The Exchanges

Q the low tens of millions in error, I think I'd be right in saying. So I'm really intrigued then when you compare, when you compare this level today and what you've seen with DFJ, To what you've seen in the past with, with the two previous, um, investing roles that you've had, uh, how does it compare when you look at public market expectations? Have they altered significantly over time?

A Yeah, I think they have for sure. Uh, in fact, one of the reasons that we started DFJ growth and I had the opportunity that I have today to help lead that practice here at DFJ is because of a trend that we were seeing specifically in the public markets. So if you go back really 11 or 12 years ago when we started conceiving of DFJ growth as a new practice or an extension of our core venture capital business here at DFJ, one of the trends we saw was that companies were starting to stay private longer, and that's definitely a meme that's played out over the last decade or so. Companies stay private longer now because the public markets want more maturity and predictability, Than in the past when they embrace companies and allow them to, you know, to, to go down the IPO path. Uh, so public market investors, I think today are more willing to give up growth and alpha in terms of the return profile in exchange for lower risk associated with less mature companies. So they want that predictability and maturity. And I'll give you a couple of examples, uh, in the, I'll go back to the seventies, eighties, and nineties, you know, prior to the last 15 years, And companies in the tech sector, um, often you'd see them go public raising 40 or fifty million dollars in general, coming out with enterprise values of a few hundred million dollars, and that would be an IPO company still growing fast,…

AI assessment note: “companies stay private longer now because the public markets want more maturity and predictability”

Q I do have, I'm super intrigued then, uh, and starting with a question from, from Tim Draper. Uh, so he, he wants to know when you discuss that, like your investments with Hughes in the earlier times of your career, uh, how does that then compare to the growth investing that you do now with DFJ when you look at the two?

A So in my career, I was actually in two strategic investing groups, Hughes New Ventures, which I just described, and then later Tribune Ventures, which is actually where I started to get to know DFJ and the DFJ team very well. Tim Draper, Andreas Stavropoulos, John Fisher, and the other partners here. Both of those groups pursued their respective investment strategies by emphasizing the same things that we emphasize as more financially or institutionally motivated venture capitalists. Namely, a focus on opportunities that transform large markets through unique and disruptive technologies. So while we evaluated the same things, people, products, markets, competition, business models, growth rates, valuation, exit path, and so forth, we also had this other dimension, which we called strategic fit. And so everything we did went through a lens that was focused on how could we, as a Help these companies uniquely because of our position in these markets that they were addressing, and also, how was it relevant to us thinking about the future of those companies at Hughes and Tribune? So I think it added another dimension, but for me, they were great training grounds because I think they taught me how to be a disciplined and diligent investor. I had the good fortune of having great mentors while I was at both of those firms, but what I didn't learn there, and what What was certainly uniq…

AI assessment note: “what was certainly uniquely different is I didn't really learn how to manage a fund”

Q the low tens of millions in error, I think I'd be right in saying. So I'm really intrigued then when you compare, when you compare this level today and what you've seen with DFJ, To what you've seen in the past with, with the two previous, um, investing roles that you've had, uh, how does it compare when you look at public market expectations? Have they altered significantly over time?

A Yeah, I think they have for sure. Uh, in fact, one of the reasons that we started DFJ growth and I had the opportunity that I have today to help lead that practice here at DFJ is because of a trend that we were seeing specifically in the public markets. So if you go back really 11 or 12 years ago when we started conceiving of DFJ growth as a new practice or an extension of our core venture capital business here at DFJ, one of the trends we saw was that companies were starting to stay private longer, and that's definitely a meme that's played out over the last decade or so. Companies stay private longer now because the public markets want more maturity and predictability, Than in the past when they embrace companies and allow them to, you know, to, to go down the IPO path. Uh, so public market investors, I think today are more willing to give up growth and alpha in terms of the return profile in exchange for lower risk associated with less mature companies. So they want that predictability and maturity. And I'll give you a couple of examples, uh, in the, I'll go back to the seventies, eighties, and nineties, you know, prior to the last 15 years, And companies in the tech sector, um, often you'd see them go public raising 40 or fifty million dollars in general, coming out with enterprise values of a few hundred million dollars, and that would be an IPO company still growing fast,…

