The Exchanges

Q I, I'm intrigued there, obviously, with the 10 X better product. Uh, Sarah Tavell at, uh, Greylock says, uh, the products need to be 10 X better and cheaper to, to really dominate the market. Is that something you prescribe to? Is the element of financial kind of savings important To your decision making, too?

A Well, for, not necessarily. It's not that I disagree with Sarah. I read that piece, and I thought it was excellent, but she's consumer facing, or, you know, she's consumer focused when she writes that, and that is probably true for consumers, but I'm dealing sometimes with companies, like, for example, I'm an investor in a company called Cruxy, commercial real estate transaction platform, and the experience, you know, technology is being applied to To this huge market that has not had technology applied to it in a way where everyone in the ecosystem does better. They're more efficient. They can buy and sell better. So nothing about it is cheaper, but that doesn't matter because that's not sort of the name of the game that they're in. So I think it depends what market you're in. And I would argue in the consumer market, it does have to be 10 X better and cheaper.

AI assessment note: “So I think it depends what market you're in.”

Q syndrome there, but I do have to touch on quickly. You said you're an angel alongside the founding of your companies. So I have to ask then, how's the decision making different in terms of the investment side when angel investing compared to VC investing? Are you kind of, you know, a lot more careful when you're VC investing? Does the DD take much longer? What is it for you?

A Yeah, so when I was an angel investor, I, my, uh, due diligence was very, very different. I knew who was leading, and a lot of, I would basically make sure that I liked the entrepreneurs I was backing, that I had conviction in what they were building, but didn't do due diligence. I sort of trusted, like one of my angel investments is Main Street Hub. That was led by Michael Deering. I trusted that he Probably did all the DD needed, or just, I just trusted that he was leading it, and that's turned out to be a wonderful investment. Now, at Freestyle, I'm leading, right? And so, even if I'm co-leading, I, my, I'm writing such bigger checks, and I'll probably lead, call it four or five investments a year, and so I have to, beyond have conviction and At a gut level, I, for me, I have to have checked all the boxes, right? I have to really feel that I've turned over every rock and have belief beyond, I would say, of what I needed as an angel investor.

AI assessment note: “when I was an angel investor, I, my, uh, due diligence was very, very different.”

Q I, I'm intrigued there, obviously, with the 10 X better product. Uh, Sarah Tavell at, uh, Greylock says, uh, the products need to be 10 X better and cheaper to, to really dominate the market. Is that something you prescribe to? Is the element of financial kind of savings important To your decision making, too?

A Well, for, not necessarily. It's not that I disagree with Sarah. I read that piece, and I thought it was excellent, but she's consumer facing, or, you know, she's consumer focused when she writes that, and that is probably true for consumers, but I'm dealing sometimes with companies, like, for example, I'm an investor in a company called Cruxy, commercial real estate transaction platform, and the experience, you know, technology is being applied to To this huge market that has not had technology applied to it in a way where everyone in the ecosystem does better. They're more efficient. They can buy and sell better. So nothing about it is cheaper, but that doesn't matter because that's not sort of the name of the game that they're in. So I think it depends what market you're in. And I would argue in the consumer market, it does have to be 10 X better and cheaper.

AI assessment note: “Well, for, not necessarily. It's not that I disagree with Sarah.”

Q So, so I want to start with you there and the third startup you mentioned. So having raised money then as a founder and now having deployed it, as you said, and led investments as a VC, I have to ask, what were the differences in the founder versus being a VC? What were the learnings for you from those Differing hats.

A Oh God. I mean, I could take a hell of a lot more than 20 minutes just on that question alone, so I'll have to think about keeping it tight. I would say first off, VC, a lot of VCs, we talk amongst ourselves how busy we are, frantic we are, sometimes things get stressful, and those of us that have been entrepreneurs know that this is a cakewalk compared to that of being an entrepreneur. That being an entrepreneur is so intense, um, it's amazing, but it is intense, And so as a VC, the highs are not as high, but also the lows are not as low. And I would say that is like the first, I would say the biggest difference between those two experiences. The second one is the focus. As a founder, you know, my various times being a founder, raising money from VCs, I was, I had the luxury, I would say, of being maniacally focused. I knew what mattered, and that's all I cared about. I'd let everything else go. And as a VC, you have to be able to balance from subject matter to subject matter, portfolio company to new pitch meeting, and it's a very different experience. I, I often joke that my lack of ADD may be hurting me in, in this role. Um, a lot of VCs, I would argue, have ADD, and whether they were born with it or it got created because of the nature of our job, I do not know, but it's interesting.

