0:00China loses big time here. China's going to lose. It's going to be harder to not only sell GPUs to China, it's going to be harder to just host them across the border. It's going to all get shut down.
0:08So, what do we chat about this week?
0:09Well, big changes of foot at Sequoia as they leave London. They shut down scouts and they merge into one team. Then we have Jansen Huang been a busy boy at Nvidia, which we will discuss. And then we have Anthropic. Where will they go out? How will it be received? And what is the impact on that on the broader AI economy? This and so much more in the show today. It is far better in an IPO to start low and go up than to start high and come back. You'd much prefer to be these guys than OpenAI right now.
0:36They're going to have the money. They're going to have the float. And they're going to be true at the private egging ball [ __ ] No one in 2026 is going to say, "Yeah, I love me those tech bros." Ready to go, boys. So many things happened this week. Uh I'm very very much looking forward to hearing the different perspectives.
1:04We're going to start on Sequoia. Sequoia made a lot of changes this week. They announced number one they'd be departing their London office uh and some of the team would be moving back, some would be moving on to different things. Um they announced that they were ending the scout program. Uh they announced that they were having one team in terms of a early and a growth coming together. Um, there was some personal changes around it, but those were the core structural elements. Now, I think they're actually
1:32very meaty in their own right. And so, I'd love to break them down. Sequoia decided I want you guys know better than me, but I thought you missed the most interesting part of what I read in it was getting winding down the evergreen program that I don't care about the other stuff. I mean, there's partner drama. People are going to come and go.
1:50No question in the SFA now, the kids from London are going to drop by the office. And no question it's better to be local and close like 20 VC is like all we can talk about all this stuff forever, right? But man, the idea which sure feels like it's back again that you should hold these assets for for decades, right? Generational assets for decades. What what the hell happened there? Why the hell we winding down the evergreen fund? It's the notwithstanding a few bumps this week with Jensen. What if they'd held all their Nvidia stock till today, right? That'd be a good one.
2:19What about all their Google stock? I mean, literally, what the hell happened to the evergreen idea? What the hell happened? This is the best idea adventure ever. You have the dominant brand, right? Hold this crap and then and then my understanding reading about is the LPS weren't allowed to leave in this evergreen structure. You're pretty much stuck, right? So why why do it once once you got a couple hundred million or a few billion go evergreen? No, actually I I thought the evergreen structure which to remind listeners basically said it basically really incented or almost
2:48pushed LPS to allow SEO to continue to hold long after a public offering because they correctly analyzed and said um you know no matter how well we do as a venture investor the real money is made after the IPO if you because you know they've been something absurd like 25% of the NASDAQ. So by definition, if they'd held all those stocks, they'd own a big slug at 25% of the NASDAQ. And so it's true. It's arguably almost always true that if you hold a diversified portfolio of really interesting tech
3:17assets, over the long term, they have, you know, compound well above, you know, any kind of S&P return. So the idea of, hey, why don't we just say we should hold them, it wasn't illogical, and that was the thinking behind doing the evergreen fund. There was probably three problems with it, though, right? The first problem is they picked a horrible time to do it because um they implemented in 22 23 which was when you know stocks actually turned down and you know over 20 years that doesn't matter but if you decide to make everyone hold stocks and then a year later they go
3:46down 30% it hurts. That's the first thing. The second thing is LPs don't like it because they have different liquidity needs and you want to be able to make your own choices. And then the last thing which is a super interesting one you should always think about the comp plan right it's and you know how to put this the individual partners in any venture firm can decide to hold their stock forever right and they and once you've cleared carry they get all the return they're going to get from doing that you know if I was lucky enough to be sequoia and lucky enough to do Cisco
4:14and take it public in I want to say 86 at 400 million market cap I can hold my shares I can distribute to my LPs and they can make their own choices now in retrospect a lot of them would look back and go, "Oh, I wish I'd held my Cisco stock." But now you're basically trying to force LPS to take their own medicine.
4:31It's like, "Damn it, you want to sell the stock, but I'm going to make you hold it." It was just, frankly, it was complex and trying too hard. It was in again going back to first it is intellectually correct in the sense that if you hold a diversified portfolio of let's call them highquality sequoia back venture sequoia back venture companies that go public you know you'll have lots of variability in that portfolio but in the end it'll be a compelling portfolio so it wasn't a crazy insight it's just trying too hard too much complexity so I
5:00think getting rid of it was just a you know let's keep it simple here people we can still make our money so that made sense to me sorry that was a bit longer than I talked no maybe when you have CFO running the place. It makes sense like it all makes sense on a that's what CFOs do. They make it they all makes sense on a spreadsheet, right? It was interesting.
5:13You know, I was watching something that Honom from Altos Venture said who talks a lot about generational investments, right? But he said they set up a series of continuation funds to do this, right?
5:21So that LPS could exit if they wanted um and stay in if if they didn't in their in their funds. Um I I assume that if if you did that perfectly other than some conflict on how those funds work, it it it lets folks go each way, right?
5:34Yeah. But the odd thing is you already been fully paid for what you're doing.
5:38So now, as I say, now you're basically giving the LPs their vitamins. You're basically saying, "Damn it, you will hold these stocks because it's good for you. I've already made my money." So look, I mean, we're going to talk about Nvidia in a while. And one of the things we'll mention when we get there is that there's a Sequoia partner on that board from 1993. And I bet you he's held all his stock, and I bet you he's worth a couple billion bucks. So, you know, you can do what you want to do individually, but I don't know if every LP in Sequoia would really have wanted to hold that stock from the from the IPO and what was
6:06it 95 or 96 all the way to today. So, to me, that one was an easy give. Let's stay with Sequoia and the other stuff though. Sorry.
6:12You know, the other the other matter thing about Sequoia just um I mean I know it's Captain Obvious, but I think for founders and others, it's a reminder the institution may be durable. No particular partner may be durable. The CFO who's the CEO's gone. All the London partners gone. bunch of the US partners gone. Now, listen, this is a this is an organization designed to make a buttload of money and it is not a nonprofit. So, it all makes sense, right? It all it all makes sense. But, uh you know, it is founders think of of sometimes their VCs
6:42being more permanent than they are, right? I I I float in and out, but uh like most things, the longest lifespan is the founder CEO, right? Like Jensen, like the longest the founder CEO, odds are it will have the longest lifespan in tech. Uh actually I might argue that but but your your salient point is the right one. Change is the only concept there and I give him credit for making change.
7:01I I think London's important. I think a lot of people use this clearly clearly that's not an opinion shared by everyone but keep going.
7:07Well I think it actually is. Um and I think you know when you look at 11 Labs which is a phenomenal investment of Sequoas and Dollar App which is an phenomenal investment of Sequoas in London and ODU a great investment in Europe too and Bolt. I think bluntly what they're saying is Europe does have great assets but we feel we can sufficiently cover it from the states.
7:30Yes, which I don't disagree with.
7:32You know one thing I will add and there's obviously two sides to all this. I I believe in being close to founders. I I believe there's value in a London office. we talk about. But I will say I don't get invited to all the things you do, Harry. Um um but every like elite like event or dinner I'm at, Mott's there, okay? Half of them Anton's there.
7:49I mean it's hard enough to get to the Bear from London, but it's cool. But getting there from from Sweden is a PIA, okay? But I mean I don't need to go forget about rate, you know, you want to be in the deal and you want to close it quickly, but especially if I'm not doing the preede or something. I don't think I need to go there to meet these guys.