AI assessment note: “Yeah, I think they have for sure. Uh, in fact, one of the reasons”

Q I do have, I'm super intrigued then, uh, and starting with a question from, from Tim Draper. Uh, so he, he wants to know when you discuss that, like your investments with Hughes in the earlier times of your career, uh, how does that then compare to the growth investing that you do now with DFJ when you look at the two?

A So in my career, I was actually in two strategic investing groups, Hughes New Ventures, which I just described, and then later Tribune Ventures, which is actually where I started to get to know DFJ and the DFJ team very well. Tim Draper, Andreas Stavropoulos, John Fisher, and the other partners here. Both of those groups pursued their respective investment strategies by emphasizing the same things that we emphasize as more financially or institutionally motivated venture capitalists. Namely, a focus on opportunities that transform large markets through unique and disruptive technologies. So while we evaluated the same things, people, products, markets, competition, business models, growth rates, valuation, exit path, and so forth, we also had this other dimension, which we called strategic fit. And so everything we did went through a lens that was focused on how could we, as a Help these companies uniquely because of our position in these markets that they were addressing, and also, how was it relevant to us thinking about the future of those companies at Hughes and Tribune? So I think it added another dimension, but for me, they were great training grounds because I think they taught me how to be a disciplined and diligent investor. I had the good fortune of having great mentors while I was at both of those firms, but what I didn't learn there, and what What was certainly uniq…

AI assessment note: “What was certainly uniquely different is I didn't really learn how to manage a fund”

Q That's fantastic. And then final question, what's your most recent publicly announced investment and why did you say yes?

A So, uh, I'll talk about a company, uh, Unity Technologies. We invested in it earlier this year. I co-led the investment with one of my partners, Barry Shuler. Unity Technologies is a remarkable company. It sits at the nexus of several trends and Around the next generation of computing and entertainment. It's led by a very seasoned entrepreneur and CEO, John Riccatello, former CEO of Electronic Arts, the big game development company. And the thing that got us to yes here was that Unity has a leading development platform for publishing and developing two D and three D electronic and mobile games. They have a near, uh, nearly two million developers that build on their game. These games, uh, Reach nearly a billion gamers every month, so they have this great core engine for developers that we love, and they've built a big, sizable business already there, but what got us super excited is the fact that Unity's core engine and development platform is perfectly suited for the next generation of computing and computing interfaces, namely virtual reality and augmented reality, and already they've repurposed or redirected that That development platform towards VR and AR software applications and have 70 to 80% market share of all development that's happening in VR and AR. And so that really got us to yes, is that that dramatic upside to participate in this next generation of computing.

AI assessment note: “the thing that got us to yes here was that Unity has a leading development platform”

Q I love to hear that you, you like the extended time of privatization. I am intrigued by one element, though. As a VC myself now, we all have to think about liquidity to LPs. Does that concern you in terms of the available liquidity to LPs when the public markets aren't so liquid and There is this extended time of privatization. Does it concern you?

A I would actually say that for us, in particular, DFJ growth, so specifically to our growth strategy, you know, we identified this trend more than a decade ago, and it really became the foundation for our growth funds and for our growth strategy. So the fact that the private markets have lengthened in terms of the time it gets to be a public company, I think has opened up a market opportunity for That we think is both healthy for companies to get funded privately through that, that hyper growth stage, but also has given us an opportunity to create a strategy like DFJ growth. In fact, for our growth funds, you know, we have a typical target holding period of about half the length of an early stage venture investor now. So the typical venture backed company to get to IPO takes eight to 10 years, sometimes longer now. And our strategy at DFJ growth really targets companies that have more of a three to six year Horizon to IPO. Now, what I, what this doesn't mean, though, is for early stage venture funds, I think there are still plenty of opportunities to build companies in relatively short timeframes to get them to enough value where you can generate good returns as an early stage investor, but that will happen more often than not through M&A at that stage. If you want to take a company all the way to the public markets, it just takes longer now because of the The trends that we tal…

AI assessment note: “I think has opened up a market opportunity for That we think is both healthy”

Q And so, that's what you learned, and then you said what you didn't learn was about investing with fiduciary responsibility. So, I'm really intrigued, then, when you made the transition, how did the transition affect your investment mindset and decision-making process, if it did?

