0:00I was just lumxed by that tweet because it basically handed every other firm a weapon when they're competing on deals saying, "Is this the partner you want when things go bad?" And we have a special guest joining us this week, Dave, the returned CEO of MongoDB. And today we discuss Open AI. They are closing the gap on anthropic, nearing a $70 billion run rate. Then we have the factory and the cognition debacle.
0:22Salesforce then buys Listen Labs for $2 billion. reflection. Could they be the US's best hope for an open- source model that can compete with China? This and so much more in today's show.
0:34I've never seen a CRO flip from one competitor to another.
0:37I just think in the AI age, the definition of loyalty has changed.
0:40The reputational damage that you can do in a long term is going to come back and bite you.
0:45When agents pick you, it's a force of nature. Right now, there's a lot that's got to happen between now and the anthropic IPO in the middle of November. Ready to go, boys. It is so good to be back and we have a phenomenal guest joining us today. Uh Dave, thank you so much for joining us, dude.
1:12Thank you, Harry. Thanks for inviting me and being part of this uh amazing group. Do you know what? Actually, I don't know if you guys know, but Dave gave me feedback that we needed to move on faster from just OpenAI and Anthropic. And we really took it to heart. And so, taking it to heart, I thought we'd start on Open AI. Uh, well done.
1:33Open AAI nears a $70 billion run rate and goes for 30 billion at 1.4 trillion.
1:43But the IPO is going to wait until 2027 despite Anthropic going out in the next few weeks it would seem. What do we think boys? The crazy thing to me when I think about the story is I mean OpenAI is back right 70 billion in revenue but more importantly if you look at your portfolio companies and others I mean Astro Soul and Luna are everywhere right everyone's using them everyone is using them and when you think where we started this year like things a lot of things in B2B only worked like at the end of last year and like only anthropic could get
2:13this stuff to work and nobody could and even coding at the start of this year only worked on anthropic and then we went into the summer and It kind of seemed like, you know, open eye in some ways was on the rope, right? Because consumer was the wrong path and they couldn't get back. It's only October or something.
2:30I mean, the rate of change here and the rate at which the OpenAI team got back in the game and made something that is truly epically competitive to the point where people are switching out their models for real because it's better and cheaper. I mean, it's it's crazy that pace at that scale. So, I mean, it's and it's 70 billion. It says it all, right?
2:50So, I mean, you counted them out 3 or 4 months ago, not literally, but figuratively. And now, if if it if they launch a truly competitive set of models, LMS, it's like instantly massively competitive. It's crazy. So, maybe it's Captain Obvious, but massive kudos, I think.
3:08Can I ask what happens if Anthrop's numbers for Q3 aren't blowout? Like every team that I speak to has at least deviated some meaningful portion from Anthropic to Codeex and everyone says how amazing it is. What happens if they're not blowout numbers? Like the world really just assumes Anthropic always has. Now the interesting thing that we should also learn from this and having s sold to developers the last 12 plus years is
3:36that there's not a lot of loyalty and uh developers are very quick to use to switch from one tool to another or frankly use multiple tools and uh and I think what we're seeing is that uh developers are are quick to find the shiny new toy. I think the question is uh you know what will uh Claude or Anthropic come out with next and what are the other alternatives. The other thing that's I think interesting also is that um what OpenAI has done is shown
4:06that when you have essentially a billion people using chat GPT a week that's a great distribution channel but the potentially where the moat is where the enterprise businesses you know um you have to sign contracts you have to train thousands of employees you have to build workflows and uh and it may be harder to switch the deeper you get into the enterprise that that's kind of a little bit of reaction I had Yeah. I guess in that sense it's OpenAI's run rate's even more impressive, right? I mean, maybe they were already embedded. Maybe
4:35they're already through procurement, but that's pretty fast change in the enterprise too, right?
4:40Yeah. Look, I mean, can I ask can I ask you a follow-up question? Sorry to interrupt, Rory. What from from your seat, do you think that is a blocker for more progress in open weights models in the enterprise? Just the literally the ability to get through procurement, get get approved, or do you not? What do you I mean obviously the explosion this year is crazy but but but it all but but but it is it is a hurdle to get over. What are you seeing from the and Sequoia side?
5:04Well actually from a side I was just talking to our CIO and we're talking about token costs and token budgets right so cost is a big factor um and that I think every enterprise has to consider. Uh no one has unlimited budgets. Uh the second thing is uh IP rights. You know how we train these models, who gets the data, how proprietary is the data. Uh and um and I think those two things are also pretty important points when it comes to what models you choose and and who you work
5:34with as you often do how you put a lot out there. And I think you're right going back to the forget the valuation stuff which we haven't even discussed just the raw number the 70% Q on Q for open AI in Q3. I tweeted at the end of Q2 when the the the OpenAI numbers came out for Q1 and Q2 and the gap revenue growth from Q1 to Q2 was 18% quarter and quarter and you did that math and it was that implied you know just under 100% year-on-year growth rate which was
6:03massive deceleration at a time when anthropic was still going 10x. So, like at the end of Q2, that was the state of the race. And I don't like to make this a horse race because you need to zoom out, but there's a part of it is a horse race, right? And if you noticed really early on in Q3, all the OpenAI team started really tweeting, we're having a killer July. Do you remember Sarah Frier comment on that? We're having a killer August. It was clearly that they internalized that, you know, Q2 was the first time Anthropic and GAP revenue was
6:31larger than them. And it just felt like they were pulling away, right? just you know 11 billion versus 6.8 8 billion growing 10x versus growing 2x suddenly a 70% number no matter what we'll talk about entropic in a second but no matter what entropic does at least changes that narrative back if if it really is correct and we don't know but if gap revenue grows 70% Q1 Q or even 60% up from 18% Q1 to Q2 that's a massive
6:59reaceleration and you know just just starting with a huge win and the big freaking sigh of relief because yeah given the open AI by forward purchases of just about everything from compute to data centers to land in Virginia if they didn't grow at hyper speed a lot of things come unstuck. So that's the first thing which is if true amazing for open AI right and then you write the second thing is did that come and this is where the dev comment on developer oil is is
7:28important is that did it all come at the expense of anthropic in other words you you're asking the question is this a rotating share game they accelerate at 70% and and then anthropic slow down marketly or did they both grow pretty well in which case the t you know you can lean into the TAM and you're right it's It's now I mean if the open AI growth rate was the key missing card you know the missing data point now that you've allegedly seen that card and
7:57again we're assuming the 70%'s correct you're exactly right the next shoe to drop is okay open AI you paid a 70% card now we're going to play our still it's 10x growth card or is it going to be a 5x growth or is it going to be hey we've slowed down a lot it will be super interesting to see where that anthropic Q3 number comes out and I won't say it's no accident but it's worth noting that the timing of the IPO now is such that that number will be in the perspectus but it will be known at the time they go
8:27public if we disentangle the revenue from the price in the round then Rory as you quite rightly illustrated I should have done poor Harry uh 1.4 4 trillion, the largest private round. $30 billion more. I mean, I thought we had dried up all private capital. Clearly, there's more. How do we think about this, Rory?
8:50This would be the first ever venture round above a trillion dollars. That's pleasing. The first ever private trillion dollar pl. I remember in the mid '90s, I remember the first above a billion dollar round and we were like, whoa, that's kind of crazy. Yeah. Moving right along with three orders of magnitude.
9:08Rory, congratulations for becoming the new head of Kalput's pension fund and you are now in charge of directs and you have the chance to do OpenAI at 1.4 or anthropic as they go public at two. What would you like to do?
9:22Oh, I think you lean to liquidity.
9:24It's a lot better to have liquidity than not have liquidity. So let's just say that two I mean so you you you separately have to value the two companies which is worth more but then separate from that liquid you really asked the question liquidity versus ill liquidity. I would much prefer to be in the liquid stock when the amount of information is as unknown as it is. You either decide you either want the liquid stock or you accept that you're holding for 3 or 4 years cuz that's what the risk of being private is. Yeah you think it can go public next year and it should be it's damn it it's big enough but you
9:54never know with the world. So, I probably would lean to liquidity at the margin.