8:06They're everywhere. And and kudos to them because it's it's work, right? Um it's like you don't I would almost think 11 Labs and if it wasn't for for Anton's accent, I would think they were Bay Area companies. I genuinely would. They're everywhere. They're everywhere. And so it is like I I do think preede you want to be local, right? And you could you're there. You could challenge later. I genuinely believe when it's not Captain Obvious, but but if but if Marty wants Sequoia, he's there every month. You're going to and and and you're going to meet him. You're going to meet him. And
8:35Sequoa has a good enough brand. you you're going to get a shot to put a term sheet in front of him and if you're willing to pay up you you know I don't know if it's so crazy but again preede I'm I'm murky on this I'm murky on precede it's you got to roll up your sleeves to do that job that's that's the lord's work the preede yeah and accepting you go back to decision it was the right thing for them I mean I think for them yeah for them you're trading off something which is maybe a little less coverage early on in the UK but you'll get the good ones and I think it's it's what you said Harry it's all about focus we need to just get everyone
9:04in a room we need to get our [ __ ] together and I give them huge credit. They are always good at reinventing themselves.
9:10One thing I didn't really get, I always did think the scout program was relatively little lift for a very significant advantage. And I I was surprised to see that. I don't know if you have any, but that one just seemed strategically Huh. Well, it did get cloned. It was I think it worked better when it was a secret.
9:29They were years ahead of everybody else.
9:32Yeah, I know. It wasn't to be I think in the earlier years it wasn't to be spoken of if you were a scout. I mean it wasn't like I don't know if you had to sign an NDA or not but it wasn't spoken of right um and uh it may be that simple is that how you know it just it just it just got too flat and I just don't think that I mean to your point we could talk about it forever. I I just read this as not having the energy. I don't want to run a scout program with the small partnership. I don't want to run ARC a mediocre accelerator that that isn't really even speedrun let alone YC. You
10:01know, I thought in the early days about running an accelerator for Saster when, you know, when when our brand was the hottest thing in SAS, I'm like, my god, I'd have to hire like 15 people. And then I'm like, I'd have to manage them.
10:12And the and my LPs would tell me to do this. I'm like, I'm going to jump off the roof if I have to recruit, manage 15 folks, all ar like it's just it's too much. And I don't know if they have the time to do this and loop in six partners in London in a different time zone with different motivations and different economics. It just it was just too much.
10:29This is too much. if you want to have a tight partnership. The other thing that I guess is part of it is obviously I'll share one other story. You know, when when when Sam Blonde, who's now at Monaco, was at Founders Fund for a while, I didn't understand Founders Fund when he was a partner there for a little while. And I'll tell you why. I didn't understand it. It seemed like too much capital for too few partners. Like I didn't understand how so few people could deploy so many. But when it works, you have to have the ability to conviction to write large checks into winners, right? But Sequoia's got some
10:58good ones. I mean, I know you can talk about what they missed out on, right?
11:01But if they have the conviction that every GP can easily, I put it in air quotes, easily deploy a bill or two regularly, then you don't need all this crap. It's a distraction. It's it's exhausting to manage the the folks in ARC.
11:13I don't disagree with you at all.
11:15And I mean, Founders Fund when you I mean, it's amazing. Founders Fund deployed the growth fund in 11 months.
11:21But what's amazing is when you with how many partners and with how many how many employing professionals?
11:25I mean, honestly, like three, five real.
11:28Yeah. No, but but they're in but they're in Stripe. They're in Andrewil. They're in SpaceX with that fund. And it's like no LP is complaining at the compressed deployment timeline there. It is phenomenal companies. But you're right. I mean, this is large amounts of money with very few people.
11:45I didn't even think it was possible when it was there. I'm like, how do you you know how many people there? No associates.
11:49Well, that's because look, how does this I don't I don't I don't get it.
11:53You have to be somewhat diversified early on, but you have to be widely concentrated later on. So, and I think Founders Fund do a really nice job of you doing both. You know, they do a lot.
12:02I mean, if you look at the early stage stuff, they do, they do a lot of little experiments, right? They do a lot of early deals that are small and kill them quickly. And then you're right, on the growth fund, they concentrate down, you know, from, I think, 20 investments in the first fund to seven or eight. It's exactly how you should do it, right? Um, okay, moving swiftly on, we have Nvidia.
12:21Jensen Hang admits to having an affair with an alleged or suspected Chinese spy. the border as a result opening an investigation into it as to what quite happened and what the impact of this is. This is not one I had on my bingo card. I'm going to be honest, guys. Look, it obviously sucks on a bunch of different levels that, you know, just to put it out there and then move on from it.
12:43Sucks on a personal level for him, his family. It's just all yuck cuz you know, you've got a personal drama going on and suddenly six billion people have an opinion on your married life after 40 years. That just sucks. Moving on from that, because I'm trying to avoid comments on that, it sucks from the company perspective. I mean, you're right. This is the most consequential company in AI and I think Shan Magcguire had a post basically saying, you know, please don't basically please don't [ __ ] it up just cuz the Chinese um intelligence agency did some kind of compromat. In other words, let's not
13:12lose the plot here. And in one sense, I'm sympathetic to that. would suck if um you know it would suck to lose Jansen because I think a different CEO would run that company very differently and perhaps wouldn't have the drive to make some of these deals happen. But then you got to say the third point is going investigation if and to be very clear it's not an investigation into a relationship. It's an investigation into you know compliance issues. It's an investigation into you know did we know was there breaches of security? Are
13:42there issues visav how the government handled it? Didn't Nvidia lobby the government, the Justice Department to back off on a test on mega speed?
13:49There'll be a whole bunch of stuff like that and it'll be messy and you know there's at least some nonzero chance that the stuff that comes out is problematic, right? And as I said to repeat that sucks because this is a worldass executive who's, you know, remember taking this thing from 93 all the way to today, the longest tenur tech CEO period, full stop. And you know, it's hard to argue he's not a success when you've had a $5 trillion market cap.
14:16All all politics aside, I think he needs a pass. Like this is too important to AI. It's too important to the US. I think this is a point a lot of folks were were making one way or the other.
14:25Objectively speaking, he needs a pass, right? I I we briefly on on an older pod discussed how Steve Jobs got a pass in the backdating stock option days. This isn't the same, but we needed jobs. And I think at least for now, we need Jensen. I mean, he someday got to retire. I think. But what this it's kind of a bummer it was like mega speed in all of this. It's kind of a bummer that it is a it's just it'd be nice if it were some something not quite as in the
14:53center of where these GPUs should be going. Whether it's really okay to host inference and GPUs for China based models in Singapore and Thailand. It's just a really unfortunate even beyond this spying thing which I think is I don't he didn't leak secrets. I mean, come on. That it's possible. It's moronic, but it's just a bummer. It's mega It's a bummer. It's mega speed, right? Which is banned by Nvidia now.
15:16Nvidia even said internally they're not going to sell them anything.
15:18Jason, I love you so much. You're like, why can't you just cheat with someone from SAP?
15:23Yeah. I mean, change your destination. I mean, I don't think it was intentional.
15:26It's just a bummer that I think this is going to last much longer than it otherwise would. I mean, I know this captain because it's so tied up with an issue that everyone's been dancing around, which is, is it okay to sidestep selling GPUs to China by just sticking them in in in in hyperscalers or data centers a few miles away? Like, this is this is this is something that kind of made no sense. Like, we'll let you train all your models. We'll let you do whatever. Just please keep the chips a few miles over the border, guys. Um,
15:56and two comments on that. One is, do you need a pass? I mean, yes, you'd like a pass. you'd like this to go away, but just to be clear, I think because you're right, you have all sorts of national security questions.
16:08There'll be interference questions. I don't think it's as easy to go away as some of the other things we talked about. You know, the the backdating options thing with Steve Jobs. I think this is more problematic. You can imagine the series of facts starting to, you know, you also have the dynamic of the government knowing about this early. Marco Rubio having a report telling Trump them not passing information on.
