Return to Transcripts main page

Quest Means Business

Multistate Suit Against Meta Now Underway; Disney Sues FCC, Alleges Retaliatory Campaign Against ABC; Trump: No Talks Underway Or Scheduled With Iran; Shein Valuation Shrinks Ahead of Hong Kong IPO; Interview With Brunswick CEO David Foulkes. Aired 4-5p ET

Aired August 18, 2026 - 16:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[16:00:18]

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN HOST: Well, bond market jitters are dragging down chip stocks. The NASDAQ closing out the session down more than one percent.

Those are the markets and these are the main events: The stakes could hardly be higher for Meta as it fights a lawsuit that could reshape the

company and cost it upwards of a trillion dollars in damages.

Nearly six months into the war with Iran, President Trump now says the U.S. has no talks scheduled with Iranian leaders.

And space is becoming a crowded market. We will hear from the New Zealand billionaire taking on Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos with his own satellite

business.

Live from D.C., it is Tuesday, August 18th. I am Jim Sciutto, in for Richard Quest and this is QUEST MEANS BUSINESS.

Tonight, a trial that could be a hugely consequential legal battle for Meta is now underway in California. A group of state attorneys general accuse

the company of designing its platforms to keep young people hooked. Meta is also accused of misleading the public about the risks. The company denies

those allegations.

Opening statements were delivered by both sides earlier, and witnesses are now taking the stand. The states are seeking up to $1.4 trillion in

damages, along with changes to how Meta operates. One advocate spoke outside the courthouse in Oakland, arguing Meta had harmed an entire

generation of children.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAWSON KELLY, MEMBER, DESIGN IT FOR US: As a child, I was unknowingly subject in a great experiment, one in which the company inside that

courthouse reduced my childhood into watch time and sold it to advertisers, one in which people who understood my brain better than I did knowingly and

deliberately addicted me to apps that pulled me out of the real world and stunted my growth.

One in which designers exploited the insecurities and awkwardness that come with growing up in order to create a machine that distracted and divided

us.

For more than two decades, they ran their experiment on an entire generation. They measured us, tested us and optimized us. To them, we were

not children, we were data.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Clare Duffy is in New York now. Of course, Meta has some experience being sued and even losing in the courtroom. This one, though,

is bigger.

CLARE DUFFY, CNN BUSINESS WRITER: That's right, Jim.

We've seen thousands of these cases filed against Meta and the other big social media platforms. As you said, Meta has already lost two of these

cases, accusing it of intentionally creating addictive platforms that have harmed children. It is on the hook for nearly a billion dollars in damages

in those cases.

But what really sets this apart -- this case apart, is the potential stakes for Meta here. As you said, the state attorneys general are seeking as much

as $1.4 trillion in damages. That is nearly what the company is worth on Wall Street and even if they don't get that big of a number, they are also

seeking changes to how the platform operates.

So if Meta were to lose this case, we could really see that reshape the social media experience that we all have, but especially for children.

Now, as you said, opening statements took place in this federal courthouse in Oakland earlier today. We got to see both sides start to outline the

arguments that they are going to make in this case, a Deputy Attorney General for California, Megan O'Neill, made the argument that Meta needs

kids, it needs them to spend a lot of time on its platform to support its ad business, and so it has created these intentionally addictive features,

like the endlessly scrolling feed and the recommendation algorithms to keep them on the platform as long as possible.

She also claimed that Meta has known about the risks to children, but misled the public about those risks, again, because it needed parents and

caregivers to trust that their kids could safely spend time on these platforms. And the states are also alleging that Meta illegally collected

data from children under the age of 13.

On the other end, you've got Meta lawyer, Paul Schmidt, who argued that the state's case misrepresents the company's platforms and its policies. He

accused these A.G.s of cherry picking internal documents and statements to support their case in a way that he says presents a false picture of the

company and he really urged the jurors here to listen to all of the evidence before making up their minds.

He talked about some of the steps that Meta has taken to protect young people, like parental controls and content restrictions for teens. So, it

is going to be really interesting to see how the jury in this case weighs all of the evidence here.

[16:05:13]

It is important to note that the jury here is in an advisory role, so they will tell the judge what they think about the verdict in this case and the

potential damages, but ultimately, it will be up to the judge to make a decision about what is the resolution of this case -- Jim.

SCIUTTO: Yes, lots of money and potential changes at stake here. Thanks so much, Clare Duffy.

Well, California attorney General Rob Bonta has helped spearhead that case against Meta. He told me yesterday that the company was aware that its

products are harmful.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROB BONTA, CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL: Designed and deployed a dangerous product. They knew it was dangerous and they lied about it to the public

and the best evidence that they knew that their products were dangerous is their own internal studies, their own internal memos, where they are

talking about the harms that their products visit on kids, whether it be anxiety or depression or addictive tendencies or body image issues or

learning loss.