A At least at DFJ, I would say it actually Opened up some grand possibilities for me, because DFJ has a heritage, I would say, of investing in some true forward-looking innovation, but very broadly across technology sectors. So today, you know, we talk about three main sectors we invest in, enterprise technologies, consumer-oriented technologies, as well as disruptors or disruptive-enabling technologies. And when you're in a corporate industry, Investment environment. You do have some, you know, some restrictions in terms of your purview, the things that you can really go after. And here it, it allowed me to think much more broadly about the way technologies are impacting the world and the timeframe where those technologies are being realized in terms of the market opportunity. And so it, uh, I I'd say it, it both opened up possibilities and allowed me to think broader, but then also really got me focused on Investment horizons. Because in this business, when you're trying to generate returns, both cash on cash, you know, return multiple, which we tend to focus on, but also IRR, which a lot of institutional LPs focus on, really does start to hone your senses towards particular timeframes and time horizons at which you're trying to build value and also find exit opportunities or find liquidity for your investors. That's some of the, that's some of the discipline that That came wit…

AI assessment note: “it both opened up possibilities and allowed me to think broader, but then also really got me focused on Investment horizons.”

Q I'm super intrigued. I had a guest on the show the other day who stated that the The cause for this increasing time for privatization and companies not wanting to go public was because of kind of aggressive PE firms and buyout firms who kind of have, um, these sub one billion dollar companies at their mercy. Uh, do you agree with that thesis then in terms of that cause?

A Uh, I'm not sure if that's a cause. I think it's a little bit of a byproduct. I think coming out of the 2000 era bubble bursting, that first generation of internet companies That got funded at somewhat breathtaking valuations for that era. Many companies going public before they were really mature enough to be in that position. You know, being a public company creates several different incentives than you have as a private company. We actually think having companies stay private longer is very healthy because you're not on that quarterly treadmill, and you're able to really pursue hypergrowth and navigate the challenges of going through that hypergrowth without being in the public market and Having to do that kind of quarterly grind of, uh, and focus on short-term results as opposed to the long-term strategy. But to answer your question specifically, uh, we actually believe that what we call the growth stage of the private markets now has really segmented over the last few years as a result of where the public markets are focused. So if the, if the typical IPO now is a billion dollars or so in the tech sector, we tend to focus on that early growth period and The, you know, call it tens of millions of annual revenue or bookings or tens of millions of users sometimes in the consumer segment. Whereas the folks you described, the mutual funds and some hedge funds and some of the pr…

AI assessment note: “I'm not sure if that's a cause. I think it's a little bit of a byproduct.”

Q And you said about the holding period, though, for those investments that you make. I am really intrigued as to the potentially, and I, and I hate this question, so I'm sorry for it, but I'm too intrigued, the kind of discernible metrics and benchmarks that, that indicate a three to six year time horizon and indicate an investable proposition for you. Um, are there definable metrics and benchmarks?