AI assessment note: “as a VC, the highs are not as high, but also the lows”

Q syndrome there, but I do have to touch on quickly. You said you're an angel alongside the founding of your companies. So I have to ask then, how's the decision making different in terms of the investment side when angel investing compared to VC investing? Are you kind of, you know, a lot more careful when you're VC investing? Does the DD take much longer? What is it for you?

A Yeah, so when I was an angel investor, I, my, uh, due diligence was very, very different. I knew who was leading, and a lot of, I would basically make sure that I liked the entrepreneurs I was backing, that I had conviction in what they were building, but didn't do due diligence. I sort of trusted, like one of my angel investments is Main Street Hub. That was led by Michael Deering. I trusted that he Probably did all the DD needed, or just, I just trusted that he was leading it, and that's turned out to be a wonderful investment. Now, at Freestyle, I'm leading, right? And so, even if I'm co-leading, I, my, I'm writing such bigger checks, and I'll probably lead, call it four or five investments a year, and so I have to, beyond have conviction and At a gut level, I, for me, I have to have checked all the boxes, right? I have to really feel that I've turned over every rock and have belief beyond, I would say, of what I needed as an angel investor.

AI assessment note: “when I was an angel investor, I, my, uh, due diligence was very, very different”

Q does, that does really intrigue me because, you know, for, for many listeners of the show who might have read Pisteel's, uh, zero to one, he very much focuses on, on narrow niche markets at the beginning. You know, Facebook, uh, was obviously Harvard only at the beginning and says, you know, start small and build out from there. So how does that kind of compete with your market analysis?

A That actually completely jives with my market analysis, which is that it's understood. So there are two parts. One is where are you beginning today? And I'm okay if that is not huge, but I have to be able to see an honest path to something that does then enable, put you uniquely positioned to tap a much larger market. So, like I said, the first investment that I made at, at freestyle, which is a company called Narvar, there was no market. And their initial product is one that you would never claim would be a big enough business in and of itself. But I'm a believer in sort of the short term product roadmap, meaning you have a product today, That solves pain that people will pay for, but it then puts you in a position for your long-term product roadmap, and that's where things get really interesting, and that's, you know, been the case for Narva, and I'm sure lots of other companies, so I actually, I agree with Peter. You have to start with that way. Oftentimes, I'll call it a wedge product, but if, if there's not a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow, that, even if you kind of make it over the rainbow, it's not as interesting to me, so I need to know that, If successful, and I'm talking about if successful for the long-term vision, not the today product, if successful, that, that it will be valuable. Yeah. So, so one is big market. The second is that the experience of the produc…

AI assessment note: “That actually completely jives with my market analysis, which is that it's understood.”

Q Fantastic. And then what would your advice be for people wanting to enter VC?

A I guess my advice would be that Have good operational experience, right? I would argue if you're going to be a seed stage investor, there's nothing like having founded a company, right? Walked a million miles in their shoes. Or if you're maybe even going later stage, I would say just operate and operate well and take those learnings to becoming a venture capitalist. And then when you do kind of come to this side, just talk with everyone, go to the people that you think have done the best work and They'll be happy to share their wisdom with you and the mistakes that they made and the learnings that they've had. Um, that was really powerful for me when I got started.

AI assessment note: “Have good operational experience, right? I would argue if you're going to be a seed stage investor”

Q So you go, that's interesting, because we're always kind of, you know, the 18 month is a staple at all. Everyone's recommended 18 months, and then six months prior to end of runway, you go out fundraising again. Uh, so, so you would recommend now potentially 24, would you, with the potential chili freeze, or whatever we're calling it?

A I would. I, um, it's not a must have, but the thing that I think matters the most in startups of getting from sort of seed stage to A is time. I've never met an entrepreneur who doesn't say, God, if I just had another six months, right? Because time's the thing that kind of bites you in the ass every single time, because you know, if you had more time, you could prove more, you could show more, you could do more. And so if you have the luxury of being able to make your cash last longer so that you can't Can prove more for when you then start those next conversations, you're going to be in a much better position.

AI assessment note: “I would. I, um, it's not a must have”

Q So, so I want to start with you there and the third startup you mentioned. So having raised money then as a founder and now having deployed it, as you said, and led investments as a VC, I have to ask, what were the differences in the founder versus being a VC? What were the learnings for you from those Differing hats.

