% of Apple developers are dissatisfied with the App Store.”It doesn’t seem to me feel any pressure or competition to actually change the manner in which you act to address the concerns of developers,” Rogers said.Cook disagreed and said that Apple “turns the place upside down for developers.”Friday was the first time Cook has testified in court, he said.The three-week trial will conclude on Monday, but Judge Rogers warned this week it may take weeks or months until she makes a decision. After that, the dispute is likely to be appealed, she said.Fierce competitionBefore Cook was questioned by Rogers, he testified on Friday that Apple faces fierce competition in smartphones and in the United States, the iPhone only has “high 30s” percent of market share. Internationally, the iPhone has about 15% market share, Cook said.The market share figures cited by Cook are a rare example of Apple discussing the market share of its most important product, the iPhone, in an effort to say it does not dominate the smartphone market.”There’s a whole list of different handset competitors. It’s fiercely competitive,” Cook said.Apple’s U.S. share cited by Cook is lower than many external estimates. For example, a recent report from Counterpoint Research pegged it between 40% to 65% depending on the quarter since 2019.Apple has argued that its control of its App Store, the only way for consumers to install software on iPhones, is essential for the company’s security and privacy promises to its users, and an important distinguishing feature in a competitive market for smartphones.”We could no longer make the promise of privacy, safety, and security” if Epic Games prevails, Cook testified, saying that the App Store would be a “toxic mess” without Apple’s rules and policies that Epic is fighting in court.Epic Games argues security is an excuse to extract fees and control what software makers do, and that Apple could safely open up its platform to competing app stores.Cook mentioned Samsung, Vivo, Oppo, Huawei and Google as handset competitors, all of which use a version of Google’s Android. He said Apple also faces competition from other app stores, including Google Play, and consoles like Microsoft Xbox and Sony PlayStation.Apple CEO Tim Cook testifying in Epic Games trialVicki BehringerWhen questioned by Epic Games lawyers, Cook declined to answer a question about whether Apple’s iPhone competes with Google’s Android in the operating system market. “Customers don’t buy operating systems. They buy devices,” Cook said.Cook said that Apple uses surveys to track whether iPhone users switch to Android devices. “Making efforts to get Android people to switch to iPhone, that’s a very important task for us,” Cook said.Cook dodges App Store and Google licensing profit questionsCook said that Epic Games’ move to use its own payment processor on Fortnite, its shooter game, was “malicious.” Apple subsequently removed the app from the App Store.Much of Cook’s testimony on Friday surrounded a non-public, internal Apple document that was sent to him describing profitability trends for various Apple divisions, including the App Store. Epic’s lawyers said it showed that Apple’s App Store is very profitable, trying to bolster its argument that Apple uses its control to boost its own profits.Cook said that the document was not “fully loaded” with all the expenses Apple spends on the App Store and that it was a “benchmarking” exercise. He said that he has a “feel” for the App Store’s profitability, but did not provide a number. An accountant hired by Epic Games previously testified that Apple had an operating profit margin of 77.8% in 2019.Epic Games lawyers also asked Cook about Apple’s deal with Google to be the default search on the iPhone browser, which was estimated at $10 billion per year by a Congressional report citing a Wall Street research note. Cook said he did not remember how much Google pays.Cook was also questioned by Apple lawyers about iMessage, Apple’s messaging program that is built into iPhones and exclusive to Apple products. Cook said that he didn’t think the lack of iMessage on Android has prevented iPhone users from switching to competitors.Cook dismissed concerns that people switching from an iPhone to an Android device might miss text messages, saying that “you can easily turn off your iMessage.”