They talk about it internally, and then knowing that these products visit harm on kids, they tell the world that they are safe. So it is the

deception and the lying that is unlawful under California law and we will show them their own words, their own studies, their own internal

determinations.

Well put that side by side with their public statements, which are lies to the public and we will let the judge and the jury decide.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Well, Meta is not alone. OpenAI has also come under legal scrutiny over how its product impacts children. In response, the company is rolling

out a new ChatGPT for teens, experience with added safeguards.

New protections include break reminders, parental quiet hours, safeguards against emotionally dependent interactions, and warnings about sharing

sensitive images. OpenAI says users who identify as being under 18 or are estimated to be so will automatically receive those protections.

Lisa Eadicicco is in New York.

Lisa, let me begin with the age issue here, because, of course, people could lie as to how old they are, but this is an A.I. product, so it is

going to try to figure it out on its own. How exactly does it determine what your age is?

LISA EADICICCO, CNN BUSINESS TECH EDITOR: Yes, Jim. So I think that's one of the big questions here. Not even just around the age verification, but

around these kinds of safety efforts in general across social media apps and online platforms, is how effective are they?

I mean, we don't really know until they come out and OpenAI says that it is going to try to estimate users ages using A.I. and that if it does estimate

that a user is under the age of 18, it will apply those protections regardless of what age the user registered for in the app.

But there are a lot of questions around how accurate that technology is, and it is often difficult to know until the technology is out there whether

or not it is working. So I do think that is one of the key questions here. And just in general, this comes as OpenAI and other tech companies as well

have faced increased pressure to do more to protect children online and OpenAI in particular, has faced lawsuits from multiple families alleging

that ChatGPT played a role in the suicide of their children.

So, this is definitely an important topic to watch, and one that the company will likely have to have to really grapple with moving forward. But

I think this effort here, this kind of way that OpenAI is framing this as being a new experience for teens rather than just parental controls, kind

of illustrates that the company is trying to think more broadly about how to make its platform safer. At least that's the messaging here, is that

they're not just trying to incorporate one-off features, but thinking holistically about the platform.

But again, we will have to see how effective those features actually are and how accurate that age verification technology actually is -- Jim.

SCIUTTO: Yes, they also want to prevent ChatGPT from expressing personal feelings towards teenagers. I mean, a lot of cases where that, you know,

overly personalizing that relationship has led to problems. We will see -- well, we will see how they work.

Lisa, thanks so much for joining.

EADICICCO: Of course.

SCIUTTO: Disney and its television broadcast network, ABC are taking the Trump administration to court. The media giant accuses the Federal

Communications Commission, the FCC, of violating its First Amendment right of free speech. It says the agency's move to initiate an early review of

ABC's broadcast licenses is "... part of a sustained, coordinated campaign of censorship and control."

In a lawsuit filed in a U.S. District Court, Disney accuses the Trump administration of waging a retaliatory campaign against ABC, continuing the

quote here "... for a single reason because it disapproves of what ABC broadcasts."

[16:10:10]

Joining me now, Timothy Zick, he is a John Marshall Professor of Government and Citizenship at William and Mary Law School. Timothy, good to have you.

Thanks so much for joining.

TIMOTHY ZICK, JOHN MARSHALL PROFESSOR OF GOVERNMENT AND CITIZENSHIP, WILLIAM AND MARY LAW SCHOOL: Thanks for having me on.

SCIUTTO: So the legal standard here on retaliation is the company has got to prove that the actions taken were caused by, or the result of its

protected expression. So how do they prove their case and how strong is their case here?

ZICK: Right. So they've got to prove three things. One, they were engaged in protected speech. That's easy. They are engaged in editorial decision

making in the broadcast company. They also have to prove that a person of ordinary firmness, that's the legal standard would have stopped speaking in

response to the government's retaliatory actions. And the third element is the one that you suggested. There has to be a causal link between the

government's actions and the speech -- the protected speech. How do you prove that?

Well, the complaint in the case is 45 to 46 pages long. It is chock full of details about two things. One, the sort of timeline of retaliatory actions

that have been taken against ABC linked to the broadcast of content, the administration, the FCC does not like.

So, for example, the Jimmy Kimmel kerfuffle about his comments about the Charlie Kirk assassin, the broadcast station's criticism of the Iran War,

for example, things that were said on "The View," those sorts of things.

And in addition, statements, public statements, by the way, these weren't sort of privately made by the FCC chair, Brendan Carr and President Trump

essentially are giving the whole thing away by saying we should just pull the licenses of these broadcast stations because they are broadcasting

negative content or content we don't like.