9:58We can go to Anthropics IPO or we can go to the the slightly salacious one, which is factory and cognition. And I I think we should go there. I'm going to just throw my hat in the ring there. So, I'm going to provide some context. Um Chris Dgnen, sales leader, legendary from Snowflake for many years, uh was a board observer at factory, spoke to Matan every day according to the founder and was very close to him. Um and whilst he
10:27was very close to him was interviewing for a role at Cognition according to the founder, Matan, this is um and then took the role at Cognition as CRO and that is when Matan came out and said, "You're bred. you know this is wrong and how bad of you. Let's start on that before we discuss Vinod that Vinod's a whole new topic. Um how did we analyze this?
10:53Yeah. So I just want to be clear um I know Matan personally I'm an angel investor Sequoa's investor in factory as well and um and MongoDB is a partner with Cognition. the fact that an adviser has access to a founders's confidential plans, you know, there should be clarity on, you know, with with the uh with the founder that they're thinking about going a different direction, especially if that's a potentially competitive situation. But if I was the CEO, I'd be
11:20pretty annoyed to see someone who had access to my plans go to a competitor.
11:26Again, I don't know if that had happened. Um, but that would be quite upsetting to me if it did. on the other side like as a CEO you're it's going to be profoundly frustrating right your adviser goes off and joins a competitor right it's happened to us all at some level right I would think 95% of the cos we would talk to would say this is fine man this is the way it works like CRO is a risky job there's a lot of turnover jobs come in fast and a lot of CRO's if it's a hot job they move very quickly
11:55right they and and so I just think that a lot of CEOs would be frustrated I think 95 5% of CRO is say I this is how I found my last job. Maybe not literally the same facts.
12:07Jason, I'm going to respect you disagree because remember that CRO has also hired other people to work for them, selling them on the company, selling them on the vision, selling them on the on uh how they're going to make money and how it's going to be transformative for their family. If that person were to leave, they basically burnt their reputation with everyone they recruited as well. So I I've never seen a CRO flip from one competitor to another. I've seen a CRO go from one company to another company in a different space because they think that's a better opportunity. Um, but
12:35I've never seen a CRO, at least that I can remember, that's ever flipped from, you know, one company to a direct competitor of another.
12:43No, I just don't think most CRO's if they were just an adviser, not not a he's not a full-time employee. He's an adviser. He's not even on the board. A board observer. What? And and that's important, right? But there is a distinction between a board observer for a little while and a board member. a CRO, not a CTO, not a founder, not a CEO, gets some some maybe somewhat retired as far as I understand it. You know, made a lot of money at Snowflake kind of kind of uh and that's fine.
13:07Nothing wrong for many for for retiring.
13:09Gets what seems to be the greatest job offer. Um it's going to happen, right?
13:14And and then says to the the other CEO, I got this offer, I'm going to take it.
13:20It'd be nice if there was a little more temporal separation. Um, but I just think most CRO that find the job of a lifetime that are just an adviser to another, they wouldn't even see a conflict. The way the way we think about conflicts as founders, I think a lot of CRO think of it as a game. Like competitors are often really friends with each other CRO. They see it all. My job's to beat My job at is to beat whomever, right? And so any I just thought founder is shocking, but I don't know if the CRO is an adviser.
13:46This is seen as crossing some sort of line.
13:48So again, not knowing all the facts, what I will tell you is that different adviserss have different roles. So you can call an adviser for a particular part of the business or particular function and saying, "Hey, I want your advice on, hey, I'm I'm looking to hire someone in Europe. Can you vet this person or give me some ideas of who I should talk to?" That's very different than someone who's inside the tent looking at your product plans, your board plans, your financial plans, and has real visibility in terms of where you're taking the business. I think if it's the former, then yes, there's no issue. Hey, this person was talking to
14:17you. was kind of a, you know, a light relationship and they decided to move on to a competitor. Okay, it happens.
14:23You're not thrilled about it, but it happens. Again, not knowing the facts here, but if someone had real insight into the business, real insight in terms of what the product roadmap was like, real insight on how they're competing and winning and losing against their competition and then they suddenly jumped to a competitor, that would be very very different to me. The interesting thing is if you think about the employee relationship first and then the advisor relationship at the employee level you know if I'm if I have a CRO working for me right at any point in
14:53time it's entirely possible that he can he or she can get a compelling offer from a direct competitor and go over there and literally know know everything about what I was doing up until the minute he gave his notice. Right. And de you might think that sucks. That was a pretty shitty thing to do cuz you were all in for team A and now you didn't go to another sport. You went to team B in the in the same damn league. It's really shitty, but it happens, right? And you know, and and you know, the factory CEO would, you know, voiced anger, but it's
15:22worth pointing out if I was a full-time employee. There's no way for me to tell CEO A, hey, I'm thinking of leaving until I got the job and then I have to give my notice. There's no halfway measure, right? So, to some extent, this is going to happen. If you have employees, they're going to know a lot about what you're doing. And at any point in time, they can go and do the same thing for a competitor. And at that point in time, it's going to suck. And right up until the minute before they sign that offer from your competitor, they had know all your plans, right? So,
15:51in other words, something like this can happen and if you you could forward communicate. You could say, "Matan, I've been approached by Scott and I would like to actually pursue it and so I wanted to let you know and be upfront about that because I'm aware I have a position of sensitivity." Then he is able to know. First of all, I'm dividing a full-time employee and then we'll talk about advisor because I think one thing the dev is corrected. There was implicit This is where you get explicit and implicit understanding. There was a there was probably some implicit
16:20understanding about the advisor that wasn't fully fleshed out on either side. And that's where I think Deb is actually correct. But going back to the full-time employee, I don't think you can, Harry.
16:30If your number two said to you, come in and said, "Hey, I got an offer from Excel. I'm thinking about it. I may go, I may not. If I if I if not, I still want you to love me as if I'd never kind of thought about leaving, but I may go." Right? The TR some and I've done that.
16:45But it's generally in an operating role, it can it can at least be difficult at least half the time.
16:51I'm But that's not the case here, Oy.
16:55I I I know I'm what I'm saying. What my point is merely people are saying, "Hey, you had a part-time adviser who left and brought all this information, right?" My point is you can lose a full-time direct report employee who brings exactly the same information and even more. So, it can happen like it it happens quite a lot in business. It's not like it's unusual. The thing that's unfortunate here is if the person's just doing kind of part-time advising, you you kind of end up in an odd you ended up in an odd
17:22situation where you're disclosing everything. That person's not on the board, so has no fiduciary obligations. He's not employed by the company. There probably to death's point was some implied statement that said, "Hey, you shouldn't do this." But it was never made concrete. Harry, you were shaking your head.
17:38I think I think you I think you're absolutely wrong. I think as an employee you have very siloed information and you don't have a lot of privileges that a board member would do with the oversight on strategic discussion across the whole company across all the different functions and so it's completely different how would you okay CFO COO sorry what do you mean I mean my my point is you you can lose if you're the CEO you can lose one of your top two or three direct reports
18:07sure sure but if you're if you're the CFO who moves on you no real insight into the maybe product road map and function.
18:14So do you think that an advis Okay. So you would say okay.
18:18Yeah. So I think I mean what what how is it so different? H half of the uh of the of the Frontier Labs folks are rotating back and forth, right? They go in and out. How they're taking tons of intellectual property and knowledge from each other. Um I I I mean I I know it's different, but I I think I think and and um Dev can challenge me here and I wish it this were not true, but I just think in the AI age the definition of loyalty has changed. I think it's changed permanently. I think culturally it's
18:47changed. I see it with some of the top executives I've learned and um just one prong. I mean people move more quickly.
18:54People are uh the compensation is very different. And I think you just have to expect people will move from competitors. They will go from open AI to anthropic to wherever. It's just that we've changed culturally and if you if it can bother you but you the world changed you know it's we got to we got to accept it.
19:13Yeah. So, so what I would say is the following. Like it's very rare for me to see people go to a direct competitor. It has happened and and and Jason, you're right. In this age, there seems to be more of that happening than not. Um, but it's still quite rare. And I think you also have to understand that these people have reputations that if they're in a leadership position, they've recruited people who work for them, who believed in them, who believe the story.
