Tsedal Neeley: The Remote Work Revolution | SALT Talks #207

“The last 13 months have not only accelerated the virtualization of work but also everyone’s technological advancement... the digital revolution is right behind us.”

Tsedal Neeley is the Naylor Fitzhugh Professor of Business Administration at the Harvard Business School. Her work focuses on how leaders can scale their organizations and recently published her book Remote Work Revolution: Succeeding from Anywhere.

The pandemic accelerated the pace at which remote work and virtualization became integral to organizations. This has created a whole new paradigm, and with it, new challenges for leaders to consider. Creating and maintaining a culture becomes more complicated when employees spend less time together in person. Technology needs to be accessible and used intentionally so that all different worker groups are included. “You need to use the right technology for the right task for the right goals.”

Large segments of the workforce have experienced remote work during the pandemic and have discovered many benefits like savings from an eliminated commute and other associated costs. This will increase calls for more hybrid work models that allow employees to spend less time in the office. “The tension is the majority of employees don’t want to come back [to the office full-time].”

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Tsedal Neeley.jpeg

Tsedal Neeley

Naylor Fitzhugh Professor of Business Administration

Harvard Business School

MODERATOR

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darcie: (00:07)
Hello. Hello everyone. And welcome back to salt talks. My name is John Darcie. I'm the managing director of salt, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance technology and public policy. Salt talks are a digital interview series that we started in 2020 with leading investors, creators and thinkers. And our goal on these salt talks is the same as our goal at our salt conferences, which we're looking forward to resuming hopefully here in September of 2021, which we'll talk about a little bit with our guests today, but our goal is to provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think our big ideas better shaping the future. And we're very excited today to welcome a big time subject matter expert onto salt whose, uh, subject matter expertise is extremely relevant, especially in the age of COVID.

John Darcie: (00:59)
Our guest today is professor [inaudible] Neeley. Uh, so doll is the Naylor fits you. Professor of business administration at the Harvard business school. Her work focuses on how leaders can scale their organizations by developing and implementing global and digital strategies. Again, nothing more relevant at no time, more relevant than in the age of COVID starting early in 2020. She regularly advises top leaders who are embarking on virtual work and large scale change that involves global expansion, digital transformation and becoming more agile. Her most recent book is called remote work revolution, succeeding from anywhere, and it provides remote workers and leaders, the best practices necessary to perform at the highest levels in their organizations prior to her academic career. Uh, so doll spent 10 years working for companies like Lucent technologies, the forum corporation in various roles, including strategies for global customer experience, 360 degree performance, software management systems, Salesforce sales, management development, and business flow analysis for telecommunication infrastructure hosting. Today's talk is Anthony Scaramucci, the founder and managing partner of SkyBridge capital, a global alternative investment firm. Anthony is also a graduate of Harvard law school. So the, I know that, uh, Sedol and Anthony have crossed some paths or have some mutual relationships that they might get into today. I'm glad

Anthony Scaramucci: (02:27)
You mentioned it Darcie. Cause I would have mentioned

Anthony Scaramucci: (02:29)
Times that I went to the Harvard law school seven

Anthony Scaramucci: (02:32)
Times in 45 minutes, but professor, what a great accomplishment, what a great life story, congratulations to you and having gone to Cambridge Latin high, uh, and there you are, uh, across the river. What an amazing, uh, experience, um, I guess I want to start, you know, there, if you don't mind, uh, tell us how you grew up, tell us what you were thinking about. Did you think you were going to be a business school professor at the Harvard business school? Tell me, tell me where you were, what you were thinking about.

Tsedal Neeley: (03:03)
Oh, Anthony, you're going to go right to it. Huh? Um, so no, I am a reluctant academic, uh, w this is the big reveal. Uh, I actually never thought that I would be a professor, much less a business school professor. I grew up as the daughter of small business people, entrepreneurs, uh, and when I was about 19 years old, my father said to me, you know, so doll, you're interested in business. Uh, you need to learn how businesses make money. So you need to go into sales. I said, what? You need to go into sales and learn how organizations generate revenue, what kind of sales, anything? So, and like any, you know, self-respecting a 19 year old. I started with candy, Anthony. I sold candy. Uh, eventually I started to, uh, sell technology systems, consulting services, and eventually met all of these mild-mannered academics in one of my big, uh, consulting sales jobs who didn't have sales quotas and who are all mild mannered. I said, you know what? I want to be like one of those people. And so here I am Anthony. I'm a mild-mannered, uh, academic at the Harvard business school. And, um, along the way did a lot of traveling with my work. I've always believed that the world is small.

Anthony Scaramucci: (04:33)
So, so John Darcie, we've established that she's a great sales person.

Anthony Scaramucci: (04:40)
They tell you that your mild

Anthony Scaramucci: (04:41)
Mannered, you got to hold onto your wallet. Okay. So let me just make sure I know where my wallet

Anthony Scaramucci: (04:45)
Is. [inaudible]

Anthony Scaramucci: (04:49)
You're coming at the game with a jujitsu that I can't properly manage. Well, before we go into my more urbane and academic questions though, tell me your favorite candy. You started in candy. I said I'm a, I'm a Reese's peanut butter guy. So what, what, what's your favorite candy?

Tsedal Neeley: (05:07)
I'm a toffee with chocolate type of gal. So score Heath bar. You realize I'm answering questions. I've never answered in life.

Anthony Scaramucci: (05:18)
I got to know. Okay. So Darcie, I've got this toffee place in, in, uh, is I love toffee by the way. Cause I'm, I'm a little, I'm a, I'm a total foodie. I got to talk. He place it called N strums in Colorado. We got it. We got to send some to professor Neil. Okay.

Anthony Scaramucci: (05:36)
Okay. I'm gonna try to win your heart and mind.

Anthony Scaramucci: (05:42)
I'm going to try to win your heart and mind through your palette, but let's talk, let's go to the remote work revolution, succeeding from EV anywhere, which is your book. Uh, and let's start with why you wrote the book and how timely the book is by the way, because it's coincident with the pandemic and tell us, uh, what you were thinking about when you wrote the book and now let's apply it to the real world. We're all living through the coma. COVID-19 pandemic. What about the book is relevant and accurate. And what about the book? Did you miss? If you missed anything, tell us, tell us your observation.

Tsedal Neeley: (06:20)
So this book had been underway for a very long time before the pandemic hit. In fact, it was a pet project for me because the problem I was trying to solve was people telling me after years and years and years, working with executives, teaching with executives, managers, and, uh, virtual and global team members that no matter how much they themselves change their behaviors to be fabulous virtual collaborators, unless everyone else develops the same skills. It's not helpful. How do I get my group, my team, my unit on the same page. So Anthony, I started hiring artists to look at visual language. I started to hire curriculum design people to try to produce a book that would have stickiness to it when groups and teams, uh, used it. Um, and I was, I had about two hundred and fifty two hundred sixty pages worth of written material research illustration. And I was walking around with it with no publication date in mind.

Tsedal Neeley: (07:31)
And in the meantime, while actually working on a different book called the digital mindset COVID hits, this book was then produced in two and a half months because all that work had been underway for about three years. Uh, it pains me. It really pains me that we've landed in this place, uh, because of this deadly virus. But the virtualization of work is something that I've always felt would be a core part of modern organizations. That's why the book is organized to bring, to bear all of the success factors when people go remote. And the actual structure of the book, uh, is relevant to COVID because, uh, along with the Harvard business review, we did a Q and a session with managers, uh, and ended up with the, uh, themes of the book, uh, because all these people kept asking about productivity. How do I monitor people?

Tsedal Neeley: (08:36)
How do I ensure productivity is maintained? What digital tools do we need? How do you maintain connection and trust, uh, in global work. And in fact, after this Q and a session, we posted it on hbr.org and it garnered almost half a million downloads in just a few days. So we knew we were capturing the key questions and the book is structured in that way. So you ask what, uh, did I miss, uh, in the book? I actually don't think, uh, uh, I missed the essence of what people need in order to construct a very effective organizations that includes virtual arrangements, but I wish I had some more things around remote teaching, remote learning, uh, things like that, more specific, uh, things, uh, that people care about, uh, and to correct that, uh, in a way, um, I've launched a course called remote work revolution for everyone it's free, it's on the Harvard X platform. And we've, we've made sure that there were affinity groups like teachers who can work together and learn together. Yeah,

Anthony Scaramucci: (09:50)
I didn't, I didn't mean it in a pejorative way. I meant academic setting and then the academic world is meeting the real world. And since you, or a great intellect, you, I knew that you would synthesize and try to figure out what's there. And so more teaching, more online, teaching, more, more of that. I guess the thing that plagues me, uh, which is near and dear to my heart is some of this trying to run a company remotely. Now for the last 13 months, you can never find John Darcie when you need them professor Neely, just so you know. Okay. He does show up with the salt talks appropriately, uh, tired, but I have no idea where he is, unless he's a here on assault org, but we'll talk about that. You and I will talk about that separately, but my issue

John Darcie: (10:36)
Is I'm in the office. Where are you, Anthony? Still on your basement?

Anthony Scaramucci: (10:39)
I'm in my basement like Joe Biden. Okay. It's been a very successful strategy. It's going to be my strategy and I'm sticking to it. So what I want to say, professor Neely is what I'm worried about is what John is actually addressing. We're out of the office. Uh, we have issued a return to work, uh, memo for May 3rd. I believe it is, or May 4th, um, which is coincidence with where the municipal workers in New York city are returning to work. Um, of course we are being lenient related to, you know, people that are concerned or have safety issues, comorbidities, things like that. Um, I've requested that people get vaccinated. I'll just talk to you very candidly. And again, that's a request I'm not mandating it or anything like that, but I believe in the science behind the vaccination, I myself have been doubly vaccinated. What I'm worried about though, is the culture, the lack of physical proximity. Um, I feel like I'm shooting in the dark as somebody that runs the organization in terms of creating the culture. Am I wrong about that? What, uh, what do I need to do? Be my career coach? Uh, you've got so many people that listen into thing that are worried about the same thing. What do you, what do you tell them?

Tsedal Neeley: (11:57)
I think you're spot on when you talk about culture as being the fundamental issue that leaders like you and organizations are concerned about. And it's, for that reason, we find that 68 to 70% of organizations would want people to come back in person. But the tension in that and the challenge in that is that the majority of employees don't want to come back to the tune of 81 to 87%. 81% is the number that Harvard business school online recently, um, uh, gathered from a survey, uh, 87% comes from the Gardner group, a survey they released in December of those numbers, 27 to 30% want remote work, full time and, uh, leaders, uh, who want people in the office. I think you have to be very careful when you force people back. Uh, first of all, because you know that they don't want that. The second thing is physical proximity does not equate strong cohesive cultures.

Tsedal Neeley: (13:04)
In fact, what is culture? If the definition of culture is what are our shared values and for most of us they've stayed the same in our organizations. What are the things that are important to us? The second half of that, or even 75% of that is what are our shared norms? Uh, how do we do things? How do we communicate? How do we solve problems? How do we make decisions? What are attitudes and behaviors essentially COVID has completely killed the cultural norms that we used to have because we've been working remotely for the last year. So the idea that we're going to go back to some old culture is actually not accurate, not true. And for you Anthony career coaching, you have to learn how to lead and build a distributed organization. If you were a global organization and had a presence in other parts of the world, they're not in that same space with you. So physical proximity and borderless meter ship becomes incredibly important.

Anthony Scaramucci: (14:10)
I think that's well said. I think it's an interesting perspective. If you're running a fortune 500 company, you're many of your people in your mind are working remotely. They're not in your corporate office. And I, I respect that, but let me ask you about the, the dilemma. I'll call it a transition dilemma. Uh, we ask people to leave, uh, they left, they're operating to the best of their capability. In fact, our firms doing reasonably good job remotely. Um, I now sort of want them back. Um, but you're saying something that I agree with you, you're a coaxing them back. You're not mandating it necessarily, but I sorta am w you know, in the, you know, passive aggressive sense of that

Anthony Scaramucci: (14:56)
Or aggressive, aggressive, or aggressive and back it's come back. You're the boss.

Anthony Scaramucci: (15:01)
Yeah. So what do you, what's your reaction to that professor?

Tsedal Neeley: (15:05)
I, I think Anthony, um, and I, I, you know, this is how I talk to any leader, CEO, uh, nation state advisor. Um, you have to adapt and be flexible and join the revolution that's taking place. Do you want people to be, uh, having water cooler conversations that are full of resentment? Do you want to lose loyalty and commitment with remote work lifestyles have improved dramatically? And by the way, I absolutely don't believe that remote work is a panacea. Uh, and in fact, in the book, you'll see that I write about all of the challenges that do exist, like being out of sight, out of sync, out of touch, and out of mind, all of those things are very true, but these are all competencies that we need to build in order to reap the benefits of, uh, the virtual environment. People are more satisfied.

Tsedal Neeley: (16:07)
People really value their autonomy, which is really self-control flex time, spending more time with the people that they cohabitate with. It could be family, it could be other loved ones and, uh, productivity has gone up in most places. So our historical arguments around productivity have been debunked as well, right? So the, the, the, the only thing that we need to work extremely hard and developing is how do we connect and how do we convey culture and establish new ones despite, uh, the fact that we're not in the same place. And I'll add one more thing. If I may please, um, Anthony, it's the fact that even physical spaces are going to be different. Uh, we're going to have one way hallways. We're going to have social distancing. Uh, you're going to have signs all over the place. Health will be, uh, something that temperature checks, temperature checks, you know, the whole thing, Pritchard checks. Uh, and even if you want to hold meetings in your old conference rooms, because of social distancing, other people will have to dial in using their laptops. So you're going to have what I call a distributed meeting. Anyway, you're not going to have everyone at the same time. So the idea that we're going to return to our old cultural norms, we need to abandon and learn how to create and maintain culture, even when we don't see everyone. That's interesting.

Anthony Scaramucci: (17:39)
You you're, you're, you're, you're coming at it from a faith perspective. And I don't mean a religious perspective. I mean, you have to have faith in your people. You have to have faith in yourself and you to inculcate that into everybody. Is that a fair assessment of what you said

Tsedal Neeley: (17:54)
Yes. And faith in your people, uh, that have proven that they can do this for over a year. Uh, and in the remote environment, I always find myself quoting Ernest Hemingway, uh, never quoted him this much in my life, but what does he say? How do you know you can trust people or that people are trustworthy by giving them trust? You start with a default of trust.

Speaker 5: (18:20)
You equip, you empower. Yeah. Uh, it's

Anthony Scaramucci: (18:23)
Interesting because it's also, how do you, how do you become powerful it's by giving power away. Okay. That's the irony of it? You know, unfortunately I had one or more conversations like that. See, Darcie's laughing in that other Hollywood square box, because I've had more than one conversation with various people in my short stay in the white house about calm down, share the power, but we didn't go in that direction, but that's a whole other topic. So, and, and, and, and while I'm looking at Darcie, how do you deal with guys like Darcie that are at the water cooler talking resentfully? How do you deal with those types of people? Well, I'm kidding about him obviously. Cause I love him. I'm talking about, you know, how do you deal with the resentful employee?

Tsedal Neeley: (19:10)
You know, if you are the cause of that resentment, it's not going to bode well. So you deal with that resentful employee by meeting people, halfway, you, you, you talked about power and I love to hear from, uh, John as well, because he represents an age group. That's been struggling, uh, a good deal that we should all care about in just a moment. But this, this thing is when you have up to 81 or 87% of your workforce, wanting to retain some form of remote virtual work who holds the power, really who holds the power.

Anthony Scaramucci: (19:50)
We want hearts and minds. Yes.

Anthony Scaramucci: (19:53)
I I'm a big believer in delegation and creating autonomy. So I'm I'm for the openness. But I also believe that we've got to mix it up a little bit together once in a while. And so I'm hoping to get to that compromise. We're going to let John talk in a second. He's got some tremendous

John Darcie: (20:10)
Lead, good HR meetings.

Anthony Scaramucci: (20:12)
He's got tremendously good millennial, like questions. He'll out stage me here in a moment, but I want to ask about workplace equality initiatives. And I want to ask about issues related to race and progress while we're operating remotely. Is it possible impossible? What do you say to people when they say, geez, I'm searching for more diversity. I want to create more inclusion, but I don't, I don't have my office, uh, together. Is that an issue or not an issue? Tell me what you think their professor.

Tsedal Neeley: (20:45)
Yes. So the topic of equity is incredibly important, especially as we are mapping out the future of our work and our workforce. And there are a couple of ways of thinking about it. One is, uh, we want to make sure that, uh, we, um, uh, are thoughtful about the people that we're asking to come back in a hybrid environment that we're not looking for low status, or even people who are just super junior, starting out in their workforce and pulling people back, uh, who, uh, are of certain demographic groups. Uh, we need to watch our bias. The other thing is, uh, many organizations have talked about the fact that they have much more diversity in different parts of their organization with people that they deemed to be essential onsite people. And, uh, if you are devising and you talked about mixing it up a hybrid workforce, your onsite essential people need to be able to participate in being able to learn from home and do certain things from home.

Tsedal Neeley: (21:56)
So we need to be very creative in ensuring that everyone gains from the virtues of remote work in terms of inclusion. Uh, one of the things that we need to make sure is that people have the technology that they need to work, uh, that they are in areas where broadband is accessible. Uh, that's one, uh, equipment structural point, but we also need to make sure that we're democratizing conversations that we're pulling people in. If we're in a video conference, call a zoom call, uh, we need to make sure that certain groups are not receding because when you're in the actual communication event, uh, you end up losing a lot of voice. So people have to work extra hard to draw people in as well. So I've talked about structural. I've also talked about the very micro and communication event. Last thing I'll say is that people are beginning to tap diverse talent from outside of their headquartered areas, uh, in order to bring them into their organizations, without asking them to move. This is a competitive advantage. This is an opportunity to seek diversity for more places than we ever have. Once we begin, we begin to detach our talent pool, uh, from, uh, uh, physical locations.

Anthony Scaramucci: (23:24)
It's a really good point. You know, that, you know, you, you, you create more competition, um, for staff, but you're also broadening the staff pool by having all of this remote activity. So hopefully it will lead to higher quality people. So let me turn it over to John Darcie, who is sitting in my office while I'm here as Scott safely in my basement, drinking my Starbucks and John, you know, you may want to turn my kids' pictures a little bit so they can get it, get in the view there.

John Darcie: (23:52)
I think it's, it's emblematic of the times that we're in. So I've obviously been working from home for most of the last year coming into the office sporadically, but when I'm in the office, I struggled to work in a COVID work environment. I don't have my webcam set up on my desktop in the pit that we have here on our office. I have to come in here into Anthony's office and onto his machine to have the capability to operate in the way that people normally do. I'm almost feel handcuffed when I'm at the office because of the environment that, that most people are working in still, which is a remote work environment. So I'm trying to retrofit my workspace slowly in my office to meet sort of the capabilities that I'm able to achieve from home. And I think Anthony has experienced that as well, coming into the office, which he's done periodically, uh, is that he's got a state-of-the-art studio in his basement, which you have as well. Uh, professor, you talked about how all the Harvard faculty has multiple cameras and virtual backgrounds and everything set up, uh, for a remote teaching environment. And it's almost, it's jarring in a way to come back to the old way of doing things because we feel, uh, like, you know, we, we sort of went into the future in terms of our capabilities, uh, that we're able to achieve from home. That's incredible.

Tsedal Neeley: (25:01)
That's really incredible. This is very, very true in that we've set up super advanced home offices and our work environments are not set up this way. And what about the commuted? W co can

Anthony Scaramucci: (25:15)
You say a word about it? No, I would say

John Darcie: (25:18)
It's jarring in some ways, you know, again, I've been coming in a couple of days a week, uh, over the course of the last several months on and off. Um, but yeah, it's jarring, you know, I think before you got used to two and a half hours of commuting, probably every day is what I have in my life. I live on long island. I commute into Midtown Manhattan, and I think my commute relative to some of my colleagues is actually less. Um, so you talk about two and a half, three hours a day commuting when you're used to waking up and being able to start your day, as soon as you get out of bed and, and end it, you know, at the end of the day, without having to commute home, you know, it is jarring to sit there on the train and the subway and everything to go through that process, to get into an office where you do feel somewhat handcuffed in a lot of ways.

John Darcie: (26:00)
And so I think going forward, you know, a lot of people talk about the hybrid work-life balance, where you're able to come into the office when you need to and work remotely in your state-of-the-art home office. When you need to, if I were designing the future of my workplace, that's what I would probably choose where it's also mentally healthy to be able to spend more time with your family when you need to and things like that. But, um, you know, I do think that I sort of fall somewhere in between that old school thinking, and we've got to get everyone back in so we can really look over them and make sure they're doing what they're supposed to be doing. And the new school of, you know, just go out there and, and trust that everyone blindly is doing the things that they're supposed to be doing at home.

Tsedal Neeley: (26:39)
You know, John, uh, I'll add to your, thank you sharing by the way, this is incredibly valuable because it provides insight into the lived experience of coming back and what that's like. Uh, Microsoft recently did a major survey in looking at people's experiences and behaviors through, you know, all the data they collect, uh, and they surveyed some 30,000 people, uh, and part of what they are learning as well is people are saying that they're saving money, uh, from the commute that every day you buy coffee, you have lunch. So there's been a lot of savings for a lot of people as well, uh, in the last, uh, in the, in the last year. But the, the, the part that I wanted to highlight too, is people want, like Anthony mentioned to be in person for the bonding, for the culture, for the connection. Uh, it's not just, uh, to monitor people's work. Behaviors is just, you want to see, you want to connect, but if you go in the office and no one's there, or two, three people are there, it's not going to be like, it used to be. So connection has to be, uh, really created in a more intentional way.

Anthony Scaramucci: (27:53)
What are you love? Yeah,

John Darcie: (27:55)
I think one of the great parts of your book is you, you go into critical and concrete steps that people can take, um, you know, best practices, both for organizations and for individuals in terms of maximizing productivity and maintaining culture in a remote work environment. So what are some of those best practices? Let's start from an organizational perspective. If somebody is looking to really optimize this remote remote work environment, and they want to maybe go to a remote work environment long-term and may I point out the two of the most valuable private companies on the planet? One being Stripe is now a hundred billion dollar company. They have emphasized a remote workforce, and they have one of the most global engineering workforces of any company in the world and Coinbase, which is set to start trading lives, uh, on the NASDAQ exchange, probably at about a hundred to $150 billion valuation. Doesn't have a headquarters. They've basically committed themselves to saying we're a fully distributed workforce. So what are some of those best practices that you think some of those companies that have done it? Well,

Tsedal Neeley: (28:55)
Yes. Yes. Um, so first Anthony you're right. Uh, here's better questions. I'm just kidding. Um, so here's, here's, uh, the thing, the, the, the first thing is, um,

Anthony Scaramucci: (29:06)
I'm stopping my video just

Anthony Scaramucci: (29:10)
Because

Anthony Scaramucci: (29:12)
All of my confirmed fears and insecurities have been proven true by professor Neil. Let me just turn the video off as we're doing this. That's that's really, that's really funny. Yeah. Well, he does have better questions and by the way, he's a star, he's a star. So I like, that's why I like teasing him. I mean, come on. It's a, it's a Jenner. It's a generational struggle over here. Neely. Let's go help out your fellow, baby boomer. Okay.

Tsedal Neeley: (29:37)
I see, I see that John is a star and I'm trying to you to retain him. Okay.

Anthony Scaramucci: (29:42)
Thank you. Thank you. All right. Let me pay attention.

Anthony Scaramucci: (29:45)
Let me put the volume up higher than hold on. So,

Tsedal Neeley: (29:50)
Um, I think you won my heart when you referenced my book, John, let's just, uh, so listen, here's the deal. The very first thing to do is to make sure you survey your organization and your workforce anonymously to understand true and real preferences. Because once you do that, then you can look at what jobs, what tasks, what functions can actually be remote and how remote can those be. And in some organizations we need to really look at what is the optimal level of fluidity that the organization can bear. So you mentioned a couple of companies, Dropbox and others are not declaring themselves as your moat. First companies, Zillow notice they're all tech companies, um, and Twitter and others are saying that people can autonomy mostly choose to go remote, or if not, they can come in. This is one of the important conditions of an effective remote workforce is that people have choice.

Tsedal Neeley: (30:56)
This is why I worry about forcing people in the other thing. Uh, John is that we need to make sure that people have the right competencies, uh, managers and leaders need to know how to lead virtually it's different. It's not the same set of things. There's some very natural, but detrimental aspect of virtuality that people have to manage very intentionally. Similarly, everyone needs to better understand how to use all of the digital tools to be effective, uh, at work. What do I mean by digital tools, anywhere from email to, uh, enterprise wide software systems to video conferencing, how do we use them? When do we use them? Because there's a phenomenon called tech exhaustion tech exhaustion, which is about cognitive overload, because people have just been using technology nilly, Willy. There's actually very systematic ways of doing those. Those are all the things that are important. And then finally, some of the large companies are bringing in chief remote officers into their C-suite, uh, in order to manage the large workforces or their highly distributed workforces. This is where the question of culture comes in as well. I'll pause it.

John Darcie: (32:14)
Let's go to the individual. You know, I think we've all experienced zoom, fatigue. You know, a lot of companies are going to zoom free Fridays, you know, to get people off of staring into the screen, you know, uh, as they've done for most of the week. Um, so, but I think zoom also has the benefit of, I used to do so many conference calls, right, where I would be on the line. There was a faceless person I was talking to on the other end. And during the work from home period, I've actually gotten to know some of these people better through zoom because I'm seeing their face. And I'm having, before we even start a conversation about, you know, whether it be a sponsorship for our conferences or, you know, whether it's capital raising that we're doing, I'm sitting there looking into the face of people around the world that I didn't necessarily wasn't necessarily able to do that at scale before. So what are some of the best practices for people to leverage the technology that's at their disposal, but also to avoid the, you know, the, the technological burnout that people experience when you have high volume of zooming going on?

Tsedal Neeley: (33:10)
Yes, let me first begin by saying that zoom fatigue should not exist. Once you learn some of the best practices related to digital digital tools. Like we should not have zoom fatigue, it should go away and we call it zoom fatigue. You know, Eric Yon has endorsed the book. So I won't call it a zoom fatigue. I'm going to call a tech exhaustion because you can have the same problem with, with other, uh, tools, but here's the thing. You use the right technology for the right task, for the right goals. Not everything requires live or what we call synchronous communication. Some things are actually much better for it to be used in an asynchronous communication mode. For example, if we need to process very complex information, the last thing you want to do is call a zoom meeting or a Microsoft teams meeting and have people listen to some terribly complex, uh, information.

Tsedal Neeley: (34:09)
It's better to email that information and have people asynchronously absorb that information and internalize it. So two dimensions that I will mention, uh, when it comes to digital tools, one is synchronicity, should it be synchronous or asynchronous? The other dimension is, should it be lean media or rich media, lean media includes things like Google docs or email. They don't convey just like you mentioned, John, um, uh, variety of expressions. They don't convey, uh, emotionality. They don't convey context, but not every communication requires that rich communication does. So you can imagine a two by two, which is actually in the book where certain activities work really well, depending on whether you want it to be synchronous, asynchronous lean, or, uh, or, or rich, not everything requires rich and synchronous, which wa, which is what a video conferencing is. The other thing is meetings are too long. For some reason, meetings have gotten longer in the last year. They need to get shorter. Yeah. You

John Darcie: (35:20)
Know, it's difficult because we try to maintain that SkyBridge, the TA the type of engagement that we have at regular meetings and in-person interactions that manifest itself in the form of frequent, you know, large-scale, uh, conference calls, but at the same time, it potentially detracts from productivity and, and things like that. So it's an interesting balance that we're trying to strike, and I'm sure that many others are trying to strike as well. I don't want to talk about loneliness. So I have the great fortune of having a beautiful wife, three beautiful kids. And so during the pandemic, I have enjoyed spending time with them and not felt some of that, you know, level of loneliness that I think a lot of people have felt that are a little bit more isolated with that being said, you know, I haven't been able to nurture a lot of my friendships the same way, uh, you know, with, with my extended family or my friends, the way I normally would.

John Darcie: (36:09)
And again, going back to those people that are even more isolated, you know, you can zoom as much as you want, or you can go on Microsoft teams as much as you want, but it maybe doesn't replicate, uh, the level of social interaction that's healthy, uh, for human beings to have. Is that true? How can we nest, how could we potentially use technology to replicate, uh, some of that social interaction in a way that eliminates some of those feelings of loneliness and how in general do we maintain our mental health in a way, you know, our humans are hardwired, I think in a lot of ways for some level of social interaction. So how do you find that balance in a digital world? That's, that's mentally healthy from a social perspective

Tsedal Neeley: (36:47)
Problem. Uh, and in fact, uh, I call it poor professional isolation. Uh, millennials have struggled in the last 13 months with isolation, uh, and especially if they're not necessarily, uh, um, with others in a household or their back into their intergenerational homes, just feeling isolated, uh, and kind of excluded from the activities that, uh, make them feel connected to others. It's a massive problem. And in fact, uh, us surgeon general, Vivek Murthy, and I had a conversation about this. It was a NASDAQ podcast where we talked both of us, because he thinks a lot about this topics, a mental health issue. Um, so you cannot think about replicating what you do in an in-person, uh, into a, a virtual environment. You have to think about these things differently, and you have to think about them, uh, through, uh, multiple means. So the VEC actually talked about how even a 10, 15 minute phone call, uh, can nourish us in extraordinary ways, rather than zero.

Tsedal Neeley: (38:01)
I believe that organizations did they have a responsibility, particularly if people are engaged in profesh, professional work outside of their organization, to make sure that people feel connected to others in the organization, meaning you actually want to pair people up to work together on projects, create teams when in the past it could have been achieved through individuals. You, you need to check in on people more. The Gardner group conducted a survey several months ago and found that percent of managers never checked in on people not to even to say, how are you, how are you doing so you have to make sure you're building in micro moments, uh, in, uh, for example, a regular meeting, uh, of 60 minutes, 10% of it is spent on checking in, connecting at the top of the hour, six, seven minutes. You pair people up and you have them working together. You do all of these virtual, uh, activities and including learning, training, doing learning that are interactive together. Another powerful way of breaking the isolation. So we have to do things outside of being taskmasters to make sure that people are connecting with one another. That's part of our,

John Darcie: (39:22)
So I want to talk about the future. So right now we're going through this sort of the beginning phase of what I think is a transition back into somewhat of a hybrid environment where you start to see some organizations like SkyBridge, like Goldman Sachs and others pushing their workers to come back to the office. As soon as may, you have a lot of companies talking about the fall, they're going to encourage people to start coming back. But I want to talk about, let's say 2030, or, you know, almost a decade down the line. How can you reimagine the world in a way using things like remote work and digital tools that you write about in the book? What does our world look like? And how can we reimagine our society more broadly in a way that leverages remote work to make the planet thrive, to make human beings thrive? You know, w what is the future of work really look like in 2030, if we were to get an a time machine,

Tsedal Neeley: (40:10)
John, this is a dissertation topic. I think you might have to take it up. Um, it's a very good and important question. I strongly believe that the last 13 months has not only accelerated the virtualization of work, but it's accelerated, everyone's technological advancements. Every organization had to leap forward when it comes to technology. What I think is right behind us, which is why I think we need to get this hybrid virtual, right? It's not going to go away. We need to learn how to do it. We need to take a leap of faith that we need to experiment. We need to lead, not in terms of fear and anxiety, but opportunity and, uh, scale. And, uh, the digital revolution is right behind us. And what do I mean by that data machine learning, artificial intelligence, personalization, matching building, online communities and building networks of people.

Tsedal Neeley: (41:12)
That's what I perceive based on everything that we know and all the acceleration that we see that, um, uh, that work is going to shift in extraordinary ways. We're going to have AI bots and agents who we're collaborating with. We're worried about building connections with other people. We're going to have AI agents working with us and institutions are going to use bots to practice, to have people practice negotiation skills. 2030 is quite to look very different. And I think 20, 20, 20, 21 is preparing us for it. And those who do will leap forward, and those who don't will move slowly at their peril.

John Darcie: (42:00)
I would love to hear you, uh, do an entire podcast on that subject matter, because I think it's fascinating. Like you talked about AI, there's a lot of different views on what it's going to do to society. I think there's some people that think it's going to displace a massive number of jobs in a way that we're going to have to find new ways of connecting with each other of adding value, uh, to society and just rethink our place in the world. And I think that's a fascinating point that, uh, that the pandemic sort of gave us a preview of that world. I want to ask you one more sort of big picture macro question. I'd also like to get Anthony back in here just for some final remarks on everything we've talked about, but what is one innovation or product, you know, I don't necessarily want you to feel like you're having to shell for, for one software solution or something, but what's one innovation you think has the potential to most markedly transform the workplace.

Tsedal Neeley: (42:51)
Ooh, one innovation, one product

John Darcie: (42:55)
As a teleconferencing. Is it something like slack, that's a, you know, asynchronous collaborative tool or, or what are things that you've seen, uh, people experiment with that you think have the potential to create sort of new paradigm in terms of how we work? Because I think email is an example of something that's so archaic and, uh, it creates so much stress and anxiety. You know, that ping that comes in through email, that I think there's much more effective ways to collaborate. I'm just curious if you've observed anything that you think is highly innovative, that's disrupt existing system. So

Tsedal Neeley: (43:27)
My answer is going to be different. It's not about the technology, by the way, I get about 10 emails a day, we've got a new innovation. Would you talk to us? Would

Anthony Scaramucci: (43:36)
You look at it? It's hard

Tsedal Neeley: (43:39)
To sort through them. And they're, I cannot tell you how many people are working on different things right now. And I don't think that's where the innovation is going to be. The innovation is going to be in our behaviors and how we use them. The number of technologies and their proliferation is not going to go down. It's actually going to go up, but we need to develop digital first mindsets and think about scale and think about augmenting everything that we do through the technology that's currently present. So I don't even see people using present technologies effectively and to scale, to connect, to do work, uh, in smart, intelligent ways. I would begin there because what you don't want to add, John is more technology, uh, in our world. There's so many of them how we use them and how we strategize around them is what we really need to innovate around. This is my true belief,

John Darcie: (44:38)
Right? Anthony, you want to chime in with any follow-up questions before we let [inaudible]?

Anthony Scaramucci: (44:43)
Well, listen, I could listen to you all day, professor. I mean, the thought the thoughts are, uh, right in the wheelhouse of where everybody needs to be. Uh, I want to thank you for joining. Um, I think the future of work is going to be very different over the next five or 10 years, but you're going to have a lot to say about it. And so, uh, I'm looking forward, looking forward to following up with you. And since we praise John Dorsey, I'm very grateful that we're in the month of April and not December because he be counting the coins. You know what I'm saying? As a bonus, right? So the good news is I can get his head back into the right space, hopefully over the next six months. So listen, John I'm teasing you he's professor Neely. He gets fan mail. Okay. Does he really? Yes,

Anthony Scaramucci: (45:30)
He gets fan. I love this.

Anthony Scaramucci: (45:35)
Please send me some fan mail, please. I mean,

Anthony Scaramucci: (45:38)
It was a real, it was a

John Darcie: (45:39)
Real, a breaking point in our relationship professor when I started getting fan mail. Cause listen,

Tsedal Neeley: (45:45)
You're a superstar and that's really obvious. I'm so thrilled to have spent this time with you, Anthony. Uh, please let go a little bit, trust a little bit, join, join the revolution.

Anthony Scaramucci: (45:56)
Uh, and uh, and I think you'll be happy.

Anthony Scaramucci: (45:59)
I think you said some very meaningful things. And I'll say to all my old fashioned friends out there that got raised in the seventies, uh, we have to embrace the future. And I think that you've made a very big statement today about how to do that. And I'm, I'm looking forward to pushing this out to as many people as possible. I want to thank you for coming

Tsedal Neeley: (46:18)
On. Thank you so much. Bye Jake.

John Darcie: (46:22)
And thank you everybody who tuned into today's salt talk. We think these topics as professor Neily alluded to this is sort of the beginning of a new world. I think there's pre COVID the pre COVID world and there's a post COVID world. And the people that think that we're going back to the old ways, I think are mistaken. And I think that people that are preparing for the future are the ones that are going to Excel. A lot of the companies that we mentioned that are already embracing remote work and all the tools that you need to make that work productive and mentally healthy for your workforce. So please spread the word about this salt talk and all of our salt talks, which we think are, are very important to educate people about different things that are going on, but just a reminder, if you missed any part of this talk or any of our previous talks, you can access them all on our website@sault.org backslash talks, instead of doing virtual conferences, which we also also think are an ineffective delivery method for, for thought leadership.