A Oh God. I mean, I could take a hell of a lot more than 20 minutes just on that question alone, so I'll have to think about keeping it tight. I would say first off, VC, a lot of VCs, we talk amongst ourselves how busy we are, frantic we are, sometimes things get stressful, and those of us that have been entrepreneurs know that this is a cakewalk compared to that of being an entrepreneur. That being an entrepreneur is so intense, um, it's amazing, but it is intense, And so as a VC, the highs are not as high, but also the lows are not as low. And I would say that is like the first, I would say the biggest difference between those two experiences. The second one is the focus. As a founder, you know, my various times being a founder, raising money from VCs, I was, I had the luxury, I would say, of being maniacally focused. I knew what mattered, and that's all I cared about. I'd let everything else go. And as a VC, you have to be able to balance from subject matter to subject matter, portfolio company to new pitch meeting, and it's a very different experience. I, I often joke that my lack of ADD may be hurting me in, in this role. Um, a lot of VCs, I would argue, have ADD, and whether they were born with it or it got created because of the nature of our job, I do not know, but it's interesting.

AI assessment note: “this is a cakewalk compared to that of being an entrepreneur”

Q does, that does really intrigue me because, you know, for, for many listeners of the show who might have read Pisteel's, uh, zero to one, he very much focuses on, on narrow niche markets at the beginning. You know, Facebook, uh, was obviously Harvard only at the beginning and says, you know, start small and build out from there. So how does that kind of compete with your market analysis?

A That actually completely jives with my market analysis, which is that it's understood. So there are two parts. One is where are you beginning today? And I'm okay if that is not huge, but I have to be able to see an honest path to something that does then enable, put you uniquely positioned to tap a much larger market. So, like I said, the first investment that I made at, at freestyle, which is a company called Narvar, there was no market. And their initial product is one that you would never claim would be a big enough business in and of itself. But I'm a believer in sort of the short term product roadmap, meaning you have a product today, That solves pain that people will pay for, but it then puts you in a position for your long-term product roadmap, and that's where things get really interesting, and that's, you know, been the case for Narva, and I'm sure lots of other companies, so I actually, I agree with Peter. You have to start with that way. Oftentimes, I'll call it a wedge product, but if, if there's not a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow, that, even if you kind of make it over the rainbow, it's not as interesting to me, so I need to know that, If successful, and I'm talking about if successful for the long-term vision, not the today product, if successful, that, that it will be valuable. Yeah. So, so one is big market. The second is that the experience of the produc…

AI assessment note: “That actually completely jives with my market analysis”

Q Fantastic. And then what would your advice be for people wanting to enter VC?

A I guess my advice would be that Have good operational experience, right? I would argue if you're going to be a seed stage investor, there's nothing like having founded a company, right? Walked a million miles in their shoes. Or if you're maybe even going later stage, I would say just operate and operate well and take those learnings to becoming a venture capitalist. And then when you do kind of come to this side, just talk with everyone, go to the people that you think have done the best work and They'll be happy to share their wisdom with you and the mistakes that they made and the learnings that they've had. Um, that was really powerful for me when I got started.

AI assessment note: “I guess my advice would be that Have good operational experience, right?”

Q So you go, that's interesting, because we're always kind of, you know, the 18 month is a staple at all. Everyone's recommended 18 months, and then six months prior to end of runway, you go out fundraising again. Uh, so, so you would recommend now potentially 24, would you, with the potential chili freeze, or whatever we're calling it?

A I would. I, um, it's not a must have, but the thing that I think matters the most in startups of getting from sort of seed stage to A is time. I've never met an entrepreneur who doesn't say, God, if I just had another six months, right? Because time's the thing that kind of bites you in the ass every single time, because you know, if you had more time, you could prove more, you could show more, you could do more. And so if you have the luxury of being able to make your cash last longer so that you can't Can prove more for when you then start those next conversations, you're going to be in a much better position.

AI assessment note: “I would. I, um, it's not a must have”

Q Do you think that's why then we've seen a growth of the seed rounds enormously? I mean, you know, you, we used to have series A's that were three to five million, and now I quite often see seeds that are three to five million. Do you think that's why?

