The Exchanges

Q Okay, so speaking of that interplay there, I'm really intrigued, because Asia and China, more specifically, is often considered this kind of black box To founders outside of it. So I'd love to ask, how should a US or a European founder really be thinking about China today?

A That's a great question. The best founders in the US and Europe are getting a lot more curious about what's going on in China. As an example, in the past three months, we've had no less than six founders from the US GGV company founders visit China in the past three months. This is really a new theme. This is not something we saw happening even two or three years ago. But I think the entrepreneurial community outside of China in the US and Europe primarily has realized that that black box is actually more approachable, and there's important reasons to try to open it. On the one hand, many entrepreneurs now are going to China or asking me if they can tag along on a trip to China because they just want to learn. They know that really innovative things are happening in China, that big companies are getting built, you know, despite what you hear in the popular press. I think the, the smart entrepreneur now realizes that China's not a copycat market anymore, that real innovation is happening there, and they just want to learn. Secondarily, I think we'll begin to see more of this. More founders and CEOs are realizing that when they go to China, they can do things like see capital because there are big capital partners in China who are looking to now invest outside the walls of China. They're looking for partnerships with local companies in China. In some cases, this is still fairly m…

AI assessment note: “realizes that China's not a copycat market anymore, that real innovation is happening”

Q Absolutely, and I'm thrilled to hear of our mutual love of tennis there, but I do want to take the opportunity. So you've been in now for almost 21 years in the venture ecosystem. I'd love to start then with, how have you fundamentally seen the startup and venture landscape change over that twenty-year period?

A That's a great question. I'm reminded of a talk That I heard actually at Stanford Business School back in 1996 by John Doerr, and he told the parable of computing paradigm shifts at that time. He was really talking about the shift from mainframe to client server, and his contention was that when you have these paradigm shifts, incumbents get disrupted by new entrants, and these new entrants become more valuable than the incumbents they replace. If you look at network-based computing, which was happening at that time, that was really a huge shift that led to the rise of the internet. And you saw companies created like Yahoo and Google and Facebook more recently. But I think if I think about the last decade, plus the six most important letters that I've seen are iOS, which ushered in really the era of mobile computing, which Apple's iPhone came out in 2007 and AWS where Amazon really ushered in the year of cloud computing. And that happened in 2006. So those were really important years. And now we're, we're just graduating a decade past those years. These two shifts, the, the mobile computing and cloud computing shifts, Have been massive. They're interrelated. They're probably the two biggest paradigm shifts I'll see in my life, and they're giving birth to some of the most important network effect businesses and protocols we've really ever seen. You can think about really the sec…

AI assessment note: “These two shifts, the, the mobile computing and cloud computing shifts, Have been massive.”

Q Not at all, but I want to start today, and I hope this doesn't make you feel too old. You started your career in venture in 1997, a year after my birth, so tell me, what was your foray into what I call the wonderful world of venture?

A Well, Harry, thanks for making me feel old right off the bat. I actually grew up in a suburb of New York City came to Stanford actually on a tennis scholarship for undergrad and had a great experience at Stanford, but at some point realized that pro tennis wasn't in the cards for me. And so after graduating Stanford, I went to wall street and worked at Goldman Sachs for a couple of years, really found that work interesting and got intrigued by investing. And then I spent the next two years working for an investment partnership out in the Bay area, came back to the Bay area. And after that found myself At the GSB, Stanford's business school, and saw the internet for the first time in 1994, 95. And it was rudimentary, but I could see that there were big opportunities from the internet. So I really went to business school to try to figure out how to combine a burgeoning interest that I had in technology with a love of investing. And it was during those two years that I discovered there was this thing called venture capital and decided that that's what I wanted to try to do. And so I was lucky enough to land a job In VC, right out of business school at a firm called Partec International, where I spent about eight years, and then joined GGV about 12 and a half years ago.

AI assessment note: “land a job In VC, right out of business school at a firm called Partec”

Q Before we delve into the China strategy, which we absolutely will do, I do want to move kind of more from the macro to yourself now as an investor and ask, how have you seen the investing style of yours change over the 20 year period? It could be everything from price sensitivity to deal sourcing. How do you think you've kind of changed as an investor?