16:26There's just a whole bunch of messy stuff here, right? So, I don't think you can assume a pass. You you can hope a pass, but you can't assume it. And then the second thing is the really odd thing, the amazingly foolish thing is this. My sense just having listened to a bunch of the interviews um Jensen's done is without any lobbying from any Chinese agent, from any entrapment agent, he wants to sell GPUs to anyone who will buy them. Right. It was all This is the part that's going to backfire. There's so many clips of him pushing hard to sell these chips to China.
16:55My point is, I don't think he was doing that cuz someone was lobbying him. I think he passionately believes that and correctly from Nvidia's perspective and his job is to run Nvidia and President's Trump job until there's another president is to run the country and from Nvidia's perspective they need to sell chips to anyone who buy chips right because what they don't want to do is have another alternative provider you know based out of China eroding their market share so my point is this you didn't get anything by entrapping him because for entire logical reasons he's going to be pushing he's been pushing
17:25that agenda pretty consistently No, China loses big time here. China's going to lose. It's going to be harder to to to not only sell GPUs to China, it's going to be harder to to just host them across the border. It's going to all get shut down. It was already stalled in Congress. It was I think it was passed by the House and not the Senate, right?
17:41This is this is not what China wants.
17:43This is bad. This is bad for China, right? Um the only the other thing I might add for for others for founders and others maybe to get away from the salacious stuff. I've in I was thinking about this before this. In my whole career, I've been involved in two incidents where boards did investigations with CEOs. Uh one female, one male actually. Um nothing exactly like this, but but it's all similar in some ways, right? It certainly wasn't mega speed and trans shship GPUs. Um the one captain obvious insight is you get
18:12you kind of now this won't be true of Nvidia, right? because it's under such scrutiny. But what level of below you kind of get who you hire in the investigation. You guys can challenge me on this, especially you, Rory. But the the the input of who investigates it, who you hire, what they're as objective as they are, are they biased in favor of the of an outcome, um they're paid, right? Whether they're a law firm or investigation agency. And ju just just be very thoughtful when you when you when you do have to do something like
18:42this that you that you that you understand that that the out the output may be already be decided when the input begins.
18:47The only comment I'll make is I I understand what you're saying that you know you you can if you're asked to run this investigation you can set the terms of the investigation and you can you know choose whom you hire as attorney that to some extent pre-biases it.
19:01That's arguably true. But on the other hand, and I again I think I saw someone make this point, when you're doing an investigation that you know is going to be second-guessed by a different investigation probably done by Congress, probably done by Department of Justice, the scrutiny level goes way up. And you know, it's look, I think one comment is this is an astonishingly long tenur board. Four of the nine board members are two of the original VCs, Mark Stevens and Ten Cox and two of and the original uh audit chair from 93
19:30Brook Su and then uh the CEO of Synapsis. I mean these are people who've been in this chair for 30 years clearly very loyal to Jensen. I'm sure you know looking at this like they needed like a hole in the head right but people tend to be professionals and if there you know and the CEO of Kulie the law firm is on the board is in fact leading the investigation.
19:49professional people, especially when they know the scrutiny coming. They're not going to just close their eyes. So, you unfortunately this thing is going to run and they're going to do an investigation knowing it's going to get you. Their homework is going to be checked by someone else who's not going to be as friendly, who might be in Congress. So, for sure, I I'm going to pull this back to the the numbers that really matter, which is NASDAQ 100 loses 2.5 trillion in a day.
20:14I had hedge fund managers, friends of mine calling me just in a tone and depress depressive state like I haven't seen in years. Guys, that much value eroded in such a short amount of time.
20:28Can you help me understand what happened here? What caused this? What's what's going on? I mean, you can start by saying it's clear proof that as the old expression, no one knows nothing. No, no [ __ ] Because that crash today, we're now recording this on Tuesday. It'll be released on Thursday. The crash you're referring to happened last Thursday.
20:47Reminder, on Tuesday night, it became pretty obvious the dams are going to win and win big and that was right. And then on Wednesday, the stock popped. So, in fact, the first response was to go up and then a day later, there was some arguably some economic news, but then some kind of angst about data centers.
21:02So, on Thursday, you pop back down. So, a lot of this is fairly reactive. It's some version of oh my god we can't build data centers all these people aren't going to let us let's build data centers so maybe we won't sell as much chips but I don't know how deeply thought true it was it was you don't see this as the AI trade cracking and it's showing first signs of that I'm going to say this again I'm going to say it every week because I the AI trade doesn't crack on the supply side doesn't crack it's like doesn't crack because the data center can be built can't be built it doesn't crack because chips Nvidia loses market share to AMD it
21:31doesn't track what any any of those other reasons if the demand is there. I said this over and over. If the demand is there and that demand will be evidenced in ARR for open AI and a tropic, if the demand is there, everything else will be roughly fine.
21:44There might be some companies like, you know, that get ahead of themselves like Core Weave, but it'll all be fine. So, I think looking at that that last Thursday and trying to extrapolate some kind of informed, oh, I've suddenly realized we're only going to sell 300 billion of tokens instead of 500 billion. Let the stock go down. I think you're just grasping it straws. I think a whole bunch of aggressive pods in hedgand got kind of nervous and kind of got blown up because they're over the skis. And remember the good folk at Citadel and places like that, they basically take
22:14your checkbook away at 5% and they fire you at 7 and a half% draw down. So it doesn't take a lot to have a bunch of these kind of pods just blow up. That's all that happened I think last week. You know, no great thought.
22:26Well, I would say two things. One, we've discussed it before. I think it it makes sense for the markets to be nervous about this. There's a lot of assumptions. There's a lot of capital to be deployed. There's a lot of debt required. And you know, as we're recording this, Enthropics getting ready and finally getting ready to IPO. And it's it's a little murky to me what happened, but it looks like they couldn't fully fill out the round, right? The round's hundred billion. They needed about a $20 million private placement. I think 20 billion to fill it out or so. Um, some of it was Google's
22:54pre-commitment repackaged, I think, as part of this round. and they had to lower the lower the the the size of the round and lower the valuation. So, uh the market is a a little jittery about this even though I think Andak also said they're at $80 billion run rate right now, right? So, you don't get much better than that, but they weren't oversubscribed at 100 bills or so it appears. Or so it appears.
23:17Remember, pushing back on that because they're not at the overs subscribed stage. That's that process. We're not in that stage of the process.
23:22It hasn't it hasn't fully priced. You're right.
23:24I actually think they played it perfectly. Right. They, you know, given the dynamics of what's going on, they put a recommended price of 70 to 78 bucks a share, which is relatively low.
23:36As a reminder, the last private round was 54 bucks a share. And we'll talk about the market cap in a second. So, it's up from the last private round on a per share basis, but feels modestly priced. And the whole plan, I'm sure, is to, we talked about this in a figure, generate interest, and then if it's successful, walk it up. Right? It is far better in an IPO to start low and go up than to start high and come back because once you start coming back everyone loses confidence and you've blown it, right? So, um, so I thought it was
24:04fairly clever, right? And from a kind of valuation perspective, as I say, it's literally up 20, I think 20 30% on a per share basis. The reason people are talking about 1.4 trillion versus 1 trillion is when you do a valuation on the private side, you include all the options. So the same price per share looks like a bigger pre- money when this valuation on a public basis they only count vested options. So it's that's why the newspapers say it's roughly a
24:32trillion today but but about a trillion three a trillion four if you counted all the granted but not unvested options. So to me it all looks smart. They're beating the numbers. They're pricing it low. Uh, and the plan I assume is people pile in and maybe they can, you know, raise the filing range or at the very least get it done at the high end and declare a victory. I think it's perfect.