A I actually believe that's just a, a change in names, right? I mean, so in the past I raised when, you know, if I go back 20 years ago, I raised my Series A and it was a million dollars, right? So it's, I think it's a change of title, but I think that the funding itself of how much you raise in milestones is pretty similar to how it's always been. I just think what used to be called Series A is now called SEED. And so I, it's, you know, people are calling it seed, seed prime, low A, but it's all the same. And I almost think the names confuse people. At least I think they confuse entrepreneurs. And so it's just a matter of, so how much are you raising and what milestones are you going to hit? With that raise. And so, you know, when you're starting out of the gate, your valuation is low. You may want to raise a little, I don't know, call it 500 K and prove something out to then go and raise your next round of financing. What is that called? Is it C? Is it A? Hard to say, but if you're raising five million, you get to call it either one.

AI assessment note: “I actually believe that's just a, a change in names, right?”

Q Do you think that's why then we've seen a growth of the seed rounds enormously? I mean, you know, you, we used to have series A's that were three to five million, and now I quite often see seeds that are three to five million. Do you think that's why?

A I actually believe that's just a, a change in names, right? I mean, so in the past I raised when, you know, if I go back 20 years ago, I raised my Series A and it was a million dollars, right? So it's, I think it's a change of title, but I think that the funding itself of how much you raise in milestones is pretty similar to how it's always been. I just think what used to be called Series A is now called SEED. And so I, it's, you know, people are calling it seed, seed prime, low A, but it's all the same. And I almost think the names confuse people. At least I think they confuse entrepreneurs. And so it's just a matter of, so how much are you raising and what milestones are you going to hit? With that raise. And so, you know, when you're starting out of the gate, your valuation is low. You may want to raise a little, I don't know, call it 500 K and prove something out to then go and raise your next round of financing. What is that called? Is it C? Is it A? Hard to say, but if you're raising five million, you get to call it either one.

AI assessment note: “I actually believe that's just a, a change in names”

Q the runway, and I'd love to discuss now kind of burn. And, you know, often we're told, you know, maybe Be as, uh, cost effective as possible and try and minimize burn as low as you can. But then how does that contrast with the growth at all costs, uh, analysis that many have gone for in the past? What's the kind of growth versus burn maintenance ratio for you?

A So I think that every company is different and you have to look and say, what are our main objectives? Like I work with all our portfolio company, or at least my portfolio company is on Okay. R's objectives and key results, right? What are the three critical things, critical objectives that you're going to work on in the next period of time? And you need to just be focused on those and you need serious growth in those, right? And, and so you need to make your burn as little as possible. And I think you do that by trying to do fewer things. objectives versus sort of hitting mediocre numbers on your key objectives. Does that make sense?

AI assessment note: “make your burn as little as possible. And I think you do that by trying to do fewer things.”

Q I'd love to discuss then, kind of talking of that, and the speed and rapidity of it, in terms of just the cadence of investing, and what you like to go for, and does the cadence remain consistent in downturns and boom times?

A Yeah, we haven't seen a change in our cadence, and speaking with other seed investors, um, I've not heard of a change in their cadence. So I think that we're all acutely aware of what the next phase looks like, right? That the bar is higher now to get your Series A. So the same sort of discipline that we applied in our past, we're applying to our current, and I would say if anything, and more so, And we're making sure that whatever, whatever companies we invest in today have enough cash to make it through this storm. And in the past, the, the, you know, the, call it what you want. Is it a storm? Is it a chilly fall? Pick your favorite name, but this new market, which I would just call it a back to reality market personally, but how long will this last? And so, you know, in the past, it's been about So I know if I wrote a check today, I want to make sure that that team has enough cash to make it at least 18 months, and ideally two years.

AI assessment note: “Yeah, we haven't seen a change in our cadence”

Q Well, this is it. I mean, so many VCs I've interviewed do often state that kind of Massive desire to, to flip between different topics and subjects and portfolio companies. So not having ADD is a very interesting thing. Uh, and so, so then in terms of kind of spreading yourself across the portfolio, how does that affect you?

A Yeah. So, I mean, it's interesting. I, every day I know exactly what I'm going to, what my goals are for that day. So I am one of those people that has a to-do list and I try to make sure that I'm really focused and I look at my calendar and I, it's Try to make sure that that aligns with what I'm trying to achieve, but I'd be lying to you if I said, you know, that that's done a hundred percent of the time. It's just harder to do that because a lot of times you're sitting at meetings for three weeks from now. You know, I guess I say that VCs have what I call duck syndrome. It looks serene and calm. They glide on top of the water, but underneath they're paddling frantically, and I think that's honestly what's going on. I am working really hard, and I think most VCs are, To add as much value as we can to our portfolio companies, to be meeting great entrepreneurs that we would consider investing in in the future, to network, to help our portfolio companies build out great teams, and then reading a crazy amount, not just understand where the market is today, but where it's headed. And so how do I sort of balance all those things? It's impossible. So you just have to kind of understand the Depending on what phase you're in, depending on what's going down, which of those you prioritize.