John Darcie: (47:11)
We've created this webinar series just to allow on-demand resources for people to consume them on their own time and at their own pace. And whenever they feel compelled to watch a video or listen to a podcast. So, uh, we look forward to a lot of people consuming. This one we're also on social media on Twitter is where we're most active salt conference. We're also on Facebook, LinkedIn and Instagram as well. And on behalf of Anthony and the entire salt team, I want to thank you again, professor Nila for joining us and signing off for today. We hope to see you back here again, soon on salt talks.

Brett Tejpaul: Coinbase IPO & Institutionalization of Crypto | SALT Talks #206

“I think Coinbase’s public listing is a moment of validation for the crypto industry and it should help fuel further adoption.”

Brett Tejpaul is the head of institutional sales at Coinbase, a leading company in the digital asset space that recently went public.

Coinbase is known for its role as one of the most prominent retail crypto trading platforms, but it is continuing to grow as the go-to solution for institutional investors getting into the digital asset space. Coinbase’s public listing marked another inflection point in cryptocurrency’s growth. With Coinbase’s public listing comes greater trust, transparency and security alongside its top tier trading platform. This has been key to attracting the continuing migration of institutional investors. “I think Coinbase’s public listing is a moment of validation for the crypto industry and it should help fuel further adoption.”

The key advancement in the crypto space is custody. The ability to buy and sell was always limited by the lack of options to store the digital assets safely and securely. “Custody was the linchpin- having a qualified regulated custodian. There are lots of ways to buy and sell, but if you can’t store it safely, it becomes really difficult.”

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Brett Tejpaul.jpeg

Brett Tejpaul

Head of Institutional Sales, Trading, Custody & Prime Services

Coinbase

MODERATOR

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darcie: (00:07)
Hello everyone. And welcome back to salt talks. My name is John Darcie. I'm the managing director of salt, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance technology and public policy. Salt talks are a digital interview series with leading investors, creators, and thinkers. And our goal on these salt talks the same as our goal at our salt conferences, which we're excited to resume here in September of 2021. And if you're watching, we hope you can make it to that in-person event, but there'll also be options to participate virtually. But our goal on these talks and the goal at our conferences as well is to provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future. And if you've been tuning into salt talks over the past year or so, you've known that we've done a series of salt talks on the digital asset space, but we also cover a through the traditional finance ecosystem as well.

John Darcie: (00:59)
Uh, big banks, hedge funds institutions, and our guest today sort of blends those two worlds. Uh, his name is Brett Taiji, Paul. He is the head of institutional sales trading custody and prime services at Coinbase, which is, uh, as you likely know, the leading company in the digital asset space recently went public by a direct listing. Uh, Brett joined Coinbase in April of 2020 after a 25 year career in the financial industry. 1.0 as he calls it at, uh, JP Morgan initially. And then most recently at Barclays, uh, he's an experienced builder in financial services, working with both institutional clients and FinTech companies, uh, at Coinbase, he's working to expand the institutional client base, build out the coverage team, introduce new features and services that institutional investors expect and educate the institutional community about crypto as an asset class and its role within a diversified portfolio.

John Darcie: (01:52)
And that's part of a mission that we share at SkyBridge, uh, with what Brett is doing over there at Coinbase. It, his most recent role at Barclays, he was the global head of sales. Uh, he'd developed large teams and incubated multiple business lines in that role. Now he pioneered the digital role across sales and trading, adopting new technologies and transforming existing platforms, including the creation of a digital bank prototype. So that's sort of step fully into the digital asset world was a natural step for Brett. Um, you know, as he joined Coinbase again early in 2020, uh, I'm hosting today's talk. So again, I am a managing director of salt and also a director of business development at SkyBridge. Uh, if you're watching this, you probably know that SkyBridge has substantial investments into Bitcoin. Uh, one of those institutions that's jumped on board, uh, in late 2020 in our case.

John Darcie: (02:41)
Uh, but excited to be hosting the talk here with you today, Brett, the first question I want to ask is about your background. So again, you joined Coinbase in April of 2020 to help lead the institutional side of the business at that time. Uh, Bitcoin was only about $7,000 a coin. It hadn't engaged in this sort of Supercycle that we're in the midst of today as we, but why did you decide to ultimately make that leap? You're obviously sort of straddling FinTech and the financial system 1.0 over there at Barclays, but what gave you sort of the aha moment or the Eureka moment to say, you know, what, it's time to make that jump fully into digital assets?

Brett Tejpaul: (03:15)
Uh, I became quite vocal about the fact that I thought that towards the end of my 17 years at Barclays, that technology was finally going to disrupt the trading floor. And so, uh, I wanted to do something about it and I coordinated that digital role. Uh, I was trying to help Barclays look to the outside world instead of building everything, sort of buying it and importing outside technology and then some early success with that. But the more success I have, the more conviction, um, I had before looking, um, in anticipation of, I think, uh, banking and finance, really being, uh, fundamentally disruptive. I looked at, um, opening an OTC trading desk, uh, in, in June of 18 and concluded at the time for an OTC, uh, crypto desk and concluded at the time that the infrastructure wasn't really there to support, uh, the sort of scale of trading I thought we would have. And, and also in a quite sort of regulatory heavy environment. But if you fast forward two years and took a second look at the crypto space, and I was amazed to see that the infrastructure I think largely had been solved for. So, um, when, when, when I then said, well, w w what's next? And if, uh, if I had this sort of super high conviction, you know, view on both cryptocurrencies and digital assets, Coinbase was the only place to consider.

John Darcie: (04:32)
Well, it's certainly, uh, been an interesting period from the time you joined to today. Uh, you know, Bitcoin has gone from today, we're trading around 50,000 from around $7,000 a coin. I'm sure it's been a interesting journey for you to say the least, but Coinbase, I think is known, uh, in the public sphere more for its retail crypto trading business. So it's the dominant platform in the U S where retail, crypto trading across a variety of different crypto assets, but it also has a very robust institutional side of the business, which you help lead. What does a Coinbase offer to the institutional community? What does that institutional business look like and what are reasons why as people are evaluating the different options out there in the marketplace, they should look at using Coinbase

Brett Tejpaul: (05:17)
Level four institutions is we have a prime platform that ties together. What I think is the best trading platform, uh, along with a qualified custodian. And then all of the services that one would expect from a prime broker, like, like financing. And so we also have an exchange which is operated separately. Um, but I'm trying to raise the awareness, uh, that, you know, Coinbase can be the go-to place for institutions. When I, when I think through sort of the top 10, if you like reasons why, um, institutions should consider coming to Coinbase, I want to begin with trust. It's super important. So that's why, you know, that that is at the top. And so trust transparency, uh, to where we're now a public company. And so last week in the back, we had had one of the world's larger hedge funds doing diligence on us for the past sort of five, six months.

Brett Tejpaul: (06:08)
And at the end of the talks and said, you know, we're really excited that you're going to be a public outbreak because we don't want to be beholden to, um, sort of private companies in this space. And we think that public companies are held to a higher standard. So I think that's important. Uh, three is we're regulated. So we operate as a New York trust company. We're fiduciary under your banking law, and we're a qualified custodian under the investment advisors act we're money transmitter. So that means we have to adhere to your KYC and AML for, uh, we're secure. So the first line of defense is, uh, of course our security protocols, and we've got an unblemished track record in that respect. And the second line of defense is the largest insurance policy in the industry, uh, five, uh, product. So, um, we have by far, I think the best trading platform, we can go more into detail why I think that's the case. Um, but I think it's second to that. Well, we're

John Darcie: (07:02)
Customers of that platform. So I can't argue with you on that one, but yeah.

Brett Tejpaul: (07:05)
Yup. Thanks. We're also the largest custodian in the world. So we have a quarter trillion of assets on platform and roughly 50% of that 122 million is now institutional when I started, um, it was, it was actually less than 3 billion. Um, and then C uh, on, on the product side, it's really the prime brokers of all solutions. So it's important that every single thing that we do stands on its own. So you can pick and choose, you can buy here and store there. But I think I'm finding to experience that institutions. I want a cluster seamless offering six, and this is a good one. It's the largest and most sophisticated investors in the world have chosen us. And so we have w w where you have a long list of companies that are announcing that they've come into this space. We've been fortunate to win exclusive mandates and most in pretty much all the cases.

Brett Tejpaul: (07:52)
And the second point I'd say is there's a long list of companies that have made pretty significant investments that have yet to disclose, uh, their, their participation. So I just, um, highlight the fact that we're, we can be trusted with confidential information seven, and we'll talk more about this later is we are a business, the business crypto infrastructure provider. So if you're a bank and you don't have native crypto capabilities, if you're a FinTech platform, if you're a challenger bank, uh, you can come to us and ask us to act as a sub custodian in the bank space, uh, and an execution platform where you can do an integration or a white labeling. So that whole, we should talk more about, um, the fact that we can white label solutions. Yeah. Do you,

John Darcie: (08:37)
Do you, uh, are you able to disclose different platforms that you guys help power on the B2B infrastructure side?

Brett Tejpaul: (08:44)
Uh, so fine. Revolut are two normal names that I think a lot of people would, would recognize, but we have about in my sort of finance lingo, we have 50 introducing brokers in the platform. So I think the, the high level of years that, um, institutions want to, um, find bulk crypto directly, they can come to us for that. Um, if instead they want to give their end customers the ability to participate in, in crypto. Uh, we can facilitate that three more points we've got,

John Darcie: (09:13)
And that top 10, I know we only got through six or seven, so,

Brett Tejpaul: (09:18)
So we had the biggest balance sheet in the world and we, and we, we were in this space rather. Um, but we put it to work on behalf of clients. And so we provide true credit intermediation. So talk more about that later as well, nine, I think we're the best long-term partner. So, so what I've learned is, uh, this space moves fast. Uh, and so, you know, generic Bitcoin custody today might be something else, you know, in, in the future. And I think you want to make a long-term investment and a partner that's going to evolve and stay in the forefront of innovation than 10, I know, long time getting here and make it easy. So, so w we've got all the available resources, um, to, to handhold, uh, to give white glove service, to give education. Um, and so we're, we're, we're really enthusiastic about welcoming, you know, new players in the space.

John Darcie: (10:03)
Yeah, man, I think, again, for us, we are customers of your trading platform. And I think for us, as we were, uh, diving into the Bitcoin ecosystem, we were evaluating different players and we were pitched certain things by different groups. We didn't at the time when we were starting our due diligence process, we weren't fully aware of the institutional capabilities at Coinbase. And so it's been an eyeopening journey for us to see just what you guys have built, the scale of what you built. And then also the most important questions we get from our customers are around trust security and insurance, as you mentioned, the largest insurance policy, some of the best cyber security capabilities, and the fact that you're a public company, the level of scrutiny that goes into all of that is also enhanced relative to some other companies that are private in the space. I want to talk about, uh, Bitcoin and crypto, you know, you, I think, as we mentioned in the open at, uh, Barclays, you helped pioneer a digital bank prototype. Um, and you, you started doing a lot of due diligence on the asset class in 2017, 2018, as many people did as it sort of burst into the public consciousness with that first rally, uh, to about $20,000. I'm talking about Bitcoin in that regard, but how in your view has the cryptocurrency market evolved and how is it different today than it was in 2017, 2018?

Brett Tejpaul: (11:19)
So if I were a ton of change, but if I put my finger on just one thing and point to it, I'd say custody, so custody and settlement, I think they're, they're really important things. And so, um, I think that was the linchpin, um, and, and having a, a regulated, qualified custodian. So now that that's there, there were lots of different ways that you can buy. Um, there's lots of different ways you can sell. You can do interesting things that you can run bots. You can do tons of different things to participate in buying and selling, but if you can't store it safely, and if he can't, you know, sort of have the complexity of storing your own sort of private and attracted away, it becomes really, really difficult. So I think the Coinbase custody solution that abstracts away, a lot of the difficulty in engaging with digital assets, I think was the breakthrough. Now on top of that, we can layer on the trading platform financing and all the things that people that trade asset classes like equities and FX and others that have grown accustomed to. Right.

John Darcie: (12:17)
And in terms of the institutionalization of the asset class, some that we've talked about, we think it's going to be a big price driver. And eventually a dampener of volatility is more strong longterm hands start buying Bitcoin and other digital assets. But from what segments of the institutional market, are you seeing the biggest uptake in interest? You talked about the fact that you guys are discreet. You don't have to necessarily name names, although there's been leaks over the last six to 12 months about, you know, big insurance companies, endowments, um, that, that have bought into Bitcoin. It's not publicly disclosing it, but from what segments of that institutional world, are you seeing the most interest?

Brett Tejpaul: (12:55)
So, uh, early adopters were pensions and endowments. Um, they, I would say in some sense long been in this space, but there's a, there's a, uh, an increasingly larger deployment of capital coming from them. Uh, when I think about, uh, hedge funds in particular macro hedge funds and multi-strat hedge funds. And so probably the biggest new entrance over the course of the past nine months has been macro funds really scaling up their activity. Um, I've also seen some equity funds and credit funds have starting to enter the space along the systematic, uh, as well. Um, three, I would say you've seen it reported that us banks are looking to get into this space, perhaps searching for sub custodial and execution partners. And so I think that banks have concluded that digital assets are a part of their future, and I'm seeing an uptick in activity.

Brett Tejpaul: (13:45)
And I anticipate the fact that we'll have some large us banks trading cryptocurrency before the end of the year, um, corporates. So corporates, uh, you've seen the big splash by MSDR, um, Michael Saylor sort of ways that you're out there. And we've had a lot of fast followers. When I think about corporates, they're there that arrive at our doorstep. Um, they talk about it in two ways. One is the hard-headed CFO or treasurer who, um, has an obligation to consider what's owned in treasury, and it's exploring the idea of owning a pretty significant chunk of Bitcoin. So that's, that's one way, um, that, I mean, corporates, the other way is a corporate who says, you know what, I think this digital economy is really going to happen. I need to position my firm to participate in commerce, uh, payroll, and as a consequence of conducting those activities in the north wind up having a bit of Bitcoin and, or other cryptocurrencies.

Brett Tejpaul: (14:39)
And so we're not gonna make a giant splash, uh, in terms of our treasury allocation, but we do want to position the firm to, to, uh, to participate in this space going forward. So, uh, corporates who have I left out. So family offices and foundations have been, you know, involved and, you know, increasingly increasingly more insurance companies. So I had a pretty memorable, um, experience with an insurance company and it's top leadership a couple of weeks ago where they actually started the conversations that of asking me what we could offer. They said, we thought through, uh, you know, 10 or 11 different use cases, uh, for stable coin. And so we fought about, you know, accepting, uh, premiums, uh, in USB-C we're talking about, um, paying out after cap on events and USB-C, and a whole myriad of other sort of use cases around, around, around payments. And then of course, we've got that large sort of last bucket, which is introducing brokers. And I scope in, you know, FinTech platforms and PayPals, and, um, you know, all sorts of, uh, brokerages and challenger banks, et cetera. And that's the world, the world that I'm, I'm also running hard after we're there, where I hope that they'll adopt, uh, some of the, the infrastructure that we can provide them that the power of those flows. Yeah. I mean,

John Darcie: (15:54)
You've seen places like PayPal, Venmo so far introduced it as they sort of build out their, build out their suite, you know, full suite of financial services. Are there others that you're in contact with that you think that all these neobank digital banks and even traditional banks are going to eventually all onboard a crypto capability? Or do you think that's several years down

Brett Tejpaul: (16:15)
The line, it feels like a trend, doesn't it? I mean, it's happening across that as I rattled through those different clients segments, there's not really a segment that I think is sleeping. I mean, I think I didn't get to asset managers yet, but, you know, we haven't seen, um, we haven't seen a Wellington, a Vanguard, you know, enter the space, but who knows? Um, I feel like they're slow moving giants, but, uh, the space also is lacking, um, from my perspective, it's lacking, um, a full suite of, of competing sort of options, um, for not just being able to we'll get the ETFs and hopefully one day soon or they're coming. But I do also think that one thing that can create a structured box. So if they have sort of cat downsides and custom payouts, I think is also coming soon. So let's

John Darcie: (17:01)
Talk about that ETF question. So there's, there's a variety of different use our sort of base case view based on conversations we've had, um, with, with former officials and, you know, not necessarily people that are directly involved in decision making process, but who have knowledge of the way these type of organizations and departments in government think, and who think that maybe we'll get an ETF by the end of 2021, late 20, 21 is sort of our base case. Do you agree with that? And what are the implications, if we do get the approval of an ETF or several ETFs, uh, on the business at Coinbase and what will be continue to be the differentiator that you guys offer in terms of people that are looking to transact in this?

Brett Tejpaul: (17:40)
I don't have any insight, uh, in terms of whether it will be this year or next year, or even the year after. Um, I do feel the marketplace, you know, wants one and I feel like the backdrop, or at least the, um, I think it's constructive. And so when I reflect about the sort of cascade of events that happen this year, um, which in part were led by, um, you know, the OCC allowing, you know, lifting the prohibition on banks to custody, uh, digital assets and allowing, you know, PayPal and non-depository institutions to the space. I think it sort of points in the right direction. So I can't, I can't be more specific on timing, but I do, I do think that that will come and, you know, w w w with respect to what happens at that moment, I, I think it's just another way for, for mass adoption, um, and participation in the space. You know, it's kind of easy to buy a ticker. Um, if you don't open a coin Coinbase, which by the way is super easy as well. Yeah.

John Darcie: (18:41)
And the interesting thing that we've seen, we saw Jay Clayton, the former sec chairman joined the board of one river asset management, a significant player in the digital asset space. You saw Brian Banks, uh, joined Binance as the head of their us business, as they try to build out a us business, or you're seeing all these former regulators jump into the digital asset space, we find it a hard to believe that those types of people would be joining us ecosystem if there wasn't some constructive level of regulation coming down the pike. Um, but also relating to the institutional market. Are there certain crypto assets that are dominating your conversations with these institutions? Is it 95% Bitcoin? And the other 5% is a theory. Um, and, and, uh, you know, in any other players in the space, is it a hundred percent Bitcoin? Is it more of a mix what's that breakdown, uh, that you're having a conversations with institutions about crypto

Brett Tejpaul: (19:35)
Assets? I would say a year ago, I started, it was almost, you know, 99% Bitcoin for institutions to the professional last year has shifted to more 80 20, between, um, you know, the base case for Bitcoin and Ethereum. And then I'd say, uh, some of the macro funds have gone, uh, outside of the, the two main liquid and are probably invested in a handful of other currencies. And so there's a pretty quick progression. I think once someone, you know, typically it tends to be Bitcoin as their first investment, and then it feels like, uh, if you're in, this is on the fastball. Yeah, no,

John Darcie: (20:14)
That makes a lot of sense. We talked about institutions. So an interesting question that I asked several guests that come on the show are sovereign governments. So there's been reports that Tamasic, which is a sovereign wealth fund based in Singapore is potentially already been buying Bitcoin. And it's on its a balance sheet, or is it in its portfolio and suggestion by sort of Bitcoin maximalists that and ultimate, uh, late part of the cycle. The Supercycle that we're in is when sovereign governments think that, uh, they need to own Bitcoin on their own balance sheets as a, as a long-term store of value. Have you seen any interest from sovereign governments or do you think that's somewhere that we're headed?

Brett Tejpaul: (20:55)
So 8 85 different central banks around the world are doing some sort of exploratory work on having digital currencies? And so, uh, I think you can read a little bit, uh, into the psyche of sovereigns through that, through that. Um, I, I do think it's a natural next progression for sovereigns that are heavily invested in fascial resources or national license of any, of any type to really begin to consider, you know, Bitcoin as a long-term store value. So I think it's, um, in scope and, um, I wouldn't be surprised if, um, we had sovereign participation sometime soon. So you

John Darcie: (21:31)
Were at Barclays before that you were at JP Morgan, as we've talked about, uh, in this episode you experienced what financial system, 1.0, looked like, and now you're on the other side of it where you, you started to sort of blend those two worlds in, in the later stages of your time at Barclays, but now you're fully in the digital asset world from your seat today, how much is traditional finance and finance 1.0 going to be disrupted by defy by crypto assets, by blockchain technology. And what does that ecosystem ultimately look like? Let's go say five to 10 years down the line. Are those banks going to be fully disintermediated? And they're going to have to either merge or acquire with digital asset companies or, or be left behind what does that world look like? If you look five, 10 years down the road,

Brett Tejpaul: (22:17)
That's a big question. Um, the, the person with the crystal ball, crystal ball at the aquarium basis, our founder, Brian Armstrong. So my mom, I couldn't really see out into the future maybe six months, maybe 18 months at best. Uh, so he's really the best person to talk through [inaudible]. But before I answer the question, I just want to widen the aperture a little bit and I want to move it away from Bitcoin Ethereum. And I want to talk about digital assets. So if you talk about visual assets, let me do that. I begin to think about tokenization of financial and physical assets, right? And so we're talking about, uh, engaging with assets other than those two, including stable coins. And when, when you do that, all of a sudden, you sort of set the expectation to say, okay, well, well, hang on a second. You've got banks that are, they do make massive payments.

Brett Tejpaul: (23:07)
They move money around the world. They trade management, spirochetes, they trade physical spirits, they do all these different things. And so I think it's just a natural and obvious progression for them to be able to transact and digital assets. I don't think it's about one disintermediating, the other, I think right now we're in the, we're in this sort of parabolic growth base of, um, having all sorts of institutions have the native, uh, capability to actually transact conduct, business, commerce payments, and other forms of lending, um, with digital assets. And so I think that's where we're headed. I'm I'm minded to as many partnerships with banks, private banks, you know, market counterparty is everyone's at the grow, what we call it, the crypto economy. Right.

John Darcie: (23:54)
Um, and, and people are going to hear some nice barking from my dog in the background here. So just don't mind that. But, uh, do you think the Coinbase, to the extent you're able to talk about the direct listing, but that serve as, as validation for the digital assets world, how do you think in a post Coinbase being public world, uh, people are looking at digital assets any differently than they were

Brett Tejpaul: (24:16)
Before. I certainly hope it's another important step of, of establishing the crypto economy and having, uh, you know, validation for this as an asset class. And so, I mean, everything, everything that I see, um, and it's not just the direct public lesson by itself, it's, it's everything else. Uh, and, and so again, if I reflect about the who's, who, and visual assets these days and cryptocurrencies, it's, it's sort of everyone. Um, and so, yes, I think it's a moment of validation and, uh, for, for the industry, um, and it, it should just help to fuel further adoption. Couple

John Darcie: (24:51)
More questions before we let you go. Um, we'll talk more about that B2B crypto infrastructure. How are you guys, uh, when did that side of the business start? How are you supporting those, uh, institutions as they build out their crypto capabilities and how big a part of that, uh, of the Coinbase business do you think that'll be, uh, in, in the coming years?

Brett Tejpaul: (25:11)
So w we we've been powering what, again, my, my terminology here, introducing brokers, which is anyone for whom, um, we help their end customers participate in so, you know, white label and, or, and, or other things. So I think over time it will be an increasing focus, but it's important to have, you know, each person or institution have the ability to hold crypto directly through us and also find, you know, other other avenues. And so it's a pretty bespoke integration that earliest can be. Uh, and so you'll have firms that may want to design the specific customer experience they want for their, for their end client, and we can figure out interesting ways to help them achieve it. And so I think over time, it will be an increasing focus, uh, for, for the firm.

John Darcie: (25:56)
Um, in terms of the, the details around everything you guys do on the prime, prime broking side. Um, could you go more in depth about all the different types of services you offer, um, you know, going a little more inside baseball here for, you know, maybe macro funds that, uh, that, that might be interested in using

Brett Tejpaul: (26:13)
Coinbase. Yeah, sure. So, uh, let's talk a little bit about the trig platform, because I think it's pretty differentiated. So we haven't, let's start with, we had a smart order routing. We have algorithmic execution. I think everyone pretty much knows what those are. Um, I would define this by saying that we're agency only on the institutional platform. So that is to say, um, if you're trading through our prime broker, I don't have a competing, uh, market maker desk, uh, which that felt so pure pure agency, um, because institutions, um, can trade through our trading platform with these phenomenally a phenomenal volume. You, you, you have an API integration and the fixed integration, you can have it on your desktop. You could call by NTC desk. So lots of different ways to initiate trading. Uh, when that happens, um, when I said, we, we have a big balance sheet and we're putting it to work on behalf of the customer.

Brett Tejpaul: (27:03)
So what that means is, um, when someone's doing their first trade, that might wire, uh, a billion dollars, but, you know, over to us, that's sitting in a bank account. And then if they're initiating a big, um, um, um, purchase of let's say, Bitcoin, what happens is they're, they're actually directing the working capital from our training empathy. And so it's that, it's that working capital, that's going out to 12 different venues and getting the best possible price of a Bitcoin in that millisecond. And so that's where I talk about the intermediation. So if by chance, there was something that went wrong operationally or otherwise on that, on someone else's exchange at the time, then, then that, that, uh, and, and institutional client wouldn't suffer loss. So, so that's a really, really big deal. And I think it's differentiator differentiating factor. There are, there are other smart order router platforms, but none of them, which I think before the protection that we can do in the way that I just described, couple more things there we traded in, on, on the bus and all the exchanges.

Brett Tejpaul: (28:02)
And so, you know, that like the more you trade less your fees are, and we w we pass that straight through to our end clients. And so that's super important. And then we give, uh, post-trade transparency. And so you'll see, and you've experienced it. It's pretty cool. You got a post-trade report, um, and you'll see exactly how the algos performed and what the, all the mini fills were. Um, another differentiating factor is, you know, how do you get billion dollar multi-billion dollar trades done in a marketplace, which is still trade pretty much like retail. And so the answer to that is, again, the trade platform. So we, we, we can, uh, be thoughtful. So if you were to engage in and, and, and want to buy, you know, a billion dollars on a, on a Friday afternoon, we we'd have a huddle with my trading team.

Brett Tejpaul: (28:46)
We'd go through it. We look at market conditions. We make some recommendations on how to layer in some T ops. We might consider putting some dip catchers in there. Uh, so if we get this big move that we saw on Saturday night, we can be optimistic and sort of fill our boots at the time. And so, and then we, we began to sort of work around the clock 24 7. And so every four to six hours, we'd get a report, we'd do a settlement. We would assess the market conditions. We go faster, we go slower. It's actually, um, I know you've seen it in action, but some of your years haven't, but it's, it's literally poetry in motion, my partner. It's fascinating.

John Darcie: (29:20)
Yeah. And as you mentioned, even, I think in Asia, uh, from people we've talked to on chain analysis, there's a lot more leverage in the system among Bitcoin buyers in Asia. So you see the market oftentimes move overnight more significantly than it does during regular trading hours in the U S and I think that's one of the things that's fascinating around Bitcoin is that the idea that financial markets, uh, only trade during certain hours is if you think about it a little bit strange, uh, you know, the fact that there's not constant price discovery taking place in markets. And, uh, you know, you guys obviously do a good job of staying plugged in around the clock to get the best prices for your customers in terms of, yeah, go ahead.

Brett Tejpaul: (30:01)
Let's just say, you know, Allison strange, um, is so pivoting from the, you know, the market opens the market closes, it's running a 24 7 trading operation in perpetuity. And so, uh, you mentioned Eric theaters, uh, earlier from one river. He actually did a, uh, a sort of test at us and a memorable moment where he wanted to see if it really was, you know, 24 7. And, uh, he, he put it in a giant sort of a series of orders and requests in on Thanksgiving morning. So when people were traveling to see, and anyway, long story short there, um, we, we, we, we did delivery, got everything done, and they sort of tested the limits of what 24 7 really meant. Right?

John Darcie: (30:37)
Yeah. Bitcoin never sleeps. Eric Peters is a brilliant guy. You know, we, we always compile sort of a handful of the best, uh, written materials around Bitcoin and his initial letter to investors as I, I think in the hall of fame of, of top, uh, macro cases for Bitcoin. So I would encourage everybody to read that last question I have for you, what stage, you know, I hate using the tired baseball analogy of what inning are we in? Are we in the third inning, the bottom of the second, whatever it may be, but you talked about how there's, there's still a large number of institutions that are either performing due diligence, or are currently invested in Bitcoin that we're not even aware of. What, what level of penetration and saturation within the institutional world do you expect to see, let's say in the next 12 to 18 months, relative to where we are now, are we, are we seeing a ton of people that are currently invested and we're seeing more people that are in the due diligence phase? Are we seeing more people that are now just becoming crypto curious, where do you think things are going to move in the next year to year and a half?

Brett Tejpaul: (31:36)
So, so if I reflect on 25 years of bringing new asset classes to institutional investors, and I think about exotic rates, I think about credit rated, as I think about, you know, uh, leveraged structured products. And I think about the cycle of adoption, it seems like it's about three to five years, right? If you're going full speed. And so it starts with nice players, it works its way up the medium-sized unabashedly there's adoption. What happened in this past year is just phenomenal. So what happened is we sort of skipped a few years and we went straight to the fifth year.

John Darcie: (32:06)
When does the clock start that it started in 2017, that a start on April 20th, 2020 when Brett page Paul joined Coinbase.

Brett Tejpaul: (32:14)
And I, I don't know where to start it because there's a lot of, I owe a lot to everyone that came before, but for me to set this wonderful stage, a wonderful business up, but all I can tell you is that it's, it's gone from fringe players. That sort of what I described that first kind of two years in my mind on adoption, straight to the, almost the sort of fourth and fifth, so sort of a year where you've full-scale adoption. And so right now I don't see anything that's going to come in between. Um, you know, that doesn't prevent that full full-scale adoption from happening. I mean, usually again, you have clusters of activity here. It's hedge funds, it's alternative asset managers and family offices, but it's not banks. And it's, you know, it's, it's not the biggest bonds, but now everyone's, um, you know, looking at it and w w and minded, I think, to deploy capital in the space. And so, I don't know, um, it, it just feels like if we continue at this pace, we're going to see adoption full-scale adoption sooner than we think. Right?

John Darcie: (33:15)
Well, Brett, it's been a pleasure to have you here on salt talks. Uh, you know, we were very happy customers and partners of Coinbase look forward to having you guys also involved in our salt conference in September as well. Um, you know, helping to institutionalize the asset class and educate people that still might be on the skeptical end of the spectrum, which to be honest with you, I was for several years, but as we've dug deeper into it, it's sort of hard to argue with the inevitability of, uh, digital assets and just the sort of reframing of our entire financial system. But thanks so much for joining

Brett Tejpaul: (33:46)
Us. Thanks, John. That's awesome. And thank

John Darcie: (33:49)
You everybody for tuning into today's salt. Talk with Brett page Paul from Coinbase. Again, we love educating people in our community, either that already know a lot about digital assets or just getting started on that intellectual journey, just to remind you if you missed any part of this talk or any of our previous talks, including a whole series we've done probably 20 or 30 now on the digital asset space, you can access them on our website@sault.org backslash talks and on our YouTube channel, which is called salt tube. Uh, we're also on social media on Twitter is where we're most active at salt conference, but we're also on LinkedIn, Instagram, and Facebook. If you're so inclined to follow us, and please spread the word again about these salt talks, especially, I think it's important to educate people on what's happening in the digital asset space. If you have a, an institution that's becoming crypto curious, uh, we'll, we'll feel free to pass along. Brett's email to you, and he can answer all your questions on that front. Uh, but on behalf of the entire salt production team here behind the scenes, uh, as well as myself, uh, signing off here from salt talkSPORT sport today, we hope to see you back here again soon.

Disruptive Venture Structures | SALT Talks #205

“There are more unicorns nowadays and the potential upside is so much bigger, so despite the COVID headwinds in 2020, venture exits were $290B.”

Trang Nguyen and Alex Bangash are co-founders of TI Platform Management, a venture capital investment firm focused on investing in innovative and disruptive companies.

Venture has rapidly grown into the largest asset class among institutional investors. A decade ago venture made up only 5% of portfolios, but now are central to investing strategy as companies have taken off in fields such as AI, crypto and cloud technologies. The upside for growth has increased exponentially. “There are more unicorns nowadays and the potential upside is so much bigger, so despite the COVID headwinds in 2020, venture exits were $290B.”

Venture opportunities are more diffuse today, so it’s more important to build better venture structures. Ten years from now, we will see venture exits continue to grow in size where a $10 million investment could exit at $500 billion.

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKERS

Trang Nguyen.jpeg

Trang Nguyen

Co-Founder

TI Platform Management

Alex Bangash.jpeg

Alex Bangash

Co-Founder & Managing Partner

TI Platform Management

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darcie: (00:08)
Hello everyone. And welcome back to salt talks. My name is John Darcie. I'm the managing director of salt, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance technology and public policy. Salt talks are a digital interview series that we started in 2020 with leading investors, creators and thinkers. And our goal on these salt talks is the same as our goal at our salt conferences, which is to provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future. And we're very excited today to welcome Trang Winn and Alex Bangash to salt talks. Trang is the co-founder of TEI platform management, a venture capital firm that backs ambitious entrepreneurs creating the world's most disruptive venture structures founded in 2015 T platform management uses its $775 million plus in AUM to invest in today's most innovative companies and tomorrow's category defining leaders since its inception TEI platform has deployed nearly $475 million to numerous emerging venture funds backed 47 funds founded by 56 entrepreneurs and enabled entrepreneurs to raise over $1 billion from LPs.

John Darcie: (01:28)
The firm has also invested directly in more than 35 companies. Trang is the former executive member of trusted insight where she managed products and grew the institutional community to more than 35,000 limited partners. Alex is also the co-founder and managing director of Tia platform fund a platform for backing founders, building innovative venture structures. Same as Trang. He's the co-founder and chairman of trusted insight. He's a founding investor in funds, such as initialized founders funds, uh, Saster among others and an early investor in companies such as true pill and standard cognition hosting today's talk and reprising her role as a guest moderator here on salt talks is our great friend. Sarah Koontz. Sarah is the founder and managing director of Cleo capital, a venture capital firm. And now I'll turn it over to Sarah for the interview. And I might chime in here, there with a few questions, uh, as I see fit Sarah, but you take it away. Awesome.

Sarah Kunst: (02:31)
Thank you so much, John. Um, and thank you so much Tang and Alex for being here, we are super excited to talk and, and hear more about ti. So, um, you know, John did a great job, but I always love to hear it directly from you. So, so trying, why don't we start with you and then we'll go to Alex would, would love to hear kind of your bio's and how you ended up, uh, you know, starting, starting TEI.

Trang Nguyen: (02:56)
Sure. Um, thank you so much or the virus, uh, today. So, uh, Tia platform management is the platform for entrepreneurs that John mentioned. Um, so we had intrepreneurs as they, em, back on the next phase update journeys, uh, whether it means starting another companies or setting up with disruptive venture platforms, such as venture studio and two platforms. So we spend a lot of time at T platform management's brainstorm with entrepreneurs about different Novo venture structures, um, that they can be valid. And in many cases for, you know, some case, we act as the founding partners of these venture firms, um, uh, Tia platform management. I also really enjoy building the team. So one of the key things that I want to highlight is that we are one of the most diverse venture firms in the industry today. So we have a global team members that is more than 50% female and 90% minority, including toady percent black and 7% Latino. Um, just in the last 12 months, um, we hit back for black entrepreneurs, um, and these, uh, you know, amazing operators and entrepreneurs like, like our south Sarah. So diversity has always been, um, uh, important to the ways that, you know, I'll foam operate and evaluate opportunities. So that's just a little bit about platform management and I told it to Alex to talk more about what we do and he's like, well, and also why we stopped the phone.

Alex Bangash: (04:37)
Great. Well, thank you so much. Um, um, for having me here set great to great to be. And thank you. Thank you, John, for the introduction. Um, so, um, I think, um, uh, as Chang mentioned, there are, you know, there are many, many amazing firms, some invest with, um, founders and, uh, uh, directly some invest in their, um, in their, uh, in funds. Um, we, on the other hand, um, we like to think we're trying to re-imagine venture capital. Uh, we're saying, how can we be partners of founders, um, through their journey? So, um, founders will start building a single company. Then sometimes they will build multiple companies as a studio. Sometimes they will build a platform such as Sarah has built and, you know, so we are saying, how can we be they're, they're their partners, we're reimagining, um, when share capital. And, um, and that kind of goes very, uh, with my background as an engineer.