19:37and then for this to get up and leave and obviously I dealt with this last week. It kind of leaves a bad taste in people's mouth in terms of how really committed were you to this and did you sell me a bill of goods? And um in in in the in the situation where a CRO or a senior executive is leaving, the question I'd ask is like, okay, I understand there's lots of opportunities out there, but do you have to go to a direct competitor? There's no other company who wanted you. There's no other, you know, company that values
20:06your skills as much as this company. Like I think the reputational damage that you can do, you know, long term is going to come back and bite you.
20:15I do we even remember next week anymore in the age of I think you do.
20:20I I think actually Jason I would say the more things change in many ways a lot of it stays the same around people around relationships how you work with them and I think people too often use the AI era as like oh everything's changed I disagree I think how you manage people how you recruit them how you develop them how you hold them accountable in fact a lot of these young AI founders struggle with this all the time because some of them have never hired a a go to market person they've never hired a finance person and so they're always asking for advice on what do I look for?
20:49And how do I evaluate someone with skills very different than mine? And they're all the same issues I had when I started my first company in 1998. Like it's the same thing all over again. It's just obviously happening maybe more visibly than it ever happened before.
21:03Until recently, my experience was there was always when when you went went somewhere else to another company, there was always the rule of two. It's kind of like the Sith but different, right?
21:10Wasn't the Sith like the rule of two? I don't know. You could take two people with you. So when you left to go do your own company, you could bring one and dev would get kind of pissed, okay?
21:20And you'd talk about it and then you'd ask permission for the second and there'd be a lot of friction. But if you cross two, the relationship was broken.
21:27Right now I'm seeing folks take like eight or 10 with them the first week and like it's not a cultural issue anymore through people that I respect and think are high ethics, right? And some of that I think is the pressure to move so quickly in the age of but I do think it's a I think it's related to this. I think it's a symptom of change that the rule of two seems to have died. Was that your rule with your team over the years?
21:45Did you did you informally enforce the rule of two?
21:48People who who left and then carpet bombed the rest of the organization try and follow them and obviously you know that wasn't a great feeling and you know and stern words. Let me ask an interesting question. Yeah. Would you prefer someone to a senior executive to leave and go to a direct competitor but recruit no one or someone to leave and go to a totally different business broadly endeavored developer tools but say and recruit four or five of your top of of his top execs? Which would you
22:17prefer to defend the talent or the knowledge? It's a tough one. I don't know.
22:21It's a tough one. I think it depends on who that competitor was. Um and it was like my mortal enemy. I'd be more upset about the former if it was another company and four or five people left. It is what it is and I'd So I do just want to I I would just love to maybe slightly move the conversation along. Um because we mentioned the word loyalty and you know when we hear the word loyalty I just think of Vin or
22:46Kosla um uh who led factories series C led their most recent round and then goes on Twitter and the wording was like um struggling second tier competitor.
23:05Absolute demolition job of Matan. Um, I don't know what to say. Was he asleep in the partnership decision? Like, was he aware that he led the last round? I'm genuinely not saying that stupidly. I don't know if he was. At Candly, I was shocked when I saw that. I was just totally flumxed by that tweet because it basically handed a weapon to every other
23:32firm competing with Kla Ventures. and Coastal got a great team with Keith and a bunch of other people there and basically handed every other firm a weapon when they're competing on deals saying is this the partner you want when things go bad. I was just totally flumx on why he would do that publicly.
23:49Yeah. I mean there's nothing to add.
23:51Some days you just make a it was a mistake. He will probably look back and say gosh I wish I hadn't done that. I'm It's like it's weapon in the hands of everyone who competes with them. Wish it hadn't happened. A lot of what's going on here is what are the what are the legal obligations versus what are the implied rules and what are the consequences of breaking the implied rules and what are the non-legal but nonetheless implied rules. It is really hard for venture firms when they're two two directly competitive deals and the only way you get around it is you make all this argument about you love your
24:20children equally. You don't say anything in public about one about the other and then you have something like this that crashes through every wall and you know it just shows that those situations of you two directly competitive investments are very fraught especially if you're actively involved in the companies. It was very unhelp it's very unhelpful for co very unhelpful for both companies. is like ick it was not venture's finest hour let's move on you know maybe it's just maybe being a polyiana he meant it positively as tough love
24:49struggling sec you know there's a theory like be harsh on the struggling the most struggling founders he thought struggling second tier competitor would be motivating I I I I I I I yield obviously the dev and the CEO of man manager side here but I do vaguely remember something about praise in public and chastise in private I don't think that was the mission here.
25:10You never know. It seems baffling.
25:13Yeah, we've we we've been talking a lot about um open models over the last few weeks. We saw Reflectionship Beam. I thought that was a really interesting story. We also discussed Rory one of yours before Intercom obviously selling to Salesforce. Well, we had Salesforce buying Listen Labs too for $2 billion.
25:33Of those two, where would you rather go?
25:36I think both are worth some time. I mean, I'd love to hear your thoughts on reflection because look, they've been frankly talking about shipping for a long time. And from what we said earlier, it seems to me that being an openweight US sourced model is a super interesting strategic position right now. So, if someone can shed something that's near near frontier quality, even if it's 6 12 months off, just from the dynamics of the market, that's a nice place. So what are you guys thoughts?
26:05Yeah, I actually tweeted out this morning. Um I actually thought that uh enterprises kind of can have their cake and eat it too. One, you get a US open source model that's near frontier intelligence that's you know three to four times more cost effective i.e. you know, cheap cheaper and that's music to the ears of any enterprise uh because there's obviously going to be some hesitation by using Chinese open source models, especially if you're in a regulated industry or industry that
26:34deals a lot of sensitive information. So to me, this is a you know was a very noteworthy announcement. Again, I do want to disclose a sequoia investor reflection, but I think it's great for the enterprise. I was at Dreamforce this year, right? And got to actually have a surprisingly large number of conversations with execs. Um, notwithstanding, you know, the incredible force of nature of Chinese-based openweight models when I nobody I talked to really wanted to use a Chinese source model. Right or
27:02wrong, fair or not, nobody everybody that was, they felt like it was under duress for cost, but no one it really wanted to use one. Again, right or wrong. So, you know, if they nail this right, it could be a torrent of demand.
27:15I agree. And I think that this also reinforces a point that you don't need the you know the frontier level intelligence for every workload if it's close to the frontier as as Rory said you know within 6 months of the latest models and addresses 90% of your use cases like especially around you know reasoning use cases like coding and agentic workloads you know um I don't see why enterprises would would uh not kind of want to talk to them immediately. Yeah, and it's funny it's, you know, because and it it ties back to
27:45the first topic at one level, so far the evidence has been, you know, when you actually talked that there hasn't been a massive push because people are lazy and the the bills haven't been astronomical and therefore they've just kind of used the frontier model and maybe, you know, downgraded to the entropic or open AI, you know, less expensive model levels.
28:05But I agree. I think the interesting thing now is because the numbers are getting so huge. I mean, if if Openanthropica reach making $70 billion in ARR, that's $140 billion. That's plus a that's more than Microsoft taxed for the longest time across both Windows and Office. That's a chunk of US corporate profits, right? And at that point in time, if you're a CFO, you probably come into your CIO and say, "I don't care that it's easier to just use Entropic Dude. We need to shave 3 million off
28:34this token bill." Right? So start using Jev for your 20% of your decisions and start using reflection or something for anything that's not frontier and figure out a way how to use entropic for the hardship. I I I would imagine there's a I'd imagine dev guys will start to have those conversations and all your customers will. That's why again these growth rates are so interesting right now for Andropic. Can they still maintain that you know unparalleled growth rate in the context of this kind of chipping away? It's like remember the
29:02old man in the sea, the guys bringing back the shark and the the fish and then the the the other fish are known at bits of the body, you know, they're just taking away slugs of revenue from them.
29:12Well, and then you've got Jev and you've got a load of the other Jav competitors also in a different way attacking them.