A You know, it's a great question. And I would say that as this industry has industrialized And it is industrializing. It's incumbent upon the actors to get more focused, and you see that at the firm level, but you also see that at the partner level. When people are doing well, I would argue in large part, it's because they've learned how to focus, and I've gotten much more focused as an investor myself. If you look at what I've done over the last decade, 99% of my activity has been in and around application-level software, applications that solve really modern business problems brought about by cloud and mobile, and I'd Point to companies like Slack and Domo as examples. And then focusing on the infrastructure that helps support these cloud-based applications. Companies in the security area, in the DevOps automation space, in application performance and monitoring. That's a big part of my change in methodology, I'd say, is staying focused. It's more than just where you invest. It's how you spend your time. So I create a lot of content. As you know, I blog actively at goinglongblog.com, and I try to connect with my audience, build out my network, In these areas so that I can assist companies with introductions to execs and other folks who can help, and I've really tried to get cross-stage. Earlier in my career, I did a lot in the Series C, Series D area, but as I've gotten more f…

AI assessment note: “I've gotten much more focused as an investor myself.”

Q Absolutely, and I'm thrilled to hear of our mutual love of tennis there, but I do want to take the opportunity. So you've been in now for almost 21 years in the venture ecosystem. I'd love to start then with, how have you fundamentally seen the startup and venture landscape change over that twenty-year period?

A That's a great question. I'm reminded of a talk That I heard actually at Stanford Business School back in 1996 by John Doerr, and he told the parable of computing paradigm shifts at that time. He was really talking about the shift from mainframe to client server, and his contention was that when you have these paradigm shifts, incumbents get disrupted by new entrants, and these new entrants become more valuable than the incumbents they replace. If you look at network-based computing, which was happening at that time, that was really a huge shift that led to the rise of the internet. And you saw companies created like Yahoo and Google and Facebook more recently. But I think if I think about the last decade, plus the six most important letters that I've seen are iOS, which ushered in really the era of mobile computing, which Apple's iPhone came out in 2007 and AWS where Amazon really ushered in the year of cloud computing. And that happened in 2006. So those were really important years. And now we're, we're just graduating a decade past those years. These two shifts, the, the mobile computing and cloud computing shifts, Have been massive. They're interrelated. They're probably the two biggest paradigm shifts I'll see in my life, and they're giving birth to some of the most important network effect businesses and protocols we've really ever seen. You can think about really the sec…

AI assessment note: “These two shifts, the, the mobile computing and cloud computing shifts, Have been massive.”

Q Now, absolutely. Speaking of kind of good practice related to boards, you recently tweeted a brilliant photo of yourself with Josh James from Domo after, as you described, a great board meeting. I'm intrigued then. What are the pillars of a great board meeting to you?

A You know, Josh is a wonderful founder and CEO, and I really enjoy spending time with him. So kind of any time with Josh is great time. But I'd say Domo in particular is an interesting case because Domo, the product, Is a platform that sucks in real-time data and helps execs run their businesses on their phone with great KPIs and metrics and charting. And the company Domo runs itself on the product Domo, and the board has access to that product. So the result of that is the board meetings at Domo are not about reporting numbers. We all have them prior to the board meeting. We have them in very granular detail. It's more about discussing the implications of the trends that the data suggests, and even the predicted future trends that the data suggests. It feels like in the case of Domo, we've moved from playing checkers to playing chess at the board level as a result, and Josh does a good job, therefore, of setting the board meeting up around just a couple of key topics to discuss. Since everybody walks in with quite a bit of knowledge on the business, those topics can be deep and meaningful and important, and we can get Just some real conclusions. Josh also, and one of the reasons I tweeted that photo is that he does a good job of exposing his key execs at the board meeting. So it's not just a show of the CEO and maybe the CFO in the board meeting, but the key executives, the wom…

AI assessment note: “board meetings at Domo are not about reporting numbers. We all have them prior”

Q You said about kind of early boards there. One that I'm always asked by early stage founders is when's the right time to establish a board? Do you have any thoughts on kind of that critical moment when maybe board formation should be kind of very present?