Alex Bangash: (05:42)
So I have no financial training. Um, I started as an engineer at, uh, uh, at bell labs. Um, and, um, from there, um, when I was in business school, after starting an optical networking company, I started an advisory service and one of the key things that, so basically I was a scout for LPs. And one of my key observation is that the best, the best venture capitalists were the founders and those building great firms. So that's how I got involved with, I was lucky to get involved with the likes of founder span and Excel, India and others in their early days. Um, uh, including now you're talking about Coinbase. Um, I remember Gary tan, uh, investing, uh, leading the seed round of Coinbase, uh, at, uh, um, by sea demo day. Um, and so, uh, you know, when, when, when Coinbase was giving out, uh, uh, I think it wasn't a full Bitcoin, but some fractional Bitcoin, um, to, to folks. So, um, so today, um, no, you know, we partner with entrepreneurs and, and help them, um, help them create the next generation firms, uh, firms, which will, um, which we'll be defining. And I think our big value add is while there are many, many great investors, these investors also have to build their firms and we help them with the structures such as studios, uh, platforms, um, API based funds and help them think about those structures and help them, uh, uh, both, uh, start partners and capital partners in, in their, in their journey. Yeah, that,

Sarah Kunst: (07:28)
That's awesome. Um, and you've been great, a great partner, uh, to, to me and Cleo capital, and I know many others and, and huge congrats on, on, uh, the Coinbase IPO. I know you're in a lot of things that, that, uh, do do some crypto. So, uh, you know, that is maybe a great kind of jumping off point to, into the next question, which is, you know, what's, what's going on in the market right now. What are you seeing in terms of, of current market trends? Um, you know, trying to touch on diversity, you, you touched on, on crypto, both of those are big trends, but, but maybe talk through kind of all the different trends you're seeing right now in the market and, and what you think they mean, uh, for, for other investors who are, are looking to invest into startups or into venture funds,

Alex Bangash: (08:14)
You know, I would say, um, so, you know, I'm, um, I've been to multiple cycles. I saw the web one dot or cycle. I saw the web, you know, web cycle and maybe we're in the web three dot or right. The distributed web with crypto and, or the parallel web. And I would say that, um, with, you know, kind of every, there's always a boom and bust cycle, right. There's always a boom and bust cycle. And I did, it's no question that we are in the boom cycle right now where, you know, and nobody could have predicted it as well. Um, COVID has accelerated, um, it has accelerated AI. It has accelerated crypto, right? It has accelerated, it literally has accelerated industry, which, which were shunned by, by, um, w VCs, you know, I'm not going to name the VCs, but, um, you know, about a decade ago, um, some, some of the most prominent kind of Midas list list out of support, Hey, we do everything except health tech and FinTech because they're regulated industries.

Alex Bangash: (09:23)
And today some of the biggest opportunities are in ad tech and FinTech, right. And they they've massively accelerated. Um, now, you know, you can see from the, uh, of course not just the telehealth boom, but then the kind of the fintechs, um, eating, eating the shared, I mean, what is the square square and, uh, uh, square and Stripe and Coinbase will be bigger, you know, or are already bigger than, than Goldman Sachs. So, yeah, I think there is, there is this, there is this trend, um, well off people now finally, um, finally, uh, believing, but then there are some other things other trends and venture has become, you know, venture has become the largest asset class amongst institutional investors. So if you go back to, you know, kind of traditional investors, um, uh, almost a decade ago, or when you're used to be 5% of the portfolio, um, and, um, you know, there were, there were some kind of, um, heads of private equity who hadn't even invested in venture today because of this massive acceleration of gains and also reinvestment of, um, our, for some institutional investors, uh, tech and, uh, you know, and venture multi-state venture is Turkey in some cases, even bigger percentage of their portfolio.

Alex Bangash: (10:46)
So I think, I think those are, those are some, some of the trends, you know, that we're seeing, we're also seeing this, you know, huge bifurcation of, right. So, you know, uh, about, um, again, 15 years ago there were, um, venture, it was the, the, the conventional knowledge was venture is not scalable, you know, and, uh, you know, you'll have the benchmark say in the plaintiff backends with their small, small funds, then the goes, this is a cottage industry. It's a, it's a mentorship model and you can't scale it and you can't institutionalize it now, you know, the largest private equity fund is a venture fund, you know, and, um, the, um, some of the VC funds are raising bigger funds than some of the mid-market buyout funds. So, so I think there's this Institute position at the top. Um, and maybe, you know, in 20 10, 20 years, the biggest, um, you know, the biggest asset managers, aren't going to be Blackstone, Carlyle, you know, invest in applied or SoftBank, Sequoia, Andreessen, et cetera, as they, they, they, they create assets.

Alex Bangash: (11:55)
Um, but on the more on the, you know, on the flip side, um, as these funds are getting bigger and bigger, they are getting farther away from the entrepreneurs. And that's why, you know, we partnered with you, Sarah, because you have this unique opportunity of, of, uh, of catering to those entrepreneurs at the earlier stage, you know, and that's why we're doubling down on formation, um, things like studios and, and seed funds and pre-seed funds, um, uh, where, uh, you know, and platforms where they are now taking the place where, um, uh, you know, kind of a traditional VC's used to do. So, um, I left, I stopped there. I know I, through quite a few different, different things I've trained. I don't know if you want to add, I think

Trang Nguyen: (12:39)
Just to add to Alex boy, so number one, we clearly see that, you know, venture capital itself is going through a rapid period of transformation and innovation, right? So, you know, as Alex mentioned, we see that, you know, as there's a boom of disruptive venture models, such as, you know, studio and, you know, as a platform models like Cleo capital, for example, right. And you know, this, um, evolution is actually, uh, this evolution is actually, uh, empowered by COVID-19 and remote work. Right. Uh, we see that, you know, chatty, she VC firms, you know, B, B side look beyond cat-like traditional VC hub. They start to develop a new way for capturing startup, right. So, you know, you see a lot of VC lawn spot, right. Um, you know, while spouse models and so on, because, you know, it's just very difficult for them, um, to fight, you know, innovation in their model and to what Alex mentioned, you know, they are further away from entrepreneurship as you know, they based Lasher upon site and invest in later shapes around finance.

Trang Nguyen: (13:52)
So, um, we definitely see, you know, the rise in venture studio. Um, we saw, you know, platforms. So to give you an example, when we first invest in, um, you know, when we started the film in 2013, I think like we can count, you know, into, um, a little handful of studio venture, maybe two of them, right. Uh, today, you know, we had by over 10 venture studio, right. Um, so venture studio is very, you know, [inaudible] and more active, but it's also very attractive to a lot of, um, introductional investor, right? So number one, the LPs, they can get access in the same type of, uh, Syria entrepreneurs, such as Elon Musk or Quito, Tio. Um, and also they, they gain access to, um, a portfolio of set up, uh, founded by Syria and entrepreneurs and, you know, the same raise money from Excel and Sequoia.

Trang Nguyen: (14:53)
So in a way, LPs can get directly to the, uh, you know, entrepreneurs without paying extra layer of fee and carry. Uh, secondly, you know, the studio venture is very disruptive in a way he's actually enabled the LPs to own more equity of the companies, uh, until series B and C, right? So as capital become planted, and as the childish venture firms have raised billions of dollars and involve investment on later stage around finance, you know, these models, uh, like studio, uh, platforms, um, become very attractive to yuppies because, you know, it's helped them with, you know, go out to exposure to early stage ventures. Right. The second chance that, you know, we see is that, you know, uh, which Alex had mentioned these, that, you know, funds have raised laughter fun side and part of that reason because they ma unicorns now they, and, you know, as a potential upside when so much bigger.

Trang Nguyen: (15:56)
Right. Um, so despite the headwinds of COVID-19, uh, in 2020, um, the venture exit in the U S is sale is 290 billion, right? So you, Hey, you know, Airbnb go public, uh, um, 100 million new, Hey, snowflake, the 33 B and then door dash at 72 V and then so on. Um, so, you know, 2020 is not just an outliner, but if you look back, you know, just in the past three, um, uh, last year numbers, like the last few years, like there's more IPO than, um, the entire decade preceding two times 18, right? So, you know, when, um, a venture fund or a venture managers or C fund managers, when they raise a fund, they should factor in number one day more unicorns nowaday. So, you know, and they also, the potential exit side is much Lasher. And the last site also has increased significantly, right.

Trang Nguyen: (16:56)
Um, just in the last five years of vital sign and also ECI valuation has increased by at least 50%. Right. We see a lot of companies went to YC demo day, and now, you know, after YC raised 20 million, um, see, first of all, it's finance or, you know, all companies that come out why sees that raise 200 million valuation. So that's kind of like the change that we see and, you know, I think like as an institutional investor, we, uh, we should be open to seed funds raising lash of one side. And at the same time, uh, seed managers also, um, should factor into a cow potential Lasher estate and, you know, raise proper funding aside for follow-on. Yeah,

Sarah Kunst: (17:39)
Yeah, no, that, that, that's totally right. And, and, you know, we, we see a lot of that in the market, I think right now that, you know, companies are going from zero to multi-billion dollar evaluations incredibly quickly and, and often, um, you know, the, the earliest investors are the ones who stand to make the most money if they have enough to, to keep doubling down and, and really be driven by conviction. I totally agree. Um, so, you know, talk a little bit about when you talk about seed funds, not, not all seed funds are emerging manager funds, but there certainly are a lot of emerging managers in NTI has been incredibly supportive of, of many very early emerging managers. And it seems to be paying off really well for you. So we would love to hear more about, um, some of the emerging managers that you've backed and, and kind of, who've gone on to do great things, as well as sort of how you think about, uh, investing in emerging managers, um, you know, for limited partners for, for larger institutional investors, um, what should they be thinking about? Because it feels like most, uh, larger institutional investors are just not adding very many emerging manager positions right now.

Alex Bangash: (18:45)
So, so I think the really important thing to think about, and, you know, and, you know, we, we ha had you as well on the ascent, uh, thinking is like when, and when, when an emerging manager gets off, because there is so much noise in the market, right? There's so many different companies they're no longer, only at only in San Francisco. Um, you know, take, take crypto for instance, they're global companies they could be coming from NSS is coming from India. Um, you know, they're, they're, um, they're coming from different markets and the founders are, are, are global. Um, and this was true before pre COVID. Now it's also true post COVID. So I think what, what is, what is really most important and really hard to build is to build the firm to build a differentiated firm, right? So there are good investors like there were before, but being a good investor is less important today, you know, because you, because the, the deal flow is so diffused and there's still, you know, you could be part of the Stanford network or part of a, you know, a part of a, um, squared alum, alumni group, or Uber alumni group.

Alex Bangash: (20:00)
And you get some sort of deal flow, but it's so diffused right now that you need to kind of build a better mousetrap. And I think that's has been our defining, um, TCIs that we want people to build better, uh, um, better venture funds, structurally. That doesn't mean there aren't that you can't build a good friendship, um, by just a single person saying, look, I'm going to be really thoughtful. I'm going to be really disciplined. And I have a great network, you know, that was true. That was true for, you know, not going to name, name, the firms and name the great partners, but, you know, it was true from say, w you know, in the, in the nineties and till 2005, when everybody sought a particular partner today, that's not the, you know, the, you know, in, in crypto people will want different partners in SAS, they will want different partners, um, depending on yeah.

Alex Bangash: (20:54)
The seed. And then, and then they have built, you know, they've built different farms. So I think that's, what's really, really important for us is who's building something really unique. Um, you know, and that's why, you know, we, we were lucky to partner with you and Sarah, because we think you're building something, I think unique it's, it's at the inception stage, but, you know, I mean, it's, as, you know, it takes a village, it takes a lot, and it takes a very long times. So, um, sometimes that's why we, you know, represent patient long-term capital. Um, and we're not looking for some dislocation or not, not looking for some, some person who's just like, oh, that person is a great brand. And they have, they're a great board member. Of course, those people will do very well, but that's obvious the non, the non-obvious is who's building like, uh, you know, who's building a great studio, no, where they will, they will build a company who's building, you know, Visalia is great, but, you know, by sees the beginning, just like, you know, Google or Facebook was great, but then there was WhatsApp and YouTube when, you know, a tech talk and they'll always be there.

Alex Bangash: (22:05)
They'll always be the kind of the next big thing, you know, and that's what we are, what we're looking for. And sometimes we're right, and sometimes we're going to be wrong. Um, but w VC is a power log game, you know, um, one of our studios, uh, you know, two years ago made 150,000 investment and it's worth 250 million. So, you know, there's asymmetric returns since that's, if they say metric returns from, from Coinbase and, and, and, um, peer to BNB and all these other companies. And, and what's, what's even more exciting right now is that if you fast forward like this, right now, we are in one of the biggest booms ever. Um, and markets will retrench. You know, there will be a time when people say, what were we thinking? Right. Nobody will be in wanting to invest in anything. Um, but if you, you know, if you kind of fast forward 10 years, the biggest thing, and genetics exits will not be a hundred billion dollars.

Alex Bangash: (23:05)
It might be 500 billion. Right. And so if you had, if you've invested at a 10 million valuation, yeah. That $500 billion company, then you will have the, you know, the, the asymmetric returns. So that's, that's kind of the back that we're making. Those are the types of people that we, that we back and we want to be, we want to be patient, you know, we want to be patient long-term partners in rather than, you know, particular names. We there's a lot of, you know, I was very, very low lucky to get, you know, um, to get my clients into emergence. As far as find, I was very lucky that Krista, I let me hit in his foot, our spine. I was very lucky to the first capita, let me in their first farm. I was very lucky that Steve Anderson at baseline then hit his first one. Like, they're all spectacular farms. I think, you know, after seeing Chris as founder, Sarah was never see a hundred X bond again. And then I think Getty, Dan might do better with his money, you know? So they'll always be someone better, you know?

Trang Nguyen: (24:04)
So I love it. Well, well, hopefully you're,

Sarah Kunst: (24:08)
You're saying that about Cleo capital in a few

Alex Bangash: (24:10)
Years. Exactly. Yeah. We're rooting for you Sarah. 200 X that's our benchmark

Sarah Kunst: (24:20)
Love it. That's amazing. And then, yeah, I would love to hear kind of your, your thoughts on this as well, sort of how you see emerging managers and where you think people should be, you know, should people be putting more money into emerging managers right now? Because it definitely seems like, um, because most people are, so overweighted in venture right now. They're, they're being very slow to add new managers, even though I think, you know, on the startup side, it kind of feels like we're in the early stages of, of sort of, you know, web 3.0 is Alex put it.

Trang Nguyen: (24:50)
Yeah. So, um, I actually think, um, in my opinions, and I think like with the same, with a lot of our LPs and we have one, some of the most sophisticated LPs in venture, I think it's very important that the LPs keep, you know, investing in emerging managers. Right. Um, if you look at the last decade and, you know, we, you know, TIAA platform, we actually looked at the performance of, you know, owners of funds in the last decade, by the Muslim managers own way in almost every single year, you know, the top one all the way he, you know, outperform established fund managers. Right. That's why you can see, you know, with, um, you know, another, you know, managers in Tia platform who had an as a hundred X fund. Right. Um, and then back to my point earlier about, um, a lot of childish, no VC firms has gone on and raise millions in dollars.

Trang Nguyen: (25:44)
Right. And they don't really invest in early stage venture. Right. Um, they actually invest in growth stage and competed with private equity and also hedge fund. So, you know, Chad's, you know, VC firm become grow from. And so the way for an institutional investor to actually, you know, invest in early stage, early stage ventures, actually to emerging managers, right. Because even with a lot of the cop, like early stage ventures that you see before Andreessen, right. You know, they become, you know, growth [inaudible], um, you know, [inaudible], so it's very important for your LPs to continue to invest in emerging managers so that they can hae the Hilti diversification in their portfolio, construction. And pro is that, you know, so children in ventures look salivating over time, right? So a lot of the top managers, 10 years ago, they know no longer as a top managers a day.

Trang Nguyen: (26:45)
And a lot of people, a lot of managers are not in the tier one list. I remember I talked with one of the institutional investor, um, actually just early in the weekend. Um, the lb actually show me the list of the top VC. Um, they, they want to get into, and funny enough several here, right? Incubated and snowflake. And Snope like a snowflake position in Southern Hills actually lashes and Excel on Facebook. But some of you is not in that top tier list. So the heels should be in that top tier list. So there's only children over in terms of generation. So it's important for your LPs to invest in emerging managers, because if you don't invest in the first sec, first one or second plan, you may never really get an opportunity to invest in talent for fun. And last, you know, I think investing in emerging managers is very important because it's the pathway to invest in managers with diverse backgrounds. Why, because women and racial minorities make up by growing proportion of emerging managers. Yeah,

Sarah Kunst: (27:52)
Yeah, no, I, I totally agree. And, and I think, um, a lot of smart people are listening to you on that, and there's a lot more people who need to hear that message. So I love it. Um, you know, we'd love to talk a little bit about rolling funds, um, and w w sort of rolling funds and, and studio models, and sort of all of these things that are not just sort of a, you know, kind of, Hey, we write you a check after you've been around for a year or so. And, you know, we're a two and 20, you know, tenure window venture fund. So we love to hear your thoughts about what's going on in the market. Um, you know, with rolling funds and maybe explain what that is to, to people who are less familiar. And then also, you know, Alex, you mentioned, uh, studio models, what you're seeing there, because it, it feels like there's some fundamental differences in kind of venture itself. Um, not only the kinds of companies they're backing, but, but sort of how the funds themselves are structured. And we'd love to hear kind of your take on some of that.

Alex Bangash: (28:48)
Um, I think these are some of the structural disruptions, right? So if you, if you look at what happened in the late two thousands, um, the, the cost of starting companies went down and you didn't need $5 million to buy a server and buy Oracle software, you know, um, to, to host a website. Um, so that gave rise to the micro VC super angels and by VC, right? So I think we're going to another, um, you know, even more transformative, um, uh, kind of, kind of movement today. And, and that of course has to do with local, no code. It has to do with remote work. Um, now anybody can set up a company anywhere, um, and, and they can build things and they can get funded through, through these, these things. So I think, you know, um, I am not that familiar with, with rolling funds and, and I think they are kind of, uh, you know, they're, they're, um, it, this is, again my opinion.

Alex Bangash: (29:52)
I think they're, they're, um, um, significance, maybe overstated, but I think, you know, um, I can give you a little bit more about, um, you know, I can give you a little more about specs. I think specs are kind of very disruptive. They enabled venture capital, they enabled faster liquidity. And one of the biggest pet peeves of, um, institutional investors about venture was the long hold times. Um, now with respects to those hold times are coming down significantly. Um, and, um, the, you know, there could be, there could be a scenario where these backs, um, you know, uh, replace late stage venture. Now that is a real possibility and specs. We'll also go through the boom and bust cycle. So I think that could be a very, very disruptive as most people have raised these larger funds on the assumptions that these companies are going to stay private eight to 12 years or 13, 14 years.

Alex Bangash: (30:56)
Um, now these companies can go public after four years, three years, you know, what, even six or seven. So I th I think it's disruptive to late stage venture, um, yeah. On, on the early stage side, I think, you know, rolling funds are very significant. Um, we're not focused on that. I think it's harder for institutions she wants to, to play on it as well. So rolling ones are a little like crypto and ICO's and stuff. They're, you know, they're less controllable. Yes. Uh, uh, let's see, let you know, no, not at easy to think and, um, you know, uh, kind, kind of, um, w with crowdfunding. Um, but, but, um, what has actually happened is, um, today and Trang Trang alluded to this a little bit, um, is, uh, today founders can build a portfolio. So the cost of companies has gone down so much.

Alex Bangash: (31:51)
And with local, no code, you actually don't need a founder. Um, doesn't need to go to a VC for one to one company, you know, before a founder only could go to a VC with one company now, um, with, with all, you know, with cloud and remote work and local ordinal code and distribution tools, the founder's name. Well, um, yeah, you know, I'm going to spend half a million dollars testing out five ideas, and, you know, I don't know, I want to launch three out of five or two out of five, and I don't. So, so that's, that's kind of a unique opportunity. And then you're also seeing the same founders now, you know, you're seeing a lot of part-time funds, which was not there, and that's of course rolling funds a contributor to that. Right. Um, but I, I don't think it's the sole contributor.

Alex Bangash: (32:45)
There are VCs who will give you money. There are some MPS, or non-traditional NPS, they'll give you money that some family office, they say, yeah, well, we'll give this person money on the side because they have great deal flow while they build their companies. So, you know, um, that, that has created a, a lot of opportunity on the, on the early stage. Um, and it's also created a lot of noise. So, you know, um, I think that, of course, there'll be many, many, many, many, many winners. Um, but there will be some, some, you know, some next generation firms that will get really good at him. So, so basically there will be factories of startups, right. So I think there will be factories of startups that build these things. There'll be factories of startups that accelerate, and, and you're seeing that in Y Combinator. I mean, it's unbelievable.

Alex Bangash: (33:37)
Y Combinator does more in one demo day than what some of the w w uh, top VC, you know, some of the best names on Silicon valley have done, you know, um, in, in 20, 25 years. So, you know, they've gotten to that scale and we're going to see, and I think that's the beginning, right? We're going to see other manifestations of that. We're going to see that, and not just an acceleration, but we're going to see that in building. Um, and of course, um, you know, you saw, you saw that with what Mike Spicer did with, with snowflake. I mean, they built the incubator. It's not like the point, however, is the point, however, is that these things are not easily replicated. Right. Um, so, so, you know, it's not easy to build a Y Combinator. It's not easy to build a snowflake. It's really hard. It's not easy to build a Cleo capital. That's why you're doing it, et cetera. So,

Sarah Kunst: (34:32)
Yeah, I agree. It is certainly not easy. And you see a lot of people try and, you know, they sort of put in similar things and they don't get the same results out. And, you know, it's, it's interesting with the Y Combinator is of the world, because there've been so many, um, accelerator programs and so many incubators, and so many of them have, have failed. And, you know, I'm, I'm interested to see, I, you know, if, if, you know, with these studios, with the rolling funds, with the part-time funds, with all of these new models, you know, is it something that, that makes the overall pie bigger, or is it something where, you know, a lot of people fail and there's just sort of one or two quick, you know, breakouts in each category. And so, so it's interesting, but, you know, I personally think that overall it's, it's really positive because, you know, when you look at venture dollars, there were more and more money.

Sarah Kunst: (35:22)
There's more and more money flowing into venture capital, but the vast majority of it flows into the later stages. And, and, you know, the reality is that, that it often seems like really early stage founders are, are a little bit underfunded. And so, you know, would love to hear your thoughts on that. There's a, there's a lot of talk of sort of, there's too much money chasing too few few deals. And, and do you feel that's true, particularly on the early stage side, or do you think there's a lot more space for more great companies to be built?

Alex Bangash: (35:53)
I think there's a lot more space for great companies to be built, but I always, and this is what we do in both with funds and with companies, you know, we like the people who are misunderstood, I would never chase the fund. We always back the underdogs. Uh, we always back to people who are misunderstood, and that doesn't mean that the, you know, kind of the, um, that the top dog, so of the, the most, you know, the kind of the, the, um, the, the people who win the beauty contest won't do well in a lot of cases. They do, but that's not, that's not our DNA, that's not the people we back. Um, and you know, and a lot of times, um, you know, those are the folks that are building something really substantive and it also goes to pricing, right? So, um, the, the, the companies that are, you know, that are really hot, they tend to get overfunded and their pricing is, um, you know, um, is, um, they're, they're fully priced or, you know, priced for perfection.

Alex Bangash: (36:52)
Um, and the, the, the best opportunities are the ones that are, you know, that are a thing. So, you know, not to name names, but actually 18 months ago, um, last year, you know, we had three, three lending companies in our portfolio, and we were like, very concerned, everybody we talked to, they were like, oh, every time there's a change in the credit cycle, the first first companies to go, um, the lending companies just get completely wiped out, right? They have, they get no second chance. And, you know, just a year after that today, I think two out of the three have raised a billion dollars to a billion dollar valuations. Um, and lending is, is, uh, a heart again, it's called buy. Now, BNPs buy now pay later. So it's funny how things that are out of favor will become, become in favor. And, you know, also the, the trick, the trick is to find those, um, you know, those, uh, um, founders who are building substantive companies, not the, not the ones that are building popular companies, and sometimes the C becomes a popularity contest, right? So it's all the heart people in San Francisco. Oh, well, they have this in their portfolio. We need to have a similar company in their portfolio. So, um, unfortunately VC is, you know, VC and LP is not a courage game. It's not a courage of conviction. And that's what we thrive on. You know, we, we like to back the, you know, back managers and companies with the courage of our conviction.

Trang Nguyen: (38:27)
Right. And I agree with Alex on, in terms of there's a lot of space for early stage companies being built and, you know, on the institutional side, really, like if you look at last year to 10 20, the majority of the LPs capital actually go into later stage and, you know, e-stop leaps managers given the uncertainty in the market. Um, but you know, and I think Sadie mentioned about Y Combinator, you know, you know, you see a lot of on salary does come and go and walk. My leader has a brand and network effect. Um, but you know, on the studio venture side, she thinks they space for a lot of studio ventures and they are not competing with each other because, you know, the studio is formed by proven entrepreneurs and, you know, they have factory creating multiple companies. So they, you know, there's more, um, successful and, you know, um, proven in Syria and entrepreneurs, um, you know, we expect to see more studio in the future and that's where a lot of startups can be formed.

Sarah Kunst: (39:33)
Yeah, I agree. I think that there's just, there's so much in front of us when it comes to building awesome companies and, you know, I focus mainly on the us. Um, but, but, you know, as, as Alex, as you mentioned, kind of about the global kind of, you know, rise of so many amazing companies, um, where outside of the U S are you guys excited about right now, where are you looking? Where are you investing? Um, and, and, and where should the rest of us be looking?

Alex Bangash: (40:00)
Yeah. So, you know, the, the, the really exciting thing is that the lines are getting blurred. So we say, well, we can only invest 25% outside the U S so just earlier today, um, we talked with an Indian entrepreneur, um, he he's, he's building a, uh, you know, a company in the blockchain space, the com he, he he's an Indian, he was an India entrepreneur incorporated in Marta, and now has companies headquartered in San Francisco. So, you know, is that an Indian company, is that it is funded by an Indian VC? Is that an Indian company? Is it a European European investment or is it, so these lines are incredibly getting, you know, getting blurred and look at UI path is going to go public. Is that, is that a Romanian startup, or is it, uh, you know, is it a Silicon valley startup? So, and thankfully, so, because that's how it should be, you know, we want to back people with global ambitions, like global ambitions, and why should it be, you know, in, I think most LPs have been trained when they invest in private equity and in Sub-Saharan Africa, it's Sub-Saharan Africa, when they invest in Eastern Europe, it's, it's Eastern Europe, CDPs, then Europe currency risk.

Alex Bangash: (41:17)
When you invest in, um, you know, Eastern European, um, we seek, you know, venture company, they are global, they could be incorporated in Delaware today. We're seeing amazing companies from a SAS company, SAS and infrastructure companies from Chennai India, you know, who would have thought that China is going to be a part of SAS and, and, and developer facing tools. So, so, and, and those companies aren't incorporated in India, they are incorporated in Delaware. So, so that's the point. And you're seeing that in, in, in crypto. And so across the board, I think, you know, amazing, amazing companies coming out of Europe. Um, you know, and then the flip side is also true to the one we were talking with one of our partners and they said, you know, you know, you know what addicts today, the contrarian thing is to invest in Silicon valley because Silicon valley is so out of favor, hardly VCs have left the area.

Alex Bangash: (42:17)
So, you know, I think there will be, there will be innovation coming out of everywhere. Um, uh, you know, um, people serving these different markets and you, you, you know, so, so SAS tools, developer tools, they're global, um, but then sometimes fintechs, you need, you know, in fintechs, you will need fintechs for each geography. You will need them, the neobanks from Brazil car deported over to Southeast Asia, you know, so you will see, see, um, see kind of fintechs geography by geography, and you could build, you know, huge companies in each geography in, in India, in Europe, in Latin, in, in, uh, you know, um, in lending companies and Neo banks and payments companies and insurance companies. So, so I think, um, you know, the regulated industries will be more geography by geography. Um, but you will have see global companies come out of, uh, you know, a lot of, uh, um, uh, um, a lot of geographies in, and you're seeing right, you said, Coupang come out of Korea and, uh, FreshWorks come out of India. And so, so,

Sarah Kunst: (43:31)
So Silicon valley is your favorite new emerging market. That's

Alex Bangash: (43:34)
What I heard. Yeah. If you want to take the country and a contrarian approach right. And say, yeah, you're the most country. And think you can do is invest in Silicon valley. Know

Sarah Kunst: (43:44)
Exactly. No, I, I love the global approach. I think that, you know, that it's so shortsighted to think that, um, you know, where, when you look at where people live and, and, you know, especially the younger generations, uh, where they're concentrated geographically, it feels that there is like a lot more investing to be done, um, in areas outside of the U S and Europe. So I love that. Um, this has been great. Um, do you have any kind of last thoughts for us as we wrap up? What are you most excited about right now in the tech world?

Alex Bangash: (44:18)
Um, you know, um, I, I think, um, I'm just most excited about, you know, how all this will unfold, right? So I don't know whether there will be a bloodbath and I, I, there's always this boom and bust cycles, you know? Um, but what I know is that venture, unlike all these other asset classes, um, you know, we've seen that venture is actually getting bigger and bigger and the big, the big VC funds will do great that emerging managers will grew date. The new models will look great, right. There's room for everyone to grow. Um, and then also, I, I think that, that, um, you know, venture is, what's so exciting is that venture is one of the few places which does well by doing good. Right. So I think we're seeing the resurgence resurgence of kind of, um, um, climate focused funds. And maybe this time they're better, you know, now we're building the infrastructure, we're building the Lego blocks, we're building the developer facing tools. They API is the AC SDKs to, to take on the challenges of, of climate. It's not, you know, the, uh, the, the kind of the climate one Dato, uh, clean tech, uh, uh, you know, investing that we saw. Um, so I think that's, what's most exciting. Um, and it's also been, you know, um, it's also kind of uplifting, like when share is the thing, which is, you know, doing, doing, doing good while doing well. So that's, what's

Trang Nguyen: (45:48)
I think to add to Alex boy, I think, you know, just last year we see, you know, the, um, you know, the exit of snowflake kind of proven out studio motto investing. So, you know, I think like for all of us STI platform, we're very excited about, you know, S more entrepreneurs setting up, you know, new venture structure. We got to enroll in a lot of more, um, you know, Novo structures and, you know, many of them will result in, you know, exceptional returns. So, um, you know, we just spoke with the wonder, well, fund managers last night that, um, create amazing platform like jar south side, um, hope two times 18 vintage fund is already at 8.5 X, and there's a lot of room to grow from there. Yeah. Yeah. That's amazing. That's super exciting. Well, those are very exciting numbers to end on. So thank you guys so much, um, for coming on and hopefully we get to see you at assault conference in person soon as well.

John Darcie: (46:50)
Absolutely. I just got out of the way and let you guys run, cause it was such a good conversation. So, uh, thanks again, Sarah, for introducing us to Alex and Trang and thanks for joining salt talks. And like Sarah said, we were getting back, hopefully the in-person a conference game starting in September in New York. And you're talking about being a contrarian, Alex and investing in Silicon valley innovation. We feel the same way about New York city. You know, New York city has been called dead once or twice. Uh, but, but we're, you know, putting our flag back in the ground here and, uh, we're going to come back with our conferences and, and get, get back into the city and I'm actually in the office today. So it feels good to start getting back to it,

Alex Bangash: (47:28)
But thank you for having us. Thank you. Thank you so much, Sarah. And thank

John Darcie: (47:32)
You everybody for tuning into today's salt. Talk with trying when and Alex Bangash from TEI. Just a reminder. If you missed any part of this talk or any of our previous salt talks, you can access them all on our website. It's salt.org backslash talks, and also on our YouTube channel, which is called salt tube. We're also on social media on Twitter is where we're most active at salt conference, but we're also on LinkedIn, Instagram and Facebook. And please spread the word about these salt talks. Especially if you have a young aspiring technology or venture investor, I would point them to this great conversation here today. They can learn a lot about taking sort of a contrarian mindset and how to find, uh, like Alex and train. We're talking about true entrepreneurs and not just engaging in that popularity contest. That's so often the case in Silicon valley, but on behalf of Sarah, this is John Darcie signing off from salt talks for today. We hope to see you back here against them.

Deena Shakir: Transformative Technologies | SALT Talks #204

“Intersectionality is not only my actual identity, but also very much my career path. Whether it’s the intersection of health and technology, or computational biology and food, it’s very core to my thesis.”

Deena Shakir is a partner at Lux Capital where she invests in transformative technologies. She’s particularly interested in contrarian and underdog founders building digital health companies.

As the daughter of Iraqi immigrants, 9/11 had a profound impact and served as motivation to build bridges between communities through work and service. This included a stint at the US State Department as a Presidential Management Fellow before pursuing a career focused on sustainable economic development. A wide-ranging career has helped establish a deep and interconnected network that plays an important role as a venture capitalist. “Everyone has their superpower they bring to the table… I’m never going to be the smartest person in the room, the most technical or most experienced. My superpower is my ability to connect.”

When identifying start-ups and their founders, it is hugely valuable to find someone who has not only expertise, but also the ability to tell a story. Communicating a company’s mission through a story is vital to sustained success, whether it be fundraising or hiring.

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Deena Shakir.jpeg

Deena Shakir

Partner

Lux Capital

MODERATOR

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darcie: (00:07)
Hello everyone. And welcome back to salt talks. My name is John Darcie. I'm the managing director of salt, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance technology and public policy. Saul talks are a digital interview series that we launched in 2020 with leading investors, creators and thinkers. And our goal on these salt talks is the same as our goal at our salt conferences, which we're excited to resume, uh, in September of 2021. And we hope our guests today will be able to join us at that event. But our goal is to provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future. And we're very excited today to welcome Deena Shakira to salt talks. Deena is a partner at Lux capital, a multistage venture capital firm with around two and a half billion in assets, under management, where she invests in transformative technologies, improving lives and livelihoods she's particularly interested in contrarion and underdog founders, building ambitious companies in digital health and sits on the boards of companies, including H one, all stripes.

John Darcie: (01:14)
And she wrote she's the daughter of Iraqi immigrants, and Dina has had a very non-linear journey into venture capital, always orienting around tech and entrepreneurship with an impact focus prior to joining the lock. She was a partner@googleventuresandledpartnershipsformoonshotproductsatgoogleanddirectedatsocialimpactinvestmentsatgoogle.org. She was a presidential management fellow in the Obama administration where she worked in secretary Clinton's office and the U S aid on program supporting global entrepreneurship, a passionate advocate for diversity inclusion and equity. Deanna is also on the boards of several non-profits. She's a Forbes contributor, a Kauffman fellow, and as a council on foreign relations term member, she lives with her husband and two young children in the San Francisco bay area. But I think she's escaped. Uh, I have three kids as well, so I know how it goes. She's escaped the zoo. That is the household during COVID and is in the Lux offices today. Hosting today's talk is AGA Scaramucci.

John Darcie: (02:11)
Who's going to be increasingly joining us as a host here on salt talks. He's done a few previous interviews. I know we did one with Joe Lonsdale a few weeks ago, AIG, but AIG is the founder and managing partner of the salt fund, which is a new fund that we've launched, leveraging the community and ecosystem that we've built here at salt that's incubating and investing, especially in early stage life sciences oriented companies. So I know a lot of overlap with what we're doing at the salt fund and what Dina does over there at Lux, but, uh, with no further ado, I'll turn it over to you AJ for the interview.

AJ Scaramucci: (02:42)
Thank you, John Dina. So good to be with you. I mean, there's tons of rich things in that background before we dive into your role at locks and, and perhaps some of the investments you've made. I'd love to just contextualize that a bit. How did you get here? Well, how did you get to, to, to Lux capital? Let's start.

Deena Shakir: (03:03)
Yeah, sounds great. Thank you, John and AIG for having me. And that's probably the question I get asked the most, um, just behind it, if you look at my LinkedIn background or my resume, um, it certainly is, uh, nonlinear and non-traditional um, although, uh, I would contend that said there really is no traditional path into this field, you know, for me grew up in the bay area. Um, as you mentioned, John, my parents immigrated from Iraq. Um, my father came to the bay area to complete his residency at Stanford in psychiatry and just fell in love with the bay in the seventies. And so, um, you know, I had a very privileged childhood compared to most of my relatives and that were very, very much informed my identity, especially, you know, being in high school when nine 11 happened and feeling perhaps for the first time in my life, that my hybrid identity as an Iraqi, as a Muslim and as an American, all of a sudden to out it to anyone on the outside seemed at odds.

Deena Shakir: (04:09)
And so that really informed, it informs my career path, my, my educational journey and ultimately my, my goals in life. I wanted to help contribute to a world where that would not happen again. I wanted to sort of do what I had. I've always done when any third culture kid, any child of immigrants has done, which is to build those bridges and to be able to seamlessly transition between worlds and to do that in service of, uh, of impact. And so, uh, went off to the east coast for college. I went to Harvard, um, and, uh, and really thought I was going to do a PhD in anthropology. And I thought academia was going to be the path for me to do that. We studied the middle east, of course, at Harvard studying the middle east meds, you know, reading ancient at Katie and tech and setting Sumerian, Sumerian of philology, because very interesting, but not necessarily what I, what I had in mind.