29:18Yeah. Yeah. And again, the forward momentum has been such that all this is like, yeah, thanks Rory, that's super interesting. But did I mention we 10x last year and the year before? So, yeah. The other thing I think it's important to understand and Jason I'm curious what you saw at at Dreamforce but I think there's a big gap between where the capabilities are and where actual usage is in the enterprise. I think there's a posity of of real experienced skill sets inside the enterprise. And so I think we're going to see Jeban's paradox kind of
29:47come into play where basically as these costs come down, people get more and more comfortable deploying it for more and more use cases across the enterprise. As they get more conversent and and scaled around these technologies, they'll they'll start deploying it for more use cases. I see this even at MongoDB. And so I think you're going to see that frankly this is a massive market and I think everyone can be successful. I I won't comment on the growth rates of the Frontier Labs versus the open source model, but I I don't see this like I don't see this as
30:17being a zero sum game.
30:18To answer this, the the captain obvious answer to what I learned at Dreamforce.
30:21Everyone I talked to, everyone was just overloaded with the amount of internal demand there is for for tokens and whatever it is, it's more than they can imagine. whether it's being used properly, whether it's being burned for nothing, they're just overwhelmed with whatever the cap is, whatever it is, the demand is probably an order of magnitude more than they have they've figured out how to surface, right? That may lead to using suboptimal models. It may lead to a lot of a lot of waste in some ways, but everyone's got got to manage it, which just that and the and the fear of
30:51using China based models again, right or wrong, is just a huge opening if you can nail it. Um, I'm just the only thing I will just add just for fun we can move on is man just personally I'm getting more and more skeptical of ev published evals. Like of course you can make an eval look great, right? How fast was it?
31:06What were really the outputs? How well did it perform on a real workflow? How well did it perform on a mission critical workflow versus telling you an item was in stock when it wasn't? Which is still kind of mission critical workflow. I found that uh that you know every single eval needs like three asterisks and four daggers next to it today. So I am I'm skeptical. Beam is as great as they say it is, but I just asked while we're on if I can get on Open Router and check before we end the podcast, but it's not there yet. But I I would try. But uh I just I it's not that I don't think these are all great. I
31:35just think all the evals are so biased and uh or focused on chess championships that I I just, you know, I'm slightly skeptical.
31:43We have we have Neatron, we have thinking machines, we have reflection.
31:48In 12 months time, what percentage of token in open-source flow will go through US versus Chinese? Well, look, just two things. As Dev made the point in the beginning, developers will change and especially here. This is this is this is a lot easier than swapping out your database, right? Uh that that that could be done, but I having recently done it, it's some work, man. I got to tell you, it's not even with an LLM, it's this is not that I mean, listen, this is still work. You have to qualify your prompt. You have to redo your
32:17workflows. It's not nothing like the internet says, but I I could see it being half in 12 months. 12 months is a lot of time. And I think every I think sovereignty plus US-based is really important. I'm not saying it will happen because I don't know that again I'm skeptical of the I'm skeptical the parody is really there versus pretend there. But if if you're even three three like you know Xus 3 months to Deb's point, it could be half in a year. A year is a long time. But that gives me a lot of confidence. I'm I'm an investor
32:45in fireworks as is Sequoia. And I think the biggest concern I would have as a fireworks or a base 10 or a modal investor would do is that actually big enterprises are concerned about Chinese models and that would prevent them from engaging with partners like Fireworks or Modal and they then go to Frontier. And so the fact that you say 50% shows me that the the levels or quality you think is sufficient enough that it would be that rate that makes me excited.
33:11Yeah, I I think the other thing that enterprises are going to care a lot about above and beyond cost is safety. Like being able to trust these systems and I think we're just you know you know getting focused on this. Obviously there's that big conference last week in Washington and uh I think it's clear that you know there's going to be some self-regul regulating approach to figuring out how to um address safety.
33:40The challenge is how do you define safety, right? Because if someone knows how to define it well, I'm I'm really curious, but it's it's beauty is in the eye of the beholder and but we need some way or some mechanism for people to be able to determine much like a benchmark and yes people can game a benchmark is like how safe are these models and I think the you know the more safe these models are uh with whatever mechanisms have placed to prevent people from doing bad things the more widely usable
34:08they'll become. Agreed. And I wouldn't guess by the way 50% Harry. But I think even 10 or 20% would be extremely significant in terms of tokens because if you think about it the foundation models on open router I think get a you know 20 30% of tokens and get 90% of the dollars. If the if the US openweight models are even 50 60% of that in terms of tokens that that's a lot of traction
34:36because it'll be by definition the more enterprise ccentric safety conscious customers doing it. I think that would be a frankly a huge triumph for reflection and as you point out a real de-risking for all the inference guys.
34:49Ding ding ding. We got investment committee Dave welcome to the committee by the way. We're thrilled to have you as part of the investment team. Uh you are sorry to see on the you know new new firm that is uh O'Driscoll Lenin Stebings. Um Jason we have 11 labs who doubled their valuation to $22 billion.
35:12Would we do 22 billion?
35:13I think at 22 billion we should consider doing up to 10% of the fund. Um time is short. Um we're at we're at an 18-month deployment cycle. Um one of our most esteemed partners is going back to run a public company. So we're losing some of the folks on the team. The way I see it, 11 Labs has done something quite diff with with with actually a fair amount of intense competition. It's it's lead keeps widening. Um it is one of the 10 most important underpinnings of of Aentic applications is their voice
35:43applications where they're going and the the rate of growth and surprisingly the margins are very impressive. This is a company that that uh you know by the time we we close the friend and families round which we're hoping to do at 50 billion right this one could be approaching a billion in revenue and that's the sort of growth rate that um I think it's the deal we've got to do and it's it's a highly differentiated I won't say they have the highest mode out there in the world but this is no this isn't jev level risk 11 Labs has built an incredible team um they have
36:12submillisecond response rates for for for voice which has become a key modal and it it's tough to find a better asset today. Do I wish it was at 21 or 18? For sure. But I say we go all in.
36:23Can I ask you, Mr. Lanin? You previously said on the show that this would be the year of substitution for voice models and that cost would drive that decision.
36:33Have you changed your mind given?
36:34No, because I think 11 Labs is for the most part, it's always a risk. For the most part, it is covered. It has multiple models. It has covered the low end and the high end. And quality here is is in many ways more important than it is in your classic open weights model. We can tolerate a little bit of uh a little bit of laxness in the reasoning um for non-critical workflows.
36:53But when you're when when that when that flower dealer is flower uh uh uh dealer is is picking up the phone, it has to work. It has to answer that phone in seconds and the it has to be the right flowers. If it fails, if it misunderstands it, if we can't populate this, this product isn't worth it. So there there's a limit to price, but I'm shocked at the deal size of 11 Labs.
37:13shocked at the number of folks that are that are relatively modest companies paying hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars a year happily and our reference checks said they love it.
37:20They feel like they're getting a good deal. So, I don't think all models are funible despite some of the other discussions we've had at the fund. Um the fact that I did recommend putting maybe 500 million into reflection and others, this is not a funible this is not a funible use case today. 12 months, it's hard to predict, but I'm impressed with the team and I don't think anybody's going to catch them here today. It matters. This is where the LLM matters.
37:4310% of the fund goes to 11 laps. Well, I just don't want to do it over two rounds, you know? I don't I don't need to see it at 50 or 100. Dev knows what I mean. Okay. I don't need to see it a second time. I just want to put all the chips in now, get the ownership I can, and move on. Right. I agree. Plenty more things.
38:00And I've got a friend of mine that's a CRO I want to put on as a board adviser. I think he'll he'll be able to help out and give him some insight.
38:09moving from one square company to another score company. Sorry Dave, we it's not intentional. Um J Rory once said a quote which is like what was the quote like whatever game you're playing just be sequoia. Do you remember the one I'm talking about?
38:22There's so many quotes. I mean you know look I've been doing this 30 years and when I came in Sequoia were top and give them huge credit 30 years later they're still there you know. So yes I I gave the Gary Lker football quote if you recollect. So with great with great surprise, Sequoia made hundreds and hundreds of million dollars uh with Salesforce buying List and Labs for $2 billion. Now apparently they had offers at $1.5 billion. A major win for Brian
38:49Shrier at Sequoia uh about $850 million back to investors on 96 invested. Sequoia did the best. They led the seed, they led the A making about a 25x.