SCIUTTO: You make the point that the timing of each of these steps is some of the strongest evidence here that each move followed specific, as you

know, public statements or complaints by the President, even Truth Social posts -- Trump's Truth Social posts that we can still look up ourselves.

ZICK: Right. It is sort of a roadmap for retaliation, if you will. The President posts something on social media, or he says something in a public

statement. The FCC chair, Brendan Carr, makes his own public statement, sort of amplifying the President's words. And then that is translated into

some retaliatory action. In this case, multiple investigations of Disney and ABC culminating in, as you said, in your lead, this sort of early

review process, which is extraordinary.

The present complaint points out, most of the station licenses aren't up for review for a few years now, some of them are only halfway through their

license terms. So the complaint says, you know, that's not a process that has been used for over half a century. So it is extraordinary, but it is

part of the sort of campaign of pressure escalating pressure, cumulative pressure that the administration has tried to put on ABC and Disney.

SCIUTTO: Big picture question here, because this case really is about more than ABC, because of course, ABC is not the only target of President Trump

and the FCC. If the court finds in favor of ABC, in this case, how significant is that for other media outlets?

ZICK: Well, the first thing is significant that ABC fought back. So there has been a lot of criticism of broadcast stations, universities, law firms,

lots of others who sort of capitulated to this kind of pressure. So that's the first thing.

It would be a significant win, no question about it. Would it put an end to this sort of campaign of pressure? It is hard to imagine it would, as you

point out, the administration has gone after other broadcasters, local stations, for example and it often works, right?

So even if they lose this case, for example, they may still decide on balance. We will just keep on with our pressure campaign because it works,

but it would be a significant win for ABC. It would be a model for other broadcasters and targets to this kind of retaliation to follow.

SCIUTTO: Professor Timothy Zick, we appreciate you walking us through it.

ZICK: Thanks a lot.

SCIUTTO: Well, a private space launch firm that got its start in New Zealand is now looking to compete with Elon Musk's Starlink. Up next, I am

going to speak to the CEO of Rocket Lab about his company's plan to get into the internet satellite business.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:17:45]

SCIUTTO: President Trump appears to be walking back his own claim of having backchannel talks with Iran's Revolutionary Guard. He posted today that no

talks with Iran are scheduled or taking place currently, and that the U.S. Naval blockade remains in effect.

He claimed the Strait of Hormuz is, "open and operating." That's debatable, while U.S. Navy patrols are gaining ground, the strait remains dangerous

for shipping. The U.K.'s Maritime Trade Operations Center said Monday that a vessel exiting the gulf was reportedly struck by a projectile.

The U.S. President shared this image on his social media platform today. The Strait, as you see there, circled underneath a label saying "New U.S.

Territory."

Kevin Liptak joins me now from The White House. Of course, as you know, Kevin, the President likes to claim U.S. territory even in places where it

doesn't exist. Greenland on that list.

But here, what is The White House basing this claim on? Do they feel at a minimum that they are making progress in terms of protecting shipping

through the Strait?

KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: I actually think they feel the opposite and that's part of why the President put out that message

today, that there were no discussions underway with Iran, despite what we heard just yesterday from Jared Kushner, who is ostensibly the envoy to

these talks, when he said that they were having, "very positive and active conversations."

Now, what an American official told me is that, in fact, there had been some positive conversations over the past couple of days, past couple of

weeks, but that today the President had, in fact, told his team to disengage, to halt in the talks with Iran, to wait it out until he feels

that they are ready to strike a deal that he would find suitable.

And the President has been frustrated by some of these reports that the discussions between Oman and Iran, about trying to reopen the Strait of

Hormuz, that there would be some sort of scheme where Iran would control the ships that go in, and Oman would control the ships going out that had a

displeased President Trump. He had been frustrated by that. That's part of why he threatened to bomb Oman yesterday, despite it being a strategic

partner of the United States for many, many years.

And so, in the view of the President, at least, these discussions are in fact, not making any progress. And his claim that the Strait is now U.S.

territory seems like it is just his way of saying that any scheme, any setup that the two countries come up with will require an open transit,

open free transit of vessels passing through.

[16:20:21]

And until then, the U.S. will maintain the blockade that it has in place of Iranian ports and that seems to be what he is suggesting by calling it U.S.

territory. Of course, maintaining that blockade and in theory, maintaining a U.S. territory would require sustained military presence in the Strait

and in the Persian Gulf and in the Gulf of Oman for the foreseeable future.

In fact, Pete Hegseth, the Defense Secretary, said last week that the U.S. was prepared to maintain that blockade into perpetuity. But that's getting

into the territory of starting to look like a forever war of the kind that the President said he would never get the U.S. involved in when he was a

candidate.