AI assessment note: “Depending on what phase you're in, depending on what's going down, which of those you prioritize.”

Q I'd love to discuss then, kind of talking of that, and the speed and rapidity of it, in terms of just the cadence of investing, and what you like to go for, and does the cadence remain consistent in downturns and boom times?

A Yeah, we haven't seen a change in our cadence, and speaking with other seed investors, um, I've not heard of a change in their cadence. So I think that we're all acutely aware of what the next phase looks like, right? That the bar is higher now to get your Series A. So the same sort of discipline that we applied in our past, we're applying to our current, and I would say if anything, and more so, And we're making sure that whatever, whatever companies we invest in today have enough cash to make it through this storm. And in the past, the, the, you know, the, call it what you want. Is it a storm? Is it a chilly fall? Pick your favorite name, but this new market, which I would just call it a back to reality market personally, but how long will this last? And so, you know, in the past, it's been about So I know if I wrote a check today, I want to make sure that that team has enough cash to make it at least 18 months, and ideally two years.

AI assessment note: “we haven't seen a change in our cadence”

Q Well, this is it. I mean, so many VCs I've interviewed do often state that kind of Massive desire to, to flip between different topics and subjects and portfolio companies. So not having ADD is a very interesting thing. Uh, and so, so then in terms of kind of spreading yourself across the portfolio, how does that affect you?

A Yeah. So, I mean, it's interesting. I, every day I know exactly what I'm going to, what my goals are for that day. So I am one of those people that has a to-do list and I try to make sure that I'm really focused and I look at my calendar and I, it's Try to make sure that that aligns with what I'm trying to achieve, but I'd be lying to you if I said, you know, that that's done a hundred percent of the time. It's just harder to do that because a lot of times you're sitting at meetings for three weeks from now. You know, I guess I say that VCs have what I call duck syndrome. It looks serene and calm. They glide on top of the water, but underneath they're paddling frantically, and I think that's honestly what's going on. I am working really hard, and I think most VCs are, To add as much value as we can to our portfolio companies, to be meeting great entrepreneurs that we would consider investing in in the future, to network, to help our portfolio companies build out great teams, and then reading a crazy amount, not just understand where the market is today, but where it's headed. And so how do I sort of balance all those things? It's impossible. So you just have to kind of understand the Depending on what phase you're in, depending on what's going down, which of those you prioritize.

AI assessment note: “how do I sort of balance all those things? It's impossible.”

Q This sounds so annoying. Quantifiably, what is a big market? Is that a billion dollar? Is that ten billion dollar?

A It's funny, I, cause I even annoy myself with not having an answer to that, and a lot of it depends on what's the size of the market, and then what, what are you actually addressing tomorrow? Usually you have a short-term product, and then a long-term product roadmap, and so those are very different markets. Overall, you know, I get excited, like the, one of my most recent investments is in commercial real estate, and you're talking about, I forget the exact number, but like, two hundred and seventy billion dollars in the US every year. Like, Okay. They don't have access. That whole thing is not addressable, but that is a really big market. And to make a big change in that market is very valuable place to be. When I get pitched things where it's, you know, three or four billion is the true market size. I find that, well, one could argue that's plenty big. I find that to be a little bit smaller than I would care for. So where's the magic? I mean, I've also, with the first investment I made, you couldn't size the market. Because it didn't exist yet. It has to be something that I believe is either currently big or will be really big. And, you know, is that north of ten billion? I don't know. I've never actually put a sort of stake in the ground on where that is. But I do know the smaller, the sort of the 3,000,000,004 billion that people could argue is big enough. For me, I prefer…

AI assessment note: “I've never actually put a sort of stake in the ground on where that is.”

Q This sounds so annoying. Quantifiably, what is a big market? Is that a billion dollar? Is that ten billion dollar?