Deena Shakir: (05:01)
And so I spent summers abroad and, um, and, uh, and then went off to grad school at Georgetown. And so ended up in DC. I graduated in 2008. Uh, in fact, I delivered the commencement address that year and the speaker right after me was that former chairman Ben Bernanki. And, uh, if you go back and look at the footage from that speech, I actually turned around to thank him and he had disappeared. So there was clearly something going on in that summer of 2008. Um, and of course, several, uh, several months later, we, we, you know, we came to see what was happening with the financial crisis, but bring that out because at the time, you know, the class before mine, class of 2007, 1% of Harvard undergrads went into wall street or consulting. It was just the thing you did there, wasn't really a clear path, um, between these sort of this dichotomy of doing well or doing good.

Deena Shakir: (05:55)
So you could go, you know, maybe you could see a doctor or you could be, um, you know, a human rights lawyer, or you could be an academic, or you could do what all the kids did and, you know, make a ton of money. And, um, and, and that's really unfortunate because it took me, you know, over a decade to realize that there is not only a gray area, if you will, that perhaps a more impactful area towards sustainable economic development, uh, in between. Uh, so I was pursuing the academic path and ended up in DC, as I mentioned. And that was a very interesting time, um, for the country, because it was there when Obama, who you may see in the, in the photo here behind me was, uh, elected was inaugurated and then ultimately took office. Um, and while I was in grad school, just, uh, as, as was the case, while I was an undergrad, I was working all the time.

Deena Shakir: (06:45)
I paid for both college and grad school by myself. And I was lucky enough to get an, a number of scholarships, but also was usually working one to three jobs at a time and happened to, um, one of those jobs happen to be as a journalist very briefly. Um, and I was on air, but I did a bilingual, Arabic English news show. I'm not sure if you can tell based on my presence with getting actually, it was very difficult because let's just say, I thought my Arabic was good, but when you ha when you have to do a news show on air and Arabic, that's a whole nother story. So happy to be on air anytime, but please don't ask them to do it in Arabic in the future. Um, but, uh, the ended up interning with the BBC and covering the white house when Obama gave his canonical speech, which became known as the Cairo speech in 2009.

Deena Shakir: (07:28)
Um, I know we talked about this before Aja, so I'm, I know you remember it, that that speech was a watershed moment for relations between the last and the middle east. And for me as someone who had grown up in the bay area, who was passionate about, uh, economic development and who specifically knew the power of technology in particular, um, to, to not only build bridges and product for impact, but also to enable livelihoods, I was really motivated by that speech. And I dropped my niece in career in journalism and made it my job to make that my job and find out who was going to be running, um, the policies coming out of that speech. So, uh, was lucky enough to get a presidential management fellowship ended up at, uh, initially it was at USA ID and then at the state department, um, and spent several years working on a number of initiatives around the post Cairo portfolio, specifically enabling, um, and, and funding, uh, programs for entrepreneurship in the region.

Deena Shakir: (08:26)
And so how, how did, how did that lead to, to venture, um, as a, is a good question. And, and a lot of it also has to do with another watershed moment for the region, which was the Arab spring and being in the U S government as an Arab American. Um, when that was happening was, was really interesting. And I was witnessing changes on the ground in the region that I didn't think I would see in my lifetime. Now, back then, we were all a lot more hopeful. Um, uh, you know, uh, certainly looking in retrospect things perhaps didn't end up the way that many had hoped, but what I was seeing was that technology was enabling change in a way that was truly revolutionary. And that to me was incredibly exciting. So it was a combination of seeing that, you know, the beginning of, of what we were, what we now call the fourth industrial revolution.

Deena Shakir: (09:12)
And I was coming out to the bay a lot for work. My job working in secretary Clinton's office, uh, on public private partnerships was to facilitate those types of relationships with startups, VCs, and, and, um, and also large tech companies. So combination of like feeling this, the, the energy here in the bay, recognizing that this, this place I had grown up in which when I left, I honestly never thought I would come back. It didn't seem like there was an opportunity for somebody who wasn't, you know, just, uh, maybe a chip engineer or, or, or perhaps a software engineer, but Silicon valley and the technology in general was not just a separate sector anymore, but a way of doing everything better, more effectively, efficiently, and in some cases more democratically. So, uh, that's when I decided I wanted to, to, to learn how to build product, and that's a, not an easy transition and it was early, you know, there's definitely a diaspora now of folks from DC in, uh, in the bay.

Deena Shakir: (10:09)
But back then, this is 2011, 2012. It wasn't a clear case to make, um, as to how someone with my background who literally studied the most non-technical degree, you could get at Harvard social studies and near Eastern languages, and civilizations would be qualified for a job on the product side. So very difficult, um, but ultimately ended up, um, being fortunate enough to get a really cool opportunity. Um, and so spent five years working on early stage product partnerships at Google, including some, uh, social impact initiatives, including, you know, Google's elections products and so on, but ultimately, uh, lands in, into healthcare. And that's what led me to venture. And it was leading Google's first HIPAA compliant, uh, product effort, meeting, incredible entrepreneurs who were doing things frankly, better than my team of hundreds of engineers at Google. And recognizing that big tech probably was not going to be the source of innovation in these really intractable fields.

Deena Shakir: (11:08)
Uh, and, and I just felt that same energy I felt when I wanted to work in the administration and that same energy I felt when I wanted to move into Google. And now I knew that it was the, it was working with startups that, um, would be my, kind of my life's work. And so, um, met some amazing entrepreneurs invested in some of them, myself as an angel, very small checks source. Some of them, some of my friends didn't venture. Um, and then that made my way over to GV where I was for a couple of years before joining Luxe. So that's, that's the not so short story.

AJ Scaramucci: (11:38)
Yeah. Yeah. I mean, it's fascinating. I mean, having that sort of systems level approach, having those varied experiences in politics, in journalism, even in academia, and then eventually in technology as given you, I think a very unique perspective on venture. I think that's a perfect segue. I mean, an Atlas and you give us a sense, give us a flavor of your own investment philosophy in the context of the broader firm and perhaps even call out a few investments that you've made that you feel particularly

Deena Shakir: (12:08)
Compelled. Yeah, absolutely. Um, so at a high level you Lux has been around about 21 years, started off in the early days as a small seed fund out of New York that, um, my partner is Josh and Peter started with this hypothesis, that there was a really unique opportunity to invest in the earliest days of company creation and in funding, contrarian, rebel entrepreneurs who were taking on some of the most challenging problems. So we're literally turning science fiction into fact. And if you think back, you know, at that time there, wasn't such a clear venture return profile for that type of a business. Now we call it frontier tech, deep tech, hard tech, and every venture firm is trying to do it. But back then, that was pretty much a category creating, um, and bold mission. Um, and so, you know, I have so much respect for Josh and Peter for doing that and doing so in their early twenties, no less.

Deena Shakir: (13:00)
Um, and, and that's how it started. And they, you know, in the early days that a lot of nanotech and nuclear and clean tech and the fund has evolved quite a bit since then. So we are no longer a small seed fund. We now have 2.5 billion AUM, and we are a multi-stage fund, but we are very much still true to that core of, uh, of a deep conviction in science and technology in improving and advancing, uh, humanity. And very much still love to be there at the earliest days of company creation. So we're quite flexible. We can incubate, we can be first capital in, we are investing out of our sixth venture fund, which is a $500 million fund. And that's really for everything from pre-seed to series B ish. And then we also have our, our second opportunity fund where we not only double down on our existing investments, but also can make growth stage investments and companies like Benchling, which we just announced another round.

Deena Shakir: (13:55)
And yesterday, like Everly health formerly I really well, um, applied intuition, uh, and others. And so, um, you know, in terms of me and my thesis, you know, one of I had a couple of different opportunities that I was exploring, um, when I was thinking about leaving GV and had been at Google and alphabet broadly for almost eight years. And, um, it Lux was one of the easiest decisions I've had to make in my career. I was very, very lucky. It was clear to me that everything about their investment philosophy was just very aligned with my values. And also my, my background Lux loves to invest in the intersections and intersectionalities, not only my actual identity in terms of who I am, but also very much so my, my career path. And so whether it's the intersection of health and technology of hardware and software of computational biology and food like Shiru, um, and, and so many more that that is core to, to what they do.

Deena Shakir: (14:54)
And it's very much also kind of core to my thesis. So since I joined, I've made a number of investments. You've mentioned a few of them. Um, I probably spend the majority of my time, maybe 60% or more of these days looking at human health and population health. And I, one of the, our most more recent investments is in a company called steady MD, which, uh, Lux led the series B four. And I joined the Bora board of, and that company is really revolutionizing the expansion of digital health, again, from this notion of being a separate field to being sort of the rails that's powering virtual care across industries. Um, so, so that's a company I'm super excited about as somebody who, you know, worked on digital health product at Google in the very early days. And it's been recognized, you know, what it takes to succeed there.

Deena Shakir: (15:46)
And also, you know, frankly what the last year has taught all of us, um, about the importance of, uh, healthcare moving into the home of the decentralization of clinical trials and clinical research, um, and of the ability of technology to enable access at large, uh, to improve human health. So that's one example. Um, another is Shira, which was actually my first investment at Lux and the company that I am proud to continue to serve on the board for. Um, and so Shiru is applying computational biology and machine learning to the development of novel plant-based ingredients. And so for me, this is a massive opportunity to Kent, to, you know, contribute to, um, taking on climate change through, you know, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but it's also a massive opportunity for a tremendous generational company. Uh, as again, we've seen in the last year, although I made this investment and, you know, before the pandemic, there is not only an increasing consumer demand for plant-based ingredients, but there is a, a really large challenge on the food supply chain.

Deena Shakir: (16:53)
That is that that is contributing to, uh, the bottom line for a lot of these food companies. And so rather than creating the next impossible burger or beyond meat or a chicken alternative, which Shira was doing is actually using machine learning to develop new ingredients. That will be the building blocks of those companies, but also enable the large fortune 500 food companies of the world to replace egg protein, or gelatin or various other ingredients in their foods. And that, and that is something that is incredibly exciting to me. It's a model that's worked quite well in healthcare and pharma for a long time. Uh, and, and Jasmine, um, with her company, Shiru is the first to actually apply it to food. So very excited about that one as well.

AJ Scaramucci: (17:37)
Yeah. Yeah. And, you know, just to jump in here, I mean, when you think about it, I mean today, I mean, we're living in a, in a time where there is truly an abundance of capital where even pension funds, sovereign wealth funds are coming down and doing direct investments really for the, for the first time. And, you know, the question here is how does, how does locks, how do you, when you approach entrepreneurs, what does it mean to be founder friendly? Uh, what does it mean to really add value, uh, in, in the context, uh, of Luxon differentiate amongst the many, other many other funds, like when you work with say Jasmine, that she wrote would love to understand, you know, how you, how you win deals, but also how you empower and catalyze the, these entrepreneurs to tremendous

Deena Shakir: (18:22)
Success. Yeah, it's a really great question. Um, I, it's funny because when I speak to family members of mine who are very much outside of the venture capital world, they find it baffling that the check writers are actually the ones who are doing most of the selling and the hustling and trying to win. That's certainly counter-intuitive, but you, you absolutely hit the nail on the head. It's like, it's the, it's the nature of the business capital is everywhere now. And recently more so whether it's, uh, a family office, a corporate VC, or an entity these days, very, um, aggressive individual angel investors like getting access to capital is not the problem, uh, for entrepreneurs. So, so there is very much a, um, uh, a selling process that's important, but, you know, for me, it's, it's, um, a lot of it is grounded in authenticity and that is, believe it or not, uh, rare to find in this industry.

Deena Shakir: (19:16)
Um, and so, you know, having my voice out there, standing, uh, standing up for what I believe in across the board from an investment thesis perspective, from a corporate governance perspective, from a diversity and inclusion perspective is something that's very important. Um, and one of the beautiful things about this job is that we have the ability to meet with the inventors of the future all day, every day. Um, and so in a way it's been almost a return to academia for me, and almost a little bit of an anthropological exercise that I've been taking and really forcing myself every now and then to take a step back and actually produce some content. So I've been doing some writing, um, and, uh, and that was something that I really kind of just did for myself initially, but I've actually found that to be quite helpful in, um, attracting co-investors and entrepreneurs who are able to see who I am and what I stand for.

Deena Shakir: (20:12)
That's not necessarily a formula and venture. There are some of the most incredible VCs out there literally are not on Twitter and don't write anything. So, you know, that that's just something that has been helpful for me. Um, and, and the other, the other thing to note is that, you know, you might be, you might have a PhD in a very technical field investing in a technical company, but you're not going to be sitting there writing the code or, you know, developing their prominent proteins yourself. So it's important to have the fluency and the product to be able to understand what it takes to build a team and very much what I did in my, in my prior world. But it's also important to, uh, to, to understand what it takes to scale a business, and importantly, to have a network, everybody has their super power that they bring to the table.

Deena Shakir: (21:01)
And this is the advice I give to a younger folks that I mentor in terms of how, you know, different paths to get into venture. It, it's not about a formula, a template and pathway it's really about like, what is it that you bring that's different than somebody else? What is your superpower? And I am never going to be the smartest person in the room. I am not going to be the most technical, uh, and I'm not going to be the, even the most experienced, but my super power, which dates back to what I mentioned earlier, even in my childhood and my upbringing is the ability to connect the ability to bring people together. And the, the sort of diversity of my background in terms of different jobs and lives that I've held at all throughout being focused on partnerships has really enabled me to build a, not only why, but very deep network that I bring to bear, whether it's through commercial relationships that result in, you know, non-dilutive capital for these companies, whether it's through, um, different co-investors we can bring to the table, or whether it's through relationships with future board members or hires.

Deena Shakir: (22:07)
That's, that's my thing

AJ Scaramucci: (22:10)
Makes a ton of sense. And, and when, when you make that, make those investments decisions, Hey, you know what, we're Luxe, we're going to lead, lead that round. You're going to join these boards, as you think about all of the various input parameters that go into that decision, whether it's team market, et cetera, how do they wait for you if you were to kind of allow us to delve into your mind's eye there PA what is the weighting of those? Those are

Deena Shakir: (22:35)
Right. The great question. I mean, it's, it's almost a cliche, but truly it's about the people at the end of the day. Um, and the more I, the more I've been doing this, the more I realized just how much truth there is to that. Um, you can have an incredible idea. Um, and that idea might be enough if you're working on a product within a large tech company, because, you know, you can swap out team members, you know, it's, there's, there's more kind of fungibility there, but when you are putting everything at risk to start a company and going through the incredibly, like, you know, psychologically draining process, that, that, that it inevitably turns into no matter how successful you are, it's about the people. And so that definitely team is very important and, you know, a lot, some of that has to do certainly with the, with their background, you know, their, their, uh, understanding of the markets, but also their ability to communicate.

Deena Shakir: (23:31)
That's really important to me. And so we, we invest in, uh, quite a few scientific solo founders, um, and there are a number of companies, um, probably the majority of companies in my portfolio fit into that bucket. Um, that it's very, when we find someone and Jasmine is a great example and are certainly others, including a few investments, we'll be announcing that in the coming few weeks where they not only have the technical and professional, uh, expertise, but they are incredible storytellers. And that is important because it reduces financing risk down the line. It, uh, empowers them to hire, well, obviously there's, you know, a marketing and kind of growth element associated with that, but it is something that is important at all stages of the company. And I've actually said this before, and I really believe it for me, it's not my Harvard degree or any of the experiences I had in my professional career that I think is the most valuable that I've had. It is literally my speech and debate experience in high school that I think has been the most valuable skill asset activity that I have ever done in my life. And so that's something that I do spend time as well with our, with our, with my founders and coaching them on. Uh, and that Luxe in particular also is, um, ha has a wonderful program where we help, um, founders with that as well.

AJ Scaramucci: (24:50)
That's fine. Definitely. You know, you, you've been a, a huge voice and very active on the diversity front in Silicon valley. And, you know, th this is, this is a topic of continued discussion on, on Saul talks. We'd love your take on what, what ways, what techniques would you suggest, or how do you think about, uh, diversity in the context of venture capital, like literal partners, uh, as well as entrepreneurs and how we can sort of reorient ourselves to be more inclusive, more, more broadly?

Deena Shakir: (25:25)
Yeah, that's a great question. Um, you know, I, I think back to the, the first few years that I was at Google, where, um, you know, as you might recall, Google was the first major company to release their numbers in terms of the demographic data and specifically on there, on the technical side. And it was damning, it was bad. And so I actually helped put together kind of a, uh, an internal SWAT team to try to figure out how can we address this both internally, but importantly, you know, given the convener that Google is and the ecosystem, and that was actually a very valuable exercise, you know, almost a decade later. And how I think about the problem now from venture capital, what we realized through that is, you know, specific then to, how can we increase the number of, uh, of, of women and people of color graduating with computer science degrees, that there are points of attrition throughout the, the, the life cycle of an individual, uh, and shaft, you know, recent data actually has shown that some of these biases and preferences start as early as 18 months of age, um, uh, you know, and maybe John as a parent and certainly myself as the parent.

Deena Shakir: (26:32)
I think about that a lot when I, you know, w w w when I'm doing my own parenting. And I think back to my own childhood, I grew up with three brothers. And, you know, that that is certainly something that is important. So in addressing issues around representation, diversity, and inclusion, there are so many, so many ways that we need to work on it, and no one solution or no one point of attrition is going to be enough at Google. You know, they've funded programs like the Gina Davis Institute, um, where they, first of all, worked on actually mapping out data within, within, uh, TV shows within Hollywood, within media. And that helped to actually write characters into TV shows to, to offer examples, um, and, and, and role models to children and, and also to, uh, to, to adults. And that was something that has worked well in stemmed more broadly in the medical field in particular.

Deena Shakir: (27:23)
And so, you know, there's definitely the element of media, which is quite important. Um, there is the elements of a child early childhood education. This is something I'm also very passionate about personally, first and foremost as a parent. Um, but also, um, as, uh, you know, as, as someone who's focused on what the next generation will look like. And so there's, there's much to be done now, but we need to start earlier on. So I actually wrote a children's book, which will be coming out soon. Um, that is specifically about a, um, a, a young girl who, um, started the company and goes through, uh, the process of, of fundraising and what that's like, I, you know, and, and, uh, specifically as a young woman of color. So, uh, there, you know, there are many ways to address those. I do think the last few years have certainly been a reckoning for the world and everything from, you know, me to, to, um, you know, to the venture capital industry.

Deena Shakir: (28:17)
And there's been quite a bit of progress. And I know this because I, I wanted to, you know, enter VC before any of that happened. And I felt a market difference in myself, but there has not been nearly enough progress. And unfortunately, uh, the pandemic, uh, in many cases has exacerbated existing inequities and biases, um, particularly for women and particularly for women of color, uh, not just in terms of, you know, the number of, you know, the, the, the mortality rate for COVID itself, but actually for, you know, the folks who are dropping out of the workforce, it is devastating and there's much work to be done there. And if we can't even keep women in the workforce, imagine how much work there is to be done, uh, on the fundraising side. And so this is something that continues to be a huge problem. I'm very, very happy to say that there are incredible organizations, like all Ray is like him for her, um, and a number of others out there, women in VC, et cetera, that are really focused on this, um, that have raised money and have institutionalized and happen are being incredibly thoughtful, starting with research and all the way through kind of programmatic activities.

Deena Shakir: (29:25)
So I think that I'm hopeful and I'm optimistic, and I'm involved in that, um, that these things are, are long-term problems and require long-term solutions.

AJ Scaramucci: (29:35)
And when does this, when does this book come out? Well, what can, when could it be expect this to, at the shelves where I'm very about that

Deena Shakir: (29:41)
TBD TBD, it's still a, it's still a work in progress. I mean, the book is done. We're just going through the process of getting it published. So stay tuned for that. Um, but I'm very excited, John, hopefully you can, [inaudible] the baby's born.

John Darcie: (29:56)
The oldest, my oldest is a girl too. So obviously looking to surround her with positive, uh, you know, female role models. And as she grows up, I would love to, uh, to introduce her to

Deena Shakir: (30:06)
You. Absolutely. And she can hang out with my daughter who's around the same age. So for sure love

John Darcie: (30:11)
It. We're going to have a playpen at salt in New York. It's like,

Deena Shakir: (30:16)
So nice. Nice.

AJ Scaramucci: (30:19)
So, uh, so I think this, this could serve as a great segue. Do you sort of the second chapter of the interview here, Dina, we're really gonna, uh, go into some kind of broad existential topics. LA love, we'd love your take. So I think the first one is not quite the softball, but what do you think the world will look like in 2050 and generation from now? I mean, you could take this in any which way direct and in a direction you so pleased, but give us a sense as you close your eyes, what do you see for the world in 2050 for better or worse?

Deena Shakir: (30:55)
I dunno if that's a softball, that's a hard one. She asked somebody that in 2019 before the pandemic, um, you know, I I've been really interested, um, just intellectually, but also from an investment perspective and, uh, gen Z. Um, and, um, I just find the, the sort of the preferences, the behaviors, the, um, the epistemic choices that they're making very markedly different from the generation before. And so that's kind of what I think about when I think about the, sort of the change makers of, uh, you know, who will be, uh, you know, shaping the next generation, whether it's their focus on, you know, environment, the environment and climate change, their inherent, um, comfort with stigmatized topics like, you know, mental health and seeking therapy, um, whether it's a sort of digitally native experience that, you know, it is different, you know, as a millennial myself, you know, yes, I was on AOL as a child.

Deena Shakir: (32:04)
Um, and you know, all of that, but this is, this is different. Now this is, this is not just about communication. Um, it's about creation and it's about, um, and it's about, uh, the next wave of invention. So I'm, I'm incredibly optimistic and excited. Um, you kind of have to be as a VC. That's one of the things I love about this job, you are, you are, you know, these are long-term investments, right? I'm not, I'm not, uh, you know, buying stocks, right. I'm, uh, I'm taking, uh, you know, making investments in, in the future here. I see, um, an incredible opportunity on the science side. I think that what we've seen over the last year is remarkable. It is incredible. I, I have to like, you know, when, when I got my, my, uh, my vaccine, I, I, uh, like many, I cried not just on a personal level. It like, you know, we're getting through this, but holy, this is such an amazing achievement for humanity, that the speed at which we were able to uncover the incredible innovation behind it, the collaboration that it took. Yeah. There were some snafoos along the way, but if that's what we can do now, you know, I'm pretty optimistic about what 2050 will look like.

AJ Scaramucci: (33:17)
Yeah. I mean, not on this point here. I mean, it, the fact that it took us 10 months, really from the embryonic phases and the breakout and Mohan to, uh, to not, not just one to really, uh, compelling an efficacious vaccines and Pfizer Moderna and maybe a handful of others to go to be seen on the, uh, the J and J side that societal immune system was quite compelling. Like, I mean, it, it was, it was bad. Don't get me wrong, but I would, I would say props to us. I mean, it's a real time horizon for Vermeer drug to market 10 years in 10, we'll take, we'll take 10 months. And I think it's, uh, a good experiment for, for things to come. How do you think, I mean, with COVID and your, your investments in healthcare and such, how has COVID really materially impacted the healthcare system and your view, and it has, has COVID in the aftermath or the continued aftermath impacted your, your investment thesis, uh, in that category. Yeah,

Deena Shakir: (34:22)
Yeah, no, it's a great question. Um, you know, we we're, we have been investing in healthcare, certainly Lux as part of my even joining for, for decades. And I have been working on a prior to COVID, but this is, this is such a cliche. I hate to even say it out loud, but it truly was, you know, it was a watershed moment for digital health. And, uh, and I can kind of elaborate a bit specifically on how and why, you know, a lot of my secret sauce or my sort of super power, as I mentioned, was around the people. And so I've been having conversations for the last decade and developed relationships with the decision makers at the C-suite of some of these top insurance companies. So payers, health systems, so providers, um, and, and research facilities. And I know I worked on and I tried, uh, I know how difficult it is to, uh, to, to, to, to make change, especially when it comes to these deep rooted kind of challenges around, uh, incentives and provider behavior and so on.

Deena Shakir: (35:20)
It is not easy. So the, the last year forced change, empowered regulatory change that might've taken decades, it impelled behavior change that might've never happened. It catalyzed, um, these technologies from niche nice to have into permanence into essential. Then if you look at the last couple of months, they're the sort of investor calls of some of the largest payers and, and, you know, the Aetnas and the anthems of the world, the Humanas the world, as well as even retail, um, CVS and Walmart. And so on, everyone's talking about digital transformation, everybody's looking for these solutions and they realized, perhaps not, not at their own choice, um, that it works. And certainly there's still a place for, of course, for, you know, interfacing care, but healthcare moving into the home is here to stay. And that is across the board, not just in terms of care delivery, but another element that's quite important to us.

Deena Shakir: (36:20)
Um, and to me personally is also on the research side and the decentralization of clinical trials, the virtualization of clinical trials, the incorporation of digital biomarkers, and so on is not only important to us, to accelerate research and enable us to have, you know, solutions like these vaccines quite quickly, but also to, um, to, to be more inclusive in our research, which has been a systemic problem for a long time, women have been drastically under-researched resulting in issues like dosage, um, you know, miss Smith's dosage recommendations and ultimately sometimes deaths as well. And it's even worse in general for, um, uh, looking at racial considerations. So a large part of that has been just how difficult it is and consuming it has to be a part of clinical research. So that's one thing that's exciting. And we're in companies like science 37 and electro labs, uh, and H one, which are really at the forefront of enabling that, um, virtualization and de-centralization using technology.

AJ Scaramucci: (37:17)
Yeah. And, and on the, on the government side of the house, the regulatory side of the house, uh, when we're sort of crafting legislation and so on and so forth, if you were in, if you were in that position, if you kind of went back to your, your government days, what pieces of legislation would you be drafting to enable and empower, uh, the entrepreneurs, whether it be on the healthcare side, or even on the therapeutic side, on the FDA side of the house.

Deena Shakir: (37:45)
Yeah. Um, that there, there would be a lot of suggestions that I would have, but, you know, certainly it's not as easy, of course it's writing legislation, as you know, because there are really entrenched interests that play here that can make it difficult, whether you're thinking about, you know, cross border licensing for physicians or, um, you know, uh, what it takes to, to, um, to, to regulate a new device and regulation is there for a reason, regulation is important. Uh, we need that. We need, uh, you know, checks and balances and safety measures in place, but we also need to, um, facilitate and fund innovation. And I think, you know, what we've seen, certainly in the last few months coming out of, um, uh, the administration has been a renewed focus and interest on that. And I think that's promising. Um, but that there's a lot of play there. So let's see. I mean, it remains be seen how much of the regulatory changes that, um, you know, whether it's around HIPAA compliance or, uh, or so on how, how much of that is here to stay, but again, I'm optimistic. Hmm.

AJ Scaramucci: (38:46)
Yeah. I mean, there's a lot of interesting regulatory considerations for these truly game changing paradigm shifting technologies in the life science sector. I mean, one of course is gene editing and the use of use of CRISPR, particularly if you're going after the germline of a given species. And I'm curious when, when it comes to genetic modification of humans, you know, if we had the ability to, to, to really do that in a pinpoint precise way, and we understood the, the ramifications, should we, should we take that, take that leap? I'm curious what your take is there.

Deena Shakir: (39:26)
Yeah. You know, I'm going back again to my childhood. Uh, you know, my, my grandfather in Iraq was a pediatrician and worked with the world health organization and he was actually involved in the early days of the, of the human genome project. And I, and as I think about, and he passed away, um, over 10 years ago. But as I think about the advances in the last decade, I always think back to what I, what would he think? And could he even have conceived of just how much opportunity there is now with these, um, you know, the cost reduction on sequencing, the human genome and our ability to uncover variance. And, uh, and hopefully from there discover therapeutic treatments, you know, Lux is, uh, is in a company called variant, which is doing just that. Um, we are, uh, we'll be making some additional announcements soon. Um, but I am long on poly genetic testing. I am long on, um, you know, pharmacogenetics. I think that there's just incredible opportunity toward the personalization of medicine, um, which has been a long time coming. And, um, and these advances on the genetic science side are, are, um, really groundbreaking. And so we're just at the cusp of that innovation

AJ Scaramucci: (40:41)
And w and one thing we think about, which is kind of a segue to that is, wow. I mean, lifespan is also extending about every year that goes by, we gained about a fourth of a year in life expectancy. That's been the case since the industrial revolution then kind of do some extrapolation over the next few generations. It is foreseeable that humans will be living a well over a hundred, perhaps even to 150 years of age. And that has tremendous ramifications on the healthcare system, on the insurance system, as well as, you know, all kinds of others, uh, related to the workforce here's as you, as you think about that or yourself, but also in the context of locks, how is that increased lifespan, uh, affecting the way in which you're thinking about these different ramifications in health and life science?

Deena Shakir: (41:32)
There is. So there, I mean, one of the big things that I'm, uh, and Lux is really thinking a lot about is at CNS and sort of, you know, cognitive science and, and, you know, that is one area where there's still tremendous. Um, just so much that we don't know, um, and, and so much opportunity there. And, um, and I had family members, um, who I've seen go through, um, you know, Parkinson's and dementia and so on. And so it is also very personal to me. So that's one area where, you know, I'm, I'm excited about the potential for transformative innovation. Um, and then in general, you know, on a more short-term, uh, level also just the idea of aging in place and what we saw through us again, through the last year, and, um, a lot of what we saw in revealing issues with nursing homes and so on.

Deena Shakir: (42:20)
But, uh, you know, as we have an increasingly digitally savvy, uh, elderly population, and as in particular, going back again to this issue, uh, uh, question around equity and gender women, finding themselves in the sort of sandwich generation where we are care-taking for our parents and also for our children, what are the types of technologies around care coordination? Um, and so on that can help to, um, to facilitate that and enable that again. I think there's, it's still quite analog in many ways and a big challenge for a lot of people. I'm sure everyone listening here has someone they know is not themselves personally, that's going through that. So I think that there's quite, um, quite an opportunity there and, and luckily a lot of venture dollars going to toward those types of companies.

John Darcie: (43:06)
And I have a question for you. So you do a lot of investing. You've done a lot in your life to change the world, but you also work at a venture capital firm where the expectation from your LPs I assume, are that you drive returns. So when you're looking at investing in life sciences companies or deep tech companies, how do you balance sort of this sales, marketing, and commercialization part of the thesis against, wow, they're doing really interesting things. I'm not that concerned about the monetization piece at the moment.

Deena Shakir: (43:35)
Yeah. You know, it goes back to sort of what I was sharing in terms of, um, graduating from undergrad and thinking about this sort of doing well or doing good. And, and the evolution of my own perspective over time, part of our investment thesis is that we are investing in entrepreneurs who are taking on massive problems, and those massive problems are there for also massive opportunities on the business side. Uh, but there are also opportunities to improve human health and to, uh, you know, in the case of Shira, for example, you know, contribute to, uh, reducing greenhouse gases, et cetera. So we are not an impact, you know, VC, we ultimately are stewards of capital for our LPs, who by the way, also represent some of the most effective from anthropic institutions, institutions, and endowments that are out there, which is another element of the impact, uh, to venture that is not often talked about, but it's something that is, is real.

Deena Shakir: (44:36)
And I feel very good about that when I know that not only are we creating value for, uh, you know, for the farming for these companies and for these individuals and creating livelihoods and, you know, stimulating for further innovation down the road by enabling ecosystems and so on. But we are also returning cap well to our LPs who are, um, you know, who, who are educational institutions and endowments and charities and so on. So that's, that's another piece of it. Um, in terms of your question on monetization that, you know, that is something that, um, is a risk and an informed risk that you take when you're an early stage, you know, a science investor. Um, but it's not a bet. It is, um, it is a calculated, um, decision that is made based on a deep understanding. And we're very thesis driven here. So a deep understanding of what it takes to get to, to, you know, to get to monetization what the market looks like, you know, deep relationships with the customers, if you will, down the road, et cetera, et cetera. And so it's, it's, it's certainly, it's never foolproof, but we, we, we are very calculated in how we make those decisions.

John Darcie: (45:44)
I'm going to ask you one more question before we let you go, Dina, it's about a super intelligent AI. So you talked about how she Ru is an example, and I'm sure plenty of your other investments incorporate AI, uh, uses AI to discover new plant proteins and things of that nature. Do you think we'll ever develop super intelligent AI or true AI? That's able to learn like a human learns, how far away might that be and what are the implications of that for the way we think about society and our workforce?

Deena Shakir: (46:12)
Yeah. Um, I mean, it depends how you define that because some might argue we already have that, but, you know, there's obviously a massive problem which has been, um, you know, which has come to light in particular with, uh, some large, um, companies with pretty, pretty serious news events in the last few months around, eh, you know, AI and ethics and AI and bias. So that isn't, that is another, uh, you know, interesting, uh, example where this sort of intersection of technology and, and, and, and, um, you know, artificial intelligence, computer science and humanities needs to come to play. So, you know, one of the, um, I think it was two years ago now Stanford launched the center for humane artificial intelligence, which I am a huge fan of. Um, and I love the intersectionality. They, they bring to the, sort of the innovation there.

Deena Shakir: (47:01)
Uh, if you look at companies like the one I mentioned variant, you know, which is ultimately focused on, on genetics and science, one of their first hires, uh, was an ethicist. Um, and so having that really deep in the DNA, no punt intent, no pun intended of these companies is, is, is quite important. So, you know, NLP, to some extent, uh, or, or, you know, is already almost approaching that level of kind of incredible with, you know, the, uh, how good the AI is in a number cases out there, but, um, there will need to be, um, checks and balances, particularly around bias.

John Darcie: (47:37)
Well, Deena, thank you so much for joining us on salt talks. It, it, uh, it's very encouraging to hear people like you with such a diverse background, uh, thinking about things like ethics in addition to investing in innovation. Um, so we're very excited. You're on the forefront of all these breakthroughs and look forward to doing hopefully more with you, uh, with the salt fund and other things that we're working on. And like I said, we'd love to have you at the salt conference in September. And, uh, if, if you need a babysitter, we can, we can collude on that. Um,

Deena Shakir: (48:07)
You might regret making that offer, but maybe I'll take you up on it. Thanks. Thanks for having,

John Darcie: (48:17)
And thank you for joining us again here on salt talks. And thank you everybody for joining us for this conversation today, with Dina Shakir, from Lux capital w one of the most fantastic, uh, venture capital firms, we think out there in the marketplace today, uh, solving big problems in a way that's also benefiting the world. Just a reminder, if you missed any part of this talk or any of our previous talks, you can access them on our website. It's salt.org backslash talk, and also on our YouTube channel, which is called salt tube. We're also on social media. Twitter is where we're most active at salt conferences are handled, but we're also on LinkedIn, Instagram, and Facebook. And please spread the word about these salt talks. If you have people that are interested in how venture capital works and a lot of the innovations that they are helping to invest in, uh, please share this salt, talk with them, but on behalf of AIJ and the entire salt team, this is John Darcie signing off from salt talks for today. We hope to see you back here again soon.

Dan Tapiero: A New Macro World for Bitcoin & Gold | SALT Talks #203

“At some point down the line, everything we have of value will be on the blockchain somewhere in this digital asset ecosystem.”

Dan Tapiero is the CEO and Managing Partner of 10T, a growth equity fund. He is also the co-founder of Gold Bullion International (GBI), a physical precious metals platform for the wealth management industry that also expanded into the cryptocurrency universe in 2014. 

With the expansion of the money supply, gold continues to act as an effective hedge for traditional institutions, but Bitcoin represents an even bigger opportunity. The digital asset class ecosystem will be bigger than gold and its invention is revolutionary in nature. Bitcoin’s invention is akin to the combustion engine and electricity. “The 8-page white paper by Satoshi Nakamoto solved a math problem that hadn’t been solved for hundreds of years, the Byzantine Generals’ Problem- the problem of distributed trust. How do two counter-parties trust each other without an intermediary?”

Blockchain technology as a whole represents the future of value storage. Ethereum has its own unique properties and offers the ability to facilitate smart contracts and more. “At some point down the line, everything we have of value will be on the blockchain somewhere in this digital asset ecosystem.”

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Dan Tapiero.jpeg

Dan Tapiero

Chief Executive Officer & Managing Partner

10T

MODERATOR

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darcie: (00:08)
Hello, and welcome back to salt talks. My name is John Darcie. I'm the managing director of salt, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance technology and public policy. Saul talks are a digital interview series that we launched in 2020 with leading investors, creators and thinkers. And our goal on these salt talks is the same as our goal at our salt conferences, which we're excited to resume here in September of 2021 in New York. And you can find out more about that event@salt.org, and we hope today's guest will join us there. But our goal is to provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future. And one of those ideas that we focused on heavily starting towards the middle of last year is the digital asset or crypto ecosystem.