And so there are some real difficulties in the President's strategy here. But at least for now, he seems to be putting this all at arm's length in

the hope that the economic pressure, and we know that the U.S. is planning new sanctions on Iran in the hope that all of that will pile on the regime

and cause them to cave to the President's demands.

But so far, there has really been no evidence of that happening, at least for now -- Jim.

SCIUTTO: Well, it is hard to ignore them. Kevin Liptak, thanks so much.

Few competitors so far have been able to take on Elon Musk's SpaceX in the internet satellite business. Starlink has now nearly 11,000 satellites in

orbit. Jeff Bezos aims to launch more than 5,000 with his company Blue Origin, starting next year, yet, one entrepreneur from New Zealand is

looking to get into the game and compete with them.

Peter Beck founded Rocket Lab in 2006. Its electron rocket has carried out nearly 100 successful launches so far. Now, the company has cut an $8

billion deal to buy Iridium, a satellite communications firm.

The acquisition puts it in position to develop a satellite network of its own. Sir Peter Beck, the founder and CEO of Rocket Lab, joins me now. Good

to have you. Thanks so much for joining.

SIR PETER BECK, FOUNDER AND CEO, ROCKET LAB: Thanks very much. Much appreciated.

SCIUTTO: So listen, Iridium has been around a long time. It is not an insignificant satellite network, but it is 66 satellites, if I believe I

have that right. Starlink has nearly 11,000. Bezos is aiming for 5,000 starting next year. Can you compete in that space with them? And how

quickly do you think you could ramp up?

BECK: Yes, now, look, I mean, our intention is actually not to compete directly with internet from space. I think, as you point out, that is a

very well served market. But our intention here is to provide services that are life-saving and critical services that Iridium has done really

successfully for the last couple of decades.

But I think the real kind of acceleration here is, you know, Rocket Lab is an end-to-end space company. We build a tremendous number of spacecraft.

And as you pointed out, we have our own launch vehicles and I think the really large space companies of the future, it is going to be a little bit

blurry about what is a space company and what is not.

And our intention here is obviously is to grow that constellation, but not to compete directly with internet services, but all the emergency services

and defense services that are relied on intently. You know, we are looking to grow and expand those. And, you know, I think one of the things that the

acquisition brings us is spectrum. And you can have as much aspiration as you want, but if you don't have spectrum, you can't really provide those

services.

SCIUTTO: If that is the focus, the emergency services and I know stories of where Iridium has saved people, right? In places where normally you

wouldn't be able to get a signal out of course. How big is that market? Like what does that grow to over time?

BECK: Yes, no, it is a really substantial market. And without trying to get too technical here, the spectrum that Iridium has is an all-band spectrum.

And what that basically means is that opposed to, you know, normal broadband spectrum, it can penetrate bad weather into buildings and all of

those kinds of things.

So, you know, our intentions here aren't just to provide basic services. I think, you know, over time with the ability to launch and build the

constellation at will, we can increase the penetration of those services and really provide something new and unique that hasn't been seen before.

SCIUTTO: Well, like SpaceX, Rocket Lab has secured defense contracts, $1 billion U.S. defense contract this year alone, $397 million Space Force

contract tied to missile and threat tracking. What portion of Rocket Lab's business do you expect to be for the defense industry.

[16:25:10]

BECK: Yes, typically, it has been about 50 percent government, 50 percent commercial. What I would say is that, the traditional kind of primes that

have provided these backbones for national security, you know, it is a little bit of a more challenging environment because obviously, you know,

the administration today is about execution. The age of cost plus contracts is fast evaporating and in favor of, you know, firm fixed price contracts

and proven execution.

And I think that's where we've been really successful, as you pointed out, we've won a number of really important National Security programs and

executing well on them and continue to do so.

So like I said, about 50 percent of our business, but if you look at the commercial, you know, the other remaining 50 percent of the commercial side

of our business, you don't have to peel the onion too many layers to find that, you know, often the government customers are providing -- you know,

are the customers of those commercial services as well.

SCIUTTO: Is this partly particularly when you bring in, say, the U.S. Defense Department, is this partly about spreading out the risk? Because

I've done some reporting of my own on how Russia and China, North Korea, Iran have deployed or tested space weapons designed to either destroy or

blind critical satellites there. I imagine the more you have, the harder it is to do. Right?

I mean, is that part of the strategy quite deliberately?

BECK: Exactly right. Exactly right. I mean, if you if you roll the clock back, sort of, you know, a couple of decades, you know, singular large

geostationary satellites in orbit were providing the majority of these kind of services. But, you know, if you're proliferated in low-Earth orbit and

moreover, you know, if you take a low-Earth orbit satellite down and one goes back up, it is kind of pointless.

I mean, you know, a good example of that is we completed the VICTUS HAZE mission for the Space Force here a few weeks ago. And you know, that

mission, they gave us a call up and we had 24 hours to deploy a satellite in orbit. And, you know, after that, we received that call and 16 hours and

42 minutes, we had a satellite on orbit.