A Certainly by your series A, you'll have established a board and it can be a small board. In fact, I think small boards for the first Several years of a company are a good practice because there's a lot to do. Founders don't and shouldn't be wasting their time educating too many people on the intricacies of their business, but having a few people who really know the business well, who've been able to invest the time in order to be valuable is important. And that's certainly true by series a, and I've even seen seed stage companies with valuable boards, even if they're fairly informal in how they meet, when they meet, it's still a good practice. For companies to start developing, harvesting, curating a board early on.

AI assessment note: “Certainly by your series A, you'll have established a board”

Q slightly pivot away from China, and finish on an area that I'm super interested It's an anomaly compared to your kind of general investing style, being your investment in Opendoor. So Opendoor, very interesting company for many reasons, a lot of public perception about it, some very excited, some more skeptical. How do you think about that and respond to that, maybe erring on the side of answering the skeptics?

A Great. Well, yes, at Surface, Opendoor is a consumer deal, and therefore it doesn't fit into my portfolio. It's a bit anomalous. But I got to Opendoor because I was investing a lot of time looking into the real estate State market, believing that software was primed to eat that market, if you will, and knowing that there should be opportunity emerging. I met with lots and lots of companies and entrepreneurs in and around that space and ultimately got very excited when I heard about the launching of Open Door, and I asked Keith Raboy, who gave a great interview with you on your show not too long ago, for an intro to Eric Wu, the founder. I met with Eric when the company was just a couple of people. He's got some great co-founders, And Ian Wong and JD and JD was super helpful in helping explain the company to me. What happened was I, uh, was tracking the company and really appreciated what I was seeing was quite early, but we decided to preempt the B because the value proposition just really resonated with me. And yes, there is a lot of skepticism about it. And we like skepticism, you know, give us another example, wish, which is a company that Hans invested in, which had quite a bit of skepticism around it. And like wish, With Opendoor, this is really a middle America play. This is not a play that necessarily resonates in markets where there's a lot of liquidity in residential r…

AI assessment note: “this is really a middle America play. This is not a play that necessarily resonates”

Q Not at all, but I want to start today, and I hope this doesn't make you feel too old. You started your career in venture in 1997, a year after my birth, so tell me, what was your foray into what I call the wonderful world of venture?

A Well, Harry, thanks for making me feel old right off the bat. I actually grew up in a suburb of New York City came to Stanford actually on a tennis scholarship for undergrad and had a great experience at Stanford, but at some point realized that pro tennis wasn't in the cards for me. And so after graduating Stanford, I went to wall street and worked at Goldman Sachs for a couple of years, really found that work interesting and got intrigued by investing. And then I spent the next two years working for an investment partnership out in the Bay area, came back to the Bay area. And after that found myself At the GSB, Stanford's business school, and saw the internet for the first time in 1994, 95. And it was rudimentary, but I could see that there were big opportunities from the internet. So I really went to business school to try to figure out how to combine a burgeoning interest that I had in technology with a love of investing. And it was during those two years that I discovered there was this thing called venture capital and decided that that's what I wanted to try to do. And so I was lucky enough to land a job In VC, right out of business school at a firm called Partec International, where I spent about eight years, and then joined GGV about 12 and a half years ago.

AI assessment note: “I was lucky enough to land a job In VC, right out of business school”

Q Before we delve into the China strategy, which we absolutely will do, I do want to move kind of more from the macro to yourself now as an investor and ask, how have you seen the investing style of yours change over the 20 year period? It could be everything from price sensitivity to deal sourcing. How do you think you've kind of changed as an investor?

A You know, it's a great question. And I would say that as this industry has industrialized And it is industrializing. It's incumbent upon the actors to get more focused, and you see that at the firm level, but you also see that at the partner level. When people are doing well, I would argue in large part, it's because they've learned how to focus, and I've gotten much more focused as an investor myself. If you look at what I've done over the last decade, 99% of my activity has been in and around application-level software, applications that solve really modern business problems brought about by cloud and mobile, and I'd Point to companies like Slack and Domo as examples. And then focusing on the infrastructure that helps support these cloud-based applications. Companies in the security area, in the DevOps automation space, in application performance and monitoring. That's a big part of my change in methodology, I'd say, is staying focused. It's more than just where you invest. It's how you spend your time. So I create a lot of content. As you know, I blog actively at goinglongblog.com, and I try to connect with my audience, build out my network, In these areas so that I can assist companies with introductions to execs and other folks who can help, and I've really tried to get cross-stage. Earlier in my career, I did a lot in the Series C, Series D area, but as I've gotten more f…

AI assessment note: “as I've gotten more focused, I've gotten more comfortable investing early”

Q Now, absolutely. Speaking of kind of good practice related to boards, you recently tweeted a brilliant photo of yourself with Josh James from Domo after, as you described, a great board meeting. I'm intrigued then. What are the pillars of a great board meeting to you?