39:01Ribbit led the B uh which 4x in 8 months. So well done Mickey. Um what did we think of this guys?
39:11I think it was a great outcome for a very clear category in a sense of it's pretty obvious that mark stepping right listen up. Market research is a very large fragmented almost pre-technical industry. There's a bunch of consulting type companies and then there's three last generation companies. Qualrex Medalia and what was Survey Monkey. all that got to kind of high singledigit low double digit billions of revenues in billions of dollars in terms of market cap outcome. So, it's a really good
39:39category. It's an existing category with a big ass spend and LLMs just do it so much better because you know what are you doing in market research? You're kind of asking questions of people, right? And sim and aggregating and assimilating the answers and the two things LLMs do well. We just talked about voice. Voice as a modality is a solved LLM problem. And then asking questions and knowing how to and not just kind of these canned stupid last generation surveys where no matter what
40:07you say, the survey just asked the next dumb question. You know, it's like did you did you like your stay? No, I didn't even check in. And then the next question is was the bed comfy? Right?
40:17That's the last generation. Whereas now with LLMs, you can adjust the questions based on what the respondent is saying.
40:25All that means market research can be done so much better um with LLMs and I think Listen Labs was one of the early contenders that did it well and executed brilliantly and you know got the real revenue and I think so great outcome. I mean it it's kind of one of those when you make the the list of use cases for AI and LLMs at the app layer that comes out like a top five top 10 use case and there it is.
40:51But you know what I would love to get Dev's thoughts on this. I don't love, you know, I I am a pretty much a fan of a lot of Salesforce's acquisitions and I've I've been champions anyone. This one I don't really get. It's not that I think it's a bad idea, but I mean Salesforce is coming up on 60 billion their target 60 billion for, you know, they're almost at 50. I just don't I don't know how 20 million of revenue of next generation AI survey moves the needle that this is and I'm not saying it doesn't. I mean, scale you got to move you either has to tuck in or move the needle, right? Maybe you think
41:20about it differently, but to move the needle, it's got to be big. And Salesforce even So, this is the one where I'm I get the theoretical appeal, but I I wonder if this one will just be kind of forgotten in a couple years.
41:30What I will say is that um I think we're going to probably see more of these deals, right? Because I think there's starting to be a difference between a feature and are are you building a feature that's masking as a company or a franchise, right? And I think a lot of AI application companies will sell because a clever product on top of someone else's platform, you know, will will basically um is is frankly a feature and if they can use the distribution of that larger company, they have the cash and distribution,
41:58they're going to take advantage of it. I think the companies that are more durable are the ones that, you know, essentially are creating a data loop where the, you know, the usage creates data that no one else has. The data makes the product better. the product attracts more usage and you kind of create that virtuous cycle. So, and so if someone tries to copy you, they can copy the features, but they don't have all the interactions that you have. And so, I think the difference here is, you know, when you look at these kind of
42:26standalone AI app companies is are they really uh feature masking as a company or are they really building a franchise?
42:33And I think the founders listen decided that this was an offer that that made sense for them.
42:38I mean, you'd be pretty pissed off if you're intercom, wouldn't you? Sorry. He's just like you've gone through like 15 years of and struggle and you know just bull this business and then you know ABBA's answer to Justin Bieber comes along and 3 years later sells for a comparable number and you're like you know so I know I know they all made money but it's like oh bugger it was an easier route wasn't there.
43:09Of course you think that as a founder. I mean, I don't mean there's always someone that had the easier route and you do think about it.
43:14Of course you think. Even at I bet Dev thinks about once in a while. God, those I mean, we've done great at but those guys Yeah, I think they had an easier easier way with it.
43:25The lesson I tell my boys is comparison is a thief of joy. You start comparing yourself to everyone else and you're going to be spend be very miserable for the rest of your life.
43:34Yeah, Rory. Yeah. Hey, I I didn't do it how you comparison's the thief of joy.
43:41Good. Good to know, Harry. But that's why that's why you were wrong to mention that cuz in the end I think both companies made money. And to De's point, you'll step back and say both of them will go, "Yeah, I feel good about what I did." Now, you're right. It's a lot easier to do it in 3 years than 10 or 15. Duh. We get that. But life ain't fair and venture outcomes are very random. And more than anything what it says is timing and the cycle is just so interesting cuz you know like look you know we put some money in intercom recently intercom achieved that
44:11valuation it could have happened for intercom had they sold in 2018 19 in the SAS boom just that's the way and to point maybe we will look back I in 5 years from now maybe 10% of these apps companies will have sold early they'll have got their 30x revenue and the rest of them will be grinding it out for six times revenue at 300 million with you 3,000 employees and the head exploding, right? But you just, you know, that's just to some extent it you can control the outcomes. You just got to like the
44:40process, right? And if you end up doing well, then yeah, both of them have done just fine. I will say one thing from the how old was Listen Labs when was it founded?
44:50I will say as a founder having been through the different lengths of journeys, um the earliest days are always the hardest, right? They're sort of fun because you know it's just you and you're c it's very creative like in the way but it's you know unless unless you're the lucky kids these days you almost always run out of money you don't have enough customers it's brutal right but I will say if you can exit for a good price in 3 to four years I'm not saying you should financially but man it's easier it's so much easier to exit no matter what struggles you go through as a team
45:18though you never get that cuz it's I find it's fiveyear chunks and they take it out of you right and if um I'm not saying it's It's a reason to sell, man. But if you can sell for an for $2 billion in the first 5 years and it was my and it was I have my I'll tell him to take it cuz it's just you just lose.
45:36It's not that we don't all want to build a We we do intellectually, but man, it it's just do it in the first in the first wave. It's so much easier. I I don't think anyone is sitting on the call screaming, I can't believe you sold. Damn it, guys. Why would you only take $2 million?
45:53No, that's not true. We've all we've all had VC meetings where a company's like this and and no one around the table says you should sell on a deal like this, right? I had one I had one this year at about this price and and every single VC said don't sell, right, in that first wave. And it's cuz there's a lot of momentum in the business, da da da, but man, getting out that first I know you can call it the first exit, but uh you really can do another I think you just have to decide if it's really you know the the thing is you
46:21have to decide if it's generational. are you building a or better? Then of course you say no, right? But um if you can get out for 2 billion in the first 5 years and you're not building or better um I don't know, man. I would I would I would take it and and uh enjoy enjoy my life at Salesforce.
46:38I mean, yes, though I it's such an old story now, but for some reason it surfaced on Twitter. The whole Zuckerberg turning down a billion from was it um Yahoo or Google? I can't remember. Right. early on without even thinking about it twice. But it is I think the real point Jason comes to your thing is what's what's your likely you have to be kind of cold blooded. What's the likely trajectory from here? You know h how and then you know how do you feel about running the tape and how likely are you to get not just three
47:08times this amount but 10x this amount and more and how do you assess that plus the personal side.
47:13I think you have to be honest if you're trying to build a generational company. I don't think that's a catchphrase. I think it's really important because otherwise you have a you have a terminal value, a terminal state and it's and if the offer is reasonable, you'll never beat the net present value of these deals. This generational stuff isn't easy.
47:28I mean, Dev's back in the seat again.
47:30It ain't the stuff ain't easy. This generational companies.
47:32So, and I will tell you the best companies always got offers to sell, right? So, I'll use my example. Um, and I wouldn't say like Blade Logic was, you know, a massive, you know, outlier, but like every stage of our growth, we had people who wanted to buy us. I remember sitting, you know, I guess I can share this now. I was in John Chambers's office. We were literally sitting face to face where he wanted to buy the company and then for some reason it just didn't work out. Then they came back again. I had EMC at the table and you just go and go and ultimately sold a
48:01year after it went public. And I think to to Jason's point, it's ultimately the founder has to decide, do I feel good about continue to build or should I just hit the ex exit button? And um and I felt good about our decision to sell to BMC, but we came really close uh a number of times to sell the business earlier and we and looking back it was the right decision. Obviously, the numbers were a lot smaller than How much did you sell for to BMC? We sold for about 900 million which which
48:30at that time was the highest acquisition paid in 2008. High.