John Darcie: (00:57)
So we're very excited today to bring you the latest installment of that series with the great Dan Tappy arrow. Uh, Dan tarot arrow is the chief executive officer and managing director of 10 T, which is his latest venture. He brings more than 30 years of experience in macro and commodity investing in trading research and economics into that venture as well as entrepreneurship in a number of different lanes, uh, before founding 10 T Dan was the managing partner at [inaudible] capital advisors, a global macro investment fund that he founded in 2003. He's the co-founder of the gold bullion international organization, which is a physical precious metals platform for the wealth management industry that has also expanded into the cryptocurrency universe in 2014, which is an interesting dichotomy that we're looking forward to diving into during this talk. He's a co-founder of the agricultural company of America, one of the largest farmland REITs in the U S at the time of its sale in 2013.

John Darcie: (01:54)
So as you can see by his bio, he has a wide array of different experiences within the asset management universe, but a global macro investor at heart, which perhaps is what led him to Bitcoin, uh, hosting today's talk is Brett messing, who is the president and chief operating officer at SkyBridge capital, which is a global alternative investment firms. SkyBridge has, uh, today, I guess maybe it's creeping over $600 million of exposure to Bitcoin through its flagship funds, as well as a dedicated product in the space. And with no further ado, I'll turn it over to Brett for the interview. And I might chime in here or there, uh, Dan would follow up well,

Brett Messing: (02:31)
Uh, I think Sean, Dan, thanks a lot for joining us. Um, I want to spend some time talking about gold and Bitcoin in your journey, but before we do, uh, in the pre-show, we were talking about Coinbase as IPO, some new highs being hit and you were looking at prices and seem pretty excited and said, there's a lot of stuff going on. So of all this stuff going on, like, you know, what do you want to talk about? What, you know, what, what do you think is most significant?

Dan Tapiero: (02:58)
Well, um, it's funny, I, I posed this question on Twitter a few months ago, early in the year saying, uh, asking what would be the most, uh, significant event of the year. And, um, you know, people had different comments and I, I forgot exactly the answers, but the Coinbase IPO I think was either first or, or, or very high up there, uh, in the ranking. And look, I think it's so important because look, it is the brand in the us. Um, it's a large company, as we saw profits are excellent. Um, you know, they're backed by some of the best VCs in the world. It's a real organization. It's very buttoned up. Um, and again, it'll be the first public company in the large public company in the crypto space. So it's definitely going to be a bellwether. Um, all that being said, I have to say that, you know, people forget that crypto blockchain, however you want to Bitcoin, however you want to describe it, uh, is a global business.

Dan Tapiero: (04:06)
And actually the, some of the most profitable businesses, larger much larger businesses than Coinbase are overseas. Um, so I would just say that, you know, there is a premium, I think on us companies just because there's scarcity right now. Uh, I suspect that over the next few years that'll change. Um, and also, you know, the degree to which U S companies are regulated and sort of ready for, let's say ready to be public, I think is greater than some of the foreign companies. Uh, yet I just think that as we watch this Coinbase IPO, we should be just cognizant of the fact that the U S really is still, you know, not, not a small percentage, but just not that larger percentage of the businesses, uh, that are in the digital asset ecosystem broadly speaking. Right. I mean, Coinbase is not even close to being the largest exchange. Right. You have Binance Hoby. Okay. Ex um, you know, now FTX, uh, all actually, uh, FTX growing faster, but you know, the, the first three certainly much larger. Um,

Brett Messing: (05:16)
Yeah, I hear that. I agree to have it tell you feel like in terms of, and we discovered spend most of our time staring a Bitcoin, you know, we haven't, uh, we haven't really evolved that far past it, it feels like us adoption is what's sort of driving Bitcoin. Do you do not at least today in 2021, would you not agree with that? Well,

Dan Tapiero: (05:38)
The U S always thinks it's us, that's driving everything. Um, I just, as an example, Hoby, so I should mention a little bit about 10 T so that I just, because, you know, I'll be saying things that maybe people think, well, where's he getting that from 10 T the private equity fund I run, we focus explicitly on mid to late stage companies in the da. So that's, that's all we do as far as I know, I think we're the first fund, um, first private equity fund to explicitly and only focus on these mid to late stage companies. Uh, those are companies that are, let's say over $400 billion in market valuation. They've established a revenue streams. They figured out how to make money. Um, there's a business, there's a mode around their business. In some cases, you know, they have hundreds, if not over a thousand employees, uh, and certainly tens or hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue.

Dan Tapiero: (06:34)
And so most of the funds that we know, you know, that you've heard of, uh, entry, sin and poly chain and Pantera, they all focus mostly on early stage seed, you know, a B round, and we're sort of more BC focused and later, um, and I give you that background just to say, um, that, you know, yes, uh, you know, yes, Coinbase, uh, is important, but, you know, as, just as an example, you know, you talk about then Coinbase has been important in the, in the U S for adoption purposes, but I mean, for instance, uh, Hoby the, the, um, the, an exchange in Asia that has 40% of its business, uh, in China, they did $2.5 trillion in volume in Q1 alone, right. That business made 700 million EBITDA just in Q1 alone. So, you know, and Binance is numbers are, are, are tremendous as well.

Dan Tapiero: (07:32)
I mean, last year, I think they did over a billion in EBITDA. So again, there's a lot of volume that's being traded. There were a lot of interesting businesses growing up all around the country. And I think it's just, you know, the U S yes, the U S institutional, uh, world is now showing interest, not clear to me what percentage they are, let's say of, of volume. Um, and I think you can, you can really go down and dig down into the chain and look at the chain analytics and figure out broadly where things are coming from, but again, Coinbase, uh, and then, you know, crack in, which is the second largest us exchange, um, are still, you know, kind of small compared to those three that I mentioned, right? So I put this more in a global, a global context, you know, so again, I'm excited about Coinbase.

Dan Tapiero: (08:25)
I think it's wonderful. Uh, they're going to do seven or $8 billion in revenue. So a hundred billion dollar valuation, 12 times revenue is, seems relatively reasonable. Um, you know, I, I'm a little concerned in a way for my own business, because if things, you know, as John said before, if Coinbase is going to 300 billion, it's going to make it a little more difficult for me, uh, to build positions in our portfolio. Um, I don't think it's going there tomorrow. Uh, there's some world in the future where it could go there, but, um, you know, I think a hundred billion with, uh, the revenues that they should do this year, I think is, you know, is reasonable.

Brett Messing: (09:06)
Hey, Dan, I'm a golden alum. I'm still digesting the idea of Coinbase being bigger than Goldman Sachs. We'll hold off on the 300 billion for awhile. Like, you know, a hundred is just fine. So I want to take a step back. So we we've just got to know each other. The first time I heard you speak was in the fall. And what, what really struck me was you're a guy who would not just somebody who invested in gold, but build a gold business based brick race Bitcoin. And there are so many people in the gold business, right. Who have not. Um, and so you're sort of, open-mindedness, you know, um, I found really interesting. So you just share that journey with, you know, with others here. Yeah,

Dan Tapiero: (09:52)
Sure. Um, you know, it's interesting, uh, you know, investors who have a hard money bias, um, often, you know, believe in gold and there is an aspect of Bitcoin, uh, that, that, that, that, that is supported by a hard money view. And we know this because obviously Bitcoin, there are only 21 million units or 18 and a half billion already been vined. Uh, there's a finite number of Bitcoin gold. Isn't exactly finite, but it's very scarce. And the supply increases very slowly. So just on a very sort of basic level, it's, you know, if you're an investor and you have a portfolio, those two things are in super limited supply, versus let's just say Fiat currency as an example, uh, where the central banks in the last year even have been really exploding, the money supplies, uh, us, China, Europe, we see central bank balance sheets really exploding.

Dan Tapiero: (10:51)
And I think with, you know, with reason because, you know, post COVID, I think they did the right thing that liquidity needed to be there. We had probably the greatest single shock that I can recall, uh, in my life, uh, to the markets and to the economy. And so they did the right thing, that being said, they've increased the supply massively. And so it doesn't take a genius to say, okay, there's a lot more of this, and there's not more of this other thing. And so the thing that is not being debased or the supply increased can go up in value. And so that's very, very simple terms. Um, I came to it because my physical gold business GBI, um, we in 2014, we integrated with a company called bit reserve, which is today uphold to the uphold wallet. And we were the first place, uh, in the world where you could buy and sell physical gold to buy and sell Bitcoin and ripple.

Dan Tapiero: (11:46)
And we had some young guys on the team back then they were really into this world, you know, for me, it was a nice idea. Uh, Bitcoin at the time was sort of small. Uh, we spent a year integrating with this company. So, uh, you know, I was part of that journey. And so I was very aware of it, but I wasn't really that engaged or that interested because as a macro guy and having been in the macro hedge fund world for 25 years, I was used to investing in bigger things, right. You know, currency and bond markets, commodity markets, and Bitcoin at the time was still very small. Um, so that was my initial introduction to it. And then in, uh, at the end of 2018, after the Bitcoin price had dropped, uh, 85%, I started getting interested in it because as a, as a macro guy, I've traded many bubbles, uh, and blow offs before.

Dan Tapiero: (12:40)
And so it typical bubble up. And then when something drops 85%, usually it's either going to zero, uh, or it's a buying opportunity. And so I just started buying in my own entity [inaudible], uh, detached capital. Um, again, it took me a lot of work. Uh, I spent literally in Q4 18 Q1, 19, probably six months there, uh, reading, honestly, it was like 10 hours a day read, you know, at least 10 books, hundreds of articles listened to podcasts, uh, really threw myself into this world and sort of fell down the rabbit hole. And when I did that, I realized that Bitcoin and this entire digital asset ecosystem is something that is much bigger than actually just gold. So I think gold is a fantastic hedge for the legacy financial system. And let me tell what I mean by that is that with bonds being neutered as an asset class now, I think, you know, a traditional portfolio that was 60 40, um, you know, from 1981 until now has done fantastically.

Dan Tapiero: (13:50)
And every time you've had a little wobble in the economy or things fell down, your bond saved you. Um, now I think in the next five years or so if we have a slow down, uh, at some point, um, you know, the bonds will not be able to protect you the way that they have in the last 30 years. So they can't really go much below zero in my view, um, and they don't yield anything. And so in my worldview gold, uh, in that scenario, gold could still go up 30, 40%. And so I think, um, you know, some people in the Bitcoin space are saying, oh, gold is worthless. It's being replaced by Bitcoin. I don't see that at all. I think it's a fantastic hedge for the legacy portfolio for the hundreds of trillions of dollars that are in the, you know, traditional or legacy world.

Dan Tapiero: (14:41)
Um, gold will be a great hedge for the asset side of your portfolio. So, however, Bitcoin, while also maybe a hard money, uh, hedge is also something much bigger. And I really think that Bitcoin is an invention. Uh, I say akin to the invention of the combustion engine. I think it's a con akin to the discovery of electricity. And I sort of came to that conclusion, you know, after that six months of work, because what I didn't realize in 14 that I realized when I really dug in was that the eight page white paper by Satoshi was really something miraculous that it solved a math problem that had not been solved for literally hundreds of years, this Byzantine General's problem, you know, the problem of distributed trust and therefore, how do two counter parties trust each other without an intermediary. And, you know, that problem you would think was, was simple.

Dan Tapiero: (15:39)
Like, just how do I send you some value without an intermediary, but, you know, mathematicians, scientists, cryptographers, they were sitting around for years trying to figure out how to do it. And they couldn't until the mechanism of Bitcoin, the Bitcoin network, uh, was explained, and I don't want to say invented, but then also explained in that eight page white paper. And so when you see that as like the crowning moment of 30 years of scientific researcher, like holy cow, all of this work came before the publishing of the white paper. This is something ingenious, something new. Um, and I just, you know, it was at that moment that I just thought, wow, this is much bigger than, uh, a store of value. This is much bigger than a hedge. This is basically the money protocol for the entire internet, right? So the internet, we send information back.

Dan Tapiero: (16:39)
Do you remember in the nineties, we used to be afraid to put our credit cards on it because the internet was invented without a security apparatus on top of it, the Bitcoin network is this Bulletproof security apparatus. It's never been hacked. I don't think I can ever be hacked. Now, the proof of work algorithm is too strong. Um, and so I just think that at some point down the line, everything that we have of value, everything will be on a blockchain somewhere in this digital asset ecosystem. And you'll have central bank digital currencies. There you'll have a whole bunch of different blockchains that do different things. And Bitcoin will be, you know, what role pal calls the pristine collateral of the, of the new system, right? It's the, it's the on, um, it's the, uh, um, undebatable asset that underpins all the other assets in this new digital world.

Dan Tapiero: (17:36)
And importantly, all of it will be fungible with each other. So, you know, there's a world one day where maybe you're walking around on your phone and everything that you own personally, a value will be on that phone. And we'll be divisible into small amounts and fungible with each other and sitting on a blockchain. So that's sort of a little bit of my sort of big picture worldview. And I think gold has a place to play really as a hedge for all those legacy assets, because you know, the dollar isn't going away, the whole world isn't going away. It's just that there's a slow transition to something that's better, right? That's, what's, that's, what's going on. I mean, look, the swift system that we use today for, for wires was invented in the forties or fifties, there is absolutely zero chance that in the next 10 years, we're gonna 10 years from now, we're going to be using a pre-internet technology like the zero chance. So,

Brett Messing: (18:35)
No, I, uh, there's a lot to unpack there. So I want to start with gold. So is gold a hedge because let me ask you something over the last decade, gold is up 10% and we've had two global crises, massive fiscal and monetary stimulus with the fed balance sheets gone from 3 billion to 8 billion, and gold is up 10% in a decade. It feels like it's, it's failed. Is that, is that a fair criticism?

Dan Tapiero: (19:09)
Um, you know, yeah. Yes and no, because, um, you know, gold, I always say this, and I've said this before gold never does what you wanted to do when you think it should do what it should. It just never does. And so in over the short term, gold can be extremely frustrating, but over longer periods of time, uh, gold has really done, uh, you know, excellent. And it really just depends on what your starting period is. Uh, if you started looking at things from 2015, uh, you know, 14, 15, 16 gold was at 1200, I think, uh, or even less now it's at 1700. So it's up roughly 50% in the last, you know, five, six years if

Brett Messing: (19:54)
You have your well. Right. I know,

Dan Tapiero: (19:57)
But I mean, that's the thing is if you look at assets from 2000 gold is go, is up 600%. If you look at, from January, 2000 until today, uh, I think gold is up even more than the S and P 500. So it really, I think it is. So I think it really depends where you, you know, where you start your holding period. Um, look, I, I it's been disappointing the past nine months. There's no question. I would have thought it would have done better. Um, but it hasn't, but I still think it's going to go up and make new highs within the next year. Uh, I just think it's one of these things. Sentiment is terrible. You know, a lot of people are thinking that Bitcoin is replacing gold. Uh, as I said, I think Bitcoin is something much, much bigger than gold, like eventually, um, you know, as is the da. So I don't, I'm disappointed, but I, I think if you're, um, you're trying to manage, uh, uh, a broad portfolio, let's say if you're an institution, uh, I think you need to have about 5%, uh, in gold, you know, as a, as a hedge. So

Brett Messing: (21:05)
I think the goal narratives been super helpful for Bitcoin, but, but, but I agree that I think it's much bigger than gold. I also think if you, if you took the owners of gold as one circle and the holders of Bitcoin of another, those there's very little overlap. I mean, I've been doing this a long time, I've known gold, right? And if I hadn't bought Bitcoin, that money would be in stocks and real estate, I would not have bought gold with it. I really, there are people like yourselves, other macro guys, you know, tutor Jones who would be in gold, right. Cause that's just, you're used to moving across these asset classes, but I think the overlap is really small. Do you agree?

Dan Tapiero: (21:42)
Well, I do. But again, you know, you speak from a completely American perspective. And so understand that only 8% of total world physical bar demand comes out of the U S so the U S is an irrelevant player on the world stage, um, on the gold world stage, uh, China and India consume about 60% of the world's physical gold. And if you throw in the emerging markets as well, that's probably up to 80%. So again, we, we have a us centric way of thinking about things about the dollar and about NASDAQ, but I think that's, that's basically over, it's not that the U S isn't a great place, but look, you and I both remember, I remember 1980, very clearly, 1990, uh, you know, 2000. So 1990, you had the entire communist block. They just emerged from zero. Uh, China was barely a country as an economic entity in the year 2000.

Dan Tapiero: (22:39)
And so relative to the growth in other places in the last 20, 30 years, you know, the world has grown up in the U S is, has not grown as much. So we come from a background where there really was only the U S and maybe Europe, and maybe a little bit of Asia. Um, but now that's changed. And this is a fully global world, um, where there are other parts of the world, especially Asia that are growing much more quickly that have different habits, different regulations. Uh, I don't think the Chinese are going to stop buying gold. I don't think the Indians are gonna stop buying gold and Americans never really had a strong proclivity for it. Um, I actually think that might even change, you know, as currency, um, you know, as currency, I don't want to say becomes worthless, but continues to not yield anything and as bonds okay. Which reflect currency plus duration, I think bonds potentially could end up being worthless, like as an asset class. Like I haven't owned any bonds for many, many years, and I don't know why anyone would own any bonds. And so for me out of bonds, one of the natural moves out of bonds. I'm talking about treasuries, of course, is, uh, is into gold. So do you see what I'm saying?

Brett Messing: (23:58)
Yeah. I want to make one point, then I've hardly left my house in 13 months. So I think you have to excuse if I have a parochial and not a global things. Yeah. But it's not you specifically. I think it's everybody

Dan Tapiero: (24:11)
And tutor and guys like me, we lived our life so much as global macro people in terms of, you know, focusing on opportunities all around the world, that really didn't matter so much, you know, where the opportunity was. We were looking around the world. And so, uh, you know, maybe that meant we missed a Google's move or Amazon's a rally or whatever it is. But, um, I think that framework is very helpful and understanding why also Bitcoin and the digital asset ecosystem are so important that global. Yeah.

Brett Messing: (24:49)
So, you know, in, in a prior life, I actually was deputy mayor of LA and I served as the ex-officio member on lasers, which is the LA city pension plan. And I was involved. And this was a decade ago in reducing the target return for the pension fund, which, you know, requires making adjustments to the budget. Um, as you point out the 60, 40 portfolio is dead. Right. I don't know how they could be making fixed income allocations. Uh, w w where does that money go? Right. And, and how does that money find its way into Bitcoin or does it, I

Dan Tapiero: (25:25)
Think it has been finding its way into Bitcoin. I mean, look, I'll just tell you my personal experience. Uh, I run the investment committee for an endowment, you know, as part of my charitable, uh, you know, time and, uh, it's, it's a relatively large endowment for a school. Um, and we went to zero bonds about three years ago and Q1 19, thankfully, um, you know, I was able to, with some other people on the committee to convince the committee to put 1% of the entire endowment into Bitcoin and the digitalized ecosystem. So we followed the Wences Casares, uh, get off zero, you know, just put, you know, mark use, go and Pompe talking about, get off zero, just put 1% of your portfolio into Bitcoin. And so we did that. Um, and you know, it's been fantastic obviously from that period till now, but in a way that was sort of a little bit of our replacement of bonds.

Dan Tapiero: (26:25)
We also have between a five and 10% allocation to gold, whereas five years ago, we didn't. So I think balancing the Bitcoin, no, no, no, we're not gonna, I, you know, I've said, look, we'll look at it when it hits three, 400,000, which has been my target, you know, and I've said that publicly for, you know, at least two years, um, you know, if it gets there, we'll think about it. And then maybe in five years, uh, we'll think about it again, but it's allowed the endowment to outperform as well, because as you know, these very conservative, uh, endowments, uh, and we're maybe a little less conservative, but you know, they're not, um, uh, they're not used to actually making much alpha, right. You know, you stick to your benchmark and if you outperform it by a percent, that's a big deal. And all of a sudden we have this asset class that's outperforming, you know, that's driving that, uh, the performance like significantly more.

Dan Tapiero: (27:23)
So I think slowly the money does come out of bonds. Um, and some of it will go into equity. There's some defensive equities out there you can own, um, maybe a little bit moves into some corporate bonds. I don't really love that, but I do think gold could potentially have a Renaissance in the next five years. And I know no one's saying that, but that's largely because there are no advocates or very few advocates for gold out there because the average age of the owners is like 65. And many of them have just, you know, they've just sort of checked out of the day-to-day world. Whereas on Twitter, you have, you know, 10,000 people talking about how great Bitcoin is, uh, you know, every minute of the day and how it's going to replace gold, et cetera. And there's some, I don't want to say replace, but you know, it's certainly one alternative, but I think you should own both. And I think they have different functions in your portfolio. It's not so crazy. And to be ideological about investment should tell you that there's a problem there, right? Because you shouldn't be ideological about investments, you should make right investments that make sense for your portfolio. So then I

Brett Messing: (28:34)
Want to merge a couple of these things, your macro background, the big Bitcoin and the psycho, which is, it seems like many people I speak to in Bitcoin are expecting this cycle to be like past cycles, right. Where we had the having and May, 2020, what's the peak going to be? How far is the pull? Gack back going to be other share my own perspective. I know you won't, you'll give me your years, regardless is all I know is, is not going to be the same. You know what I mean? I'm not, I'm not, it could be shorter. We get of a bear market next week. It could be, there's no evidence to suggest that, but I just think it's very, very unlikely that the cycle is substantially similar to the prior ones. Um,

Dan Tapiero: (29:20)
You mean, in what sense that, you know, we've had five or six corrections of 80%, is that what you're

Brett Messing: (29:25)
Talking when people are saying, well, the peak usually comes between 14 months and 18 months after having right. Go up this amount. So there's a, there's a, there's a time aspect to it. There's a price and decline aspect to it. Um, and I think there's there, you know, it's, everyone's got the same trade on and whenever I see everyone at the same trade, it usually worked. Doesn't go that way. And, but what do you think?

Dan Tapiero: (29:50)
I, I completely agree. I mean, you know, I completely agree that, uh, there'll be some correction at some point, but, uh, I don't know that it's following any specific route or path. I mean, the surprise would be to be honest, the surprise would be if we got up to 100,000 and just stayed there for a few years, you know, more or less like give or take 20, 30%, uh, or whatever, 40, I mean, just up and down around that number, that would be the surprise. Um, so I sort of think a little bit the way you do, uh, but could we also go up to 300,000 and then correct back down to 50? Sure. I mean, there's no, you know, it's still, you know, I say an emerging asset class because only like one to 2% of the world have crypto wallets or accounts. Right.

Dan Tapiero: (30:43)
And so that sort of reminds me more of like the internet in its early stages, 19 96, 19 96, 1% of the world had access to the internet. Right. So, and by 2006, it was 15%. So that's a 15 X in 10 years. I think that this world, this digital asset ecosystem I think can grow certainly 15 times over the next 10 years. Like I, that's why I still think it's relatively early, it's an early asset class. And therefore you can't discount that it could do that 300 and come back down to 50. Right. I just don't know. Um, I just recommend people not to trade it. I think you have to allocate a percentage of your portfolio, have a target and come back to it. And even as a professional money manager, having traded, you know, global macro for all those years, I think, unless you're doing a 24 7 and you're professional, you should not be sort of moonlighting trading crypto. I mean, it's, it's very, I think it would be very difficult.

Brett Messing: (31:50)
It seems untradeable right. It seems like, I mean, you know, you also have event risk, right. You know, you, you have your position on, and then a line Musk comes in, right. Or name whatever event may or may not happen. It, you know, it just doesn't seem like, uh, like anyone who's winning, winning, you know, I think, you know, you just, just, just gotten lucky. Um, w what, what do you see driving us to your price target? W w what events are you looking forward to see, to know that we're on pace for that?

Dan Tapiero: (32:21)
Uh, I think there are so many, um, look, one of them, uh, uh, one of them, I think obviously will be central bank and government adoption, right. Um, corporate adoption, which is what sailor has been pushing, I think, uh, is sort of one level. Again, he's a very advanced, uh, tech focused guy and to have Elon mosque and, you know, Jack Dorsey and sailor putting some of their bounds sheet into Bitcoin, they're at the very cutting, cutting edge of it, right. Massachusetts Mutual's allocation. Um, last year, I think it was a huge sign that you could have the beginning of sight, very conservative people. You ask, what are these guys doing, you know, with all their bonds? Well, here, Massachusetts mutual is doing a toe dip. So I think that it's just the first ending for the institutions, the corporate end. I don't think it's even started, uh, in terms of central banks, um, you know, and government.

Dan Tapiero: (33:26)
So that could certainly very easily take us up to 200, you know, potentially 200, 300,000, um, you know, just that forget about even, you know, increasing global adoption and all these places forget about even, you know, um, you know, uh, banking the unbanked, right? That's the whole idea that, you know, in the emerging markets, they'll take up crypto more easily because, you know, they'll bypass the, you know, the first stage of, you know, the banking of being, you know, countries that don't have proper banking systems will, you know, jump through that and, and, and go straight to crypto. Um, there, there are a whole bunch of variables, but just those two alone could probably take you up there, uh, to 300, because I'll tell you where a $1 trillion valuation now. So it's just saying, going to 5 trillion, right? And if you look at total assets out there they're $500 trillion of value in total assets. I think they're $192 trillion of cash. Plus cash flows, fixed income in the world. So we're talking about going from 1 trillion to 5 trillion, not that big a deal, that would be a 3% exit as of a two and a half percent exit is from cash and from bonds, right. Just that right.

Brett Messing: (34:47)
So Dan, on the micro strategy corporate event, I thought Ross, Steven said something very interesting, which is, he said that where we are in Bitcoin is that the left tail has gone, right. We've taken zero out of the equation. I guess my question is a two-part one is, do you agree with that? Uh, and his view obviously was if you, if you cut the left tail off and Bitcoin is massively undervalued, um, and secondarily, if we're wrong, and this is like a video that we wish would never, you know, be seen again, because we're just so wrong. Um, why are we wrong?

Dan Tapiero: (35:23)
So I agree with him that it's impossible for it to go to zero. That was the reason that I sort of decided to focus on this or deciding that I was going to focus on this rule for the next 10 to 15 years. Because, um, you know, after doing my research, I just thought some intervention of this significance just can't go to zero. And that, that, you know, people are wrong really just because they haven't done the work and they haven't realized the significance of, you know, of what's been invented. So I completely agree. That was sort of one of the main reasons I really got stuck in, because I believe there's zero chance that go to zero now. Uh, so I don't think it can go to zero and you're saying, so what would be, what would be something, uh, that could happen that would, I would be wrong? We would be wrong about what about it going to zero?

Brett Messing: (36:17)
Oh, about, you know, not, not, not zero necessarily, but, you know, it's, you know, it becomes, it returns to being a niche asset trading between a couple of thousand and 10,000 in perpetuity like this, this, this, this turns out to be just a moment, right. You know, assets.

Dan Tapiero: (36:36)
Well, you know, I would have said in the first five or six years, that that was possible. Um, but I really, I, you know, the, the network effects have been too big. Um, I think the first five, six years it was vulnerable and it was still small. And, you know, maybe, you know, it could have been, uh, attacked and hacked potentially, but it really survived already. So it's really like, at what point do we actually stop saying, Hey, where are we wrong? We're going to go back to 10,000. At what point do we say, this is an invention akin to the invention of the combustion engine. And in fact, maybe this thing Bitcoin can go to 10 trillion in value or 20 trillion. And that the digital asset ecosystem is going to encompass $500 trillion of value. I think that's more rare. You know, when, when you said to me before, you know, it's not going to happen the way that it is before when everyone thinks something.

Dan Tapiero: (37:38)
I mean, I've done hundreds of calls and meetings for 10 T you know, my fun. And very often I get asked this, the, you know, the same questions can the government attack. It will, they will. They ban it. It uses a lot of energy, all these typical things that on Twitter, they call FID. Um, and these questions have been answered by guys a lot smarter than me in pieces, a lot longer than any of us are gonna reap. And so to me, all of that still is a sign that we're right about things, right? Like there's still so many doubters, there's such a wall of worry to climb. Um, I see zero chance of zero. And I think the more, you know, the, the other, the flip side question is how many people have you spoken to the talk about the DAA and Bitcoin in those terms as the money protocol for the entire internet one day.

Dan Tapiero: (38:31)
And I would say, you know, one out of a hundred, and then how many people say to me, can it go to zero? It's probably like 30 out of 130 to 40, 30% think that, you know, it still has this problem or that problem. Um, so I know that doesn't really answer the question, but I sorta think we're beyond that, uh, question. Like it's already with us, we have central bank, digital currencies. They're going to move around in this new digital world. Like the central banks have already validated it for you. So I don't know why it would go to zero, right. Although

Brett Messing: (39:12)
I have to tell you just, just, just today, you know, we were in contract with a pretty large wealth management firm. You know, we have a Bitcoin fund, that's conditional investors. And they were basically, NFW no crypto. We think Bitcoins go to zero. And I was like, really? I mean, this is a, this is, you know, I'm not going to out them because it would make them look really stupid. So I'm not going to say who it is, but you know, it's a pretty name brand place, so it, it's still out there. Um, but you know,

Dan Tapiero: (39:43)
Let me tell you what, when it's not out there anymore is when we have to work. Right. Well,

Brett Messing: (39:49)
The thing is interesting, you know, we were trying to, because we're mandated by regulators to provide quote balance, right? So I was looking for, you know, thoughtful anti-big coin pieces and they don't exist. In other words, if, if you do the kind of exhaustive research that you've done in iPod, you find ad hoc attacks, right. By folks on Bitcoin, you won't find a 20 page paper on why Bitcoin isn't, isn't a, you know, attractive investible asset. Or if you have, please send it to me. Cause I haven't found them.

Dan Tapiero: (40:23)
Yeah. I mean, look, I think in the first five or six years, there were some things out there. I mean, no, I know I, and I just think that, and maybe in the first five or six year, their fixers, there were some valid complaints. I mean, for a long time people said, no one uses Bitcoin. I can't buy coffee with Bitcoin. Right. It's not worth anything. Um, like it's not transactable, but that really wasn't, you know, that's not that w that's not really why it's important that that's not the sort of dominant narrative. Um, and I think it took going through many questionable use cases in narratives before getting to where we are now, right.

Brett Messing: (41:05)
In the early days you couldn't buy coffee, but John and I bought meth with our Bitcoin. So John, do you want to launch a few questions at Dan before we wrap it up?

John Darcie: (41:17)
I would love to. Um, so then you launched 10 T it's a, from what I understand, the $200 million fund to invest in crypto companies, you were talking about, you know, your concern that if, if Coinbase goes off at 150 or $200 billion valuation, which by the time this airs Coinbase will be trading live, uh, so we'll either look really smart or really dumb, uh, when that takes place. But you're, you've raised this fund to invest in the digital asset cryptocurrency ecosystem is that over-complicating things, should people just be investing in Bitcoin and Ethereum, and if there's any other blue chip products or protocols out there, why invest in the picks and shovels rather than just the pure play, you know, apex, predator, coins. Yeah,

Dan Tapiero: (42:03)
Look, I think, uh, and I tell this to all my perspectives, you know, uh, have 50% in Bitcoin, uh, and 50% in 10 T because it's a different, it's a different exposure with a very different risk reward profile. So like, as an example, in 2018, when Bitcoin went down, 85% of basket of these companies would have broadly maintain their value. So also, you know, a private equity fund invests over 12 to 24 months and we have a 5, 6, 7, 8 year holding period. And so, you know, a lot of people, uh, are not comfortable holding one thing. Um, you know, look, yes, Bitcoin is the thing. Bitcoin is fantastic. I would even say if you want, maybe do 85% Bitcoin, 15 or 80, 20, you know, 20 in, in Ethereum. Um, you know, I think the other cryptocurrencies are really more like early stage technology projects. And I think they're for VCs, uh, I don't know that they're for the average sort of retail guy out there who certainly doesn't have the capacity or capability to do the deep, the deep dive, and you don't know how to take apart, uh, you know, have the background in, uh, you know, programming.

Dan Tapiero: (43:20)
And I just, just, there are so many it's so discipline, interdisciplinary, this, this area that, um, there's more stuff that you don't know than what you know. And so the picks and shovels bet, um, I liked because it has just a very different risk profile. Uh, yeah, maybe we underperformed Bitcoin, maybe we outperformed Bitcoin. I don't know. Um, but for a guy from my sort of traditional, uh, background to really believe that I could make a five or 10 X on something, uh, is incredible and I'm happy with that. And I'll let the, you know, the young guys can play an Ave and uni swap and, you know, in graph and make 20 bucks

John Darcie: (44:05)
RP at 20 cents or, and

Dan Tapiero: (44:07)
Make, you know, 2500% return or 25000% return. I think that's wonderful. But again, you know, the VC model is more invest in 10 things, nine go to zero and one is Google. And my approach and my background is a macro investor. I want to make a broad sector bet because I want to, you know, I want to have exposure, uh, to this, to the value in the digital asset ecosystem going up. That's my, that's my bet. And I don't want to have any one thing I don't want to just don't exchange as we've divided the world up into three buckets for us, it's digital asset ecosystem gateways, uh, next generation financial services companies, and then blockchain infrastructure companies. And we're going to have a portfolio of three to five companies in each bucket. And my bed is, is that over the next five, six years, that that will appreciate, and that I'm not going to have to, you know, worry about the volatility or the businesses going under, as I said, they're already, I think mature, some of them are coming public soon. Um, so it's just, you know, different investors have different risk profiles, but if you were to say to me, Dan, you know, I'm just going to have everything in Bitcoin. I'd be like, oh, that's good too. Right. It just depends. You know what you're trying to do with your portfolio.

John Darcie: (45:30)
It's amazing. The way the conversation around Bitcoin has evolved. We're talking about it right now as sort of the equity sleeve of a traditional portfolio. Whereas the venture investments are almost like the, you know, the alternative sleeve and it's amazing how quickly Bitcoin has gone from this speculative asset to a that's the bellwether, you know, steady, you know, allocate most of your, your capital to that, um, to that asset. We'll talk about Ethereum for a second. So we spent a lot of time talking about Bitcoin. Ethereum is sort of the silver to Bitcoin's gold, you know, deputy here in the cryptocurrency world, but it's obviously performed incredibly well over the last year, uh, including in recent days, we're taping this, uh, on, on Tuesday, April 13th. But, um, what do you view a theory of in terms of it, the, the pluses and the minuses relative to Bitcoin, obviously Bitcoin's immutable supply of 21 million Bitcoins is a very attractive to people. Uh, but what about Ethereum? Do you like, and not like relative to Bitcoin?

Dan Tapiero: (46:29)
Yeah. Um, you know, I don't know so much that it's silver. Uh, I think it's its own thing. I think it's a phenomenal, uh, you know, I mean, I call it an invention as well, but I mean, it's unbelievably complex. I mean, it's programmable money. Uh, you know, you can embed smart contracts into money. That phrase there, uh, is probably not understood by 99% of the people out there. What does that even mean? Embedded smart contracts, uh, you know, in programmable money, it just, it's crazy. It's like, um, so I mean, I think it's quite a phenomenal thing. It has a different use case really then than Bitcoin, as I said, Bitcoin, I think is that pristine collateral of the new system. It, you know, as you mentioned, it is defined, the network effects are unbelievably powerful. It's the brand of what it is. Uh, but I think a theory, its own thing and is equally phenomenal in its own way.

Dan Tapiero: (47:33)
So I don't, and you know, you know what some of these things are, you know, programmers find it easier to, to build on. It has a lot of flexibility. Yes. Maybe there's a little more supply that's out there, but we'll see what happens with ease too. You know, there's talk about it becoming a deflationary currency. I don't know why they're doing that. I guess they want to try to outbid coin Bitcoin, which doesn't make any sense to me. Uh, you know, a theory should be what it is and, and stay with the integrity of that. Um, but that one is clearly, you know, it's where sort of Bitcoin was maybe four or five years ago in terms of its maturity. Um, I don't see that as a science project anymore. Look, even Vitalik said, uh, on one of the interviews I listened to a podcast a few months ago, he said, look, Bitcoin is 100% complete.

Dan Tapiero: (48:23)
It's done, it's mature. He said it theory is like 60% there. We still, you know, we still have things that we need to, you know, overcome et cetera. But, um, I mean, I think it's a super powerful thing. I mean, just look at what's happening with the NFTs. Those are all on mostly ERC 20 tokens. Right? So, um, the, the reason I just want one thing I didn't mention regarding your last question, I would, I would say is that the bet that I have on this da eat, you know, why I like it is because it's also a bet on all the things of value, uh, or all the things that will be moved into the digital asset ecosystem that we are not even aware of yet. So as an example, NFTs didn't exist really six months ago. Now you have NFTs going from a hundred to a thousand dollars to a hundred thousand dollars, you know, to millions, of course, people 69 million. So like no one could have predicted that a year ago. And so Bitcoin is wonderful. Bitcoin can go up a lot, but you know, having a bet on all the things that are going to develop in the future that we're not even aware of yet to me is a different type of bet. So anyway, I just bring that back in. Then

John Darcie: (49:43)
We could go on for probably hours with you talking about the global macro and geopolitical situation with Bitcoin, Peter teal had some recent, interesting comments on that front. We're going to wrap that up for today. We'd like to keep these around 45 to 50 minutes. So it's been a pleasure to have you on salt talks. We'll hopefully have you on again in the future. And we'd love to have you at our live salt conference in September. We're getting back to our live in person gatherings, assuming everything continues on the same trajectory it is with the pandemic. So thanks again for joining us. Brian, you have a final word for Dan before we let him go.