24:52Guys, what does it go out at?
24:54I mean, I know you don't like predictions, Rory.
24:58Not things that can't be predicted. I mean, I think it'll be very successful.
25:03I think it's a great company. Yeah. I mean, I think it's So, you think it'll go at 1.1 and pop to 1.4?
25:09Wouldn't be surprised in today's market?
25:12I mean, look, well, yesterday's market, today. Yes. In a normal market, yeah, if nothing crazy happened, yes, if nothing crazy happened, then yeah, I wouldn't be surprised.
25:24Look, it's not my It's not my gig, but for what it's worth, I think it's going to trade flat.
25:28Because I I listen, I I Rory's right. It doesn't feel like the round got filled out. I'm just using round for fun, right? Um it hasn't priced yet. Um they can go high into the range. They can even they can even raise it again, I guess, if they want, right? I think there's still time. Maybe I'm wrong. I mean, retail's hard to predict. Don't get me wrong. I'm been a big proponent of this, but I I feel like they the market is fatigued here. They couldn't raise the full hundred billion from uh directly in the IPO. Open AAI fatigued its market. It was only able to raise 10 billion, right? We're just getting
25:58fatigued. This is my view. So, I could be wrong. I just got my email from Robin Hood saying I can finally be an anthropic shareholder. Hooray. Very exciting. But I think we're I think we're fatigued. I think we're fatigued.
26:09I I actually just spoke to one of the largest allocators uh trillion dollar funds um and they were like listen I'm not worried about this 80 billion I'm worried about the next hundred billion cuz that layer is very thin and you know well that's the same point really right yeah it does they do it does seem to have been fatigued do you mean the next 100 billion they're going to need more and more money all of these companies so to speak but especially anthropic and open AI and I just don't think there's the depth of capital to continuously fund them again.
26:38God, it's f it's odd that I'm being the bull here, right? I think they get uh I think it's been the first chance to buy a pure play Gen AI nextgen company other than just, you know, picks and shovels. So, I think there'll be wild interest. And on regards on the capital thing, I think that if they continue to grow like a weed, they'll need a lot more capital.
26:56But if they if the growth slows down, I remember this is a company that will have $200 billion of cash on the balance sheet. More company more cash on the balance sheet than any other company in America. So I I I think I think it'll be fine. I think it will, as I say, trade up well and be it it's it going back to first, it's a great company, right? And strategically, I mean, if you put it this way, all I can say for sure is if you think this is a tough discussion, you'd much prefer to be these guys than OpenAI right now.
27:24Oh god. Because they're going to get their IPO done in the next um month. They're going to have the money. They're going to have the float. and they're going to be true with the private begging ball [ __ ] right? And I'm willing to bet six, nine months from now that CFO will have a convert on file. He'll raise a couple, you know, 50 bill.
27:42They'll do all the tricks you can do when you're a big ass public company.
27:46They will access public capital at scale. Meanwhile, OpenAI is smaller, starting to accelerate, doing great stuff, but um still unprofitable, still private, and still, you know, trying to raise 11 billion plus retail. Uh tough place to be. I would much prefer to be public. I think that the exhale that you'll have if you're on the entropic board when you go, "Ah, we're public. We got $200 billion.
28:11We're kind of at a c operating in compositive break even depending on the quarter. We're done. We're golden." Versus I'm still private. No, it's it's such a better position to be in.
28:21Yeah. Right. I assume if they can, they'll do a convert or a secondary or some sort of offering. what whatever var whatever the myriad of variants they'll be able to do at that scale within four to 5 months if they can right they'll they'll put another 40 50 60 billion on the balance sheet and they they'll be able to right the float will be there and that'll hoover up that last bit of demand um it's a good point it's just going to be easier for them to do it not easy but easier it'll be finally to Rory's point though it's going to be a gift because we'll finally get quarterly real numbers they're not going to
28:50disclose everything but we're going to learn a lot more we've had to sit around trying to figure all this crap out from coreweave and Nvidia and and NBS. Now we're going to have Enthropic every quarter having to disclose at least far more than we've ever seen before. It's it's a gift to all of us. We mentioned OpenAI and rather being public. Uh OpenAI did come out and say this is Greg Brockman. I think it's interesting also Greg's further prominence into the spotlight. Greg is the one who's saying a lot of these statements now, which I think is interesting and it wasn't the
29:19case before. Annualized revenue grew 70% in Q3. enterprise doubled and became majority of revenue which I thought was interesting. Yeah. Um and I mean obviously also Codex is crushing and really handing it to cruel code in a lot of ways. Um any note on that them closing 11 billion at 1.25 or just would rather be anthropic?
29:41No, I mean again again you know I don't want to be ever snide with any company.
29:44I mean if they really did we accelerate to 70%. That's stunning and yeah for that quarter it looks like faster than entropic. So, you know, what's interesting now is, you know, wildly competitive two-way race on these products. So, it'll be interesting to see token pricing. I mean, we're going to discover what the demand elasticity of token pricing is because I think these guys are going to push down on pricing. I think, you know, you're already seeing some of that. And then we'll discover what is the demand elasticity of tokens. Does a 10% or 20%
30:13reduction in price, does it result in a 21% increase in usage such that revenue goes up or does it result in a 15% increase in usage in which case net revenue goes down? That's what we're going to find out cuz two people the basis of competition will be pretty clear. Compute capital and token pricing.
30:31I think it's just interesting if they're growing at 70% now. What was it earlier in the year at the Nater right 30% or something?
30:36Yeah, there was an 18%. there was a miserable quarter of yeah just a reminder to me I I I know again as captain I obvious when dev was on the show from [ __ ] what he said is there's no loyalty with developers I just think we can't predict anything we can predict that anthropic and open AI will have more revenue 12 months from now than they have today and we can predict it will be radically more but literally running running a very simple eval between Astra and Fable or Astra uh and Opus it it it is truly
31:04trivial and you know and so it will this ping we've just the entire time we've done the show it's been ping pong right ping pong between these guys they both grow and it's going to continue to be ping pong so um no one else can acquire the compute they have at least in the US but hard to hard to predict what the ratio will be 12 month 100 days from now hard to predict hard to predict they did also come out and say that dots their agent product is very expensive and computeheavy they bring to bear the
31:33question of like is this agent proposition and consumer product about it is able to hit prime time.
31:42I do think it's maybe I guess I added that question. I do you and Rory kind of jumped all over me. Rory said they'll figure it out. Great startups always do. And I believe if you didn't need billions and billions of compute when done was available, it would be true. Um Harry said he do Instinct at 30 billion.
31:57It was to a deal to die for. I'm waiting to see. I just I just it's just these products are so good. Um, but they're just so expensive to I I misunderstood.
32:10I thought back when we started talking about this that the cost to run dots or grock or muse or instinct was like four to five bucks. That's what it cost to run lovable or replet. Okay. And it's it's VMs. It's it's non-persistent VMs that spool up and spool down for your website. That's what it costs those guys. And it's a good business, right?
32:26If if they can if Level and Revlet can charge you 25 to 30, um, it's a good and it's a good business for even for Wix, right? At 200 million for base 44. I was wrong. This is like up to 20 bucks or 30 bucks a month to run these things. And we and the learning from Grockbot and Dots is we want them to do even more. My Muse is running all day all day long for 20 bucks a month. I mean, I know Rory thinks it doesn't matter for meta and maybe it doesn't, but you know these the everyone else is compute constraint and I mean they have on video for I don't
32:55know how long they can say. We'll just have to see. I don't know. Comput is going up. GPU prices are going up. every there is no deflation, right, in in in in GPUs. So, I I don't know if it's sustainable. We'll we'll see. And I just think I'm sorry to ramble. I think ultimately these products are less interesting if they're not fully persistent. If you can't run an agent as often as you want 24/7 doing your work, it's just not that interesting. It's just an automated workflow. Um it's it's great, but it's not that interesting.