So --

SCIUTTO: Wow.

BECK: You know, you can take as many satellites out as you want out of orbit, but if you can put them up every 16 hours or less, then it is kind

of a pointless exercise to even try to take them out.

SCIUTTO: Wow, that's such a change in such a short period of time. Well, Sir Peter Beck, we wish you luck. Thanks so much for joining.

BECK: Thanks so much.

SCIUTTO: Well, back here in the U.S., Bill Rasmussen, the ESPN co-founder who helped transform sports television, has died at the age of 93. The

network announced his passing today from the effects of Parkinson's disease.

Rasmussen and his son, Scott, launched ESPN back in 1979 turning the once unlikely idea of a 24-hour sports network into a media powerhouse and a

fact of life.

ESPN Chairman, Jimmy Pitaro called Rasmussen a visionary and innovator whose spirit remains part of the company's culture today.

Brian Stelter is with me now.

And Brian, I mean, just sort of like 24-hour news, right? I mean, 24-hour sports changed the way people watch sports and absorb sports news.

I just remember, you know, watching ESPN, you know, from the early days, right? You just always knew it was there. You know, did your team win and

so on. I mean, this was a -- you know, he was a groundbreaker.

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: There are some parallels here to Ted Turner, whose life we talked about a few months ago.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

STELTER: Turner, the founder of CNN, passed away earlier this year. Both men, Turner and Rasmussen, creating these cable channels at the end of the

1970s, beginning of the 1980s.

Bill Rasmussen's story is really interesting because he had been working for a sports team. He had been working as a communications director, doing

P.R. for the New England Whalers, a hockey team that went out of business a long time ago. He got fired from the hockey team. He was unemployed. He was

trying to figure out what to do next in his life. And that's when the idea for this sports channel popped up in his head.

He told the story about how he was on a drive with his son, stuck in traffic on I-84, and this idea popped in their head. He sometimes credited

his son, Scott, saying, "Why don't you just run football all day long?" And Rasmussen faced some of the same skepticism that Ted Turner faced with CNN.

People would say to him, "Who is going to watch sports 24 hours a day?"

The idea of having a 24/7 channel devoted to sports was a totally, you know, wild concept. It was hard to imagine at the time, but Rasmussen

helped push it into being, eventually taking out a big credit card -- basically putting it on a credit card, launching ESPN in Bristol,

Connecticut, where it is still based today.

One difference from Turner and Rasmussen is Rasmussen left the company after about a year. He did reunite, though, in the 90s, so he was really

there at the very beginning, getting ESPN off the ground floor. And I find it to be a fascinating and frankly, a lovely story, Jim, about second acts

in life. You know, here is this executive down on his luck, fired by his team, who comes up with something that revolutionizes sports and media.

SCIUTTO: Yes. No question. Yes and that -- I mean, his early exit, you know, forced out, also maybe a sad part of it, but as you note, he was

welcomed back into the fold, as it were.

Brian Stelter, thanks so much.

STELTER: Thanks.

SCIUTTO: Well, the largest recreational marine company has rolled out now autonomous docking technology. Coming up next, the CEO of Brunswick will

tell me how it works.

[16:30:40]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:33:49]

SCIUTTO: Shein is set to go public Wednesday in Hong Kong. The fast fashion brand exploded over the last several years. But a series of economic

challenges have taken a large toll on its valuation.

Kristie Lu Stout explains.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KRISTIE LU STOUT, CNN CORRESPONDENT: You've probably seen Shein haul videos like this. But how much is the company looking to haul for its long awaited

initial public offering in Hong Kong? Reports say under $30 billion. That's quite a drop in valuation from its previous funding rounds, nearly $100

billion in 2022 and $64 billion in 2023.

So why has Shein lost its shine? Shein tried New York and London before finally getting approval to list here in Hong Kong. It's notorious for its

cheap and trendy clothes, mostly made by third party suppliers in China. It could churn out thousands of new styles a day, which has brought huge

profit margins and rapid growth.

But it's been hit with higher costs and slowing sales, according to its prospectus, thanks in part to the removal of the de minimis exemption in

the United States, Shein's largest market, which allowed goods worth less than $800 to enter the U.S. duty free.

[16:35:07]

Shein is also facing a probe by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission that could result in significant fines. Over the years, it's faced scrutiny from

Western lawmakers over its business practices, including accusations of using forced labor, which Shein denies.

Also weighing on the retailer, a new three euro sales tax on low value shipments to curb what the E.U. calls unfair competition from China. But

the company could still grow in the rest of the world, where their products are not as heavily taxed and where there's still appetite for this $5 T-

shirt.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SCIUTTO: Well, Brunswick, the world's largest recreational boating company, is leaning into A.I. to help with one of the most stressful situations at

the helm. Its auto captain system helps pilots dock their boat in tight spots. Brunswick is also rolling out an A.I. co-pilot to assist with route

planning.