Brett Messing: (50:14)
No, it was feeling great. You know, I was looking forward to it and it, uh, it's been fantastic. Thanks Dan. Thanks.

John Darcie: (50:21)
So you guys are two, two brown guys, uh, you know, bonding here, so great to have you guys together, but thank you again, Dan, and thank you everybody for tuning into today's salt talk, uh, with Dan Tappy arrow. Um, just a reminder, if you missed any part of this talk or any of our previous talks, including we have an entire series of these conversations on cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin, digital assets, uh, you can access those on our website. It's salt.org backslash talks and on our YouTube channel, which is called salt tube. And we have an entire playlist again, that's dedicated to these digital asset oriented talks, which I might add are generally our most viewed episodes. Even though we've talked to Titans across hedge funds and private equity and venture capital and public policy, these Bitcoin and digital asset oriented talks continue to be the most popular, which I guess gives you an idea about why we're seeing the price action that we're seeing in Bitcoin, Ethereum and other digital assets.

John Darcie: (51:15)
We're on Twitter as well. Please follow us at salt conference is where we're most active in the social media sphere, but we're also on LinkedIn, Instagram and Facebook. Please spread the word about these salt talks. We love educating people about what's taking place in the digital asset ecosystem. And like Dana said akin to the invention of the combustion engine. We could be at the very early stages still of this revolution, but on behalf of Brett and the entire salt team, this is John Darcie signing off from salt talk for today. We hope to see you back here again soon.

Ed Hajim: "On the Road Less Traveled" | SALT Talks #202

“Failure early in life is a gift. Doing everything right and having things go wrong is a gift. You learn from that.”

Ed Hajim, the son of a Syrian immigrant, is a seasoned Wall Street executive with more than 50 years of investment experience. He is now chairman of High Vista, a Boston-based money management company. He recently published his memoir On the Road Less Traveled: An Unlikely Journey from the Orphanage to the Boardroom.

A tumultuous and nomadic childhood saw Ed Hajim bounce around the country, living in hotels, YMCA’s, orphanages and foster homes- 15-20 different places in his first 18 years. From it, a determination grew to attend a private college and hide that troubled childhood. From a wide-ranging and successful career came the understanding and development of the Four P’s: Passions, Principles, Partner(s) and Plans. For Hajim, finding his partner, his wife Barbara, was key to his life. “If you can truly find someone in life you can support and will support you, who you can share your life with, solves at least half the problem.”

It is important to never become a victim or give in to self-pity. This means always asking ‘what’s next?’ after a failure. “Failure early in life is a gift. Doing everything right and having things go wrong is a gift. You learn from that.”

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Ed Hajim.jpeg

Ed Hajim

Author

On The Road Less Traveled

MODERATOR

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darcie: (00:07)
Hello everyone. And welcome back to salt talks. My name is John Darcie. I'm the managing director of salt, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance technology and public policy. Salt talks are a digital interview series that we started in 2020 with leading investors, creators, and thinkers. And our goal on these salt talks the same as our goal at our salt conferences, which we're excited to resume in September of 2021 in New York city. And that's to provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future. And we're very excited today to welcome ed Hagan to salt talks. Ed is the son of a Syrian immigrant and as a seasoned wall street executive with more than 50 years of investment experience, he's held senior management positions with Capitol group EF Hutton Lehman brothers all before becoming chairman and CEO of Ferman cells.

John Darcie: (01:06)
Hey, Jim has been the co-chairman of ING Barings, the America's region chairman and CEO of ING Altus group. And I N G Ferman sells asset management after that acquisition and chairman and CEO of M L H capital today, he is the chairman of high Vista, a Boston-based money management company hosting today's talk is Anthony Scaramucci, the founder and managing partner of SkyBridge capital, a global alternative investment firm. Anthony is also the chairman of salt. And I believe, you know, it's been something like 20 years. Anthony, you mentioned since you stepped into Ed's office, when you were at your previous business, Oscar capital,

Anthony Scaramucci: (01:43)
All right, John Darcie, I've been lying about my age. Okay. Yeah. Let everybody know that I know age them for that long in truth truth be told right before nine 11. Uh, I went to see ed, uh, he probably won't remember the visit as well as I do, because at that time he was still is a legendary person on wall street. And you know what I, what I, after reading your book, one of my reactions to you, ed, and I said this to my old professor, Sol Gittleman, you are the O positive of relationships, meaning you're like the universal donor. You can meet people, find something in common with them and build a relationship. Uh, and that's one of the big takeaways from your book. But I remember our meeting very vividly because we were in the process of selling our company. Uh, one of your colleagues, bill Turgeon brought us into your, your office and you gave me great advice, uh, which I often give to other people, which was, you know, do the right thing for your employees, pick the place, uh, to land them in a way where, you know, it'll help their careers.

Anthony Scaramucci: (02:53)
Uh, and that'll turn out to be a good decision. We ultimately sold that business to Neuberger Berman. Uh, Jeff Lane, uh, uh, was running Neuberger at that time. Um, but, but onto you, I want to hold up the book, uh, it's on the road, less traveled. Uh, the book is an unlikely journey from the orphanage to the boardroom. I got to tell you, sir, it was a brilliant read. I'm not saying that the flatter you, I read a lot of books. We have a lot of authors on, but your story is remarkable and unique. So I'd like to ask you that first question, tell us how you grew up in

Ed Hajim: (03:32)
It. Uh, it's a story that starts prior to my birth when my father came over and as an immigrant in 1900 and, uh, they, they settled in Bensonhurst, Brooklyn. Uh, dad became fascinated as young men with something called radio and by 1918 had, you know, taken a number of technical courses, got involved in RCA. And for the next, you know, the one roaring twenties did very, very well. I've a picture of him with an airplane. You supposedly own buildings on a hundred 10th street. And then in 29, he was obviously, margined a 10 to one like everybody else. And in the next four years, between 1929 and 33 lost everything. And those of us who know friends who have declined in, in, in personal wealth and so forth, not it has an enormous impact. And when you lose everything, I mean everything the same time, his most important parent, his mother died, and she supposedly died of a broken heart.

Ed Hajim: (04:35)
She was involved in the community and community winded difficulty, and she died in 1933. He decided that basically, uh, he was either going to commit suicide or drive across country with his last possession, which was his car lucky for me, decided not to commit suicide and drive across country. Uh, uh, he stopped at a cousin's home in St. Louis. And, uh, he was, he met their fifth child who was an 18 year old, young lady, 15 years, his junior, and they got married in two weeks with just another story. Anyway, they proceeded to California that I found that the streets were not paid to gold at a couple of finding a job. Supposedly the only happiness happened three years later when I was born 1936 at the queen of angels hospital. Uh, and it lasted a few a few months and they found out that having, uh, uh, you know, no amount to feed was not a good deal.

Ed Hajim: (05:29)
Three years later, uh, difficulty really with my wife's father was a very difficult man, having all the demons from his decline and wealth. Uh, my mother at 24 years old, divorced my father and got custody of me and took me from Los Angeles back to her home in St. Louis. She was not welcomed in St. Louis. Her father had 5, 6, 5 children at the time, and he was not glad to see a divorced 24 year old woman with a three-year-old child. My father got $5 a week alimony and child support, and he got Sunday visiting rights on the book cover. You'll see the picture of my father and I in a car, 1936 Roadster driving on highway 66, 1 of the visiting rights he got there. He found me so called unkept. And instead of taking me to a movie or to the playground, he got back on highway 36 and kept driving to Los Angeles, uh, told me that, uh, I never seen my mother again a few weeks later.

Ed Hajim: (06:28)
He said she died. And that's how I kept it for another, uh, 57 years thinking that she had passed away. Uh, dad and I spent a couple of years together, although he was a merchant Marine at the time radio operator. I spent time with, uh, with a neighbor most of the time. And when the war started, he was either, either volunteered or became, was, uh, drafted as an officer in the merchant Marines. And I didn't see him for four and a half years. Uh, he put me with a Catholic welfare agency, which resulted in my being at five Catholic, uh, foster homes, five schools, uh, which was an interesting experience. The war ended. Dad came back on the east coast. I made the trip across country. We spent some time in the Sloan house on 34th street, Y YMCA, which still exists. Wasn't a pleasant place at the time.

Ed Hajim: (07:19)
Then a hotel room in Coney island while he saw Atlanta based work, it didn't work. He had to go back to see. Then I went, ended up in two Jewish orphanages, one in far Rockaway. When I aged out of that one, I ended up in a better, a very good orphanage in Yonkers, New York, about four blocks from next to the high school. So 15 or 20 different places in the first 18 years, uh, you know, a real eager as they call it a trip from, from, you know, from Mecca to Medina and many stops along the way. And the, the relationships from the Forrester homes were ranged from being abusive and cold, to warm and caring. So, you know, what I got out of that were a lot of disadvantages, which in my book, I try to put across to people like me resulted in some of the advantages.

Ed Hajim: (08:05)
And that's sort of the thumbnail sketch it's it's in the book. It's, it's better. Well done to me, just running to all those pages very quickly, but the child, it was very difficult and it, you know, some people call it Dicksonian, but it, it, I, I, as I say, it wasn't my fault. And I, I had people along the way that did help me writing the book made me recognize there was some very good people along the way, which basically helped me get through the period. Uh, dad came in and out of my life and, uh, at 17 I make one of the key decisions in my life. I decided that one, I was going to go to a private college, no matter what it took. And I just shackled the clock. He got that done. And two, I was going to take my background and hide it, which the psychologist with today would say, it'd be a disaster. But for me was the answer. I was going to draw that line at 18 years old, go to a college and tell everybody that never tell anybody my, my story. And I kept that a secret for 55 years. And that's another story.

Anthony Scaramucci: (09:07)
So I want to go directly to what you attributed to be one of the cornerstones of your success. And that's your wife, Barbara, and you write some beautiful passages about her in the book. But one of the things that is, uh, uh, striking to people that are married is the unconditionality of love between a spouse or two spouses. I should say. We see that relationship often with children, but you have that relationship with your wife. And since we're here to also embarrass you, just give me one, there's a beautiful picture of you right here. So I'm looking at this strapping young man in 19.

Ed Hajim: (09:47)
Well, I'll go ahead. I don't have my hunk.

Anthony Scaramucci: (09:49)
Yeah, I'm going to come on. That's 1959. Okay. There you are. Uh, looking like a super honk there. So tell us about the courtship with Barbara, how she came into your life and her influence.

Ed Hajim: (10:02)
It's a long story, and I hope you can put up with it, but that picture was taken. I was at an it's an incident Navy, our first trip requests, the ocean stopped in Hawaii and somebody took that picture. I thought it was kind of humorous, uh, Barbara, the story about Barbara and I are really, is it that you can't, you really can't tell a story like this in my, and by the way, at the end of the book, I have my four PS and the third P is partnership partners. And there's a thing called P one. If you truly can find P one early in life, someone new you can support who will support you. Someone who you can share your life with it's really solves at least half the problem. And I met the Barbara situation is that it's unfortunately a long story. It starts in 1957.

Ed Hajim: (10:46)
When I was the editor of F I founded, I was founding editor of a humor magazine at the university of Rochester. I felt that the school was a place where fun went to die, and I was going to get a human magazine. That's a whole story. Anyway, the next editor was a boy named David Melnick, who was a year behind me. And in order to transfer the information on this under human magazine, I went to his house in Staten island. And while I was there talking about the human magazine is 13 or 14 year old, little pigtail sister was buzzing around and we kept chasing her away. After I left the house, she told her mother and father that she was going to marry me. Of course, she ever had a teenage crush. They didn't think twice about it. Seven years later, I was at the business school.

Ed Hajim: (11:31)
My second year phone rang spring, who was David Melnick. He said, well, I'm getting married and I want you to be my best man. I said, great, hung the phone up realized I did not have the money to fly to San Francisco where he was in school. So I quickly call it the placement officer. I said, have you got anything in California? I don't care what they do. I need a, and the girl lady, there was a buddy of mine. Actually, we had dated for awhile. And so she said, come on over. There's nobody. There's no availability, but there's a company here called capital research. This is in a mutual fund business. I'd never taken an investment course. I wanted to manage a business. I didn't want to go in the investment business. I mean, they said, we'll put you outside the chairman's door and you can cost them and see if you can get the invitation to the dinner.

Ed Hajim: (12:17)
They invite a bunch of people that dinner. Then they cut the group in half and they invited half out to, for no, the interview in Los Angeles. Uh, I got there stood outside the door, Jim Fullerton, the chairman came out and the way he tells the story is I, he learned more about me in 10 minutes than he learned all day long by anybody, any hour interview. Anyway, they invited me to dinner. I made the cut, I got the chance to go to California. I was on my way to the airport and I got a phone call from Barbara's mother who said, would I take a little Barbara to the wedding? And I said, sure, at Idlewild airport, which is now Kennedy, we passed each other a dozen times. I finally had PA system and the little 13 year old turned out to be a 20 year old striking young lady.

Ed Hajim: (12:59)
And we got an airplane. She fell asleep on my shoulder. We went to the wedding. We danced, we had a good time. And I appeared the next morning. And Monday morning at Capitol research hung over, not interested, only interested in one thing, which was to get out of there. The first thing he did was give me a battery of psychological tests, which I flunked. I can spend my time on capital research for, because it was a great, great day. Anyway, I finally got out of there back to Harvard, uh, and a couple of weeks later, I invited her up for a weekend and she quickly said, yes. And I said, okay, I'll fix you up with somebody your own age. And I did. And then a couple of weeks later, I didn't have a date. So I think I invited her up and she came up and she spent a weekend with me very innocent weekend.

Ed Hajim: (13:41)
And I'm thinking anything of it. She's a nice little girl, much younger, you know, seven years younger than I was. So we were all set, ready to take a job on wall street. I'd interviewed all the usuals, Goldman Sachs and Kuhn, Loeb, and Lehman brothers and, and Eastman, Dillon, and so forth. And I was going to take one of those jobs. And, uh, there's a long story in there. Anyway, I decided last minute to take a job in California capital research, this company that I had no interest in, by the way I worked for him for 10 years, Barbara was a teacher in Connecticut. She immediately canceled her job and applied to graduate school at San Francisco state, university of California, San Francisco got in. And what does San Francisco we dated for about a year and somewhere along the line, under the, under the golden gate bridge I proposed and we were married. So it was, it was a, it's a, it's an Odyssey. Uh, I ended up spending 10 years with the company. I had no interest in the only reason I went out there was to be the wedding for her brother. And we're now married 55 years. And we have three wonderful children and eight grandchildren, which is really my legacy, uh, seven grand sons, by the way, that's too long. A but unfortunately,

Anthony Scaramucci: (14:53)
Please, it's a brilliant story, which is why I didn't want to interrupt one second of it. And you've regaled some of it in the book. Uh, I'm not a pop psychologist. Um, but I, I, when I read your book, I made an observation of myself and a note, and I'm going to ask you this. And, and, you know, I just want you to react to it. You know, some people that grow up the way you did in a fractured situation, moving about, uh, can develop trust issues, can develop a fear based, uh, relationships, not want to wait deeply into the pool. Uh, but you manage to overcome all of that, uh, as it relates to your marriage, but also the business relationships. And, and I'd like you to get into the four PS. If you don't mind, I don't want to ruin the book for people, cause I certainly want them to read it, but I want them to get a sense for your ethos. How are you able to, um, break out of the shifting winds and sands of your childhood to live this anchored in such a stable, great, uh, career arc and family arc?

Ed Hajim: (16:03)
Well, I can go into it in depth, but I want if I want to simply say why the problem with most people have backgrounds like me, that spiraled down as they become victims, they come victims of their circumstance. I refused no matter what happened to me. And by the way, my entire life not to be a victim, always asks what's next. I've tried to delve in why I took that Oster possibly because my, my father was a victim. He always complained. It was always somebody else's fault and children tend to do the opposite of their parents. So maybe that was the reason, but all through my life, no matter what happened to me. And I had a wonderful question last night at Alfred university, a young man asked me what was the hardest thing that I've ever had to do in my life. And I said, it's basically something where you do everything right? And it still comes out wrong. Spend seven years with Lehman, brothers turned two divisions around and they still throw you out in the street because you don't get along with the boss or, you know, you go to it, then tuck it and you apply to the golf club and they reject you. You know, even though you're a good guy and you sit next to the, the guy who's a trustee, you know, who recommends you and so forth. So in many respects, don't I just I'm pitching this. Well, John John Dorsey

Anthony Scaramucci: (17:18)
Wants me to landscape the golf club that he's a member of. I just want to point that out to you and I'll tell you what we're up against. We're going to keep going, but you built a golf club on Nantucket. So we'll go into that in a second too, but I didn't mean to interrupt you, but I had a throat Darcie under the bus there temporarily, go ahead.

Ed Hajim: (17:35)
Don't be a victim, no matter what anybody does to you try to think of how to, what to do next and get out of it. You know, whatever it is. And in my case, it really has paid off because in many respects, you know, getting thrown at you, Lehman my brothers story is a great story because I really did everything right for the first time in my life. And I communicate with people at Xtra, made the first woman vice president at Lindsey management company, blah, blah, blah, but Glucksman, and I didn't get along. And he forced me out of my division and I, I left there and I got my dream job and the same thing with the golf course, being rejected as the best thing that ever happened to me, because I don't know you're doing John, but building a golf course is one of the great experiences of all times. I can talk about legacy, you know, all the companies I worked for except for capitalism.

Anthony Scaramucci: (18:21)
Well, it's also, it's also the best golf course on Nantucket. I don't know. I don't know if you remember to say that. Okay. All right. I'm sorry. Well, I'm not really much of a golfer, but I don't know if you remember Jack Schneider now and a company. Uh, he, he took me there. He had several, uh, friends of his that were members there. Uh, and, uh, it was absolutely breathtaking.

John Darcie: (18:40)
And Anthony shot, I think a 1 43. Well, and that was,

Anthony Scaramucci: (18:44)
That was on the first nine. And I made the 1 43 on the first nine. Let's not talk about the entire score. Of course, I did think that you had a score. You were scoring points by swinging. I didn't realize it was the opposite, but what we can talk about that later go to the four piece. So, so it'll be a book by one of the things I want to emphasize. We have a lot of young people listening to our Saul talks, no victim hood, no self pity. Uh, you know, you take life as it comes and you, you, you do your best to see the good things in life. And you come in from a position of gratitude, which you obviously have indicated in the book, but tell us about the four piece. Let me give you the

Ed Hajim: (19:24)
Mic. Give me just again, you, you said it so well, don't be a victim. Don't look for self pity. Don't look, don't look for anything. Special failure early in life is a gift. Think about that, doing everything right, and have things go wrong is a gift you learn from that. And because in many respects, all of those mistakes, the problem that I had turned out much better because they occurred before piece in my mind. And this is really, you got to buy me a bottle of good red wine. We could spend the evening on it. I truly believe. And this is, this is my own way down deep thought process. You only have one constant in your life. It's your inner voice. And you must have a language for your inner voice. This is what I want young people to be talking to them. They talk to themselves, but a lot of it's noise.

Ed Hajim: (20:10)
That's why I developed the four piece. If you say to yourself, what am I passions and passions are an overused word. I know that it's what are your talents? What are your interests and how do they frame with today's world? What are your principles? What are your principles? You know, what, what, what lines won't you cross? I mean, I started in the Catholic schools. So, you know, I got the golden rule with the golden rule or on the knuckles, you know, and they basically made me understand what the good Lord wanted me to do. So that was very good. But principles change throughout your entire life, just like passions, passions, evolve. And I make the point and passions. I started out with, you know, baseball, basketball, math, science, and girls, and, you know, morphed at college. And I can go through that in length if you'd like principals, same way more.

Ed Hajim: (20:56)
But I, you know, early on I had the second golden rule, which is he who has the gold rules. I had great desire become financially independent. And everybody formed that faces that fork in the road. How much of your effort you want to spend on achieving financial resources? And I spent a lot of effort on until I was about 47 and ended up leaving bows. I kind of had just enough money to sort of get through. And I would take a job that I really wanted, which was to be worked with a small firm and have fun. Freedom became more important than money at that point. And of course later on the most important thing, which is tonight is gratitude. Really gratitude is very important. Now the third Pete partners and besides finding [inaudible] you find you're only as good as the people you surround yourself with.

Ed Hajim: (21:42)
I look back at my failures is because I either didn't have a partner or the wrong partner. Whenever I had the right partners, a big tall, six foot, five guy from Dartmouth, his name is Steve Fletcher, who constantly came my office and said, don't do that. You can do this. It's okay. And he took care of the old four-letter firms. And you would have, he would have been associated with this SCC and ASD New York stock exchange. Anybody who came in, he handled it. I was able to do the things I use my partner. One thing, find partners who can do things you can't do, but need to be done. Find partners that things that you can do, but they do it better than you do. Then find partners who do things that you can do very well, but you don't want to do so. What you ended up with is things you like to do that you do well.

Ed Hajim: (22:26)
Think about that. And that's why I structured my partners. Now I have a secret for them that none of four thing is plans, uh, plans, you know, God, you know, man plans and God laughs that's a Chinese expression that the Yiddish people took on. But you know, in many respects, it's not true. I want people to write plans because at least they know where they want it to go. And then take those plans and think about the context of your life. You want to have some fun, spend an evening thinking about somebody born in 1900, like my father and someone born in 1936, like me, the difference in our life context, context, you know, find a waiver, a cycle for our trend or something that basically is going to go up during your lifetime. And if you can find that and get the wind at your back and it fits with your passions and your principles and your partners, you know, boy, you've got like to marry those first three to the fourth one.

Ed Hajim: (23:24)
And I always kid about this friend of mine, you know, loved Alaska, loved gold mining was helping the Indians up there. Everything was going fine. He married someone who hated the coal, you know, does it work? You know, is that kind of thing that you sort of have to deal with? Those are the four piece I used it at Rochester, almost in every one of my graduate. I made 70 graduation speeches. I use most of the time. Cause I really thought that those even missed missing, not necessarily the four piece, but use a language with yourself that you can go back to. And of course the fifth piece is purpose, which all those things, you know, undermine, undermine the underlying purpose for everything you're doing. And so I find this and if you can concentrate on looking at your passion to your eye, my passion changed.

Ed Hajim: (24:06)
I mean, in college I was a very, I'm honored to be a physicist for awhile, but by my junior year, I started to recognize what really turned me on my real passion was helping people. I started the human magazine and I took on partners, helping people be better than they think they can help them to exceed their own expectations. That really got me excited. I didn't know it at the time, looking back, my business grew, I started to recognize that's what turned me on. And you say, why have I made good relationships? Because if people believe that you're really interested in them makes life a lot easier, not easy. And then of course you marry that with the most difficult thing that people do in our businesses. You know, you can reach great Heights if you don't worry about who gets the credit. So if someone feels that you're really interested in them and they're going to get the credit, you have a couple of hundred of those people surrounding you, you will do really well.

Anthony Scaramucci: (25:02)
So I mean, again, these are all, these are great pieces of advice. I want to go back to the book for a second because, uh, you live this, you live this in the book. Um, take me back to the Nantucket story because you're 56, 58 years old. You're in that ballpark it's 1994, you're opening, uh, the golf course, uh, take us through the process of getting the zoning approval on that ancient, uh, new England island, if you will, uh, and how you were able to make it all happen.

Ed Hajim: (25:39)
It's one of the things I left out of the book and men respect because we were bidding against the very prominent other person in getting the property. And we had to pay a little more than we, we bought a knock out bid at $8 million for the property. And we had constant covenants in there. And in our bid, which we'll ask one was, you know, if we didn't get golf, golf, permitted, then we would basically not buy the property. Well, he took that out in his last bid. So we had to take it out and I had, uh, you know, raised $10 million with 50 people or $200,000 a piece. And I'd go back to them and say, we may not have a golf course. We'll just give you five acres a piece anyway. And so we started the process with, with, uh, with all the agencies.

Ed Hajim: (26:22)
And of course Nantucket was easy because this property was zoned with a goal or two. We could have put 150 units on that property. And we decided we showed them a, uh, a program. We said, here's what we can do 128 units. Here's what we should do. 60 units. Here's what we're going to do. Five units, a clubhouse was four cottages. And so that in tuck us, ran us through pretty quickly. Uh, but Massachusetts, we got caught finally with that endangered species woman who was in charge of that. And she was worried about the Harrier Hawk. And so we had to spend about $800,000 doing all kinds of things for the Harrier Hawk, which went on for 10 years. But anyway, we had about four foot of paper in the permitting process and, you know, $2 million, but we got the job done, took us about almost over a year to get the thing done.

Ed Hajim: (27:15)
And finally, we started with the bulldozers, April the eighth, 1995. It looked like the landing not landing on D-Day with all the backhoes in front hoes and bulldozers coming down, milestone drive. And I still say one of the great things. I'm not, I click a little bit of art, but building a golf course is art with a bulldozer and moving as little dirt as you can. And using as much of the natural undulation, which we could Fred and I stood up Fred green, who deserves all the credit for building the golf course. He's built, we built three golf courses together. One in Vale. Second was Nantucket. The third was in London, but Fred did a fantastic job. He brought in Reese Jones and the whole thing was covered with four or five foot of scrub Oak. We couldn't even see it when we drove through it.

Ed Hajim: (28:02)
And one day we were standing in the middle of it all. He said, why don't we take it all down? I said, what will it cost? He said, well, probably a quarter to a half, a million dollars. We took it all down and found one of the great, just natural undulation. And so we took the bulldozers. Didn't have to do too much work. Anyway, we, uh, we spent two years building the golf course with Reese. It turned out to be the number one private golf course built in 1997. Our clubhouse also won the number one award in golf magazine. And it was a great experience. And I have been hugged by more women because their husband has moved them to Nantucket than anybody in the Western world, because, you know, because nobody would come to golf, come to Nana, took it just as I went, when I got turned down by sanctity, I went back to Barbara's ethic.

Ed Hajim: (28:49)
We're going to have to sell a house. You said, no, can sell a house. Why don't you build a golf course? You built one avail. I said, Bale's got land. Nantucket, doesn't have land. So I went out and I found the land invited Fred out, and the rest is history. We have basically changed the island. We've in fact, I get gave good credit to the, the membership goes about two years. Well, first year we had our first charity event and we raised $400,000. People went crazy, oh, it's 13 requests. The next year we said, stop. We started something called the children's charity a couple of years later, which is the only charitable event at the island. You know, anything else? Nobody can come to the island, raise money except that one night. And now we're into this almost 20 years. We've put 25 kids through college with the largest charity on the island.

Ed Hajim: (29:34)
We support 40 or 50 different charities. Every year. We've made a contribution to the new boys and girls clubs, new hospital. And we now started my new mini crusade, which is vocational education. We now have through vocational scholarships, welders shifts to go to Thompsons. Wells have cost $40,000 a year. So we have two college scholarships and three or four vocational scholarships. Every year we hold one gala. And I think we raised more money per, per capita than almost any place I've ever been in. And it's something it's a model I'd love if I had time to take it to other clubs around the country, because you really become instead of golf club, you come in institution and that really changes everything. And the island, you know, accepts us now as part of it for them. And I think it's very important. And if I wasn't rejected, we probably never would have built the club. And, you know, and I still say one of the great opportunities at all times, all times after to finish nine holes, you go up to the snack bar. You tell Kelly, you want to, you want a muscle milk or a smoothie or something. And she says, what's your number? And you say number one. And that's the best. That's the greatest compliment anyone could ever.

Anthony Scaramucci: (30:46)
I love, I love, I love the story for so many different reasons has been a lot of clubs that I frankly have been rejected from over my life at, but, but I will say this about Nantucket. Uh, my first trip to Nantucket, uh, I was at a Tufts university, um, and I obviously had gone to Cape Cod. I took the ferry over to Nantucket, uh, fell in love with the island and my wife, my first date with her was on the island of Nantucket. And, uh, I took her there. Uh, we went to the white elephant for breakfast and then, and the white elephants

Ed Hajim: (31:19)
Right there. It's actually down the block from my house. Yeah,

Anthony Scaramucci: (31:22)
The white elephant. Beautiful. Um, and so a few years back, she presented me a map of the island, uh, which was, uh, made in the 1870s. It's a beautiful map, uh, of, uh, and it's in my house here. So I have a lot of fondness for Nantucket. Well,

Ed Hajim: (31:39)
My wife, we got there in 86. We were there for two hours, should get a real estate agent being an island lady. It's that now Nantucket with you just fell in love. And she was one of the prime movers on the whaling museum, but we have a map, but you have to come to our house. We have a map in our house from 1775 of Nantucket, which I bought in London and I have it up there. And another one, we have a couple of maps. I used to collect maps for awhile, but, uh, my wife fell in love with it and talk and she can sit there in our living room, in the rain with a smile on her face. So she's just a happy lady at Nantucket.

Anthony Scaramucci: (32:17)
Well, I got to let John in here. He's got some questions from our audience, but, um, I love the stories at, and I love, I love your life story and I'm so happy that you were able to put it down into words on the road, less traveled, and I'm encouraging all the young people that listen to us, please go out and buy this book. Um, but John, go ahead. Yeah. So you

John Darcie: (32:40)
Obviously had a storied career on wall street at a lot of great organizations, capital group F Hutton, uh, Lehman brothers firm. And Seltz, what did you learn at, at any of those stops about things that, that worked well in terms of organizational culture and process, and some things that you encountered that, uh, that you wish you could have fixed or that you observed that didn't work?

Ed Hajim: (33:02)
Well, I learned, I learned to process. I mean, I'm an engineer by background, so it's, it's observed design do analyze the results. And so you've got to have sort of things you focus on. I do believe the following process it's and Lehman brothers wouldn't agree with this it's culture. First strategy, people, numbers and Lehman rose always, but you know, it was more focused on the numbers. That's why they made me hire. And thank God that did this fell asleep, lectured all the numbers for me, but I work on culture and strategy. Those two, you could do strategy first and culture second, but it's important culture. Usually each strategy, if you don't have the right culture, it doesn't work. And in each case, that's what I try to do. Try to produce a culture by being, by being willing. And a Navy taught me to be willing to do anything that anybody in your shop has done.

Ed Hajim: (33:55)
I was sat in the trading desk. I made sales. I sure as heck did research. I was a research analyst. So running institutional business was really easy. I could relate to any one of them now what I didn't learn. And I, this is the what's next question. Especially in our day and age, got to keep asking that. And each time I changed jobs or made a move was because what's next I left because foaming would not marry my fabulous research department, this banking business. He was an Alice in a gopher as their statisticians and our bankers, you know, they're, they're, you know, they're the people that really work with important people. I said, no, they don't understand analysts know more than anybody about companies. And that's what companies want today and tomorrow. And they also want trading. And so he didn't buy that because he was a retail guy.

Ed Hajim: (34:44)
And I, and I understood that because he wanted enough institutional business not to be embarrassed. And I did that. He wanted me to take over retail and I said, retail is okay. The new game in town, institutional Lehman bros is building a 44, a 400 seat trading room. And that just, that was the next step in our business. And so I knew that and foam is not willing to do it. So I went to Lehman brothers and of course, Lehman brothers, the story's been written too many times. You know, the problems there is cultural complete. They're the smartest guys in the world. I mean, I will never forget getting a phone call from one of our talent partners. He says, you've got to tell me about the economy. I said, where are you? He said, I'm on the Pope's plane. I mean, and I remember working with Peterson, he had it.

Ed Hajim: (35:31)
He would have the federal reserve chairman on hold, talking to somebody else, Kissinger or somebody else. I mean, at lunchtime, you looked at the people coming to lunch. I mean, it was unbelievable. And so it was, it was a sad, sad story when Lehman went down. But what I learned constantly and with Ferman cells, it was what my message was very simple. We're sitting on a Lily pad, we're a bunch of frogs. And if it's a good Lily pad, other people are gonna jump on a slip ed as slowly but surely it's going to sink. We better jump to another one. So we constantly had to stay moving during my 15 years there, before we got bought by ING almost half the firms like us went out of business or more merged out. So we stayed in business by continuing to add businesses by continuing.

Ed Hajim: (36:13)
I mean, I, I built the money management business, really 40, 40 million to 12 billion in that braid before money management was really important to investment banks and so forth. But I learned constantly to keep moving. And by the way, also to constantly give people reason to do their own thing. I mean, they would kill me about another guy. You're bringing them in. You're giving them a desk and telephone. You're going to check them in six months and what are you doing? But that's what really happened. And all my guys really were. And I also credit myself with the compensation problem on wall street for 20 years, I was the highest paid person in the firm. One year, that was a year we sold to Xerox because I really felt I did that when I deserved being paid the most. But then I was not because I think that, and Bob, David Kerns at Xerox told me that when I merged me, he said, you know, I've never been the highest paid person at Xerox. And he was one of the classic guys of all times I've over asked, answered your question. I think it's what's next. Yeah,

John Darcie: (37:14)
It was exactly what I was looking for. And I think it explains a lot of why you were so successful is that, you know, you, you hire good people and you put your trust in them to do what they're expected to do. You create a culture, uh, that, that aligns everyone's incentives and you're willing to do everything within the organization. You're not asking people to do something that you're not willing to do yourself. I think it's also a credit to your, your modest upbringing and how you lifted yourself up by your bootstraps, uh, that, that you're not afraid to get in the hands. You

Ed Hajim: (37:43)
Know, I could have empathy with almost anybody, you know, going, going, you know, having been as poor as I was a kid with my background or a young person, my background, we have, we had, you know, shared experiences. We're in Harvard business school where everybody graduated from Princeton, you know, I had that experience as well. You know, it's an interesting, you know, so you're really lucky. I tell people, young people, I get a lot of questions about people from good, bad, you know, from fine backgrounds. What do I do to make my kids, you know, learn to put him in an uncomfortable position, send them to NOLs, send them to outward bound, nos, natural leadership school, get them a job in a, in a psychiatric hospital in Kentucky, or one of the dads that you know, or, you know, send them to Bangladesh. You know, uh, I got a friend who does, does a spinal surgery in Ethiopia.

Ed Hajim: (38:30)
I would be as assistant for the summer. You know, that kind of thing, but you're right. You make you, John, your Virgo, you picked out all the things I said, I kind of strung them all together. It's truly, and being able to give people credit, you know, make sure they understand that you're not trying to take the credit, give them the credit. And also the compensation. One of the problems is he even give him the credit. They say, well, thanks for the credit. Where's the money. And so you've got to give him the money to, of course I did the one thing, which I still think ties everybody together. Everybody owned a piece of the rock,

John Darcie: (39:01)
Right? Yeah. I think, you know, and I usually give Anthony a hard time on these talks, but two of the things that you just mentioned are things that he drills into us here at SkyBridge one, he has a plaque. I'm actually sitting in his office in our New York headquarters right now. There's a plaque. Ronald Reagan said, it's amazing what you can accomplish, essentially, if you don't care who gets the credit. Um, and, and also leave, you know, he, I

Anthony Scaramucci: (39:23)
Know I don't like John getting the credit for all these good ratings on Saul talks though. Hey Jim, I got a B no enough is enough, right? That's exactly. You can only go so far. Okay. I just want to make that clear, but go ahead, John. John took it a little bit too, literally agent.

John Darcie: (39:41)
And then, uh, the second piece is from Lee caching. He writes about this in one of his books is, you know, he, he asked Lee Kushing, what is one lesson that you would give me in my career to help me be successful? And, and Lee Kashink told him, leave money on the table for your partners. Don't try to squeeze every dime or every penny out of every transaction that you do with your partners, give them more than they even might expect. And you're going to have, you know, a partner for life and somebody who's going to be a lifelong advocate for you and someone who can unlock value for you. I'll give

Ed Hajim: (40:11)
You another idea or on which I, I did unconsciously deflect credit. They try to give it to you. I w when I was the chairman of president of the alumni association, Harvard business school, they wanted to throw a day for me after I was on the board for 10 years. And we did do, we did do a lot of night, really good things. We did this long, uh, lifelong, lifelong, lifelong learning process, which really actually was very spectacular. You're going to give me a day. So that, that day was my day. I developed a video for Christine who was the assistant director of alumni relations, who was absolutely fantastic. And so I did a video on her and her life and how she helped us and everything else. And after that session, which I did get a lot of credit. One of the women, very senior ladies that are abysmal came up and said, that's the classiest thing I've ever seen.