33:22Yeah, I hear you. You're right. Costs go down. And you're right. Short-term compute prices go up because of supply and demand. long-term compute prices go down because of Mo's law. In the end, it'll get cheaper. It'll be fine. The question is, are you two years away or five? I I don't have, you know, my my intuition is maybe five.
33:40My intuition is Yeah. The boys at Meta can carry the cost. Okay.
33:49Investment committee time. You know, honestly, the team edited Rory's statement last week where he said, "Harry, that was so much better. that was so more intelligently posed just for us to play in the office, which is nice because the way that we structure investment committees has changed within O'Driscoll Lampin Ventures. Um, and so we have three deals on the table today.
34:13We have Zipline raises 1.5 billion at 21.5 billion, three times its January price. Option one. Option two, foul doubles to 16 billion price on more than 800 million of ARR. And we have Revolute, the fintech juggernaut from London, prices at $115 billion in a secondary round, which was up 53% from their last round. Now, Mr. Lankin, of
34:43the deals on the table, listen, I like all three of these deals. And if if we really want to slice, if we really don't care about having to concentrate a strategy, and I think the fund needs to, I'd be good doing all three of these. I think these are all great deals. I think Zipline went long. I didn't get Zipline years ago. You know, this is been forever. I didn't really get doing drones in Africa. I know people love the founders. They love the company, but it never made sense to me, right? But fast forward where we are today with autonomous everything. Autonomous delivery, autonomous Whimos, autonomous
35:11cyber cabs. Zipline appears poised to be a winner. Um, it seems rich, but I I like it better than than invested in Whimo. The unit economics are better. Um, and I think it's clearly a winner. I think we should make this bet.
35:23Revolute's mark Revolute appears unassalable, right? And unlike the others, the margins are more attractive, right? And it seems to be going from strength to strength. Uh, it's the simplest one I could see doubling or tripling. You know, foul, it's just for now, and I know Rory's right, compute will become a commodity in 3 to 5 years. Um, you just can't get commute today.
35:44So, foul fireworks and others. I have long-term concerns about these businesses. Uh, fireworks was hacked twice this month. It's brutal. Um, but this is unstoppable. This we and and in venture sometimes we just have to be tourists. We have to be part of a wave.
36:00And if you make me pick, I'm going to pick foul because the underlying trends for the next two to three years. Um, and I know some of the guys at Altimter and others, I think we can flip this at 40 billion worst case. So, we have more than our prep. So, I'm I'm going to do this one, but I'm cool. Unlike all the other weeks, I'm good with all three.
36:16I'm good with all three. I just don't think we get the concentration for the fund that we want. Um I remember Peter Teal and my other good buddies at Founders Fund said, "We got it. We got to pick." Um but this is the toughest week. These are good ones. They all have The reason is they all have the right trends going for them. Um you know, maybe foul with the 6% gross margins that that might be an issue, but the trend is so strong.
36:38I don't know what it is. It's going to be pretty low, but uh they're all these are good ones.
36:43These are good ones, right? We did that, you know, that's what I really believe, but honestly, Foul might be the least durable of them, right? I I could flip it around and say if we really want to go long in our Evergreen fund we just set up, we're going a little counter to the other funds. We're going to evergreen. We can't do FAL because it's just unpredictable. But Zipline and Revolute are enduring properties.
37:01Oh, I'm starting to feel really uncomfortable about where this market's at. I want security and I want safety and I think Revolute is the best asset by far here with by far the best founder of our generation. Give me Revolute at 115 every day. Let me compound for 10 years and I'm calling it a day.
37:17Harry just wants to put his money in a preferred stock of a bank.
37:20Yeah. Yeah. No, funny enough. Yeah, that that I I because Yeah, they're super interesting. I mean, look, they're all interesting and high quality assets.
37:27Very different. I mean, let's just go to Zipline. Biggest attraction of Zipline and of one, right? They are, you know, people know what they're doing, but they started off doing drone delivery of medicine in Africa, but the big business now is making drone doing drone delivery in the United States. They have a contract with Walmart. They're doing a ton in Dallas. They're rolling out in other markets. That's the real positive here. And there's just a huge [ __ ] ton of logistics to make all that happen.
37:52The scary thing is you're probably getting they've done 3 million deliveries in the US. you know, you probably only get five 10 bucks a delivery, right? You've got to do a lot of deliveries to make this work, right?
38:07So, this is an amazing company. I don't I've not seen the numbers. Um, but my guess is you don't get there on a revenue multiple. You get there on the this is the next infrastructure play and if people are willing to have drones drop stuff everywhere, you can make out like a bandit. And it's a plausible it's a big story and a plausible story but at 21 billion you're really leaning into that Walmart contract. So that's amazing but scary.
38:32Yeah that was that was sort of the whimo that's why I brought it up as a comp.
38:36Like they make sense if you if you ignore ignore a bunch of things that's it's hard to argue with the market position and the technology is exciting right but yeah getting the math may not pers out to get our 3x agreed and then foul almost the opposite. It's not an end of and then they have a differentiated position in generative um in kind of more um kind of video delivery versus kind of more generic inference based hand and fireworks and all those but yeah in that broad market of people doing that you're
39:05right the big argu the argument yes there is what you said I think Jason you said the trend is your friend right now you know the total inference market is kind of third party inference market in other excluding the foundation models is five billion plus or minus growing like a weed So you probably get public goody years growth here there but you would be scared that the dynamics of that industry which is wildly attractive now could change at scale. I mean you'd be tempted to do that one just because it's worked so well. I mean we looked at these inference providers early on and
39:33angst incorrectly incorrectly about the long-term structure of this industry. It turns out you might be right in that in the end but when demand is trebling quadrupling every year no one gives a [ __ ] about the long-term implications. So when you look at that you know so at 1 billion 2 billion 3 billion they've been great and at 16 billion you might be closer to the end than the beginning.
39:53So you are driven back to Harry's choice which is maybe I'll just put it in Revolute who are busy destroying yeah taking away the business of every European you know retail bank and taking their young customers and you know the attraction about that to your point Harry about the next 20 years is when you look at the demographic of their customers I mean revolute even though we call it a bank it's mainly money movement it doesn't do a ton of lending but over the next 10 20 years all those customers who are you know 19 to 25
40:23today are just going to get older. They're going to want mortgages. They're well positioned to be the biggest bank in Europe.
40:29They are obliterating European incumbents. We will see market share for Revolute unlike we've any ever seen for any historical incumbent. And we'll see a product suite much broader. And so both the depth of market got it and the product suite they had means I really do think there's at this there's a 4x from here. I think with the downside that we have keyman risk on Nick. Do not let him leave the building.
40:55I want him near no roads, cars, any moving objects. Um, okay Jason, you mentioned fireworks and the security incident there.
41:06Do you want to touch on that or we can touch on the security M&A because Crowd Strike and PaloAlto have been making Well, I think the fireworks thing is interesting from a security perspective.