48:35It was a killer deal. I had I had a small company that competed with him. He cleaned our clock. Blade Logic was the winner in that category actually. And the number two was a ref who is now at Bane Capital. He was running center point. We had Moonlight.
48:51Yeah. Center. You walked all over us.
48:54I remember. revenue were you doing when you sold?
48:57Uh we're doing uh about 100x then then the Swedes did do well which which by the way was right on the heels of the GFC. So the market was getting quite skittish in 2008.
49:10One that I am interested by is actually one that Jason suggested which is Vel at 600 million in ARR with agents being 50% of the new business up from 3% at the start of the year. Jason, I always find you quite mind expanding for me when you talk about these topics. How do you think about this? How much budget we should give to agents for 2027? What's the takeaway for us from Versel now getting 50% of new business from agents
49:40Well, look, I would say maybe two different things. One, I I think that, you know, there's there's a bunch of companies like Verscell that that had the right infrastructure, the right product before AI and agents, right? So Verscell founded in 2020, right? Um to to I mean GMO did not know that that in 2026 the majority of his business would be from agents, right? Spinning up applications on their own, right? No, no, nobody saw that. So some of the some of the most amazing stories, even 11
50:09Labs is a little bit of that. Certainly Replet founded in 2016 is like a big case study where you just you just you just you you you latch on to that and it just works. And they do have the tiger by the tail, right? Versel, there's lot of competitors, a lot of really strong competitors, but agents pick agents pick Versel. It's very strong. And you know, it was interesting. I think what did they say? They're growing 170% at 600 million from 20% increase in in in customers or something. I mean, the the the the expansion revenue is
50:39astronomical, right? And it's just the thing is when agents pick you, and I'm sure Dev's thinking a lot about this, right? On the database side, when agents pick you, it it's a force of nature right now. And agents, what I've learned from, well, you have 21 agents. We're building all day between me and me. I'm literally building 8 to 10 hours a day.
50:56And man, my agents have opinions and they're really hard to argue with. And if they want to use a vendor, it's a lot of energy. I know I'm anthropomorphizing it, but it's powerful when an agent uh decides something. And Versell is a major beneficiary of this. Even even when we started even last year, it looked great, but it never seemed it would be as important as it is today.
51:15Oh, that's just that's just where I'm going to stick my code, right?
51:18Important, but but but back office infrastructure, but man, this is where so many agents and apps are running and um I you know, I I would I would only want I would I would take this one to the IC too.
51:29This is really interesting about the point that Jason made is that agents are picking or making decisions, right? But for the last 25 years, every marketing person, every company has optimized how you show up on page one of Google, right? You educate human buyers. Now, you have to make sure that agents can find you, understand what you sell, have current, accurate information about you across the sources they read. And if you're missing from an AI generated answer, it's like being invisible on
51:57Google. And uh you know, full disclosure, Sequoia has a company called Profound that helps companies with those helping them. But I will tell you this is a massive problem and it's not just in tech. If you're an e-commerce site or or you're a retail um you know company trying to sell through e-commerce and agents are now making the buying decisions you got to figure out how to educate those agents otherwise your business is going to zero. You know when I look at this market we too have a company Dave Peak and everyone's like
52:25well it's just like a next generation of Seamrush. Is it just a next generation of kind of SEO analytics providers with your profounds and your peaks or is this actually a much larger category that we're not seeing? I I think the opportunity is more than just analytics but telling you where you're missing and all that. I think the opportunity for these companies is not just telling you what you're missing, but to help shape the content and create the content to help you solve that
52:54problem. If they can close the loop, that becomes a very compelling solution versus just telling you you're here, you're not here. This is what the other guys are doing.
53:02I'm just looking today for example, it's it's smaller, but look at recent. So, for example, the first agentic purchase we made was resend for email. Okay? When I was trying to set up a bunch of agents last year, um uh I kept getting recommended sendrid, but but because they need this the CEO to go founders to go back, I just couldn't get the damn Send Grid thing to work. They'd kind of deprecated free. I couldn't figure out the key. It kept breaking. And it was and so I asked my agent what I should use. I said use resend. Resend April
53:28106,000 MCP calls to September 3 million. That's agent saying to use products and I'm not saying profound isn't doing that. They may well be. My limited experience is this is different.
53:40Yeah. Because I I I want to kind of disagree. How did your agent decide?
53:45Because I I assume some part of it is the general how I show up initially in the an in the answer engines. you know, how I show up on OpenAI. And then what else does the what else does your agent look at? Is it just the It looks at your infrastructure. It looks at the application you're building. It looks what's trusted. It looks what it thinks the right match is.
54:01And once in a while, it'll make wacky choices that are very specific to your use case. Um, but uh you got to be that one. You got to It's not a chat. GPT is going to give you a generic answer based on a number of fact. I'm not saying they're using the same LLMs, right? So some of that is being into it but but the an agent knows your whole stack. It knows every it knows your application.
54:22It knows what you've built on top of on top of the system. So it will make a very specific recommendation what to use.
54:28And this problem is even more profound no pun intended for early stage companies because there's so much corpus of data for your incumbent who's been around for 101 15 years. If you're trying to start some incumbent the agent's going to see all this data about the incumbent and very little about you.
54:42So when it makes a decision, it could very easy just basically pick the incumbent solution. So it's actually incumbent upon the startup to figure out how they basically educate agents on what they do, the documentation, the APIs and all the infrastructure and the wrapper so that they can then show that they are truly a first class experience for an agent to make a decision on.
55:06And going back to the here's my for what it's worth, here's what I tell my portfolio companies. I've I've invested or work with. I say, "Find 10 folks you know that have agents in production doing different things. 10 folks you trust and ask them every two weeks, what would you recommend in this category? What would you recommend?" And see what the agents recommend. This product doesn't exist today. I think the four of us should fund it. But it doesn't it's not the same as profound, which is guessing what LLM do. These are live agents in the field in different
55:34applications asking the agent what what should what what should be used, right?
55:39And what would that agent just let me understand where is that agent who will answer the question? I mean that agent presumably is doing some other job and you'll just go on and agent could be at any any tech company any startup is going to have agents running today that's that's worth their salt.
55:54Yes. And you you you will allow your agents spew out what they're using internally.
55:59If I like for example literally I'm on the phone right now. I'm asking one of my an app I'm building SAS it's agent what should I use for hosting? It said first use render. Actually, honestly, I barely know render. Okay, it says use render. My pick. The agent said my pick. Number two, Railway. We know Railway.
56:18They're doing pretty well, right? Number three, Fly.io. Number four, Number five, Versel. Not suitable for this. Oh, interesting. I would have picked Versel, you know, for this. Uh I I don't You guys may know Render. I never heard of it. And you know what? Probably I would probably use Render. And it literally says my pick and you got it. So, Render just got a lead. It just got a pretty good lead from this agent, right? You got to win that war. Can we get into the last round in render? Can we get the Sequoia price at Render? What was the Sequoia price? Anybody know?
56:47But I don't know. I don't think it's actually the same market as Profound and Peak. So So like yes, I don't I Okay. Interesting.
56:56So So yes. Um I I actually do I think it is because I I I think both prof I know both companies actually wrote a term sheet on the profound A which we got it. And I think naturally both those companies when they're finished figuring out how to h how you show up on on chachi pt for humans are going to quickly evolve to how do I if if if agents are who I need to show up for then by god I need to tell my c my customers how to show up for agents so I think it's a natural
57:25next product extension right I because I think the z because you know don't get kind of caught up in the minutia of oh we only do it for human zooming out as Jason has convinced Because everyone, humans and agents, will make purchasing decisions and using LLMs and using information they get online. And you're going to have to make sure as a vendor that you show up correctly. And whatever that takes, the opportunity there is to sell a solution to the marketing person who's got to solve that problem in any
57:53company. There's some dude at MongoDB who is going to be figuring out this afternoon, check how we show up on agents to make sure when Jason needs to get a database, we show up first. And if that person needs to have some way of surveying what other people are saying about them, what other agents are saying about them, that's a product that MongoDB is going to buy, right? And I think that's the profound opportunity.