A Yeah, of course. I think as a growth stage investor, at the stage we focus, which I call, if you segment the growth category into early growth and later growth, you know, we mentioned earlier, we, we tend to focus on companies that have market and product validation. Really important to us. We spend a lot of our time in our partner meetings talking about two things. We talk about, is the company validated? Are they in the hyper growth phase of their business? Do they have a big enough market opportunity that based on the valuation we're paying Today, that they can generate the kind of venture-like returns we want in the future within that three to six year time horizon typically, and are they emerging category leaders? And so, when you put all that together, you know, do they have breakout potential? We look for really, I would say, several metrics, but two that are really important to us. Obviously, the scale of the business. Have they moved past the early product and technology risk phase of the business or So that they have that market and product validation. Are they in the scaling phase or the execution phase of the business? So, so we look for metrics around that. Typically for us, that means what we have found over the last decade is that typically takes, at least in our mind, kind of the ten million dollar annualized revenue or bookings run rate or more. So we typically…

AI assessment note: “ten million dollar annualized revenue or bookings run rate or more”

Q and then final question, sorry, before we move into a quick fire and talking about kind of the growth stage that you're in, often, obviously, I speak to much earlier, even seed stage investors, and price doesn't very much play a role in their investment decision-making process. So, I'm intrigued for you. How much of a role does a reasonable price to pay Play. Does that make a big difference?

A Yeah, of course. I mentioned that I, that there are two things that we talk about in our investment committee meetings. Is the company validated, truly validated, and are they in that scaling or hyper growth phase of the business? And there's, there's not a bright line test for that, right? Um, other than some of the metrics we just talked about, of course, we look at unit economics and business model and gross margins and all the things that matter about the financial profile and business model of business. But the other thing we talk about consistently, is this a fair and reasonable price to pay for the company? Does it give us enough opportunity to generate the types of returns we're looking for within the time, you know, within our time horizon? And not only does it give us the opportunity to generate our target returns, but does it do that in a normalized environment? So you have to step out of current environment. What are valuations today? What are multiples today? But Think about in a normalized environment, uh, what's, you know, what's a reasonable or rational multiple to pay? Of course, we're investing in companies that are typically growing at more than a hundred percent a year. And so you may find that you're going to pay a premium. I'll tell you at the growth stage, I never feel like, you know, we're not a value investor. So I never feel like price we're getting is…

AI assessment note: “the other thing we talk about consistently, is this a fair and reasonable price”

Q Yeah, absolutely. Love them both. Uh, and then penultimate question, and one from Tim, uh, Tim Draper. So he says, how did you feel when the Cubs won? I had to ask him what the Cubs was, But, uh, apparently it was a big event. Oh, wow.

A Well, so, you know, the Cubs is, uh, is a major league baseball team here based in Chicago. And I know Tim is asking that question because I took him to game seven of the 2003 national league championship series where the Cubs lost three straight games to lose an opportunity to go to the world series. So, and when we were at that game, I was kind of an infamous series, but you could literally hear a pin drop in Wrigley field where the Cubs played Played. The opposing team, the Marlins, celebrated their victory, so it was surreal, and it was so sad, and so now here we are in 2016, and wow, pure joy, exhilarating, great relief. You know, I say fly the W, and, uh, you know, I sang the song, the Cubs are gonna win today. It was, uh, it was an amazing thing for me and our family, because we moved here to Silicon Valley from Chicago about 10 years ago, and, you know, now the curse is over for all Chicagoans. A dark cloud's been lifted, and You know, for those people who take such great pride in their city and their beloved clubs, I say, uh, hats off to them. It's, uh, it's fantastic. Uh, and thanks to Tim for the question.

AI assessment note: “pure joy, exhilarating, great relief”

Q one do you have to ask, and it's Roy at scale recently said to me on the show, markets make outcomes, team outcomes, Not so much. How do you respond to this at this stage of, of the company's life cycle when, as you said, we're moving into hyper growth and scaling, and it's not so centered around the team as it maybe once was at such an early stage?

A That's a good question. I agree with Rory that the size and the state of the market is paramount to growth stage investing, but I also believe that the success in delivering value and achieving growth in that market is all about having a hungry and qualified team of People that have the vision and the kind of the operating chops to execute that against that vision. And so our, our companies are nothing without their people. So while the market is a prerequisite for creating opportunity, uh, the degree of success as a company, I believe is, um, largely based on taking it and taking advantage of that market opportunity depends largely on the team of people that are part of that business.