41:16I think um it's niche, but um you know, Fireworks has had two major breaches this month or in the last 30 days. It's pretty bad. Two things that are interesting to me. Um one is that every everyone's trying to steal API keys for inference and they're all trying to steal anthropic and open AI keys and they have massive swarms of bots and everyone's been hit by this, right? Um Railway was hit by this. North North Zone or Northgate, the other competitors hit by this. they've been hit by this
41:44and the genesis of this is trying to steal any anyropic or open AAI tokens you can and and I as an individual user on Ultra on on Claude my spending I didn't even know was set at $100,000 by default. So if someone stole mine because it was on fireworks and eval could have charged $100,000 in minutes. That's what they do. These crime syndicates steal these. They they they scrub it. you can get cheap
42:12inference and they they instantly there's so much demand for it as we're talking about, right? They can spend that $100,000 in seconds, it's gone. And that's what happened. And Fireworks was hit twice. Everybody's been hit. And any way you can get inside of someone's infra and take these these these these keys, people are going to do it. It's the most lucrative criminal trade you can do right now, right? It's is this is better than selling Rolexes. You steal off someone's wrist in London. This is the crime of of the year. And it's only
42:41going to get worse. And um and I know a lot of folks I I I know tons of folks that have been hit similarly. I wouldn't say tons. I know multiple other folks that have been hit similarly. And and and you're going to be hit and it's exhausting and um it it's uh it's just beginning. And the flip side is, you know, it seems like going also going back to f like this is terrible, right?
43:03But no one can leave. You can't get you can't replace the capacity. Where's Harvey going to go, right? where where's Stebings O'Driscoll and Lumpin startup going to go? like you just can't if it's a you can't you know all these guys just have seven figured up contracts there's nowhere to go but um boy everyone's going to get just more and more sophisticated to to just steal to steal your API keys can Harvey trust them now right Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har
43:27Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Harvey runs on it that they've trained their models they've done all this but what are we going to do and um it's just very interesting and very complicated if even fireworks couldn't do anything about it that was point one was there a second are you oh just that it's going to happened to everybody, man. Oh, here's the thing. Listen, may listen, Fireworks is not that old of a company, right? So, so maybe maybe as embarrassing it is, their sec ops and DevOps, it seems a little bit immature, right? I guarantee you it's better than 99% of SAS
43:55companies. They just laid off their whole SEC ops team last week as they're trying to get fit, right? Um, so just everybody's going to get hit and everyone's data is going to get stolen.
44:05Um, it's it's and it's great for the it's great for the big guys. It's great for the big security companies. It's great for folks figuring that out because it's just I mean everyone got hit in in Black October or whatever we called it, right? Um everyone it's it's only going to get worse with these swarms. Everyone said they got hit by swarms of bots. Swarms of them. It's something we just haven't really seen before. Fireworks and you know maybe they didn't disclose everything that happened, but they were pretty clear that the these swarms are are difficult to mitigate. Yeah, it's terrible. It it
44:33it's really I I you know this and down and outages were the things I I that's why I wanted to sell my last company. It's so stressful. Whiz said nine of the leading AI developers disclosed it a swarming incident in October alone.
44:50Unit 42 said bills are $1 million before detection. If it's you if it's 100k by default for like basically a proumer key, pretty easy to steal a million pretty darn quickly, right guys? Which M&A is the most interesting do we think?
45:03Crowd Strank and Palo Alto, Dial Pad, Fox and Roku, the potential of Silver Lake and PIF taking out Unity.
45:11I think you have to break them up. I think you highlighted two categories of M&A that are kind of very classic fast grow company, you know, bigger company acquiring an adjacent product and that's the crowd strike PaloAlto. They're all doing kind of small, you know, 400 million plus or minus perfectly great outcomes. um you know products in agent security which totally makes sense you're the end to end platform agent security is the number one issue I mean you know we've you know crowdstrike and
45:40paloto are consumate acquirers and they know their job is if if the new if the new a security issue is agent security then just go do acquisitions deal with the problem so that just it's kind of in a category of incredibly obvious you know I think one of my colleagues had looked at the space and there's typically three or four companies in the space the trick is to buy the hot on get intercepted by Crowdstrike or PaloAlto fairly quickly. So that made sense and then the same thing with the coding agents Meta and OpenAI buying adjacent kind of products all about the software
46:09development life cycle which is all just being redone from zero. So I think those two groups of acquisitions, the cyber and the coding agents are very classic, you know, incumbent buys product to meet the needs of an evolving technology market and and they all make total sense and look great to see cuz you know there's been a der of venture M&A and it's nice to see you know these guys just coming in and you know making good offers. when you get a dial pad buying
46:38ADA for 400 million in stock at a 21 valuation if you're the ADA investors are you like yay I think you know disclosure we actually also sold the company to Dalpad in the past so I have an investment in Dalpad and we actually had a competitor to ADA which we sold to Zoom three or four years ago right so I the good news is I have some form in the space I think if you're ADA you are a very good prel kind of chatbot services chat bot, right? So, the problem is you're up
47:07against the fact that you had a prior generation of technology, maybe you've replatformed to an LLM first technology, but you kind of probably lost the wind out of your sales. So, your ability to now compete with, you know, at some level Sierra, maybe Decagon is just hard. So, I think getting acquired as part of a bigger company makes sense.
47:25You know what just depresses me a little bit related it's related to this we can talk about the deal set there there was some Mark and Dre clip this week about it and it really resonated with me which is just you know when when maybe a year and a half ago folks started talking about AI native startups it it kind of triggered me I don't really get triggered but but I mean it got triggered to me it's like oh what what magical sauce do they have using GPT3 right uh well these these these kids are so brilliant because they grew up in the age of AI I'm like I I think a smart CTO or two can figure this stuff out right
47:51and indeed they can but as We as we're rolling into 2027, guys like ADA, I'm just so disappointed that these nonAI companies can't get their acts together. They can't run their companies differently than 2021, 22, 23. They can't move faster. Their teams are stuck basically shipping at the same rate. Hooray. Both an LLM on. But look at poor Canva, right? Too effing slow.
48:17Everyone's too slow. And um you know this isn't a bending spoons deal, but if you can't accelerate your team, you got to find some sort of I guess soft landing. I you know I I added this to the list cuz everyone said this was an amazing exit. I don't view it as an exit, right? If there's no liquidity, I don't think it's technically an exit. It may be the right thing for both set of investors, right? Dial pad gets another player probably with 50 million of revenue that's somewhat enduring and
48:46some folks. But um man, I'm just bummed that people can't get their act together. It is really true um how much effing faster uh quote AI native startups are um than four or five years ago. And it just I just did an investment this week and and and and you could pick at it a little bit. I love it. But man, the the rate at at what the rate that they're pushing out software is is maybe the fastest of of anyone
49:13that I've seen. And I just culturally, you know, for your portfolio, 1231 might be the time you got to kind of give up. You had you had 2 years to and you know, you get these email updates. We're going to put together next year an AI native team internally. I mean, that was your 2025 plan, guys. All these cos and startups pre they have the right ideas. They all get it. They're just too slow.
49:38And I've given I've I've just about I mean, I kind of have given up, right?
49:42So, is this an exit for the ADA investors? I mean, I don't think it is, but it's probably the best option that that's that's out there, right? Craig's a great CEO, right? Dial Pad will find its way to an exit. They're probably at 600 million or something like that, right? It's still going to be brutal if if in today's IPO world, but at least they'll find a way to an exit. Um, but man, no one could they can't get they just can't move. They can't move like the kids these days. And kids could be older. Like it's actually not even an age thing, but it is truly a
50:12If I was Orlando Bravo, Rory, I would be paying 50 million bucks a year to Mr. Jason Lanin to come in and talk to our CEOs about how to make our very monolithic, old, stale organizations AI first. make every CEO see what Jason sees because I think that'd be the most valuable $50 million any large PE fund will spend.