58:14It's the peak opportunity. It's a bunch of other companies in the space. I think it's a good space. I for some I think it's going to have more depth than the Seamrush space which ended up commodified and boring for a whole bunch of reasons.
58:27Yeah. I mean for reminder we did the series I think C at HubSpot and I say this over here it was an SEO company to start out but they just did a brilliant job of adding a whole bunch of other stuff on top. You solve the customer's immediate pain point especially these marketing platforms you solve the customer's immediate pain point and then they realize they have an adjacent painoint and you solve that and then you solve the one after that. And I think every marketing person has a three-year list of pain that they have to solve in terms of how they show up in the new
58:56world of LLMs and they want all the help they can get for that, right? If you make solutions, you can make money here. So, I think it's I think it's a super good market.
59:04Okay. What topic have I missed, boys, from the list that I have to discuss, Dave? This Okay, there was one I liked, but I I like the one because it could change a lot of tech stuff. uh the engineers suing um which one was it? Uh which which of the the license deals?
59:21That was super interesting.
59:23I didn't think about that, but now it seems like an obvious claim that that like I lost the benefit of my consideration by doing this. I don't know where the lawyers come out on this one, but yeah, give us the background on this one. Gro engineers sue over Nvidia's 17 billion license and hire deal. Two former engineers sued in Delaware alleged Groboard effectively sold its core technology and top 200 staff to Nvidia through an 11 billion license plus about three billion in stock leaving common holders with a hollowedout company. The news is that they perceive that there might be a
59:52course of action cuz what h I mean zooming out a million miles corporate law tries to say everybody gets treated the same and there's 200 years of precedent and you know exactly how it happens. All common shoulders get treated the same. Board members have a duty of care, a fiduciary duty to all shareholders and there's like your case law up the wazoo has to happen. And this stuff tears up all the case law, right?
1:00:16And it effectively allows the buyer to reallocate consideration in the company. Hey, you guys are coming across and you get a lot of money. You guys are getting stayed behind and you get a little money. And crucially, these two employees had already left the company. And I don't know this for sure, but my guess is when the acquirer is allocating capital, they don't say, "Oh, I also want to take care of the ex employees."
1:00:38Because they're like, "Why would I bother?" Right? But Delaware law says everyone who owns a common sharehold is exactly the same. And it's one of the non-negotiable principles of this stuff that you treat everyone in the same security in the same way. So when I read that, I thought, h that's interesting.
1:00:53That's a clever little case, right? And it will be an it'll run a little. I wouldn't be surprised to see it settled cuz there's probably only a small number of people in the class cuz my guess is everyone who came across was happy. My guess is everyone who stayed and got stuck is happy. So it could be a relatively small number of people who'd left already. But it's going to be an interesting case where they probably have some legal argument to make.
1:01:19I mean de I'll connect dots, right?
1:01:22Remember we started this discussion about people leaving and you know leave very very quickly. And here's the parallel I draw is like investors long ago and actually even more recently have learned to protect themselves in situations. They negotiate these kind of issues up front. What happens in any kind of exit, including a weird one?
1:01:38Employees never thought to ask about this. So if you're a founder, you're going to have employees saying, "Hold on, what happens to my equity if the company's tech and some members of the team get bought, but the company doesn't?" And uh um and I think founders need to be able to answer that question because that's a question if you know as people learn about this is going to be coming up more and more often especially if people you know um you know switch between companies very often
1:02:07and the idea of kind of corporate law Delaware or even if you go to a place like Texas you shouldn't have to think about as an employee because it's like dude you know there's common law and you'll all be taken care of the same but once that gets eroded as you say Once that it, you know, it's up for grabs, then it's quite insidious. And you're right, everyone has to think, you know, when I join a company, I don't just have to think what my 1% is worth. I have to think, well, what could happen to my 1% if you sell the the IP? What could happen to my 1% if you sell the IP and
1:02:35half the employees? And I think it probably makes everything harder to pull off. So, it it'll be interesting to see if this kind of leads to some kind of push back away from those kind of structures. I mean, they're not ideal.
1:02:49And the the only reason people are doing them is because of the FTC. I mean, no one will ever say this because they can't, but it's because of the FTC and the fact that you can't get M&A through in any appreciable time, whereas you can get these deals done literally overnight and the employees start next days. It's a workaround, a regulatory problem that is no surprise creating a bunch of second order issues and unfairness.
1:03:12And some I just think it's interesting because listen, this this structure is fading away a little bit in the politics aside in the current administration. It sure seems easier to get a quick deal done a Finn or a Listen Lab pretty quickly, right? So, some of these issues, some of some of them are are fading at the margin. Um, but man, I don't know. Some of these deals sure feel like mergers in substance to me.
1:03:33So, I think I think if I think if one of these lawsuits wins, which even if one fails, another may well win, right? I think this is a mergers and substance. I think these deals will die because they already have double taxation. They're already horrific from a double taxation perspective. then add a whole set of risk and carve back for the employees we're leaving behind with the keys at Windsurf who will end up being the big winners and cognition, right? But it looked like they got left with the keys and a year of cash to work it out. Um, I think it'll end these deals if there's
1:04:02significant legal risk here and and and it it also feels to me a little like a safe note. You know, SAFE say I know this sounds niche, safe say they qualify for qualified small business stock because they're stock, but they're not. They're clearly not stock. And all these merger doc all these non- merger documents say they're not mergers.
1:04:19There's licensing deal and I'm sure they say it a thousand say it's not an acquisition. But just because you say it's not a duck, it don't mean it's not a duck. I think these are some of these are ducks.
1:04:30Exactly. And that's exactly the case they're laying out which is it was a de facto acquisition and there's a whole bunch of things you have to do in an acquisition. So yeah, you're right. It's just it's interesting in hindsight that we didn't think about this because we they may end up being like how the hell did we think we could do these deals and just completely work around the not just part of the cap table but the whole cap table.
1:04:51But it's it's forgiveness permission. I don't we talked about it at time. We don't like it. It feels unfair. But I think the pragmatic answer that I'm willing to bet Grock was Nvidia, wasn't it? Right. I'm willing to bet let's say they have to settle and they have to chuck in an extra 200 million bucks. The real answer is my lawyers, my very smart lawyers came to me and said, I found a way that we can buy this company on a Sunday night and all the employees start on Monday morning and we have the IP versus this other way where we put in an
1:05:19application to the US government and close in nine months. And Jensen said, "Is there some risk?" and they said, "Yeah." He said, "I can live with it." Done. We did the deal. And then two years later, you go, "Yeah, it was a little bit of risk. It turns out it's 1% extra on the price. Here's 200 million bucks."
1:05:34I think an additional that just isn't discussed enough is Muse was a phenomenal launch and has been a phenomenal reception. We should talk about that. And and I respectfully think DOSs has been very unimpressive. I thought that demo was incredibly poor, very techcentric. How do I do flights for enterprise usage for an OpenAI employee? I I thought it was out of touch and I thought it was very underwhelming. Um thoughts I obviously used Muse for a
1:06:03while and you're right there let's do music. They've killed it. And you know I as as someone who thought and that acquisition isn't working. It seems there's a whole bunch of gear grinding. I just got to give the executors credit.
1:06:14Whatever he did, whatever between Zuckerberg and Alex Wang, they put their heads down and they ship product. And as the CEO on this call, both CEOs in this call know better than me, that cures everything. They shipped the killer product. They launched it fullon. They resourced it with compute. They kicked ass, right? You know, and it's good. I mean, I'm going to New York this week.
1:06:35I'm pay. It's real fun. You do Instinct and you muse and you kind of check on them and see who's winning. It's kind of a bit of a geeky joy, but there you are. They're, you know, absolute, let's use the word frontier, state-of-the-art.