David Foulkes is the CEO of Brunswick Corporation. He joins me now.

I see your you're at the helm right now. Thanks so much for taking the time.

DAVID FOULKES, CEO, BRUNSWICK CORP: It's a pleasure. Yes, I'm at the helm of a Boston Whaler, one of our premium boat brands.

SCIUTTO: So let me ask you this because I'm a lousy sailor. But I do at least know that one of the hardest things to do is to pull into port, is to

try to, you know, squeeze your way, particularly on a windy day or, you know, when it's crowded into a slip. So tell us how this works.

FOULKES: Yes, it works a (INAUDIBLE) autonomous road vehicles work. It has a set of six stereo cameras, what we call the hard top here, which you can

see above me. And they stitch together a 360 degree view of the world around it. And range -- and established range to various objects. They also

-- it also classifies objects so it knows if it's another boat, it knows if it's moving, it knows if it's a person.

And importantly, it knows if it's a dock of some kind. So you approach the dock, you can stand up maybe 100 feet if you like. You simply on a screen

move an image of the boat, see where you want it to dock. You hit dock and the boat docks itself in a very measured way, in a very predictable way,

and in a very smooth way.

SCIUTTO: So I wonder this, I mean, listen, my car and maybe the cars of a lot of people watching now have something along these lines, right? It

works sometimes, it doesn't work other times, right? Sometimes it sees the spot, sometimes it doesn't. I mean, how do you guarantee, given, because,

listen, not every marina is the same. You know, I just wonder how you know it's going to work when you really need it.

FOULKES: Yes. We have tested in a wide range of different marina conditions. Docking, starboard docking, port docking, stern docking bow

first in very tight spaces. We actually (INAUDIBLE) for the boat so that we can, you know, we can't look at every marina in the world physically, but

what we can do is create simulated environments and allow the boat to operate in those simulated environments.

So we have been through thousands of different docking scenarios in different virtual marinas and real marinas to make sure that the system

operates well under all reasonable conditions.

SCIUTTO: Is it a luxury item or is it an affordable item?

FOULKES: Well, it's definitely here, we're on our -- one of our premium boats here as a Boston Whaler. One of our other premium brands is Sea Ray.

And we have another boat in the same marina with (INAUDIBLE). So typically we start these high technology introductions at the more premium end. When

we first introduced these things, they're relatively low volume, so they can be more expensive, but not as expensive as some other options you might

have on a boat of this price and scale.

So it's a reasonable option cost. Our objective, though, always is to gain acceptance and gain scale and then begin to reduce the cost and migrate it

down into other products that are more of the value end of our product line.

SCIUTTO: Well, David Foulkes, fascinating idea. Thank you so much for walking us through it.

Well, a new tour in Philadelphia takes people on an unusual journey to meet the real city dwellers. Pigeons.

[16:40:06]

CNN's Scout Richards shows us how a rehabilitation turned into a passion project.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SCOUT RICHARDS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Did you know pigeons can produce milk for their babies? That's just one of many things you'll learn

on Philadelphia's hottest new outing, the Philly Pigeon Tour.

ASPEN SIMONE, FOUNDER, PHILLY PIGEON TOURS: Who's ready to go see some pigeons?

RICHARDS (voice-over): The whole thing started four years ago when Aspen Simone and Hannah Michelle Brower became infatuated with the birds after

rescuing a sick pigeon who's now named Primrose.

HANNAH MICHELLE BROWER, FOUNDER, PHILLY PIGEON TOURS: We're kind of pigeon haters before we met Primrose. I did take her to a rehabilitator. She was

malnourished. I got a text saying, I don't think she is going to survive on the streets of Philadelphia. So do you want a pet pigeon?

RICHARDS (voice-over): Their newfound pigeon obsession eventually sparked an idea. Why not turn it into a tour? And it turns out people were

interested.

SIMONE: We had this joke. We talk about pigeons so much it could be our job. And now it is. It sold out instantly. We added more tickets, so we

decided to do it weekly and from there it's just taken off.

RICHARDS (voice-over): According to their Web site, the tour promises to teach participants all about pigeons' behavior, biology and history while

also covering the birds' long relationship with humans. And if you're lucky, you may even see something surprisingly elusive, a baby pigeon.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It was also cool to, like, be in our own neighborhood and look at it in a different way.

BROWER: We really want people to come away from our tours with compassion and empathy. Seeing them in a new light as something valuable, as part of

the city ecosystem and increased compassion towards all beings, including all groups of humans.