A You know, Josh is a wonderful founder and CEO, and I really enjoy spending time with him. So kind of any time with Josh is great time. But I'd say Domo in particular is an interesting case because Domo, the product, Is a platform that sucks in real-time data and helps execs run their businesses on their phone with great KPIs and metrics and charting. And the company Domo runs itself on the product Domo, and the board has access to that product. So the result of that is the board meetings at Domo are not about reporting numbers. We all have them prior to the board meeting. We have them in very granular detail. It's more about discussing the implications of the trends that the data suggests, and even the predicted future trends that the data suggests. It feels like in the case of Domo, we've moved from playing checkers to playing chess at the board level as a result, and Josh does a good job, therefore, of setting the board meeting up around just a couple of key topics to discuss. Since everybody walks in with quite a bit of knowledge on the business, those topics can be deep and meaningful and important, and we can get Just some real conclusions. Josh also, and one of the reasons I tweeted that photo is that he does a good job of exposing his key execs at the board meeting. So it's not just a show of the CEO and maybe the CFO in the board meeting, but the key executives, the wom…

AI assessment note: “board meetings at Domo are not about reporting numbers. We all have them prior”

Q Okay, so speaking of that interplay there, I'm really intrigued, because Asia and China, more specifically, is often considered this kind of black box To founders outside of it. So I'd love to ask, how should a US or a European founder really be thinking about China today?

A That's a great question. The best founders in the US and Europe are getting a lot more curious about what's going on in China. As an example, in the past three months, we've had no less than six founders from the US GGV company founders visit China in the past three months. This is really a new theme. This is not something we saw happening even two or three years ago. But I think the entrepreneurial community outside of China in the US and Europe primarily has realized that that black box is actually more approachable, and there's important reasons to try to open it. On the one hand, many entrepreneurs now are going to China or asking me if they can tag along on a trip to China because they just want to learn. They know that really innovative things are happening in China, that big companies are getting built, you know, despite what you hear in the popular press. I think the, the smart entrepreneur now realizes that China's not a copycat market anymore, that real innovation is happening there, and they just want to learn. Secondarily, I think we'll begin to see more of this. More founders and CEOs are realizing that when they go to China, they can do things like see capital because there are big capital partners in China who are looking to now invest outside the walls of China. They're looking for partnerships with local companies in China. In some cases, this is still fairly m…

AI assessment note: “smart entrepreneur now realizes that China's not a copycat market anymore, that real innovation is happening”

Q No, I mean, it's been an incredible journey to watch. You mentioned the incredible founding team there. I do have to ask before we do the quick fire. You've said before that a great CEO has the ability to manage momentum. Can I ask, what do you really mean by this?

A Yeah, you know, and I think Eric and Keith and JD and Ian have done a great job. I'd open door with momentum management. Startups are really, really hard. No one in the world really wants you to win, except for a very small cadre of people who you either have working for you or invested in you. And so you need to build momentum across kind of every dimension of your business. So people will just care and maybe give you the benefit of the doubt. And when I talk about dimensions, I mean, financings, I mean, financial results, I mean, news and PR, I mean, customers, I mean, partners, Even the types of employees you're able to attract and retain. You need to continually step up and to the right along all of these dimensions to be successful. And if you skip a step, if, for example, you raise too much money at too big a price too soon, you introduce quite a bit of risk into that equation. In fact, I heard a recent interview you did with Sam Altman, and my recollection is Sam mentioned the same thing. He mentioned startups need to keep raising money at increasing prices. Can't have a down round. Down rounds are very difficult to recover from. And that's what I mean by being a momentum manager, just being really thoughtful and smart about creating momentum and having it build so that you can control it and not overreaching and risk losing it.