1:06:46This is as compelling as any freaking startup. You guys had news nailed it, right? And you had conversely, I was trying to figure out dots today. I wasn't quite sure what it is. Even at the end of it, I went and looked at in in anticipation of the program here. I went and looked at the whole online demo day thing, and I'm I'm not quite sure I got it yet. I see what space is this going, but yeah, it's not nearly as cool.
1:07:07And sorry, you are a 30-year venture investor, Rory. How do we feel about America adopting this?
1:07:13I don't know. I'm not going to be as opinionated as that. I wouldn't I'm I'm I'm not a product guru. I'd like to hear from these guys. But my point is I wanted to celebrate the good because in the past I'd been a little cynical of the meta thing. They nailed it. I want to celebrate the good stuff. I'm all I can say on the OpenAI dot stuff is I'm still trying to figure it out. So Jason, did you did you turn it on? I think I listen I don't I don't disagree with Harry's point that like the consumer PR element was definitely underwhelming considering the the muse buzz which I
1:07:42modestly contributed to but I think I think it's because the the the initial point of dots is that it integrates with codecs and can work as a co a 24-hour coding agent and one of the annoying things and one of the things that you know it's under discussed that actually a replet or lovable did well in the early days is they could be on all the time right at least sort of sort of um but it's pretty annoying to to you can't really keep uh cloud code or codeex going 24 hours. That's why open claw took off and others. I'm I'm simplifying a lot of stuff. Now everyone has a
1:08:1224-hour persistent agent that can work with with codecs if nothing else. So I want to give it 30 days and see what developers do for real, right? with a persistent agent optimized around codecs um before giving up on the fact that maybe they weren't as excited about about booking my business class tickets uh to Palm Beach over the holidays as uh as other folks were. I it could end up being the big the bigger win and almost in in a sense it's almost guaranteed to win in that sense, right? If it if it's
1:08:41sort of the persistent extension of of codeex and building on the open AI stack, you like it almost can't lose unless they stop developing on it. Um, but maybe it's never that consumerry, right? Maybe it's just a nerdy product and like like it's okay. Like you can make money in these nerdy products, can't you? It's there is money to be made.
1:08:58There is definitely.
1:09:00That's just my read. Like let let's view it from the developer lens and give it 90 days and see what cool stuff gets built.
1:09:05It points to the thing we've said before. It's just super hard to be developer forward, enterprise forward, and consumer forward at the same time.
1:09:14you know, it's just an yeah, it's just a which interestingly ties back to the comment and where your former colleague went to run the enterprise side of um Meta. I I I think that doing one thing well is hard. Doing two two things well at the same time is super hard. And I think Open AI struggles with that all the time. Even on the kind of the product surface area, there's just a lot going on. Do you remember last week when you mocked me for my buying of
1:09:42stocks in the middle of a show? 26% up in a single week, Rory.
1:09:49What did you buy again? Why did you buy again?
1:09:51I bought New Bank and I have to admit, I didn't quite know the Brazilian elections were coming and they would go in my favor. I didn't know that the Monzo deal would not happen, which would also go in New Bank's favor. But 26% in a week, I got a lot of thank yous from people who made thousands and thousands of dollars.
1:10:09So, let me get this straight. You bought a stock.
1:10:12You're a veritable Robin Hood making all these people thousands of dollars. A veritable Robin Hood.
1:10:16You bought a stock and two things that you didn't expect happened and your stock went up and you're feeling good.
1:10:22That's that's the takeaway here, right?
1:10:24I feel more I feel more, you know, charitable. You made money.
1:10:28I just don't answer. No, but it is interesting that as a Brazilian-based company says stock goes up when they realize they're not investing in a third world company like the country like the UK, stock pops. Sorry, just being mean and Harry, they're walking.
1:10:42Can I do one before we lose D's thoughts on?
1:10:46Can I know I know we barely I I added to this cuz I don't think we touched enough on it. I loved on the Aura IPO.
1:10:52I thought this was I thought this was terrible news for venture. terrible news for venture because you could argue this one is is overpriced I guess right I mean that's an analysis uh maybe Rory had a point that um 4Runner was selling a you know I think them selling their whole stake was a large part of the IPO which adds some element to pricing but I just think it's a huge bummer that a company growing 1.2 2 billion growing 74% with pretty attractive recurring revenue portion of it. The IPO got
1:11:22pulled like we talk about M and liquidity is easy and and and M&A's everywhere and the the 1,000th Frontier Labs can be bought for 7 billion, but this one kind of bum bum honestly it bum bummed me out that this deal didn't happen. I felt it was under discussed as as something that didn't happen. I don't know what you thought Dev on this one.
1:11:40I think Jason I you know it's like that old saying aam's razor. I think we got to figure out what the simplest answer is. And to me, I think it was probably price. I think I again I have no inside information. So, but I think they probably the bankers probably told management and the board that they could get this deal done at certain price, they quickly had an oh moment and rather than go through a protected problem. And I I I don't think the optics of someone selling their entire position is great for whatever that's worth. I think it came down to they
1:12:10couldn't get the price they wanted and they pulled the pulled the filing. That's purely speculative on my part. I have no inside information.
1:12:15But you really think they I mean for sure. But I mean the the markets are pretty good overall and it's hard to grow much faster than 74% of the scale if you're not an LLM. I a function of what what your multiple you think you have. Right. So you I agree and I I totally agree and again disclosure just as you know we have a small passive piece there to a M&A right situation. So I was bummed too, right?
1:12:37But to your point, I think the super and there was a good piece in the Wall Street Journal on it, right? And one just to put out it is possible that they pulled it because there's an M&A pending or something, but let's assume that's not the case. I just put it out there to outline the range of options. I think Dev raised an interesting point and it's more interesting than just because it gets to banker dynamics, right? We've all seen it. Bankers are pitching a deal. They want to tell you I mean they want to tell you as optimistic a story as possible. the this could be one of those cases where if you convince the
1:13:06board that you're going to get 50 bucks a share, right? When you're trying to get the business and then when you go out to talk to the investors, you only get 40 bucks, they only offer you 40 bucks a share. This is the kind of dynamic that happens and you see that happen in IPOs, right? And it feels a very subpar outcome. And I you're right, Dev. I do wonder I'd love to see what the banker books were when they pitched the IPO and what they said, you know, the price per share would be, right? And this is the problem. It's always a weird
1:13:36dynamic when bankers are pitching an IPO because, you know, to some extent there's always the feeling, well, you just go for the person who says you're going to get the highest price. But if he's whispering in your ear and it turns out not to be true, then you end up in this far worse situation where you think you're going to get something done, you telegraph it, and then it doesn't happen.
1:13:55I would have hit the bid on price here, boys. Come on. You look at the consumer hardware companies that have gone before from your jaw bones to your palatons to I mean, hit the bid at 13 and take it out already.
1:14:07Yeah, agree. What you're saying is what you're saying is the board and again I don't board should have said these guys told us 30 bucks a share whatever it is they didn't believe it but we didn't believe them so our lies cancel each other out we got offered 20 bucks a share that's a good price hit the bid and yeah they obviously chose not to and that's they had their reasons but yes I think it's very hard to go this far down I mean I can't remember did you guys at Blade Logic did you hit it the first time after you filed did you did you have an extended filing or something
1:14:37weird like out of you clean straight out.
1:14:39No, we got straight out. It was a little wobbly. The market was a little wobbly at the time because that's when the signs of that the debt markets were maybe not as solid as people thought. We went out in July of 2007 and then progressively got worse, you know, going into 2008, but we got out.
1:14:56Yes. Got it. So, you probably would be one of the last out of that class. I remember we had Omnature in I think it 06 for early 07 but yeah you had that Vonnage company and a couple of others and then it got thrashed and then it was done right but yeah Harry to your point I mean playing that back listen what he said is that the the debt markets were getting a little shaky take a look at the Wall Street Journal now sometimes you're right Harry you should hit the bid and get it done when you get that far down because you know there's a lot that's got to happen between now and the
1:15:26I mean the anthropic IPO in the middle of November. I don't mean to be rude, but I got to go sell some software. So, yeah, you got to sell some software.
1:15:34Go sell some software, baby. All right.
1:15:37Thank you for the time. It was great for the show.
1:15:39It was awesome. We're done. 11:30.