Ed Hajim: (41:06)
And I did it unconsciously because I really thought that Christine was, she was Christine and Fairchild fabulous lady. And she basically, I quit the board because originally, because I thought it was just a resume builder, she came after me. So you got to come back on the board. It's more than a resume builder. I went on those first two years at another eight years, and I became this president of alumni association, but I deflected it. Same thing I did when I left as the chairman of board of trustees at Rochester, I did something which I think, you know, I think you should copy. And I asked the president for 40 minutes and I gave him a book called, this is, this is the, my moment, which is a book about gratitude. I also got crystal pieces on and I put each person's name, university of Rochester.

Ed Hajim: (41:53)
And thanks, ed. And I said, this is a thank you that can never be destroyed. I can never go away. What you've done for me as a board, we raised 1,000,000,003, which was unbelievable. That's an old historic, what you've done for me and for the school should be remembered forever. And that's why I want to say, thanks for everybody. You know, deflecting credit, you really cashing is exactly right. Leave something on the table, by the way on deals. It's the same way. You know, I, I remember the Xerox deal. I didn't push that. I did push the push, the, the, uh, the ING deal a little bit because I felt they were undervaluing me. I knew what the price they willing to pay for one of my competitors. So I was, I knew that was in their pockets. So I figured I'd, I'd take that.

Ed Hajim: (42:33)
Uh, but you know, I, I left that on the table and also I feel very, very confident. I tried to give back to both Xerox and Diane G, if you read the book, both people, you felt that it was an overpaid deal. In each case, they both did just fine. You read the book. So I'm kind of excited about that, but those are the kinds of a little bit less, but marry those two things, helping people do better than they think they can and not taking the credit and even deflecting the credit want. I tell you it really works and is unconscious. It sounds like manipulation. I did it unconsciously and writing this book and thinking back as a biscuit, Rochester, when I started the book, I started to realize that was what I was doing unconsciously. And I, by the way, I did it because I got a kick out of when someone comes into your office and says, I just did this unbelievable deal that you may have really helped him with or her with, you know, and you see him light up that really turns you on, or, or in the case of kids with, at college.

Ed Hajim: (43:35)
When I got this, by the way, the book looks like to me, could be, I'm hoping I got some emails back from some, some what we call a, a foster home foster home kids up in Boston, who basically, uh, with a group called Wiley. They, they, they, they, they are counseled by this group called wildly. And they're in places like MIT and Harvard and Tufts and so forth. And I got a couple of letters and emails after one of my talks saying, ed, you really inspired me to keep going. That pays all the bills, pays all the bills. You get so much more than you give. No

John Darcie: (44:09)
Matter what, Jonathan, he's pretty good there. Don't he, I don't know about you finally get somebody on, ask the good questions. You know,

Anthony Scaramucci: (44:19)
This is the last time you'll see him on Saul talk. You're fired Darcie. You're fired the, your book again in all seriousness though, ed, not only is he good at this, but he's the head curator of our salt conference, uh, which are two live events that we were doing prior to the pandemic. And so, yeah, no, we've, we've, we've, we've downloaded a lot of responsibility to John. He's done a brilliant job. Yeah. Hey

Ed Hajim: (44:45)
John, I, I give you a great empathy. My daughter is that as a curator for Ted talks, the business or our Ted talks, it's one of the toughest jobs ever. It's like being a Broadway producer with only one night stands. Really. It's very tough. No, I

John Darcie: (44:57)
Mean, we, we strive to be in the stratosphere of Ted talks. You know, salt talks is what we call our series and it's modeled after Ted talks. I think obviously what she's done there to contribute to the success of that organization. I'm sure is amazing. I want to ask you one more question. There's too much wisdom here for me to let you go early. So we're going to go right up to, uh, the end of our allotted time here, but it's about the future. And you know, um, you've talked a lot about how you talked about the Lily pad. You talked about, you know, if you don't jump off the Lily pad to the next Lily pad, you're going to get left behind. And I think generationally, there's a lot of people on wall street in the industry who don't think that way and are trying to hold onto the past.

John Darcie: (45:34)
You see companies like a Coinbase. I don't know how familiar you are with digital currency and all that stuff. That's going to go live and be a hundred plus billion dollar company. You have Stripe, which is a private, you know, payments company that is worth a hundred billion already in private markets. Both of those either bumping into or exceeding the market cap of a company like Goldman Sachs. But as you look out into the landscape, uh, where do you see the puck moving to use an overused cliche in terms of wall street, in terms of fintechs disruption of old wall street. And how would you give advice to CEOs of some of these, uh, legacy organizations in terms of how not to get left behind,

Ed Hajim: (46:14)
You know, change is, is it's corny, but change is accelerating, but there's more opportunity now than ever before, but you've got to keep changing. I mean, the fact that foam one would not accept the fact that institutional was going to take over from retail and be more important, whether they wouldn't marry the, the, the, the, the research department, you know, to us bankers and so forth. And the fact that, that, that Glucksman, wouldn't recognize that that investment, that asset management was the next step. You know, I don't know how big we could have been. We went from 2 billion to 10 billion to two and a half years with the Lima name. I could have been Larry. I could have been black BlackRock. You know, if you left, it left us alone, maybe anyway, today, AI VR, AR genomics biotech, all this stuff that wall street has to finance over the next, you know, 20, 30 years, there's a book by Julian Paul 2030, which is terribly statistical.

Ed Hajim: (47:12)
And after reading, I'm reading fiction for the first time in my life, so that some of the non-fiction memory is not as, quite as, as, as, as, uh, you know, it's not as juicy as that as fiction, but you know, 20, 30, the next 10 years, what he talks about, the kinds of changes that are going on wall street has to accept. You know, I'm not, you know, I'm not an owner of cryptocurrency because I'm an, I'm an old fogy, you know, you know, but I now recognize that's very, very important, you know, and people, but I traded it in the, over the counter market in the sixties. People said, what are you doing? Hang on. I can trade over the counter stocks. The spreads were so wonderful that my over the counter desk made more money than anybody else, because I had these 40 guys from Staten island, all trading over the counter stuff, you know, anyway.

Ed Hajim: (47:55)
So I think that today wall street has more opportunity than ever before, but it's going to be different that the problem with wall street today is that you have too many, very large companies. And, you know, when you're competing against very large companies, it's just very difficult to operate, but you're getting some new companies like Coinbase. I mean, there'll be other programs like that. I'm recommending most young people, unless they're really fantastic. This the really fight, you know, really, really get excited about finance. Just there's so many other opportunities that I plus the world is now three or four times, as big as it's been before international possible. And internet gives you access to all of that, finding a way, find a cycle, find a wine day, a trend, find an unsatisfied demand, or find a need. That's going to be satisfied. Then the next 20 years you're going to have a lot of fun wall street is, is very, you know, JP Morgan is a fantastic company.

Ed Hajim: (48:50)
It just hard to compete against, and Coinbase has done it, but it's going to be the exception rather than the rule, but it's going to be, I think that in many respects, the financial business has have topped out to some extent. I mean, automobiles have not been so good for a very long time, except for Tesla. You know, it's been a tough one. You know, there were, I mean, how many automobile companies now there are so few of the only two or three in America today. So I think that working for the financial business shouldn't be drawing as many young people as it drew when I was in school. So I think that basically what my advice would be. You should have some group of people in every large company in a skunkworks like Minnesota mining, thinking about what's next and be willing to spend money on it and don't throw out anything.

Ed Hajim: (49:37)
Don't throw out any idea and have it separate from your company. And basically say here's, and this is what capital research did with me. They threw me on this. So you got to go to Greenwich to do a growth fund. We can't have that here, you know, in Los Angeles, I mean, growth fund income fund income, only over there, Greenwich, you know, and they did that. And, and of course I flunked badly. You'll see that in the book I, I got, I got the terminal disease called hubris and they brought back in, but the growth fund of America, which I found and started, ended up being the largest mutual fund in the country at one point, Don, even bigger than fidelity for one period of time and income fund got, I think it was really a hundred billions a day, but that was the completion of that product line.

Ed Hajim: (50:24)
So today let's get those snuck works, working, don't throw out anything. And unfortunately, which is one of the most difficult thing it's international, you must be international. And unfortunately New York has given away its prominence. I, I, I complained about America, a couple of veins. We should've never given away that marketplace. We should have kept it. We should have sponsored it now. You know, when it was a point in time, you couldn't do a hundred million dollar bigger than a hundred million dollar deal outside the United States. Now Hong Kong could do it. London can do it. So you've gotta be international and you gotta get people that are willing to get on the plane and get out and go, go see those places. And you have to have international. You have to have international, uh, uh, you know, employees constantly. And there are two ways to do that. Even for a little firm in sales, ended up with offices in Tokyo, uh, Sydney and San Francisco. There was all those foreign places and London. We had big offices in London. I remember going to the Tokyo to visit, visit my office. And I bumped into Bob Greenhill from Morgan Stanley and he said, uh, you're here. What are you doing? I said, I'm busy. My office is so much. I said, how many people do you have? You said 800. How many do you have? I said one.

Ed Hajim: (51:37)
And in the world of remote work,

John Darcie: (51:39)
You know, having a global distributed workforce has gotten easier. That's the last thing.

Ed Hajim: (51:44)
That's the last thing today? People in the financial business recognized the COVID like every other difficult situation has huge positives. Tell them that telemedicine is going to explode FinTech, just what you mentioned. But ed tech, FinTech and med tech are going to be just huge explosive areas. And it may not require as much capital. We may have to sort of change things. A bit funding may have to be smaller and maybe some new businesses that, that all these companies go into and some may be too small with some of the big companies. So some of the smaller companies can do a better job.

John Darcie: (52:18)
All right. Well, ed, it's been an absolute pleasure having you on, um, you know, we'll have to meet up on the golf course or at the salt conference. I know Anthony's not much of a golfer, but uh, yeah, I'd love to tee it up with you either down there on ocean, read for Nan talk or you can come see us on long island. Uh, I'm up actually in the town that Anthony grew up in port Washington. Um, the club, uh, the, the club that I play is called sands point and golf club. A Tillinghast beautiful, a Linksys style course. Um, it's great. Just, just around the corner from my house.

Ed Hajim: (52:51)
Well, if you get to then talk and I'll give you an afternoon at the Nantucket golf club, uh, uh, Anthony, you can come, we, we can sit and let them play and we can sit and watch him, but

John Darcie: (53:00)
Then he can do the landscaping, see that he's,

Anthony Scaramucci: (53:03)
He's gonna want me out there pulling the weeds and that's how these guys are. Yeah, no,

Ed Hajim: (53:07)
But it, it it's a sanctuary.

Anthony Scaramucci: (53:10)
It's an absolutely breathtaking course. Uh, I was up there, uh, with Wayne high zag now, uh, legendary Wayne Isaiah, uh, in 1997. Uh, and it was the year that he had won the world series. I remember he had the, he took the Florida Marlins when he owned it to the world series in 97 and then eventually sold the team. But, uh, yeah, absolutely legendary, beautiful course, ed, uh, on the road, less traveled, uh, amazing book, an unlikely journey from an orphanage to the boardroom. And, uh, I love the cover ed, but I love more of the content of what's in this book and I'm recommending it to everybody. And I want to thank you personally, on behalf of all of us, for joining salt talk today.

Ed Hajim: (53:56)
Thank you very much. Appreciate your time. And the good questions was a lot of fun. Thanks

John Darcie: (54:01)
Very much. Likewise. And thank you everybody for tuning into today's salt. Talk with the great ed. Hey Jim, just a reminder, if you missed any part of this talk or any of our previous talks, you can access them on our website. It's salt.org backslash talks or on our YouTube channel, which is called salt tube. We've made all of these episodes free and available for everyone to watch. So please spread the word. We love educating people, uh, young and old from great people like ed who have incredible lessons to teach from their long careers, successful careers on wall street and elsewhere. Uh, just a reminder. We're also on social media at salt conferences where we're most active on Twitter, and we'd love for you to give us a follow up, but we're also on Instagram, LinkedIn, and Facebook as well. But on behalf of Anthony and the entire salt team, this is John Darcie signing off from salt talks for today. We hope to see you back here again soon.

Mayor Dean Trantalis: How Communities Can Become More Resilient | SALT Talks #201

“Fort Lauderdale has established itself as the most diverse city in Florida. We have different people, cultures, orientations- we have a large LGBTQ population… It’s a microcosm for the rest of America.”

Dean J. Trantalis is mayor of Fort Lauderdale, FL after first being elected in 2018 and winning reelection in 2020. Mayor Trantalis is the first openly gay person to be elected mayor of Fort Lauderdale.

In 1990, a countywide referendum to list sexual orientation as a protected class lost following an ugly battle. Activism eventually prevailed in 1995 when Broward County became the first county to pass such an amendment and paved the way for further LGBTQ-supportive laws. The ongoing dialogue between different groups in the area has facilitated a diverse and vibrant population and turned Fort Lauderdale into one of the most attractive and fast-growing cities in the country. “If you hold onto the past, you’re never going to move forward and grow. It’s important to find commonality and understanding; and also acceptance of differences, but it doesn’t mean we have to be adversarial.”

Fort Lauderdale has seen comparative success in its handling of the COVID pandemic. By listening to the science and recognizing viral spread occurred mainly indoors, opening beaches and encouraging outdoor activities was central to public health messaging.

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Dean J. Trantalis, Esq..jpeg

Dean Trantalis

42nd Mayor of Fort Lauderdale

MODERATOR

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

Joe Eletto: (00:08)
Hello everyone. And welcome back to salt talks. My name is Joe Eletto and I am the director of operations for salt, a global thought leadership and networking forum, encompassing finance technology, and politics. Saul talks as a series of digital interviews with the world's foremost investors, creators and thinkers. And just as we do at our global salt events, we aim to both empower big, important ideas and provide our audience a window into the minds of subject matter experts. And we are very excited today to welcome mayor Dean trend Talis to salt talks. The intern Tallis is the first elected mayor of Fort Lauderdale in 2018. Uh, first elected rather in 2018 was reelected in November of 2020. So congratulations are in order this 2018 election represented the largest victory in city history for a candidate running for first term, as mayor Dean previously served on the city commission representing district two from 2003 to 2006, and then from 2013, until his Ascension to the mayor's office, twice served as vice mayor from 2005 to 2006. And from 2016 to 2017, he represents the city on the Broward metropolitan planning organization, the county tourism development council, the Broward workforce development board, the Florida league of cities and the greater Fort Lauderdale Alliance and hosting today's salt talk is no stranger to the south Florida area, Anthony Scaramucci, who is the founder and managing partner of SkyBridge. He's also the chairman of salts. And with that, I will turn over to Anthony for the interview.

Anthony Scaramucci: (01:45)
So, so mayor, first of all, thank you for joining us. But, uh, what I said before we got started is someday you're going to be the mayor of all of us and by all of us, I mean, everybody here that lives in the Northeast. So, so tell us about your background. Tell us where you're from. Uh, tell us how you arrived in south Florida and your Odyssey to becoming the mayor of Fort Lauderdale.

Dean Trantalis: (02:09)
Okay. Well, first of all, thank you for inviting me here on the show. Uh, I feel very honored to be able to be able to speak with you and, uh, talk about, uh, Fort Lauderdale. So I'm originally from Connecticut. I was born there and, uh, went to college at Boston university and then subsequently went to law school here in Florida at Stetson university. Uh, I began the practice of law. I was admitted to the bar in 1980, and I've been practicing here in the Fort Lauderdale area since 1982. Uh, you know, I first came down here as a young kid in my twenties and thinking I'm just going to come down here for a year or two, enjoy myself, get to see what the east coast of Florida is like. And, uh, move on somewhere else. A friend of mine said, Hey, you can, you can bunk adhere in my apartment is a con here in my living room. You can stay here, um, which I did. Uh, but then I realized this was a place to be a place to build a career as a place to, uh, both enjoy yourself as well as be able to fulfill yourself. And, uh, and I've been here ever since, since 1982 and it's been, uh, it's been really great and, and there's so much more as we continue to grow as a city and as we continue to grow as a state.

Anthony Scaramucci: (03:25)
So let's say that I landed from Mars and I needed a place in south Florida. And I was looking at Miami. I was looking at Fort Lauderdale, Hollywood say the east coast of Florida Palm beach. Uh, why would I come to Fort Lauderdale? Tell me about the great city that you are the executive of.

Dean Trantalis: (03:47)
So, you know, Fort Lauderdale, like a lot of cities in Florida are, were young communities. And, um, and each of the cities that you mentioned, uh, these have their own cultural significance. Uh, Miami has a large Spanish and Cuban population, uh, Palm beach, uh, draws its people from other parts of the country. Um, Fort Lauderdale, uh, has now become the new breakaway city. It is, it has established itself as probably the most diverse city in the state of Florida. Um, different people's different cultures, different orientations. We have a large LGBTQ population. We have a large, uh, uh, we have just large segments of, of all, all cross-sections of races and cultures. And it's exciting. It's enriching. Um, and, and you can see the results of that. People are buying up real estate here, like, uh, like they've never done before. Why? Because they see that it's really a, a microcosm of the rest of America and they, everyone can find a comfort zone for themselves here. And everyone's welcome. We have, the welcome mat is open to everybody. And, uh, let me tell you something, that's a great thing. When, when people can feel, you know, feel good about themselves and being able to, um, find friends and, and career opportunities, that's really where we're at. Um, building a family, building a business and, uh, building a life where, um, really you can feel so, so good about being part of what's going on here in this part of the country.

Anthony Scaramucci: (05:23)
Well, I want to, I want to go into that because you're talking about diversity, obviously. Uh, we're, we're big champions of diversity at SkyBridge. You were part of, um, you were in fact, the co-chair of Americans for equality, and you oversaw the enactment of the Broward county human rights ordinance. Uh, tell us about that. Tell us about that process and tell us how it shaped your political arc, how you use it almost as a platform to run for office.

Dean Trantalis: (05:52)
So, um, honestly I didn't really think of running for office way back. I was more of an activist helping others, you know, get elected to public office back in the early nineties. Um, specifically in 1990, we, uh, uh, part of a county wide referendum as to whether or not to add sexual orientation as a protected class here in Broward county. And, uh, uh, we lost miserably 60 40. It was a wretched campaign. Uh, the LGBT community back then we were known as the gay community, uh, was demonized, was treacherous. I was just, uh, it was just a very unfortunate time in our city's past. We overcame that, um, we then moved forward and we're able to 1995 to get the, the county commission to enact that amendment to the Broward county human rights ordinance. And ever since 1995, uh, we were the first county in the state to be able to now pass such an odd amendment to our human rights ordinance, but to make it stick.

Dean Trantalis: (07:00)
So we've had it there for all these many years. And we're very proud of that achievement. Uh, we subsequently were able to get the county to pass a domestic partnership law, which today seems almost kind of novel and cute because we now have marriage equality in this country, but it was a way to foster the diversity and to understand that we, and this can be part of the, uh, part of the city part of the world, um, believed in diversity, believed in cultural enrichment. And I have to say that, uh, Fort Lauderdale has definitely been a willing partner to, uh, embrace diversity and to embrace, embrace the kinds of things that we all represent. So, um, it wasn't until about year 2000, 2002, uh, a, an opening came upon the city commission here in Fort Lauderdale was that they can see, and I said, you know what, I'm going to try to run for that. Uh, it wasn't the first time a person from the gay community tried to run for that position, but I decided, you know, maybe it was right for me, maybe it'll work this time. And, uh, luckily I was able to win and it was, uh, I was the first openly gay city commissioner in the city of Fort Lauderdale to win an election like that.

Anthony Scaramucci: (08:16)
It's an amazing story, but there are, there are additional layers to the story mayor that I want to get into. Uh, one of the massive do with the Presbyterian church down there and your relationship with pastor Passy Enza, um, and the evolution of that relationship. And I was wondering if you could add some color, uh, for our listeners and viewers about that. Sure.

Dean Trantalis: (08:40)
Well, you know, back in the early days, um, we, it wasn't the Presbyterian church per se. It was a specific church called the core Ridge Presbyterian church. And at that time, their founding pastor D James Kennedy, um, who is a strict fundamentalist, uh, really targeted the gay community with a lot of anti-gay rhetoric, uh, demonizing the LGBT community. Uh, we were their biggest fund raiser. Um, uh, we were an easy target at the time, but over time, um, you know, the community T found less and less interested in that type of, uh, rhetoric. And, uh, and about 12 years ago, he passed away. Um, and people that followed him, uh, those who took his place in, in the pastoral role of that church, um, uh, had a far different philosophy, um, while we all agree to understand and, and accept each other's differences, we've all agreed to peacefully coexist.

Dean Trantalis: (09:43)
And currently, uh, Rob Pia Senza is the pastor at the core Ridge Presbyterian church. Um, and it's, and it's important to understand that both he and I have met on several occasions along with other members of the, of the faith community, both in the LGBT community and in the fundamentalist community. And we've been seeing over the last several years to talk about commonality, to talk about how we can build bridges, to talk about how we can put the hate from the past, instead of holding onto it and try to embrace the love of the future and build a foundation for the city of Fort Lauderdale that is going to be sustainable and lasting because, you know, like, you know, in any tortured relationship you hold onto the past, and you're never going to be able to, to move forward. You never going to be able to grow. And I think it's, I think that holds true in this situation. We all realize many of us realize that it's important to try to find commonality, try to find understanding and, and accept the fact that we do have difference, but it doesn't mean that we have to be adversarial.

Anthony Scaramucci: (10:53)
I love this story, you know, uh, uh, it's a long time ago now when I think about it, but back in 2007, 2008, I worked with a group of hedge fund managers to pull over some of the Republican state senators in New York, uh, to legalize gay marriage, same-sex marriage in New York. And then I had the opportunity to work on this with, uh, uh, the human rights campaign for the national movement, which ultimately led to that court decision.

Dean Trantalis: (11:21)
Thank you for doing that. You appreciate that.

Anthony Scaramucci: (11:23)
It's my pleasure. I mean, listen, I'm, I didn't choose my sexuality. I mean, we don't have to talk philosophically about how it works, but I've always felt firmly that, uh, you know, uh, life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I don't remember the sentence where it said for straight people. I don't remember that in the, in the language. I think it means everybody. Um, but the reason I'm bringing this up is that I had the opportunity to do meet with vice president, then vice president Biden in Davos, Switzerland, where we were working on a commission together to create that opportunity outside the United States with other nations. And as you know, uh, some of these nations culturally, or very different from the United States, uh, we're very self-critical here, but we have some, you know, social progress going on here, perhaps compared to other nations, not working as well in some of the other nations.

Anthony Scaramucci: (12:12)
I guess the reason I'm bringing it up that way is you seem to be a elite, not, not seem to be, you are a leader in this sort of movement and shattering these false totems and these preconceptions. And so what advice do you have for people that are in political life that are really just trying to get people to relax about other people's lifestyles and other people's way of living? You know, I tell my conservative friends, you guys are for a smaller government everywhere, but in my bedroom mayor, you know, they want a larger government in my bedroom. I mean, it doesn't, it doesn't make any sense to me. So what do you tell people in terms of the first steps necessary to push forward?

Dean Trantalis: (12:53)
Well, it's a, it's an interesting question, and I don't know if I have the complete it answer, but I do know that, um, uh, but being strangers with one another is the best way a to create animosity and advert and, and to maintain an adversarial relationship. Once you reach out and say, Hey, let's be friends, Hey, let's get to know one another. Uh, the idea of familiarity, uh, I think helps break down a lot of the barriers that have that stand between one another. Um, I see, I see senators, I see congressmen holding on to their, um, to their points of view, which to me are, uh, are holding us back as a country. And, uh, and, and honestly, um, I hope they become fewer and fewer as time goes on. And I think that the, the successes that we have achieved in this country through whether it be through legislation or Supreme court rulings have taken us to a new level each time in which, uh, it was recognized that equality is a fundamental freedom in this country.

Dean Trantalis: (14:01)
And it, like you say, Anthony, it is it's, it's, it's available for everybody, not just for those that are chosen. So, so, um, my advice, I guess, if, if that be it is to, uh, say is to reach out to others. Now someone will say, oh, well, you must, you must get them to, you know, to forsake their past and to beg forgiveness for what they've done or what their predecessors have done. And, and I said, well, that's the best way to, to, to prevent anything from happening. You start with an olive branch. Okay. And you reach out, you have to be a noble person, I guess, in this undertaking. And, um, and that's the only way you're going to get dialogue to begin. And whether it be on issues of, of, of sexual orientation equality, or whether it be on anything that we are now discussing at the national level, I mean, let's face it.

Dean Trantalis: (14:52)
Uh, th the, the president is trying to pass an infrastructure bill. Okay. Well, one way to certainly defeat any effort is to, is to raise objections and to, and to talk about differences. You're never going to get anywhere that way you start with what you have in common. You start with what you can agree with. You start respecting one another and understanding that each person does have a point of view. Once you get past that hurdle, you're beginning, you've now begun a dialogue. And I think you can look to success at the end of the process. And I think that pretty much holds true for just about anything that you try to deal with when it comes to trying to settle differences between parties,

Anthony Scaramucci: (15:32)
The mayor, w what are you, what are you doing for Thanksgiving? I think you need to come to the Scaramucci house and help me out a little bit like a couple of peace pipes, and you can hang out with my very fun, but ridiculously dysfunctional Italian family. But I think, I think what you're saying is, is beautifully said, and I think it's a, it's totally true. The minute that you meet other people, and you realize that you have these common themes of love and you common theme of trying to just help out your family members and the people around you. All of a sudden people dial down their animosity. You know, I always found really some of these politicians, they're not for the gay rights movement until they discover one of their children is gay and they realize how much they love their child. And all of a sudden they were like, well, why am I against this again?

Anthony Scaramucci: (16:17)
It's sort of nonsensical. Um, I wanna switch topics for a second because I'm interested in your thoughts on policy, around COVID-19. You've got this beautiful city, uh, it has been a destination for spring break for many people over multiple decades. I, myself, I say with fast, yes. I say with great pride. We won't mention on the air. Some of my dastardly, uh, experiences in Fort Lauderdale, but that was a long time ago, but in 1983. And of course, again, in 1984, I was, uh, on the beach with you guys, but you have this wonderful place. You've got the public health and public safety issues around COVID the science around COVID, uh, you've seemed to have done an amazing job, frankly, in terms of inviting people to the state, inviting people to your city, you know, pretty low incidents of, of, uh, of the virus there, comparatively. Uh, tell us your thoughts, tell us the design of your program, how you thought about these things philosophically and what you've learned that you can pass on to others. Well,

Dean Trantalis: (17:24)
As you know, it was about last year at this time that, uh, uh, the federal government finally came to grips with the very idea that, you know, COVID was at our doorstep. Um, and it was, um, it was, uh, you know, it was, it's a nobody's playbook as a public official, what to do to bring a pandemic. Nobody went to school learning how to, to deal with a pandemic. So when the federal government started to say, when the CDC started to say, you know, COVID is here, we need to start shutting down. Uh, we followed suit, we shut down our beaches on March 15th in facts that we were the first city in the country. Uh, along with Miami beach, we collectively decided let's shut our beaches down. Let's close spring break. These, the experts are telling us that we would be a super spreader event.

Dean Trantalis: (18:15)
And so let's shut our beaches down. So we shut them down for, we figured for a month, we'll see what happens, you know, in our, and I even say, we thought it would go away after a month. Okay. So, you know, April rolls round may rolls around, you know, this disease is not going away. Uh, in fact, the virus is spreading even more. And so over the, as the weeks passed, and as the months passed, we realized that, um, we could be shut down and expect this disease to be cured. The only way we were going to be able to function was to figure out a way to coexist with the disease. And, and what does that mean? That meant that, uh, we had to deal with the disease, make sure we had testing sites, uh, working with the governor's office, putting party aside, uh, and putting ID, you know, ideological views aside, we both were on the same mission to try to keep people safe.

Dean Trantalis: (19:10)
So working with the governor's office, uh, we had testing facilities, both, both the rapid testing and the regular testing right here in our city. Um, and that was important because people needed to know if they were, if they were infected. Uh, and then we, we continue to maintain the protocols at the CDC are required in terms of, uh, capacity within restaurants and bars and, and, uh, and interactions with one another distancing and of course wearing a face mask. So we continue with that through the, through most of the summer. Uh, and then, uh, and it was difficult. A lot of people found the challenge to be very difficult to deal with, but, uh, we felt it was important in order to try to prevent the spread from continuing. We didn't shut anybody any. We started to open things up. Why, because we realized, for example, in Florida where everything, uh, could be open and, you know, in New York city, you know, in December, you can sit outside at a restaurant, but, you know, you're there with the pigeons, you know, no one else has done to sit out there with you.

Dean Trantalis: (20:13)
It's so cold. So we're lucky. We were lucky here in Florida, we were able to, uh, to be outdoors. In fact, instead of closing the beaches down, it made sense to open the beaches and encourage people to come down and use the beaches because it kept them out, outside. It prevented them from going indoors. There was a lot of effort to, to create curfews and so forth. And we pushed back on that because all curfews do is push people back in their hotel rooms and closed spaces, and that's the worst super spreader you could possibly get. So, so we were, you know, we were able to maintain a balance and, uh, and allowing, uh, businesses to reopen, uh, returning people to their places of work. A lot of them are still working remotely. Um, but I'll tell you, it's, uh, it's been a difficult challenge.

Dean Trantalis: (21:02)
And, uh, and when we were finally able to get vaccines, uh, again, working with the governor's office, uh, we were able to get some of the first vaccination sites in the state and, uh, people have been rushing to get appointments. You know, it's, it's just been a real challenge, a tragedy in many, many cases. So many people have died, um, and being just days away from getting a vaccine, it's just been a real, real, you know, very sad moment in our, in our communities as, as I've seen throughout the country. But, um, but we've been trying to balance the needs of people and balance the experience to patients at the same time, trying to keep people safe, trying to save livelihoods as well as lives. And, uh, and you know, here we are today with about a quarter of our population here in Broward county, having been vaccinated, and we're working aggressively to try to vaccinate the rest. No,

Anthony Scaramucci: (21:56)
This I think is a, it's an amazing story. So I want to ask a follow-up question, but I'm going to frame it like this. We're going to, we're going to stick this interview into a time capsule. And so you're going to be talking to one of your success sores now, 10 or 20 years from now about dealing with COVID-19 and you're sending a message to the future about what you learned and what was the right policy versus the wrong policy, as opposed to left or right. Policy. And I think that's one of the things that you're going to be remembered for mayor is that you were all about right or wrong policies, not left, or right. So tell us what that message would be.

Dean Trantalis: (22:34)
So, um, the, of course the best thing is to follow the science, follow the experts, try to understand, you know, where they're taking, what direction they're taking you in this particular case, the Corona virus, uh, was transmitted through an aerosol, uh, interaction where you could breathe on somebody and that's how you get the, the virus. Um, if a pandemic should come back in, in the same form in the same way of spreading it, uh, I would encourage people to remain outdoors, no curfews, uh, and just maintain social distancing and wear the mask. The mask is probably the most important thing this past weekend, we had a demonstration on our beach for people who were protesting against the use of masks. You know, what God bless them. Uh, I hope nothing happens to them, but, uh, I think politics, uh, as you know, Anthony politics injected into this entire pandemic is what killed hundreds of thousands of people. And, um, and I feel very, very bad that they have been victimized by, by what happened this past year. But here we are today is public leaders find to do the right thing. And, um, and so my advice to my successor, uh, is to follow the science and, uh, and just do your best to try to balance the need for livelihoods, like I said, and lives. And I think you'll come out of this successfully. I think,

Anthony Scaramucci: (24:06)
I think it's a great, it's an amazing message. Okay. So I want you to, I want you to pitch me now. Okay, we're going to put your different hat on, uh, I've got this huge business. Uh, my name is Elan Musk, and I'm running something called the boring company, uh, which is not boring at all. They're about boring into the ground because there's nothing about Elon Musk. That's boring other than the fact that he's running the boring company, and you've got this difficult subterranean issue in Florida. And I want you to pitch me on bringing me to Fort Lauderdale and my company. Go ahead. Let me hear the pitch.

Dean Trantalis: (24:43)
Lauderdale is probably, uh, going to make the boring company finally hit the headlines, uh, in this country because right now is sort of been simmering. It, they're doing a little project in Las Vegas. They have their test site in Hawthorne, which is right outside of, uh, downtown LA. And, uh, we visited both those places, amazing project going on in Las Vegas. And also they're beginning one in San Bernardino, but the real breakout, uh, uh, project is going to be here in Fort Lauderdale. Why do I say that? Because we're going to stretch the limits of the boring company and test them, test their metal to what it can really accomplish with this technology and this process that they've, that they've invented. And I think that, um, coming to Fort Lauderdale, they're going to see that, you know, the challenges that people think that are in Fort Lauderdale are ones they've already, they've already, uh, countered in Las Vegas.

Dean Trantalis: (25:36)
For example, everybody thinks we have a high water table and therefore you cannot put a tunnel underground. Well, guests plus Las Vegas is sitting on an underground lake. The entire tunnel system that they have there is, is submersion of water. Uh, they've also hit huge rock formations when they were digging underneath. So all those, all those issues that could possibly interfere with our progress here are not issues. They've they have the experience. They have definitely have the talent we met with their, with their geologists and, and their, um, and the people that re run the organization. And they, they like us are excited to see, um, progress, move forward with the type of tunnel systems that we have in mind. Let me give you an example. Um, originally we went out there because we wanted to talk about, uh, building a tunnel for our train tracks.

Dean Trantalis: (26:29)
You know, in south Florida, we have a train system that runs north south, and we're talking about putting a commuter line between, uh, Miami and west Palm beach. You know, the whole point of running a commuter line is to get vehicles, the roads try to for, for, uh, focus mostly on mass transit, which is environmentally important. And we think that's where this country needs to go on. But at the same time, you know, we already have a lot of east west corridors, uh, roads, uh, river. Um, all of which would be frustrated if 40 or 50 more trains were to start to travel up and down this corridor. So the department of transportation here in Florida wanted to build a big bridge that would, uh, that would raise the tracks overground and, and avoid the interference with the roads and the river. You don't build bridges that cut cities in half.

Dean Trantalis: (27:20)
You don't build bridges that permanently divide these people that live on this side of the tracks and those that live on the other side of the tracks. This city has a, just an unfortunate history with race relations and how it has separated them because of the tracks. So by burying the tracks, we, first of all, uh, not only would it create more open space and not only would it, um, uh, take away the physical separation between, uh, demographics within our city. But we discovered through the boring company that we can do this at a much, much cheaper price than anything that was offered by other people who have made the, who have responded to our proposals, the, the state, uh, said, oh, it's going to cost you a billion dollars a mile. And this tunnel system was going to be about three miles long. Well, the boring company said a billion dollars a mile.

Dean Trantalis: (28:12)
We can do it for $15 million a mile. And you add the, the cost of construction for the train tracks and the switching and pumping systems. Maybe you're up to $40 million a mile, which is a far cry from the billion dollars a mile that was first suggested by the state. So in addition to that tunnel system, we're also, you who've been to Fort Lauderdale, right? Anthony. So you know that sometimes going down in Los Olas Boulevard, getting, trying to get to the beach, it's our premier Boulevard, shopping district, uh, art, art district. It's a great, great place, um, uh, for people who come to Fort Lauderdale. Um, and it's also part of, one of the most premier residential districts in the entire state. Um, it's played with traffic on weekends and holidays. So we've come up with the idea of rerouting traffic through a tunnel. We have the bright line station with a parking garage.

Dean Trantalis: (29:10)
People, families want to come to Fort Lauderdale beach, can park their car at the parking garage and get shuttled through, uh, through autonomous vehicles through this tunnel, five bucks, a pop you're at the beach, uh, your family's with you, you, you don't have to worry about parking at the beach and you've completely eliminated the whole traffic scene. And you've added nothing to the traffic by taking a system. That's going to be a front burner item here in our community. We're so eager to put it out there for public response. And that's going to put the boring company on the map far sided, uh, inventive, creative ideas, such as that. That's where we're heading here in our city.

Anthony Scaramucci: (29:52)
Listen, it's an amazing story. I get, I get to listen to you for hours mirror. I got to, I got to turn it over to Joseph here in a second, but I got, I asked one last question. Uh, we had the, uh, the mayor, uh, there Suarez from Miami on salt talks and he gave a wonderful presentation. Uh, you know, in, in many ways, I, I see you guys as similar in terms of love of the city, love of the state love of the intersection of the business community and social progress and all of these great things. Uh, I understand that you were working on a cross city partnership to develop south Florida into what you guys are calling the magic region. So tell us a little bit about that, and then I'm going to turn it over to Joseph so that he can fire in some questions. Of course, I've miss some things, but I want to, I want to hear about the magic region first.

Dean Trantalis: (30:45)
So, uh, a few months ago, uh, mayor Suarez, Francis I, the vice mayor of the county and, uh, mayor singer of Boca Raton, uh, with some of our staff, people had lunch. And, uh, we met and talked about how we could, um, organize our efforts to promote, uh, promote businesses in the south Florida areas specifically with regard to tech industries and financial service industries. And we were looking for ways to brand ourselves and looking for a way to, um, enhance the branding opportunities, uh, through collective efforts. And, um, uh, and so, uh, we haven't had our second meeting yet, but I think we have, uh, continued to work, um, uh, individually with trying to, uh, put together our best efforts. And we will, we're now working towards a second meeting with the new ideas that we have and to see how, in fact we could brand south Florida, uh, as you know, the magic capital of the world, because it is magic.