AI assessment note: “while the market is a prerequisite for creating opportunity, the degree of success as a company”

Q and then final question, sorry, before we move into a quick fire and talking about kind of the growth stage that you're in, often, obviously, I speak to much earlier, even seed stage investors, and price doesn't very much play a role in their investment decision-making process. So, I'm intrigued for you. How much of a role does a reasonable price to pay Play. Does that make a big difference?

A Yeah, of course. I mentioned that I, that there are two things that we talk about in our investment committee meetings. Is the company validated, truly validated, and are they in that scaling or hyper growth phase of the business? And there's, there's not a bright line test for that, right? Um, other than some of the metrics we just talked about, of course, we look at unit economics and business model and gross margins and all the things that matter about the financial profile and business model of business. But the other thing we talk about consistently, is this a fair and reasonable price to pay for the company? Does it give us enough opportunity to generate the types of returns we're looking for within the time, you know, within our time horizon? And not only does it give us the opportunity to generate our target returns, but does it do that in a normalized environment? So you have to step out of current environment. What are valuations today? What are multiples today? But Think about in a normalized environment, uh, what's, you know, what's a reasonable or rational multiple to pay? Of course, we're investing in companies that are typically growing at more than a hundred percent a year. And so you may find that you're going to pay a premium. I'll tell you at the growth stage, I never feel like, you know, we're not a value investor. So I never feel like price we're getting is…

AI assessment note: “is this a fair and reasonable price to pay for the company?”

Q one do you have to ask, and it's Roy at scale recently said to me on the show, markets make outcomes, team outcomes, Not so much. How do you respond to this at this stage of, of the company's life cycle when, as you said, we're moving into hyper growth and scaling, and it's not so centered around the team as it maybe once was at such an early stage?

A That's a good question. I agree with Rory that the size and the state of the market is paramount to growth stage investing, but I also believe that the success in delivering value and achieving growth in that market is all about having a hungry and qualified team of People that have the vision and the kind of the operating chops to execute that against that vision. And so our, our companies are nothing without their people. So while the market is a prerequisite for creating opportunity, uh, the degree of success as a company, I believe is, um, largely based on taking it and taking advantage of that market opportunity depends largely on the team of people that are part of that business.

AI assessment note: “while the market is a prerequisite for creating opportunity, the degree of success as a company”

Q And so, that's what you learned, and then you said what you didn't learn was about investing with fiduciary responsibility. So, I'm really intrigued, then, when you made the transition, how did the transition affect your investment mindset and decision-making process, if it did?

A At least at DFJ, I would say it actually Opened up some grand possibilities for me, because DFJ has a heritage, I would say, of investing in some true forward-looking innovation, but very broadly across technology sectors. So today, you know, we talk about three main sectors we invest in, enterprise technologies, consumer-oriented technologies, as well as disruptors or disruptive-enabling technologies. And when you're in a corporate industry, Investment environment. You do have some, you know, some restrictions in terms of your purview, the things that you can really go after. And here it, it allowed me to think much more broadly about the way technologies are impacting the world and the timeframe where those technologies are being realized in terms of the market opportunity. And so it, uh, I I'd say it, it both opened up possibilities and allowed me to think broader, but then also really got me focused on Investment horizons. Because in this business, when you're trying to generate returns, both cash on cash, you know, return multiple, which we tend to focus on, but also IRR, which a lot of institutional LPs focus on, really does start to hone your senses towards particular timeframes and time horizons at which you're trying to build value and also find exit opportunities or find liquidity for your investors. That's some of the, that's some of the discipline that That came wit…

AI assessment note: “allowed me to think broader, but then also really got me focused on Investment horizons”

Q I'm super intrigued. I had a guest on the show the other day who stated that the The cause for this increasing time for privatization and companies not wanting to go public was because of kind of aggressive PE firms and buyout firms who kind of have, um, these sub one billion dollar companies at their mercy. Uh, do you agree with that thesis then in terms of that cause?