50:36Yeah. Oh, I thought I thought you were gonna say you're gonna have him talk to all the companies you want to acquire and make them so depressed about their prospects on a standalone basis that they'll sell to Orlando for three times run rate.
50:46Possibly say I mean that would be great too for Orlando. Um you know what the problem is too? I've been thinking about this a little bit. Sorry you don't have to go down this this rat hole for too long. you then you might think, okay, so that's true, right? The the the pre-AIIF companies just can't get there fast enough, right? But why why don't the AI guys just buy them, right? Why don't you just buy them, buy the contracts, buy the customers, and have your kids just just buy them out, right? And actually, the problem is the AI native guys are just growing too quickly. It's not worth it.
51:16It's never worth doing. It's not worth it.
51:19You both have to be kind of growing within a band for this to be worth it, right? It's no wor because the truth is you buy someone else's old contracts and then you incurred all their problems and the customer is never grateful for you for solving them. It doesn't matter at you, right? So I agree. I mean the point is it's what you said Jason for all these older customers. It really is march or die. You either get with the program or your toast and it's it's not even interesting to say it anymore. It was interesting two years ago when you started saying it. Now it's just a given. So let's move on.
51:44Okay. It's like sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh sh shape up or shape out. Well, Cloudflare's kind of done that. I mean, they they shaped up, baby. 20% layoffs earlier in the year and they're crushing up 39%. And then you've got, you know, Fresh Works crossing a billion with 30% fewer employees.
52:05God, efficiency at its finest, huh?
52:08Palunteer at 2 million, 2 million per employee. It's very enterprise, but it's 2 million per employee.
52:13Growing 100%. Growing 98%.
52:16So, we just didn't need the people.
52:18I think AI may be the excuse. and we didn't need the people. And AI AI opened our eyes to the reality of it when it was always staring us in the face in 2021 working 20 hours from home and doing our four side hustles. It was always true. Uh it's just AI AI made it made it clear.
52:36I think that's the real truth. Yes. I mean to some extent there probably there is AI leverage, but I think the real truth is you can Yes. Especially when you've got that kind of growth. If you've got a giant secular demand pull, right? You don't need to do all the marginal things that you were doing in 2021 to make revenue happen. You just got to staff the machine and take the business as it comes, right? And and therefore, you can have compelling efficiency. So, I I do agree. I think it is eyeopening how efficient some of
53:04these companies have been able to be.
53:06Right. Which makes sense. I mean, if you're selling, if you have two and $5 million contracts like Palunteer and you know, if revenue doubles, you probably can't hire headcount fast enough to catch up. You literally can't stop your margins going up, which is a wonderful place to be.
53:20The one interesting juice for Cloudflare, we don't spend too much time on and even Twilio, right? These are not brand new companies, right? We were just talking about an AI native versus native. Uh Cloudflare may be more agile company still founder run than Twilio, right? Which is not found. I mean, who knows what it' be like if Jeff was still there going when he was on our show. I think it'd be even better. Putting that aside, these are sometimes you wonder, you know, how big a deal are agents, not AI, not LLMs, but agents, right? It's still in some ways I run I run everything on agents, but it seems niche, but this is what's fueling
53:50Cloudflare from 20 some odd percent to 39% growth at almost 4 billion in revenue. It's it's agents and it's and it's agentic spend at Twilio, too. And in some ways, for 2027, all I want to talk about is agents. It's just agent.
54:01This is what's driving it. We had LLMs, we had inference. Those are good ones. I know we just did fall. I feel good about the deal. It's fine. It was a good 2026 deal, but all I want to talk about is how agents are changing, buying, building, sharing, learning because it's it's going to be the majority of everything in our space is agents are going to do it all. And Cloudflare is a public beneficiary of it. So let's let's going forward for the fund. If if it's not an agentic beneficiary, I don't want to hear it anymore.
54:27Is that why Atlassian falls after it warns on seat and subscription growth?
54:32Is that it? If it's not a Jantic, I don't want to hear it.
54:34Yeah. Listen, we all love Mike, but his idea that was was how critical the the front end in the UX is on the 20VC. I just didn't love it. I mean, agents don't care. They don't care about your UX and their UI, and they don't they don't care about any of this stuff. Humans do, but they're a declining percent of everybody's user base. The percent that are humans is declining. Even in vertical B2B, it's declining.
54:55Yeah. I mean, you you talk last year and they had April of last year, the world is ending, then it exploded in the back half of the year. probably a relief rally and now it's a little bit like okay you're not dying immediately but the new trend is not your friend because the new trend is agencies not a a agents not engineers and that means the seat license thing is brought into question but still up on the year Jason you said about Canva earlier u in a challenge bucket as well as Figma
55:23falling below $10 billion uh for the first time in a long time I think today it's about 10.2 2 billion. Any thoughts there?
55:30Well, my meta thought is, and again, I don't want to talk about politics. Well, we have a new Congress and we're going to have a new chair of the banking committee and others. We haven't had a change in the in the in the executive branch. I am worried even with that antitrust gets harder. I mean, Figma, listen, I know I know maybe Dylan's happier running the company. He may well be, right? You know him, Harry. I don't know him. He may well be, right? Um, but man, it would just it would eat at me.
55:55Not every day cuz you got to move on in life, right? It takes you got to move on in life. But we've now fallen into the single-digit billions when I had 20 billion plus a big I think a big package for him and others, right? Plus instant liquidity for the investors in what 2022? I mean, this is just a a tough one on the on the lifetime IRRa, right? Uh and do you really think you'll get back to 40 or 50 billion? Do you really think agents are going to be using Figma? Even though the numbers are great for Figma,
56:23right? the trends are not ideal and it's just uh so I just worry antitrust is going to get harder and that we had this brief window where where it was good and if it gets harder man it's just a it's just a bummer for everyone in the venture ecosystem it's a bummer agree at the same time just ju just just to commemorate success I mean you are dealing with a 40% plus or minus revenue grower very strong free cash flow even though they're still having positive and the whole so the trends are good and the whole hit was because they're they're
56:52putting they're spending more on AI So that's going to have more gross margin head. So yes, I I I agree. It's a thing they tell you when you you when you have these M&A discussions and someone says the old boring statement, but it's actually boring because it's true. Hey, you're getting an offer of X now. If you turn down X, you could work for the next three years, do an amazing job because Dylan has done an amazing job. Grow your damn company 40% a year. Get it to free cash flow positive. Get the damn thing public. And at the end of that, you're going to be worth half what you are
57:22today. You know, no one ever said capitalism was fair or easy, right? And that often is the argument for taking that preemptive offer, which obviously they did, except for the government wouldn't let them. But you're right, Jason. It It's going to psychically hurt. I don't know well enough to know how it knows of them. But yes, I I'm doing all this to get back to half what I would had for free in 2022.
57:42It's also really hard if if when you go into these companies, if you if you visit them, right, you'll see it really is hard to retain people. It creates a malaise over it for the for the high performers, right? You can fix it with RSUs and you can fix a little a little bit with additional grants and targeted stuff but there is just this malaise at folks even I mean Figma like okay we can talk I want to talk about a second point about whether seat businesses are stable but yeah almost 40% growth at its scale you can't argue with it right it it's
58:09it's S tier but with the stock so far down um this just malaise sets in it sets in and as a founder you can h as founders you can hunker down I'm still worth a billion right or whatever 500 million to what the hell doesn't matter it's liquid anyway, right? This is my life's work. But man, that malaise, it's just it's h it's hard to pull pull out of it, right? And it's and it's hard to attract new people, right? So, you double down on the existing folks and that's I don't have an answer to this one. When the malaise sets in, it's it's
58:39just tough, right? The one thing I would say, Rory, I I I listen again, I'm not an expert in the public markets. I'm not I'm not even um an amateur, but I think I truly believe if you look at all the the most impacted companies, right, the there are seatbased ones that the markets do not believe will benefit from agents and AI. And I believe Figma, unless it radically changes, it it's going to be in the doldrums, relatively speaking, right? The AR multiple is still like seven or eight, but it's
59:08going to be in the doldrums because people believe seat models at here at Monday at HubSpot, they're just terminal. They the markets believe these companies not not that they're going to die. Maybe terminals are wrong but but that more and more is going to be agent driven and they'll bid up Cloudflare and Twilio you know moldy oldie Twilio and they're I don't see any way that that the seatbased guys are coming back but Jason don't like it.