AI assessment note: “And that's what I mean by being a momentum manager, just being really thoughtful”

Q No, I couldn't agree more on kind of the importance of that multi-touch point. I do want to shift slightly though to a topic that you touched on earlier, which is the prominence of China to GGV's focus. So I have to ask then, with Silicon Valley always being hailed as the center of all things tech, why is China so important to GGV's strategy?

A If you look at our history, we've been in China since day one, since 2000. Today, half our team is in China, half our, over half our investment team, over 50% of our investments have been made in the China market. The returns from our investments in China have been stellar. China's just a very important part of our strategy, and our reason for being there is that it's really worked very well. I would say that our strategy has evolved in China. When we got Started, and really when I joined 12 plus years ago, China was a way to diversify our portfolio, and our limited partners appreciated that. These days, as the world has gotten flatter, as we discussed earlier, there's just much more interplay between the two markets, and so being in both has really helped us a lot, both from a diversification standpoint, but importantly, from a strategic standpoint as well.

AI assessment note: “The returns from our investments in China have been stellar.”

Q about kind of the often related to copycat elements of the Chinese market. One thing that's very common, though, between US and Chinese markets is kind of the incumbent heavy nature with Tencent, Alibaba, Baidu. I'm intrigued. Doesn't invest In the market, How do you think about this with the likelihood of them either copying early or acquiring too early for significant venture returns? How do you think about that?

A Definitely one difference, tangible difference between the U.S. US venture market and the China venture market is exactly what you mentioned. The bigger players in China, Alibaba, Tencent, Baidu, increasingly others now like Xiaomi and Tochiao and other companies that are emerging play a very meaningful role in the China landscape. And if you're a startup, you need to know what your strategy is with respect to, you know, the Baidus and Alibabas and Tencent or the world. What I see happening more recently is not that those companies are copycatting and trying to kill startups. They're trying to identify the startups that have breakout potential and get money into them and invest in them as soon as possible. And so if you're a founder in China or a VC in China, you need to figure out how that game is going to play out. Who the best partner is, and how to make sure you make the right decisions, because it is a very important decision as to who your backer is going to be. It's unlikely, for example, that both Alibaba and Tencent will come into the same company, and if one backs a company, then you can expect that the other will back a competing company in the space. So it's important to play that game right. You don't want to take an investment until you're strong enough to deal with that type of partner. They can be very powerful once they invest. They have lots of capital, and so…

AI assessment note: “not that those companies are copycatting and trying to kill startups. They're trying to identify”

Q the show who said that VCs are segregated to those that spend all their time with the winners, And just aim to make them kind of even bigger multipliers for the fund, or they spend all their time with the struggling companies aiming to recruit the cents on the dollar. How do you think about that, and where you spend your time amongst the portfolio with that consideration in mind?

A Yeah, so one thing I learned early on in the VC industry is that you make all your money on the winners that can run. Honestly, you don't want to get too involved and mess things up, but you want to try to help put an environment in place where the winners can continue to run. Conversely, with Companies that aren't doing as well, you have to give it your best shot to try to help them achieve their goals, but ultimately, if things aren't going to go as you originally planned, then turning the page is important. It's important for the entrepreneur, and it's important for the investor, because the most valuable asset we all have is our time, and so trying to find a good home for a company, land the plane with dignity, and move on is also an important skill. I don't know exactly how that time balances out. It's more fun to spend time with winners, for sure, but it is also more difficult when companies aren't doing well, and many VCs get very focused on companies that need their projects, that need turnarounds, and that's awfully tough in technology.

AI assessment note: “I don't know exactly how that time balances out. It's more fun to spend time”

Q You said about kind of early boards there. One that I'm always asked by early stage founders is when's the right time to establish a board? Do you have any thoughts on kind of that critical moment when maybe board formation should be kind of very present?

A Certainly by your series A, you'll have established a board and it can be a small board. In fact, I think small boards for the first Several years of a company are a good practice because there's a lot to do. Founders don't and shouldn't be wasting their time educating too many people on the intricacies of their business, but having a few people who really know the business well, who've been able to invest the time in order to be valuable is important. And that's certainly true by series a, and I've even seen seed stage companies with valuable boards, even if they're fairly informal in how they meet, when they meet, it's still a good practice. For companies to start developing, harvesting, curating a board early on.