A Uh, I'm not sure if that's a cause. I think it's a little bit of a byproduct. I think coming out of the 2000 era bubble bursting, that first generation of internet companies That got funded at somewhat breathtaking valuations for that era. Many companies going public before they were really mature enough to be in that position. You know, being a public company creates several different incentives than you have as a private company. We actually think having companies stay private longer is very healthy because you're not on that quarterly treadmill, and you're able to really pursue hypergrowth and navigate the challenges of going through that hypergrowth without being in the public market and Having to do that kind of quarterly grind of, uh, and focus on short-term results as opposed to the long-term strategy. But to answer your question specifically, uh, we actually believe that what we call the growth stage of the private markets now has really segmented over the last few years as a result of where the public markets are focused. So if the, if the typical IPO now is a billion dollars or so in the tech sector, we tend to focus on that early growth period and The, you know, call it tens of millions of annual revenue or bookings or tens of millions of users sometimes in the consumer segment. Whereas the folks you described, the mutual funds and some hedge funds and some of the pr…

AI assessment note: “I'm not sure if that's a cause. I think it's a little bit of a byproduct.”

Q And you said about the holding period, though, for those investments that you make. I am really intrigued as to the potentially, and I, and I hate this question, so I'm sorry for it, but I'm too intrigued, the kind of discernible metrics and benchmarks that, that indicate a three to six year time horizon and indicate an investable proposition for you. Um, are there definable metrics and benchmarks?

A Yeah, of course. I think as a growth stage investor, at the stage we focus, which I call, if you segment the growth category into early growth and later growth, you know, we mentioned earlier, we, we tend to focus on companies that have market and product validation. Really important to us. We spend a lot of our time in our partner meetings talking about two things. We talk about, is the company validated? Are they in the hyper growth phase of their business? Do they have a big enough market opportunity that based on the valuation we're paying Today, that they can generate the kind of venture-like returns we want in the future within that three to six year time horizon typically, and are they emerging category leaders? And so, when you put all that together, you know, do they have breakout potential? We look for really, I would say, several metrics, but two that are really important to us. Obviously, the scale of the business. Have they moved past the early product and technology risk phase of the business or So that they have that market and product validation. Are they in the scaling phase or the execution phase of the business? So, so we look for metrics around that. Typically for us, that means what we have found over the last decade is that typically takes, at least in our mind, kind of the ten million dollar annualized revenue or bookings run rate or more. So we typically…

AI assessment note: “typically takes, at least in our mind, kind of the ten million dollar annualized revenue”

Q So, I have so many questions that offshoot that. I mean, firstly, you said there about learning to be a disciplined and diligent investor. I'm really intrigued. What does that mean? Does that mean a particular cadence, or does that mean a rigidity of mindset that means you're focused? How does, how does that look when you discuss a diligent and disciplined investor?

A Yeah, that's a really good question. I think at least for us and how we practice at DFJ, and in particular DFJ Growth, where I'm, uh, you know, one of the partners that leads that practice, I think it means being theme-driven, being conscious of the way the world is changing through New technologies, new sources of innovation. Having a mindset that allows you to think about the future, say, five to 10 years ahead, but then also being able to apply all of the experience and analytic approaches to assess the, both the timing, as well as the, I'll call, efficacy of business models and markets and growth rates, and then ultimately assessing the, you know, the people. The people that you're partnering with, these visionary entrepreneurs that are leading the way, thinking about the future, trying to change the world, but to have an approach when I say disciplined, where I wouldn't say it's so methodical per se, although it can be, but it's really trying to think within the boundaries of how to build a business, how to grow a business, how to create a business that's, that's healthy and is building value while at the same time is pursuing these passions and these dreams of the entrepreneur that But, you know, kind of wrapping that all up into a package for something that can be sustainable over long periods of times that addresses real needs in the market.