59:33So you are the new CEO of Figma. What do you do differently then? Okay, I hear all you what do you do differently?
59:40Well, okay. First of all, I I thought I think I knew like 10 months ago, right, when when the world changed. I'm not close enough to to do Figma today, right? I I will say this, the agentic design, the ability to go into an agent into into claude, into replet, into whatever and say, I want a perfectly designed end to end experience for my app. That does not exist today. Design mode in these apps are a joke. I use them all the day. I use replets canvas
1:00:08design today. It's a joke. Claw design is really neat and it's built in. It It's still kind of a joke. Lovable and Replet are both at a billion. They're not They are great tools for product people, but for design, they are a joke.
1:00:21So, it's not too late to do that, but you would have to just own it. Like I would go all in on aentic design. We will be we will deliver uh a sort of you know a notion. And I just picked notion cuz because it's famous for I you can build we will build you aentically your app every page every element of it will be as good as notion or better using our AI and our agents and it's going to cost us a lot of basis points. It's going to cost us a lot of gross margins and we're going to have to cut a bunch of things
1:00:51for our enterprise customers which is where all our growth is. But if we don't do this um we'll be like Adobe like we'll have our role our workflow role but we won't we'll be part of the past because agents will bypass us. You know, we talked a little bit when when when Cloud Design launched. I genuinely think I and I use all these products every day. Don't get me wrong. Thank you for the exist. They are a joke from a design perspective. They're a C minus. So, there's still a chance, but if you don't, but you can't do it at the Canva pace.
1:01:16I actually agree. And I, you know, we've looked at the creative market and I'm instinctively not creative, but one of the things we did was we worked with two or three, you know, uh, graphic designers and literally watched them do their work and had them do the same task in Canva, Figma, and then some of the modern video editing tools. And it's exactly what you saw, Jason, is that when they fall into one of these modern ones that's very agentic based, it all just goes quicker. They just type in what they want and it shows the node display. When you just look at that flow, I mean, cuz then you ask them,
1:01:45well, why what was the experience like in each of these three or four different products and you get some version of it just happened easier. It was you I was easier able to launch and just do it seamlessly with the agent and you didn't get that experience, isn't it? Figma make and Figma whatever the other one is, right? There's two different ones depending on if it's if it's kind of graphic or coding type stuff. Yes, you have to start with the product which and really make it for that customer. Really make it super usable.
1:02:12Tim, is there any that I've missed the wealth tax? We can talk about I mean lucky us all the billionaires can come back home, right? It is always fun.
1:02:21Yeah, it was always fun to watch California and you know the country swung Dem like we haven't seen Dem swing since 1974. It was a real we're done with these people. We're voting for the other guys top to bottom. I mean, you know, we're running. We might be have a uh, you know, damn senator from Mississippi. It's, you know, amazing swing. And at the same time, California, the most prototypically dem state in the country, at some stage said, "Yeah, we're doing all that, guys, but we're we're not doing this. We're not doing
1:02:50this wealth tax thing, which is really interesting."
1:02:52What's the takeaway from that then? I'm a break.
1:02:54I think the takeaway from that is one, I think I think one, there's generally a suspicion of propositions. We talked about this 6 months ago is that you know there's generally a no bias in propositions because I think California's recognized it's an incredibly stupid way to make legislation. So there is kind of default and then on top of that I think the the no vote won the argument right I think they made good noise and I look and it's it's impressive because no one in 2026 is going to say yeah I love me those tech bros I love me those tech billionaires but as yet you know give
1:03:23credit to the Google founders give credit to Stri they were able to make the case look this is just not good right you lose these people they'll go to another state you lose their income tax you'll end up net down right and I think fundamentally I I always say I think the voters are smarter than we ever give them credit for. And they basically said, "Yeah, we're going to get rid of the old lot. We're going to vote make a clear signal we're done with what we have in Washington, but we're just not going to screw things up totally here, people." So, yeah, cuz there was a no. And it's interesting. It
1:03:52was a no on that one. That didn't pass.
1:03:54And then the one that banned them doing it again, which was I think Prop 42 or whatever, the one after that actually passed. The one that says not only are we not doing a wealth tax, but you can't do it, you can't try and do it again. So I think it was a very emphat I mean emphatic mid-50s vote but it was a clear please don't do this. So a big loss for the side that wanted I thought it was good. I mean I'm not the only thing I might add is you know Sergey and friends did outspend the the unions 10 to1. Um I do think that impacts propositions if nothing else.
1:04:21Hey especially propositions about money.
1:04:25I think it's a very I think it's I think I genuinely think this was very important because listen I and again I don't I don't network the way Harry does. I don't have his network, but I spoke to two quiet billionaire founders, but not CEOs who were both planning to leave. Not not the Zucks. They were already planning to leave when this happened. And it's not it's not just about this. It's um it almost ties back to the beginning of this conversation with Sequoia and London. I mean, it's just a bummer if the best people leave
1:04:53California. It's even a modest bummer that that Elon politics side that Elon left and went to Texas. It it makes sense for his current businesses. It was going to happen anyway. It's a modest bummer. the more and more folks that just leave the the it's not just billionaires. These are not these are not uh passive wealth managers managing strings of uh laundry laundromats and fed. These are folks building, right?
1:05:15You don't want them leaving California. You just don't want it. And this I genuinely believe if this passed um it would have sent a clear message that California is toxic to the most successful entrepreneurs. Parker said it from Ripley and others. And I think it would have I genuinely believe it would have had a domino effect. Not as big.
1:05:34It's easy to say things on Twitter. Not as big as they said, but I knew folks already planning to leave. It's just not good for the center of AI and wealth. I mean, Anthropic's going to generate the average Anthropic employee $41 million in the IPO. The average employee and that's average. $41 million. You want to kill that? You want that? You want that to go to Miami? You really don't. You really don't. $41 million the average employee. more wealth created in this IPO. Far more wealth than any other IPO
1:06:03that's ever been created for employees. The founders are down to 1% each 1 something percent. Um but um crazy, right? Crazy, right? 216 billion going to current employees and 160 billion in the pool.
1:06:16Wow. That's real money.
1:06:19Yeah, it's real money. Nothing like that. You don't want them leaving. I think Anthropic is a hot enough company.
1:06:26it like it needed to be here, but maybe they could have moved. Maybe they still could attracted some talent to the beach. It's possible, but I think even if the company doesn't move, people can move when they're making their tax decisions. So, we agreed there's nothing more to say. It collapsed. As I say, super interesting to see it collapse in the context of an otherwise massive blue swing, which I would argue is, you know, as I say, shows people were awake and voting for a clear centrist majority. So, all good.
1:06:52this 41 million average for anthropic, right? Founders are each selling 264 million, which I don't think is a big deal, right? Um, but it's pretty crazy, right? It's pretty crazy.
1:07:06Yeah. All right, boys. Rock and roll.
1:07:08What a busy week, huh? Thank you so much for joining me.
1:07:12No problem. See you soon.