A It's funny, I, cause I even annoy myself with not having an answer to that, and a lot of it depends on what's the size of the market, and then what, what are you actually addressing tomorrow? Usually you have a short-term product, and then a long-term product roadmap, and so those are very different markets. Overall, you know, I get excited, like the, one of my most recent investments is in commercial real estate, and you're talking about, I forget the exact number, but like, two hundred and seventy billion dollars in the US every year. Like, Okay. They don't have access. That whole thing is not addressable, but that is a really big market. And to make a big change in that market is very valuable place to be. When I get pitched things where it's, you know, three or four billion is the true market size. I find that, well, one could argue that's plenty big. I find that to be a little bit smaller than I would care for. So where's the magic? I mean, I've also, with the first investment I made, you couldn't size the market. Because it didn't exist yet. It has to be something that I believe is either currently big or will be really big. And, you know, is that north of ten billion? I don't know. I've never actually put a sort of stake in the ground on where that is. But I do know the smaller, the sort of the 3,000,000,004 billion that people could argue is big enough. For me, I prefer…

AI assessment note: “When I get pitched things where it's, you know, three or four billion”

Q to the broader assessment of the environment now, which, which could be the reason for the paddling desperately. Because we have seen huge amounts of changes in the market in recent years, you know, a lot more capital in the seed stage, a lot lower costs of starting a company. So how's this impacted your investing? And is this in line with its impact on your fellow seed investing community?

A Yeah. So, so first off, going back to the duck syndrome for one moment, I would just say, when I talk about it paddling frantically, I just mean that VCs are doing a lot, a lot more than that met my eye when I was a founder, right? I worked with incredible VCs in all my companies and they would come in and they would join meetings and they would drop wisdom and they were calm and they were, they were just so wise. And then they would leave to their next meeting. And I didn't realize how much Work was happening underneath to make that the case. So I don't mean to say everyone's frantic in a, in a negative way. I just mean to say there's a lot of work that's happening that you don't necessarily see as a founder. As a founder, they made, my VCs made it look easy, like they were gliding on top of the water. So So I don't mean to say frantic in the negative way. So now switching back to your question, I feel that right now it feels like a calmer, more realistic time, at least for me, and I would argue my, the, you know, the other seed investors than it did two years ago when I joined Freestyle. When I joined Freestyle, deals were going so fast and furious, and I would also say, Argue that I saw a lot of stupid stuff happening, things that I could recognize because I was here in 2001 and I was here in 2008. Right. And so I've seen the downturns and I saw things that I knew we were no…

AI assessment note: “switching back to your question, I feel that right now it feels like a calmer”

Q to the broader assessment of the environment now, which, which could be the reason for the paddling desperately. Because we have seen huge amounts of changes in the market in recent years, you know, a lot more capital in the seed stage, a lot lower costs of starting a company. So how's this impacted your investing? And is this in line with its impact on your fellow seed investing community?

A Yeah. So, so first off, going back to the duck syndrome for one moment, I would just say, when I talk about it paddling frantically, I just mean that VCs are doing a lot, a lot more than that met my eye when I was a founder, right? I worked with incredible VCs in all my companies and they would come in and they would join meetings and they would drop wisdom and they were calm and they were, they were just so wise. And then they would leave to their next meeting. And I didn't realize how much Work was happening underneath to make that the case. So I don't mean to say everyone's frantic in a, in a negative way. I just mean to say there's a lot of work that's happening that you don't necessarily see as a founder. As a founder, they made, my VCs made it look easy, like they were gliding on top of the water. So So I don't mean to say frantic in the negative way. So now switching back to your question, I feel that right now it feels like a calmer, more realistic time, at least for me, and I would argue my, the, you know, the other seed investors than it did two years ago when I joined Freestyle. When I joined Freestyle, deals were going so fast and furious, and I would also say, Argue that I saw a lot of stupid stuff happening, things that I could recognize because I was here in 2001 and I was here in 2008. Right. And so I've seen the downturns and I saw things that I knew we were no…

AI assessment note: “So now switching back to your question, I feel that right now it feels like a calmer”

Q the runway, and I'd love to discuss now kind of burn. And, you know, often we're told, you know, maybe Be as, uh, cost effective as possible and try and minimize burn as low as you can. But then how does that contrast with the growth at all costs, uh, analysis that many have gone for in the past? What's the kind of growth versus burn maintenance ratio for you?

A So I think that every company is different and you have to look and say, what are our main objectives? Like I work with all our portfolio company, or at least my portfolio company is on Okay. R's objectives and key results, right? What are the three critical things, critical objectives that you're going to work on in the next period of time? And you need to just be focused on those and you need serious growth in those, right? And, and so you need to make your burn as little as possible. And I think you do that by trying to do fewer things. objectives versus sort of hitting mediocre numbers on your key objectives. Does that make sense?

AI assessment note: “you need serious growth in those... make your burn as little as possible.”