AI assessment note: “I think it means being theme-driven, being conscious of the way the world is changing”

Q So, I have so many questions that offshoot that. I mean, firstly, you said there about learning to be a disciplined and diligent investor. I'm really intrigued. What does that mean? Does that mean a particular cadence, or does that mean a rigidity of mindset that means you're focused? How does, how does that look when you discuss a diligent and disciplined investor?

A Yeah, that's a really good question. I think at least for us and how we practice at DFJ, and in particular DFJ Growth, where I'm, uh, you know, one of the partners that leads that practice, I think it means being theme-driven, being conscious of the way the world is changing through New technologies, new sources of innovation. Having a mindset that allows you to think about the future, say, five to 10 years ahead, but then also being able to apply all of the experience and analytic approaches to assess the, both the timing, as well as the, I'll call, efficacy of business models and markets and growth rates, and then ultimately assessing the, you know, the people. The people that you're partnering with, these visionary entrepreneurs that are leading the way, thinking about the future, trying to change the world, but to have an approach when I say disciplined, where I wouldn't say it's so methodical per se, although it can be, but it's really trying to think within the boundaries of how to build a business, how to grow a business, how to create a business that's, that's healthy and is building value while at the same time is pursuing these passions and these dreams of the entrepreneur that But, you know, kind of wrapping that all up into a package for something that can be sustainable over long periods of times that addresses real needs in the market.

AI assessment note: “I think it means being theme-driven, being conscious of the way the world is”

Q I can't miss it. Okay. I'll write it down now. Uh, and then let's do the hardest element of your role with DFJ. Is there a kind of continuous recurring theme that challenges you?

A Yeah, it's, uh, you know, it's, it's everything. This is a, it's a hard business for sure. I have colleagues and friends and partners who've done great things in their careers and have been incredibly successful. And I think across the board, folks I know would say, uh, you know, this is a hard business because it's so multidimensional and And, and you, you know, have to really have the same passion for these businesses of the entrepreneurs you're backing. You have to have that disciplined approach towards selection criteria of the investments you do make. I would say for us, or for me, it's really building our own team here at DFJ and DFJ growth to be positioned as a truly effective and valued partner for the world's best and most, you know, visionary entrepreneurs, providing an environment for our team that rewards great instincts and judgment. But also teamwork and collaboration. I think the difference there, what I want to highlight is many venture capital firms, you know, they, they operate differently. They have, and not that it's worse or one's better than the other, but they operate in with partners in isolation or in silos based on their individual specialties. At DFJ Growth, we consciously buck that trend and that temptation because we want everyone on our team to be knowledgeable enough to express an opinion and to contribute to the decision that we're making and to …

AI assessment note: “for me, it's really building our own team here at DFJ and DFJ growth”

Q I love to hear that you, you like the extended time of privatization. I am intrigued by one element, though. As a VC myself now, we all have to think about liquidity to LPs. Does that concern you in terms of the available liquidity to LPs when the public markets aren't so liquid and There is this extended time of privatization. Does it concern you?

A I would actually say that for us, in particular, DFJ growth, so specifically to our growth strategy, you know, we identified this trend more than a decade ago, and it really became the foundation for our growth funds and for our growth strategy. So the fact that the private markets have lengthened in terms of the time it gets to be a public company, I think has opened up a market opportunity for That we think is both healthy for companies to get funded privately through that, that hyper growth stage, but also has given us an opportunity to create a strategy like DFJ growth. In fact, for our growth funds, you know, we have a typical target holding period of about half the length of an early stage venture investor now. So the typical venture backed company to get to IPO takes eight to 10 years, sometimes longer now. And our strategy at DFJ growth really targets companies that have more of a three to six year Horizon to IPO. Now, what I, what this doesn't mean, though, is for early stage venture funds, I think there are still plenty of opportunities to build companies in relatively short timeframes to get them to enough value where you can generate good returns as an early stage investor, but that will happen more often than not through M&A at that stage. If you want to take a company all the way to the public markets, it just takes longer now because of the The trends that we tal…

AI assessment note: “opened up a market opportunity for That we think is both healthy”