AI assessment note: “Certainly by your series A, you'll have established a board”

Q the show who said that VCs are segregated to those that spend all their time with the winners, And just aim to make them kind of even bigger multipliers for the fund, or they spend all their time with the struggling companies aiming to recruit the cents on the dollar. How do you think about that, and where you spend your time amongst the portfolio with that consideration in mind?

A Yeah, so one thing I learned early on in the VC industry is that you make all your money on the winners that can run. Honestly, you don't want to get too involved and mess things up, but you want to try to help put an environment in place where the winners can continue to run. Conversely, with Companies that aren't doing as well, you have to give it your best shot to try to help them achieve their goals, but ultimately, if things aren't going to go as you originally planned, then turning the page is important. It's important for the entrepreneur, and it's important for the investor, because the most valuable asset we all have is our time, and so trying to find a good home for a company, land the plane with dignity, and move on is also an important skill. I don't know exactly how that time balances out. It's more fun to spend time with winners, for sure, but it is also more difficult when companies aren't doing well, and many VCs get very focused on companies that need their projects, that need turnarounds, and that's awfully tough in technology.

AI assessment note: “I don't know exactly how that time balances out. It's more fun to spend time with winners”

Q No, I couldn't agree more on kind of the importance of that multi-touch point. I do want to shift slightly though to a topic that you touched on earlier, which is the prominence of China to GGV's focus. So I have to ask then, with Silicon Valley always being hailed as the center of all things tech, why is China so important to GGV's strategy?

A If you look at our history, we've been in China since day one, since 2000. Today, half our team is in China, half our, over half our investment team, over 50% of our investments have been made in the China market. The returns from our investments in China have been stellar. China's just a very important part of our strategy, and our reason for being there is that it's really worked very well. I would say that our strategy has evolved in China. When we got Started, and really when I joined 12 plus years ago, China was a way to diversify our portfolio, and our limited partners appreciated that. These days, as the world has gotten flatter, as we discussed earlier, there's just much more interplay between the two markets, and so being in both has really helped us a lot, both from a diversification standpoint, but importantly, from a strategic standpoint as well.

AI assessment note: “China's just a very important part of our strategy, and our reason for being there”

Q about kind of the often related to copycat elements of the Chinese market. One thing that's very common, though, between US and Chinese markets is kind of the incumbent heavy nature with Tencent, Alibaba, Baidu. I'm intrigued. Doesn't invest In the market, How do you think about this with the likelihood of them either copying early or acquiring too early for significant venture returns? How do you think about that?

A Definitely one difference, tangible difference between the U.S. US venture market and the China venture market is exactly what you mentioned. The bigger players in China, Alibaba, Tencent, Baidu, increasingly others now like Xiaomi and Tochiao and other companies that are emerging play a very meaningful role in the China landscape. And if you're a startup, you need to know what your strategy is with respect to, you know, the Baidus and Alibabas and Tencent or the world. What I see happening more recently is not that those companies are copycatting and trying to kill startups. They're trying to identify the startups that have breakout potential and get money into them and invest in them as soon as possible. And so if you're a founder in China or a VC in China, you need to figure out how that game is going to play out. Who the best partner is, and how to make sure you make the right decisions, because it is a very important decision as to who your backer is going to be. It's unlikely, for example, that both Alibaba and Tencent will come into the same company, and if one backs a company, then you can expect that the other will back a competing company in the space. So it's important to play that game right. You don't want to take an investment until you're strong enough to deal with that type of partner. They can be very powerful once they invest. They have lots of capital, and so…

AI assessment note: “What I see happening more recently is not that those companies are copycatting”

Q slightly pivot away from China, and finish on an area that I'm super interested It's an anomaly compared to your kind of general investing style, being your investment in Opendoor. So Opendoor, very interesting company for many reasons, a lot of public perception about it, some very excited, some more skeptical. How do you think about that and respond to that, maybe erring on the side of answering the skeptics?