SIMONE: And thanks for being on the pigeon tour.

BROWER: Thanks, y'all.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SCIUTTO: Well, the U.S. midterm elections are, of course, getting closer. And today is another day of significant primaries in several states. Voters

in Alaska face a confusing choice today in their Senate primary. They must decide between Dan Sullivan and Dan Sullivan. One of the Sullivans is the

sitting Republican senator from state, the other is a retired school teacher who happens to have the same last name. They do have different

middle initials, which will be listed on the ballot.

President Trump is urging Republicans to be careful which Sullivan they pick. He and other Republicans claim the other Dan Sullivan is a dirty

trick by Democrats to try to gum up the GOP race.

We should get those results in the next 24 hours, and may the best Dan win.

That is QUEST MEANS BUSINESS. I'm Jim Sciutto. Up next, "Richard Quest's World of Wonder."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:45:43]

RICHARD QUEST, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR (voice-over): It's time to embrace new adventures.

Just doesn't get much better than this, does it?

Seize the moment in this WORLD OF WONDER.

Route 66. 66, man. That's cool.

(Voice-over): We have been driving along Route 66 for three days. Illinois, Missouri, and Kansas are behind us. We are halfway across Oklahoma. The man

I've come to meet here is a Route 66 legend.

JERRY MCCLANAHAN, AUTHOR AND ARTIST: My name is Jerry McClanahan. I'm an artist, but I'm also an author and a map maker and a historian.

QUEST (voice-over): Jerry is being modest. He is Mr. Route 66, having written the definitive guidebook.

Wherever I've been, everybody has said, oh, but you must speak to Jerry. As we look at Route 66, how much of the original is there?

MCCLANAHAN: If you take all the roads that ever were 66, including the dirt roads, the original pavement that you can still drive, there's like about

80 percent. This is my studio back in here.

QUEST: Wow.

MCCLANAHAN: I've been doing paintings for people of their cars on Route 66.

QUEST (voice-over): Jerry's artwork captures the heyday.

MCCLANAHAN: '45 through '55, tapering off into the '60s would be the heyday. That's when you had the most vacation travel. They're getting out

and enjoying the freedom of the road.

QUEST (voice-over): After World War II, there was a dramatic shift. Prosperity meant more families had cars. From migration to vacation, route

66 became the main street of America, and the road trips that young Jerry took with his family left lifelong impressions.

MCCLANAHAN: So I'm in the back seat confronting all this cool stuff, all the cool neon, all the billboards, all the come-ons.

QUEST: Are you obsessed with Route 66?

MCCLANAHAN: I guess. I guess it's taken over my life. You know? Get me out on like the original concrete 1930s road. And there's the concrete with the

joints thump, thump, thump, thump. It's a different world. It's a time tunnel. When I was a kid, we would say, are we there yet? When are we going

to get there? And I'm still not there yet.

QUEST: It's pink and it's got these slabs. Just look at it. So this is probably original from when it was paved in the 1930s. Route 66. This is

amazing. You know that saying, everything is bigger in Texas? It's true.

The Big Texan.

BONDI BEAU, CAMERAMAN: Big steaks.

QUEST (voice-over): Seventy-two ounces, two kilos of beef.

Can you do it?

BONDI BEAU: There's only one way to find out.

QUEST: Have you got the indigestion tablets?

(Voice-over): The Big Texan in Amarillo opened during the heyday of the mother road.

BOBBY LEE, CO-OWNER, THE BIG TEXAN: That road, that's what brought the world to the Texas Panhandle. That's what gave the Big Texan its birth, was

that road being out there.

QUEST (voice-over): Bobby Lee is carrying on that legacy of his father now with his own son at his side. For 66 years, those travelers brave enough

have saddled up for the 72-ounce steak challenge.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So you get one hour to eat it. It's a 72 ounce steak. It's a baked potato, shrimp cocktail, side salad and a roll.

QUEST: I'm in trouble here. I am in trouble.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is it.

QUEST: Oh, no.

BONDI BEAU: Oh, my god.

[16:50:01]

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Attention, Big Texan, all the way from Australia and the U.K., we have Richard and Beau attempting our 72-ounce steak challenge.

QUEST (voice-over): And we're off.

BONDI BEAU: Cheers. Kind of overwhelming, though. Look at this.

QUEST: I think there's very little chance that I'm going to succeed.

BONDI BEAU: It doesn't even look like you've eaten any.

QUEST: I've eaten more than you have.

BONDI BEAU: No. You've just cut it all up and moved it around everywhere.

QUEST: No, no, no, no, no. I'm just going to sit for a few minutes to just out of honor and respect for the Big Texan.

(Voice-over): Beau and I are clearly fading fast.

I'm just wondering, was our strategy wrong? Should we have started slower?

BONDI BEAU: There is no strategy.

