Naam: Uber, Lyft, and WeWork burned more capital than cleantech
Ramez Naam · Can 'deeptech' venture capital solve climate change? · Nov 11, 2021 · at 14:02
Investor Ramez Naam pushes back against the narrative that physical deep tech and cleantech are uniquely too capital intensive for venture capital.
0:00 / 0:19exact quote · 19.4s
720p mp4 · rendered on demand · StarZero watermark
“If you look at, you know, some real darlings of The tech VC world, companies like Uber, or Lyft, or WeWork, you see companies that have burned through an enormous amount of capital, far more than most cleantech companies ever have or ever will.”
quote is from the automated transcript, cleaned for reading: filler sounds and stutters are removed, nothing is rephrased. names can be misheard (the analysis reads context, assessments check outside sources). how →
More from Ramez Naam
Naam: Deep tech startups no longer need commercial scale to exit
“It's no longer the case that we have to wait all the way until we have a product commercially on sale or at scale for this to produce an exit.”
Naam: App-based software businesses have weaker moats than hard tech
“We used to believe that, or companies like, again, I'll say Uber or WeWork, we thought, oh, they have natural network effects, they're gonna have a gigantic moat but it turns out switching costs for consumers are actually pretty low, and maybe lower, And some …”
Naam: SPACs generated more upside for deep tech than other investments
“I think it's a fair case to be made that SPACs have generated more upside for deep tech in climate tech and in other sectors than they have for any other Type of investment”
Ramez Naam: Portfolio company ESS went public before achieving commercial scale
“ESS, you know, my portfolio just went public two weeks ago now when we're recording this, and they've got a commercial product, but they haven't certainly hit commercial scale at this point.”
Naam: Addressing climate change requires $100 trillion in infrastructure turnover
“Or the early stages, honestly, of a hundred trillion dollar clean energy revolution, essentially. We're going to turn over, that sounds like it's just a made-up number, but when you actually look at the infrastructure turnover we need to address climate change…”