A Great. Well, yes, at Surface, Opendoor is a consumer deal, and therefore it doesn't fit into my portfolio. It's a bit anomalous. But I got to Opendoor because I was investing a lot of time looking into the real estate State market, believing that software was primed to eat that market, if you will, and knowing that there should be opportunity emerging. I met with lots and lots of companies and entrepreneurs in and around that space and ultimately got very excited when I heard about the launching of Open Door, and I asked Keith Raboy, who gave a great interview with you on your show not too long ago, for an intro to Eric Wu, the founder. I met with Eric when the company was just a couple of people. He's got some great co-founders, And Ian Wong and JD and JD was super helpful in helping explain the company to me. What happened was I, uh, was tracking the company and really appreciated what I was seeing was quite early, but we decided to preempt the B because the value proposition just really resonated with me. And yes, there is a lot of skepticism about it. And we like skepticism, you know, give us another example, wish, which is a company that Hans invested in, which had quite a bit of skepticism around it. And like wish, With Opendoor, this is really a middle America play. This is not a play that necessarily resonates in markets where there's a lot of liquidity in residential r…

AI assessment note: “this is really a middle America play. This is not a play that necessarily resonates”

Q What strategies and actions can VCs do to instantly increase partnership dynamics?

A You know, at GGV, we have a lot of trust and respect for each other, and we are willing to compromise on a collective basis. To succeed. I remember a fun story. I was talking to a very well-known VC at a very well-known partnership that shall go nameless not too long ago about China. And at the time, this firm had a China operation like we do. And I remember asking this person, hey, when do you have your partner meetings? And he looked at me kind of funny and said, well, what do you mean? Of course, we have them at nine AM on Mondays. And I asked, hey, do you know when that, what time that is in China? And he looked at me kind of curiously and said, no, I actually don't know what time that is. You know, that's midnight or one AM depending on time of year in China. And so this firm was having, you know, their partner meetings and asking their partners in China without even realizing it to have their meetings at midnight or one AM. And usually they go several hours. If you look at GGV, we have our partner meetings at five PM on Mondays here. And, you know, they often go pretty late into the night and that's eight AM Tuesday morning in China. So it's, it's not terribly convenient for either side, but it works well because it's compromised. We also travel like quite a bit. I'm in China four to six, sometimes even more times per year, and my partners from China are always in the US …

AI assessment note: “those are really important elements, I think, of increasing the, uh, the partnership dynamic.”

Q To the other side of the VC table, though, and one that is often kind of less Talked about maybe, which is the element of being a board member with the 21 years of experience. How have you seen your style of being a board member change with that time?

A I think being a board member is a full contact sport, especially as you invest earlier and join boards that are of young companies. You need to be there. You need to be available and really ready to listen, offer advice, roll up your sleeves and help wherever it's necessary and wherever possible. Now, one aspect of the modern VC market is that Silicon Valley is, Losing its primacy for startups. You're seeing great startups getting going in lots of regions throughout the U S and throughout the world. I've been on boards in China in my life. These days I'm on a board in Boston. I'm on a board in New York. I'm on a board in Utah. If you want to be impactful as a VC, I think you need to be ready to travel. That's a change from, let's say over the last five to 10 years. So that's a big thing that I've seen change. And I think those VCs who are really good at what they do are there. And the entrepreneurs feel very close and know they can pick up the phone and know they can have a meeting whenever they need one and know that their VCs are thinking about their biggest problems and trying to help wherever they can.

AI assessment note: “need to be ready to travel. That's a change from, let's say over”

Q To the other side of the VC table, though, and one that is often kind of less Talked about maybe, which is the element of being a board member with the 21 years of experience. How have you seen your style of being a board member change with that time?

A I think being a board member is a full contact sport, especially as you invest earlier and join boards that are of young companies. You need to be there. You need to be available and really ready to listen, offer advice, roll up your sleeves and help wherever it's necessary and wherever possible. Now, one aspect of the modern VC market is that Silicon Valley is, Losing its primacy for startups. You're seeing great startups getting going in lots of regions throughout the U S and throughout the world. I've been on boards in China in my life. These days I'm on a board in Boston. I'm on a board in New York. I'm on a board in Utah. If you want to be impactful as a VC, I think you need to be ready to travel. That's a change from, let's say over the last five to 10 years. So that's a big thing that I've seen change. And I think those VCs who are really good at what they do are there. And the entrepreneurs feel very close and know they can pick up the phone and know they can have a meeting whenever they need one and know that their VCs are thinking about their biggest problems and trying to help wherever they can.

AI assessment note: “need to be ready to travel. That's a change from, let's say”