QUEST: Oh, I feel sick.

(Voice-over): Can Chat come to the rescue?

Am I better off chewing the steak or getting it down into the stomach faster? Take frequent sips of water, steady pace rather than slowing. I

thought I was doing it.

BONDI BEAU: I mean, I'm done. The Big Texan has beaten me.

QUEST: Oh, I can't even look at that anymore.

BONDI BEAU: Twenty-four minutes and four seconds. Anyway, well done, sir. It was a good try.

QUEST (voice-over): This town ain't big enough for Beau and I, and the Big Texan.

We're on the road for another thousand or so miles. Maybe a bit more. What's the secret?

LEE: Enjoy every second of it because Route 66, it's a gift that's here in America that you get to go do and savor it. Savor every second of it. Not

like you did the steak.

QUEST (voice-over): Bobby and Jerry both talked about the magic, the pull of the road. It's easy to feel that as we move on our way.

We are not yet even halfway there.

(Voice-over): The journey is the very purpose, to see, feel and explore.

Kick, kick, kick. I was getting my kicks on Route 66.

(Voice-over): Making new friends along the way.

Stop being so greedy.

(Voice-over): Only a fool would rush to leave this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

QUEST (voice-over): We are nearly halfway through our Route 66 trip, and so far we've driven through four states and into the fifth. We are in Texas.

The sky goes on forever.

(Voice-over): And in places Route 66 looks never ending, too. But here in Texas, we see exactly how the mother road went from vacation route to

bypass. When the bigger, faster interstates came along. It was inevitable. In 1985, Route 66 was decertified.

This is one of the classic motels that thrived when Route 66 was at its heyday. And then once the interstate came along, they just all were

abandoned because there wasn't the business. No one was coming along Route 66. Now they just all here.

(Voice-over): By all accounts, the tiny town of Adrian, Texas, should have dried up like the others when the interstates opened. Except for one

detail.

[16:50:00]

This is the Midpoint on Route 66.

(Voice-over): People from all over the world come here for a photo and a slice of ugly pie at the Midpoint Cafe.

BRENDA HAMMIT, OWNER, MIDPOINT CAFE: Hello. Hello. How are you, darling?

QUEST: Right. What are we making?

HAMMIT: You are going to be making a blueberry banana pie.

QUEST: Oh. Oh, my Christmas is at once.

(Voice-over): Brenda Hammit owns Midpoint and makes the pies.

HAMMIT: So I have chocolate, chocolate, peanut butter. Our Elvis, which is chocolate, peanut butter and banana, coconut cream, blueberry --

QUEST: Yes, I get the idea.

HAMMIT: Last year I had 84 countries come through and we spent -- and we made about 1500 pies. First you're going to take this and you're going to

dump it in here.

QUEST: Oh, focus, focus.

HAMMIT: You're making a vanilla cream. It's a base for all my pies. Excuse me, just --

QUEST: Now I'm in trouble. She's left me in charge.

(Voice-over): There are a million places along Route 66 where people can stop and eat, but there are a few signature places like Midpoint.

Why did you decide to buy it?

HAMMIT: Because it's iconic. And I wanted to help bring it -- keep it going, and bring it back to life.

QUEST: You know what you're doing. You do these things with much more --

HAMMIT: Yes.

QUEST: When you don't know what you're doing.

HAMMIT: Come on back here with it, please.

QUEST: Yes, I'm on my way, ma'am.

HAMMIT: OK. Just pour it in there. You're good. Just pour it in there. And now you're going to take this blueberry and put it on the top and spread it

around a little bit. Yes. There you go.

QUEST (voice-over): The cafe may have changed names over the years, but it's still one of the longest running restaurants on the route going back

to 1928.

HAMMIT: That is a green chili apple.

QUEST (voice-over): And as for those ugly pies.

I love it. I can see why this is very popular.

(Voice-over): The name started under a previous owner. Brenda admits her own pie struggles.

HAMMIT: Sometimes the first piece is upside down, inside out.

QUEST: What did they taste like this?

HAMMIT: Well, you're very welcome. I'm so glad you all came to see me.

QUEST: Mm. That is.

HAMMIT: It's very good, huh?

QUEST (voice-over): It is a delicious ending to the first part of our journey.

We are halfway there. We've only got 1,139 miles to go.

(Voice-over): We've got new adventures ahead.

Please tell me I'm not sitting in a bathtub under a giant flip flop.

(Voice-over): Epic vistas await.

My whole stomachs just gone into sort of flutters.

(Voice-over): Certainly more friends to make.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh, hey, guys.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's our friends.

QUEST (voice-over): And more wonders to be found in part two of our journey.

Whether you do the first half, the second half, or you do the lot, Route 66 right through a WORLD OF WONDER.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

END