Dean Trantalis: (31:49)
Uh, great things happen here and abracadabra, you never know what's going to be on your doorstep the next day, but it's, you know, let's face it. So many people are moving to south Florida right now. Uh, as you said, you know, I may someday be the mayor of the world because the world is moving down here. And for good reason, uh, we have no income tax. We have no estate tax. Uh, our sales tax is moderate compared to other places. And, and, um, and you can't beat the weather. Uh, I think a lot of people would rather sit in front of their computer screen, listening into the waste, splash against their, uh, their porch, as opposed to watching a snowdrift piling up against her. It's just a totally different, uh, mindset. And let me

Anthony Scaramucci: (32:35)
Take, we, we have to end our mutual love affair on this of me sitting here freezing Mayer. I mean, come on. I mean, literally that's like taking the rock salt that I'm throwing on my driveway and putting it in my eyes. My God. You're right. So, I mean, and the other thing is, is that you guys have figured out, I think mayor Suarez as, as well, that taxes are priced for services. And so you have to deliver services. One of the problems that's happening up here in the Northeast, specifically in New York, the taxes are going up and the services are going down. It's a bad recipe for people and it's hampering their quality of life and it's causing a, uh, a migration. And so you guys are the beneficiaries of that, but you deserve to be given the policies. I'm going to turn it over to, uh, to Joe. Um, go ahead, Joe. And I will point out full disclosure, Joe and I have known each other. He's my, uh, he's my friend's best friend from high school. I'm sorry, my son's best friend from high school. And, uh, it, him and I know each other for probably since you were about 13, right, Joe,

Joe Eletto: (33:43)
It is a pleasure to have you on mayor. I was reflecting on my time in the, during the pandemic sitting in my one bedroom with my partner after everything was basically closed after 10:00 PM being driven inside because I couldn't go elsewhere and there was nothing else to do. So the, the idea of these curfews, you know, having lived it and then coming down to Fort Lauderdale, I wanna admit how many times Anthony I've been to Fort Lauderdale during all of this, but has been, you know, a real wake up call for the different lifestyles that could be led. So I want to, um, just have one more note on COVID. You know, uh, governor Newsome came out, everything is trending in the right direction in his state. He has set a June 15th reopening date for, for the majority of things being open south Florida is in a little bit of a different spot because a lot of the con the, uh, companies are, are open and things are able to be, you know, visited and such. Is there a point at which the south Florida area is able to say we are past the worst, the worst of it, and able to move forward? Or do you think it's too early to make that call?

Dean Trantalis: (34:49)
We've been listening to some of our counterparts in government. Our county mayor has been talking about starting to lifting restrictions sometimes by the end of this month at the beginning of next month. But again, I think we have to follow the science. I think we have to follow the infection rates and the, and, uh, and the hospitalization rates. Uh, I'm not too quick to want to really change much of that yet. We we're, we're pretty much open back down here. Um, we still require restaurant workers and, and, and hotel workers to wear masks. Uh, you know, it's, it's, um, uh, you know, it's not a con it's not a free for all here, you know, and when people come to this state and when people come to Fort Lauderdale, you know, they have to respect some of these COVID compliance rules that we have in place.

Dean Trantalis: (35:36)
Uh, and I think that's, what's helping to keep the infection rate down and hospitalization rates down. Uh, and, and, you know, I feel bad for governor Newsome in California. He's got an enormous state with so many different types of peoples and cultures and attitudes that, you know, one policy does not fit all. Uh, I think our governor realized that, and, and I think that's why he didn't impose some of these statewide restrictions, but allowed us to, to tailor make those restrictions according to our needs and expectations. So, um, so the thing is that that going forward, uh, I'm hoping to see, uh, these more and more of these restrictions removed as vaccinations become more and more prevalent. So if we're able to vaccinate half our county within a month, which it looks like that's, what's going to happen happen, we'll start to see a loosening up.

Dean Trantalis: (36:28)
And I think the president said by the end of may, uh, everybody should be vaccinated. So, uh, we have our fingers crossed that people get vaccinated. I know there's this, uh, um, weird philosophy out there that, you know, the devil is in the vaccine. Um, you know, people, it's just a matter of, you know, understanding science and realizing, you know, I had my vaccine now for a couple of months and I'm still here, right? So I still have five fingers on each hand. So, uh, um, but it's really important to respect one another and to keep one another protected from the spread of this disease, because it is a deadly disease and, uh, and 560,000 people have died in this country as a result of this disease. It is not a laughing matter.

Joe Eletto: (37:24)
Correct. And we had professor Hotez on Saul talks, I think about two weeks ago to discuss sort of vaccine hesitancy and, you know, south Florida and Fort Lauderdale, west Palm, Miami are, are demographically potentially different than the rest of the state, or at least large parts of the state. Are you seeing bag vaccine hesitancy as a, as a big thing in the Fort Lauder, uh, Fort Lauderdale Broward county area? Or is that just not happening at the, at the scale of potentially other areas or other states like in Alabama or Mississippi?

Dean Trantalis: (37:54)
Well, we have, we have our measure of downs here. There's no doubt about that. I mean, we have, uh, people who just, uh, you know, first they wanted to wait until the Johnson Johnson vaccine came out because they only wanted one job. And then you get a lot of people based on either cultural reasons or religious reasons, um, uh, or just people who doubt science altogether, uh, just saying, you know, they'd rather, they rather, you know, tough it out. Um, you know, that's a big mistake and, uh, um, especially since you can still get it, even with the vaccine, I mean, it's what they say, 95%, uh, it's 95% effective. Well, there's always going to be a five percenters, one out of funny. Okay. Who may still get it. So, um, so let's just be smart. Let's listen to the doctors and, uh, um, and, and let us all just try to protect one another where our masks try to get vaccinated, uh, and, and let's just become a better society.

Joe Eletto: (38:52)
Absolutely. And one last question, just as we add to the list of humble brags that we're able to give you for Fort Lauderdale, um, I am a self-proclaimed FTE, and I know that the airport's going through a $3.2 billion. Like, I don't even know if you call it a remodel just to re-imagining. Can you tell us a little bit more about that? What that's going to do for the area? I think for Lauderdale is the fastest growing large hub airport in the country right now. So what does that mean for people coming down here looking to relocate businesses and such?

Dean Trantalis: (39:21)
Well, what it means is this part of an overall, uh, um, agenda to rebuild the infrastructure of, uh, our communities. Um, whether it be the airport or even, even in the city of Fort Lauderdale, we have undertaken a huge project to rebuild our sewer systems, our water systems, uh, everything about our infrastructure. We are, we are rebuilding we've suffered from the, from the, uh, neglect over these years when I became mayor, it was, uh, it was the first thing on our agenda to, to rebuild these, uh, system in order to, to become more sustainable. So as more and more people move into the area, we're building a lot of new buildings, these buildings, these are filling up within months. Uh, it's, it's uncanny. And, um, and we have to, as a, as a responsible government, respond to this, uh, to these needs and these expectations so that when you turn on the faucet, water will be there. When you flush your toilet, you know, is going to go away. You know, we have a responsibility to respond to that. And, uh, uh, we have a very, we have a fast-forward agenda and we have been moving very quickly to accomplish this. So, um, we want to make sure that when people come to Fort Lauderdale, that they enjoy the experience and, uh, and no one walks away regretting what they found here.

Joe Eletto: (40:37)
Oh, this is fantastic. Anthony, do you have any last words for the mayor before you let him go? Uh, you know, mayor

Anthony Scaramucci: (40:42)
I'm, I'm super impressed. You know, I wish I, I wish I was on the, uh, Tran talus presidential campaign, as opposed to the other guy's game that I got myself involved in, but, you know, there's always time. There's always time, but I, uh, I look forward to meeting you in person.

Dean Trantalis: (41:02)
He's our neighbor up the road here, you know, the whole

Anthony Scaramucci: (41:04)
Fan neighbor, uh, you know, uh, listen, you know, there's no, for me, there's no hard feelings. Life goes on. I don't bear grudges towards anybody, but, uh, you're, you're doing an amazing job, sir. Thank you so much for, uh, joining us on, on, on salt. Uh, and when I'm shoveling snow up here in the Northeast, I'm going to be thinking of you. Okay. I'll, I'll be sure to, uh, I'll be sure to be thinking of you enjoying your beautiful view and you're amazing sunrises, uh, and that great, beautiful, uh, town that you live in. And, and thank you so much for joining us and hopefully we'll get you to one of our live events. Yeah.

Dean Trantalis: (41:43)
Well, let me tell you, when you come down here, just let me know, love to show you around town. And, uh, it's really been a great experience being part of this show. So thank you again, or,

Anthony Scaramucci: (41:52)
Or our pleasure. And I will definitely take you up on that and, and, and listen to me, the, uh, the dinner invitation for, with the crazy Scaramucci cheese of Thanksgiving is open invite. Okay, you may need a diplomatic pack. You may need a diplomatic passport, however, to get into the house, but that's all that, that we could work on

Speaker 4: (42:10)
That together. Well, sir, thank you

Joe Eletto: (42:13)
Again, and thank you so much for tuning into this latest episode of salt talks. If you'd like to view our entire library, you can head over to our YouTube channel at salt tube. We're also very active on Twitter. So we're at salt conference there where we have live transcripts and videos as well. Please also follow us on LinkedIn. If you're on that platform, as well as Facebook and on behalf of the entire salt team, this is Joe Eletto signing off for today. We look forward to seeing you again soon.

Nikhil Kamath: From Chess to CIO | SALT Talks #200

“Your version of happiness can’t have a template. Feeling fulfilled in life is something you’ll have to figure out on your own. Trying to have more money than your peer group doesn’t appeal to the newer generation as it did to previous ones.”

Nikhil Kamath, along with his brother, co-founded Zerodha, India’s largest brokerage exchange with over three million users. Kamath and his brother also founded the asset management firm True Beacon in an attempt to disrupt the traditional asset management space.

Around 2009, India’s brokers would charge as much as half a percent of volume as a broker’s fee. With the belief that such fees made profitability too difficult, Zerodha was created simply to remove those barriers and from this users have flocked organically. Opportunities for disruption in finance will continue to grow into areas like traditional banking. “I think there’s a big opportunity to disrupt banking. I think banking will become more fragmented and have tinier banks who do a better job serving clients in those niches.”

Zerodha provides similar levels of access to financial markets in India as Robin Hood in America where the GameStop-Reddit saga made headlines. Among the lessons learned are that retail traders should seek to organize around stocks with good fundamentals instead of those headed towards bankruptcy and that regulators should limit leveraged trading. “I think we should be careful about how much leverage is provided. When you allow someone with $1 to short $50 worth of GameStop, that’s when things get unnatural.”

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Nikhil Kamath.jpeg

Nikhil Kamath

Co-Founder & Chief Investment Officer

True Beacon & Zerodha

MODERATOR

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darcie: (00:07)
Hello. Hello everyone. And welcome back to salt talks. My name is John Darcie. I'm the managing director of salt, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance technology and public policy. Salt talks are a digital interview series with leading investors, creators, and thinkers. And our goal on these salt talks is the same as our goal at our salt conferences, which is to provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future. And we're very excited today to welcome. Nickeel come off to salt talks and keel is the co-founder and chief investment officer of both zero dot, which is the largest broker brokerage exchange in India. It's been called the Robin hood of India as well as true beacon and asset management firm, uh, that Nickeel and his brother started, uh, that, that they saw an opportunity to disrupt the traditional asset management space in India and around the world.

John Darcie: (01:06)
And I know their performance has been fantastic since they started true beacon as well, but Nickeel also has a non-traditional background into, into the business world. Uh, he started trading equities at the age of 17 after giving up a career as a professional chess player. He was a chess prodigy dropped out of school at a young age, but started trading stocks and fell in love with financial markets. Uh, he largely focused when he was a trader on emerging derivatives and commodity sectors before co-founding Komatsu associates at the age of 19 to manage the net worth of high net worth individuals in portfolios and public markets. And in 2010, as I mentioned at the age of 23, he co-founded zero die with his brother Nitten, uh, the company aimed to revolutionize Indian financial market access by adopting a transparent ultra low fee and proprietary tech driven strategy.

John Darcie: (01:58)
It's also self-funded, uh, by the [inaudible] brothers. So it's taken no venture capital funding. It has over 3 million users and is the country's largest retail brokerage platform. It facilitates orders were 10 billion us dollars per day, which accounts for about 15% of the daily equity volume in India. The company is headquartered in Asia, is it hub Bangalore? And as I mentioned, it's funded entirely by Nikila Niton. It has a valuation of over 2 billion us dollars. Uh, the Klamath brothers also incubate, uh, FinTech companies through their VC fund rain matter, aggressively investing in a variety of different FinTech companies, driving innovation, aimed at bringing financial inclusion across India, which is something, uh, that is a very welcome development hosting. Today's talk is Anthony Scaramucci, the founder and managing partner of SkyBridge capital, a global alternative investment firm. SkyBridge traditionally is in the hedge fund industry as a fund of funds. But in recent years, we've continued to diversify our business have made several investments, the FinTech sector. So looking forward to a great conversation today about FinTech, about trading, about financial markets. And with that, I'll turn it over to Anthony for the interview.

Anthony Scaramucci: (03:09)
Well, first of all, congratulations on your amazing career. Uh, and so we're, we're, we're super thrilled to have you, but I want to go back, uh, because you're 17, you're trading, um, you're being inspired somewhere to start so early. Um, and so tell us about that. Where, where did you get your vision from your inspiration and when did you decide that this is what you were going to do with your life?

Nikhil Kamath: (03:38)
So, Anthony there never

Nikhil Kamath: (03:39)
Really has been a plan. Uh, I think, uh, everything that has happened up until now has been fairly organic. Uh, the decision to go into trading happened by virtue of having people in my vicinity might be a group. Some people I knew who were trading back in the day, uh, I attempted many different things at that point in life, but, uh, trading is the one thing that kind of stuck on, I think it worked well for me. And also I had some kind of a natural liking towards trading. Uh, the one great thing about reading a career in trading or investing when you're going solo and not working for a larger enterprise is there's no starting, uh, you know, minimum qualification one requires or, uh, you don't need to pass a certain exam to be able to do it. You can, you know, bring in a little bit of capital and you can begin trading on your own. So that played a huge part in, uh, the entire trading career.

Anthony Scaramucci: (04:40)
You you're, you're the founder of India's largest retail brokerage company, zero doubt. So tell us about the origination of that company, uh, and why you've got competitors. Uh, what was your edge, uh, in terms of your execution and your vision for the company?

Nikhil Kamath: (04:58)
So when

Nikhil Kamath: (04:59)
We started 11 years ago, uh, the marketplace then was very expensive. Uh, brokers would charge as much as half a percent on volume as a broking fee. Uh, back when we were full-time traders, uh, we, we always thought that it would be impossible to remain efficient and profitable as a trader being these kinds of fees. So the intention of starting a broking firm was to kind of like Reid ourself out of paying those fees. Uh, but once we started to, we got a broking platform and we started using it and kind of start developing it the very early stages. People really liked it and they came on board. So we have been in the very lucky, a situation where we started in 2009, right after the financial crisis. So not much money was going into innovating the FinTech industry, especially in India, but we also have organically grown without having to, you know, go out there and market or do ads and stuff like that.

Anthony Scaramucci: (06:05)
You, you, you you've said, I mean, I referred you to say this, that, uh, there are people that have inspired you. So tell us about those people. Tell us who your mentors are, tell us who you lean on. Who's your personal board of directors?

Nikhil Kamath: (06:22)
Well, mentors,

Nikhil Kamath: (06:25)
Mentorship is not something I truly believe in, especially, I think you start off in life having a mentor, and then when you meet them physically and you spend a little bit of time and with them, everybody has flaws. So the whole mentor, mentee relationship, I don't think works, but, uh, as my personal board of directors, you know, it would be my brother, some of my colleagues who, who have been working with us for a long time now I would consider them the personal board.

Anthony Scaramucci: (06:55)
You know, it's interesting, you know, uh, uh, Churchill said that once he said that there are no heroes to a man's valet. And at the end of the day that, uh, no matter who we're talking about, they've got issues, strengths, and weaknesses, et cetera. And I, and I totally agree with that. Tell us about the asset management company called true beacon. Um, why did you take that step and tell us what true beacon is? Yeah. So

Nikhil Kamath: (07:19)
Even today, I mean, if you were to look at different geographies, not just in India, but even in America, for example, uh, when a ultra HNI individual, uh, typically wants to allocate money to a third party fund, he goes to his wealth manager or private bank who acts as a middleman in introducing the fund and they charge you a percent or two in between to set up the fund for you. Then the fund manager charges you 2% a year. If the client makes money, does not make money. There is a recurring fee of 2%, which is essentially paid in perpetuity. Uh, and there are many inefficiencies like, you know, these are not open-ended, there are locking periods. You can't take out your money for three years and such. So the intention is starting to beacon was, you know, uh, when I wanted to allocate my personal money a few years ago, these are the issues I dealt with.

Nikhil Kamath: (08:15)
And I was like, if there is not a great product for something like this, why not try and attempt to create it on our own. So we are trying to read the ecosystem of all of the inefficiencies that I just mentioned. A true beacon will not have any middle men, not have any distributors, uh, no setup fees, no exit loads, no, lock-in completely open-ended. We don't have the typical annual management fee that other fund houses do. Uh, instead we've kind of like got a performance fee of 10%, which makes us totally client aligned. Uh, it's a way of putting the fund managers neck on line. So if we don't make money for the clients, for any reason, for three years or four years, we have zero revenue as a company. So we are trying to approach asset management in, in a slightly different manner, uh, wherein you know, we only build based on the performance we bring in and we have kind of waved off everything else.

Anthony Scaramucci: (09:15)
Yeah. It's fascinating. And you, and you got your start basically at 14. I mean, you dropped out of school at 14, you became a chess champion. Um, tell us about the future. Um, I have adult children, uh, two of which went to college, one went to business school, one, uh, one has dropped out of college, uh, and he's pursuing a career in the music industry and, you know, he's doing quite well without his college degree, as he points out to me all the time. Uh, I'm an old fashioned fuddy-duddy. I went to college, I went to law school, uh, but the future is really different Maciel and the things have changed. So tell older people your observation of that and where is the future as it relates to secondary education? Yeah,

Nikhil Kamath: (10:04)
I think education, the formal structured education, I think, has to change to keep, keep, uh, keep pace with the, how the times are changing. But one significant change that I think will happen is people will no longer have one career in which they spent 40 years. I think the newer generation is a lot less patient than the previous ones were. So I would picture, you know, having people having three or four careers in their life span, you know, somebody does a certain kind of job for 10 years. It takes a year off and then does completely, uh, something which is very different for the next 10 and so on and so forth. So I think the gig economy is going to play a bigger part. Then we have witnessed up until now, uh, and education, I think will change in a manner that outside of what you learn in your college or your school, or whatever, whatever stream of education you choose to pursue, versus the amount of information and knowledge you're able to, you know, assimilate on your own and practical, pragmatic knowledge will probably have a greater importance than traditional structured, uh, education.

Anthony Scaramucci: (11:19)
So I shouldn't worry about my kid. Is that what you're telling me? I mean, I, you know, cause I I'm, I'm this old fashioned traditionalist NICU, well,

Nikhil Kamath: (11:27)
I wouldn't know Anthony, but, uh, I'm guessing, uh, I think we used to evolve at a pace, you know, like, uh, a 40 year old man would meet a 20 year old kid back in the day and, and realize that the 20 year old is far more evolved smarter in many ways than the 40 year old is I think that intergenerational gap, that window is narrowing. Now, if I meet somebody who is five years younger than me, instead of 20, you already see the difference. They are a bit more evolved, a bit more, uh, acknowledge or CLI uh, adapt in a way. And, uh, I think that that pace of evolution is changing significantly, such as by virtue of him being your son and so much younger than you. I think the probability that he's also a bit more evolved at quite high,

Anthony Scaramucci: (12:17)
You know, it's, it's, it's, it's interesting because I, I absolutely believe that. Of course I supported his, uh, the portrait from school and he's, he's doing something that he really loves. I, I live by the motto of Mel Brooks, the American comedian, uh, where he says, relax, none of us are getting out of here alive. And so you have to pursue your dreams and, and, and, and had that vision. And I think what you're saying is a resonating message for people of all generations, we can learn from each other. We're also coming into the earth with different, uh, families were coming into the earth with different biology. And so therefore, you know, you know, some of us are more advanced than others. I can remember a Michael Dell who helped me actually get SkyBridge started when he was 27 or 28. I said to him, I've done everything right.

Anthony Scaramucci: (13:04)
I went to law school, I went to undergrad, you dropped out, you know, and we're separated now by billions of dollars. And so I always want to encourage people to pursue their dreams and to stay on stuff like this. So you're, you're a great role model for these young kids. Um, before I switched over to game stop and things like that, what advice do you give people? Um, people call on you and they say, okay, this is what I'm thinking about, what my career, what is sort of the template that you tell people to think about philosophically? Well, I

Nikhil Kamath: (13:39)
Think there is no template. I would say that, but, uh, uh, I think we've all been too fixated by our peer groups in a way, uh, the people, the cities that we grew up in, the people that we grew up with, uh, there is this French guy, Rennie, Gerard, who talks about something called mimetic theory, uh, in isolation. We truly do not know what we want. Uh, we think we want what we want based on the people around us, by, you know, kind of mimicking what their perceived goals are. So I would say, you know, like take the time to figure out what you actually want. Uh, having more money might need a certain pedigree of people happy or having more, uh, academy success might make a certain kind of people happy, but your version of happiness, I don't think can have a template or your version of feeling fulfilled in life.

Nikhil Kamath: (14:35)
You will have to figure it out on your own, uh, as time passes. I think I'm coming to realize that the whole monetary aspect of, uh, trying to have more wealth than your peer group, uh, it doesn't appeal to the newer as a date to, you know, maybe my generation or yours when you meet a 15 or a 20 year old kid today, especially in the affluent community. I don't think their trip in life is to have more than their friends in terms of financial value. A lot of them are evolving. Do you know, uh, in a way, or be a bit more righteous and kinda like do things which are not just good for them, but for the ecology and the community as well, which is actually a very, you know, interesting and inspiring. And I hope the world evolves in that direction.

Anthony Scaramucci: (15:26)
We'll say they, I think it's a beautiful statement. It's the reason why I wanted to ask you about this because you know, we're finding now that we are, and again, we have social issues related to this, cause we're not spreading the wealth as much as we need to. And of course, I want to do that through market forces, not through the imposition of the government, but as we get more abundance in the world, we find that our base needs are fulfilled. And so therefore, what are we actualizing as human beings? And so with that, what is the next step for you as you see your career unfolding?

Nikhil Kamath: (16:03)
I think more of the

Nikhil Kamath: (16:03)
Same, uh, the one thing I realized Anthony is each time I attempt something, which is not my core competency, uh, I'm guessing my core competency is, you know, stock markets and FinTech. Uh, every time I've invested outside of that, I've tried to be adventurous and do new things. They've never really worked out for me. So I think I'm going to stick to my niche and kind of like try to build more product and more companies, but in my core sector and, uh, we've started asset management. Now we might attempt insurance banking, but everything in, in the sector where we already have a captive audience.

Anthony Scaramucci: (16:45)
Yeah. I think it's good advice. I mean, of course I had my foray in politics and tequila and yeah, that didn't, that, wasn't my sweet spot. You can see John Darcie laughing. I'm going to cut his night later. Okay. Cause I see him giggling to himself over there, uh, before I turn it over. What's that if you remember Anthony,

Nikhil Kamath: (17:03)
We spoke about this. Uh, we met at Davos in a pre pandemic world last year, and I remember you talking about politics and I think Trump was meant to be speaking there and stuff like that.

Anthony Scaramucci: (17:17)
I know, I totally remember we were at the wine bar. Um, it was interesting that, uh, you know, we, we had of course Trump and I had had a falling out. Uh, I tried to be supportive of him. Um, but, uh, I don't know if you remember, but standing where this was Mark Burnett, uh, the producer of the, uh, of the show, the apprentice. And so mark wanted me to smoke a peace pipe with, uh, president Trump, but, uh, you know, uh, obviously that didn't come to pass, but in any event. Yeah, no, I, I absolutely remember the conversation vividly. Um, I turn it over to John Dorsey, who is our resident millennial that has all of the fancy pants, millennial questions. I'm more of the boomer old fashioned questioner. Uh, but before I turn it over to him, you're an avid reader. Uh, that's something I, uh, uh, pride myself in. I try to read everything. And so what types of books do you like what's on your nightstand right now? Uh, what do you, what do you, what are you, what are you reading these days? Yeah, so

Nikhil Kamath: (18:18)
I, I try to keep it fairly eclectic. I had a big history phase where I was very interested in, you know, uh, Greek history, uh, maybe the nasi history, many different bouts of history, uh, that was followed up by psychology. I think that interests me today more than other things, because at the end of the day,

Anthony Scaramucci: (18:40)
Have a psychology book. Nickeel that you've read recently.

Nikhil Kamath: (18:43)
Uh, what I was

Nikhil Kamath: (18:45)
Talking about earlier, it's in-between philosophy and psychology, but, uh, the memetic theories of rainy Gerard, I think are a good program. Uh, I think, uh, Freud is a little bit out there, but a euphemized version would probably be young, which is more apt for readers today. Uh, Adler is good, uh, in many, many great books in psychology, but if I have to talk about one book I like right now, I think it's Rennies.

Anthony Scaramucci: (19:16)
Yep. Okay. Good. All right. Well, I'm going to, I'm going to turn it over to John, but before I do that, talk to me about GameStop and the emblematic nature of game stop. Is there a revolution going on right now? Is this a blip on the screen or are we going to see a revolution because of people like you? Um, you're basically providing technology to people that I saw back in 1995 on the Goldman Sachs prop desk, uh, where you're getting instant information and instant feed, relatively costless or almost costless trading. Uh, those are things that, uh, gave the Goldman Sachs prop trader twenty-five years ago, a significant advantage your evening, the playing field for people. So is this a game changer or a blip in the system?

Nikhil Kamath: (20:03)
Well, I, I think the

Nikhil Kamath: (20:04)
It's a pity that, you know, these guys who are the ready traders pick something like GameStop stop, uh, which inherently does not have sound fundamentals. Uh, it was a company walking towards bankruptcy before they started meddling with it. Anyway, on the other hand, if they were to pick a company which a hedge fund had shorted and beat down, which had decent fundamentals and had had scope and potential to grow, I think the equation would be totally different, uh, in this entire game stop saw. I think those Reddit traders, they're the ones who actually ended up losing a lot of money. Uh, so I would say blip, I don't think this will continue, but, uh, information about hedge funds being shot, whatever company is publicly available and has been. So for a long time, uh, great if people won't, you know, champion the cause of the company and support the small guy and get together and all of that, but they should pick companies with some kind of fundamentals versus picking companies, which are on the verge of bankruptcy and moving the price only based on, you know, the fact that they can come together with a certain amount of capital.

Nikhil Kamath: (21:16)
I don't think that works John Dorsey.

John Darcie: (21:22)
All right. Well, uh, it's a pleasure to have you on Nickeel. Um, I want to talk about India for a second. So you guys are based in Bangalore. Uh, we recently had Rahul Padgett potty on, on assault talk, talking about, uh, things that are going on in the digital asset space. So, you

Anthony Scaramucci: (21:37)
Know, he's been practicing, pronouncing that name for about six months. Okay. I just want to make sure you know that, okay. This is very good, John. That was impressed.

John Darcie: (21:44)
Thank you. Thank you, Anthony. Still can't pronounce it. Your mouth probably happened to you, but, uh, for some reason, I've, I've got them all, but to Martha

Anthony Scaramucci: (21:51)
Atmos, to like me, despite the fact that I can't pronounce his name. Okay.

John Darcie: (21:55)
That's fair. I guess that's why everybody just calls him Tomas, but India is a fascinating place to me. It's it's somewhere that's rapidly modernizing. It has an incredible base of engineering talent and entrepreneurs, uh, in your time as an investor, as an entrepreneur over the last decade or so, how has the entrepreneurial landscape evolved in India? How has the quality of investment opportunities in India evolved and what do you see as the future for India as you look out over the next decade? Yeah. So

Nikhil Kamath: (22:26)
The one thing that has changed over the last decade is, uh, a lot more attention has fallen upon, you know, Indian entrepreneurs and the startup scene here. Uh, just in terms of liquidity and the amount of money chasing quality, Indian startups. I think the number has gone up 20 fold in the last decade. I think that trend will continue. Uh, we have to remember that, you know, India is a large country, right? We have, uh, we have a lot of people when it comes to things like FinTech companies or people like us who are stock brokers. We are operating in an ecosystem where in, for example, out of the billion and a half people we have in the country only about one or 2% of our population, even today has access to financial markets. So that number will steadily continue to grow. And, you know, it will go up and at some point you'll come near the 60, 50% that you might have in America.

Nikhil Kamath: (23:26)
So each micro market like that in India, each ecosystem has significant scale and potential to grow. And I think people recognize that opportunity and there has been a lot more attention capital interest in India, uh, in the very short term though, I think it's a bit overdone think, uh, uh, how we are valuing startups in India today, just because of this, you know, the cycle where we will grow from being this small ecosystem to a much larger one over the next 10 or 20 years, I don't think even, uh, accounting for that, the valuations we see are justified. Uh, if you were to look at the 10 most valued startups in India, uh, maybe nine of them do not have any profits. Uh, and I don't think that's a fair picture and I don't think that's a good way to kind of like, uh, value them. There's no justification for that. So it'll be interesting to see how that changes and evolves.

John Darcie: (24:27)
Well, I'm sure your investors, uh, value the fact that you tell them the truth. You know, you have a lot of cheerleaders in financial markets today. It's, it's, uh, it's good to hear a sober and honest assessment of what's going on, but I want to go back to, uh, your sort of adolescents. You were, you were a chess champion. You didn't, you know, maybe weren't able to take the next step into being the greatest grand master in the world or a professional chess player, but you were an extremely talented chess player. A lot of people I know that are very successful, young entrepreneurs play chess and are very good at it. Are there things that you learn or skills or mental frameworks that you learn in chess that you think that you've been able to apply in business to help you be successful a little

Nikhil Kamath: (25:08)
Bit, maybe? Uh, so Joe and I think chess is more about memory and theory than it is about intelligence. And you know, how smart who is you become a better chess player. You know, when you have gone through middle game theory and game theory, you have kind of like read up on all the games that have been played historically, and in a way you're able to regurgitate what has happened and who did what, when during your chess game. Uh, the one parallel maybe that I could draw is chess is a bunch of rules that you have to follow. You know, you, you try and control the center, you develop your pieces, you console as quickly as you can, uh, beyond these rules, there is opportunity to be creative and differentiate yourself as a player. I think that applies in business. Uh, it might be a business run by a millennial or a baby boomer, or, you know, a generation Z or whatever. But I think there are these rules that each one of us has to follow in the business that we are attempting, and we get to be creative beyond that. And differentiate beyond that. I think that's a good parallel and maybe chess teaches you to do that a little bit better.

John Darcie: (26:22)
Right? So I think FinTech is a good application of that. So obviously the financial industry, uh, in, in different countries, there's different regulatory frameworks, but you have to fit within certain regulatory frameworks as a financial entity. Um, but at the same time, a lot of investors, especially venture capital investors like to invest in people that are the financial industry that don't necessarily come from inside the establishment. So people that can look at it with a fresh set of eyes and say, you know, maybe things are done this way and they could be done this way, but obviously it all has to fit inside of a regulatory framework. What type of FinTech companies are you most excited about that? Maybe take a fresh look at the way things have been done. Historically, there's obviously a lot taking place in the FinTech sector. We're investors in companies like Klarna, which is the largest player in the buy. Now pay later space. Uh, plaid is a, um, is another FinTech company that's enabling these pipes and rails into traditional banks through FinTech FinTech applications. Chime is another one. That's a neobank, that's basically disrupting the entire, you know, branch banking model. What different types of fintechs are you most excited about? And do you think are changing the system, you know, most actively, I think

Nikhil Kamath: (27:34)
There is a big opportunity to disrupt banking. Uh, I think the whole lending, almost everything a bank does today has not seen serious disruption in a long time. Sure. There have been met, uh, you know, like, uh, Neo banks in different pockets of the world, which have done well, but structurally banking has not changed. And that carry in between how much a bank borrows at how much they lend it. Uh, I think there's plenty of room to disrupt there. I think banking, uh, in a way will move towards becoming more fragmented than consolidating. And you will have tinier banks in different niches, which do a better job at serving the clientele in those niches versus having one large bank, which does everything. Uh, so in FinTech I've seen a lot of evolution in asset management and broking in, uh, uh, even to a large extent in insurance and products related to that. But I think banking will be the next big sector to be disrupted. Right.

John Darcie: (28:39)
And how was the pandemic not just impacted your business there at $0 or the way you invest at true beacon, but in the way you think about the world. So, you know, obviously, uh, there's a couple of different factors at play. We moved to a completely digital world, almost. We're sitting here talking on zoom rather than being at an in-person conference. Are you visiting our office here in New York, uh, in the United States and around the world, different central banks and governments threw money at the problem. So when you look at the long-term impacts of the pandemic, how has it reshaped your business and help them grow? What do you think are going to be the longterm impacts of the way our minds are sort of reshaped, uh, by the pandemic era? Yeah, so for business,

Nikhil Kamath: (29:21)
It has been good. Uh, I think, uh, people who did not have time to, you know, go out there, open a trading account and allocate some time to invest, have actually gotten the time now. So the industry has grown tremendously and we have grown with it. Uh, I think the same has happened in America as well, but a lot more investors in traders have kind of manifested out during the pandemic. Uh, personally, I, I quite hated John. I mean, I'm sick of like talking to people on a computer screen and zoom is great and everything, but, you know, beyond a point it does get, uh, I don't think it's the same as meeting someone in person. Uh, so honestly I can't wait for it to end. Uh, I'd love to begin, you know, life where I get to travel and meet people and do things together and collaborate, uh, this entire sitting in your home office and staring at a zoom screen all day. I think, um, I'm kind of like completely bored out of doing that

John Darcie: (30:25)
Well, that gives me a good segue to plug our salt conference, which we're resuming, uh, in September of 2021 in New York city, to the extent you're able to travel safely. We'd love to have you there. Uh, September 13th to the 15th in New York city, it's gonna be the first time that we've held our conference in New York city. You know, we were trying to help the city sort of bounce back from the pandemic and also make it accessible to people like you, who might be traveling in from out of town. We also most recently did our salt conference in Abu Dhabi in 2019. So we're looking forward to welcoming people from the UAE over to our salt conference in New York, but we'd love to have you there. And we're believers in the exact same thing that you can replace that interpersonal interaction, uh, when it comes to evaluating people, uh, and making connections.

John Darcie: (31:07)
And I also love that you're not talking your book again. I know the pandemic has probably been very good for your business the same way. It's been good for a lot of, uh, FinTech oriented companies. Um, but I want to talk about crypto and blockchain technology for a second. So you're not necessarily directly in that space. I don't know, potentially incubate some companies in that space through rain matter. Uh, but you obviously seen an explosion in the prices of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, Ethereum and others and explosion and things like non fungible tokens and decentralized finance. What's your view on crypto and blockchain? Uh, how has it reshaped the way you think about business or FinTech, or are you thinking that this is some sort of a short-term fad that's going to wane?

Nikhil Kamath: (31:50)
Yeah, so John, I I'm fairly jaded by the fact that I've missed the bus and I don't own any Bitcoins or I don't have any large crypto investments. Uh, I think central banks across the world, especially in America for that, in that case has been fairly irresponsible over the last two or three decades. I think they have continued to print money, uh, at a rate that that should ideally have the rest of the world question what is happening. But considering that, you know, it's not in our best interest to do that. And we all also intern on many dollar backed acids, it does not happen. So I think the use case where something like a Bitcoin, which has a finite number that is available are increasing, but I think the question then is at $60,000 a coin, uh, uh, do I think I have missed the bus and I would not like to change the rally anymore.

Nikhil Kamath: (32:48)
Yeah, I would say, uh, at $60,000 a coin, I don't think I'm in that boat, which believes that, you know, Bitcoins will have the same market capitalization's as gold in a way they're comparing it to things. Uh, it's like, uh, you know, apples to tomatoes, kind of a comparison there, nothing in common at the end of the day, gold still has a use case. And, uh, there is a cost of mining each time you get gold out. So I'm not the biggest fan of crypto coins or Bitcoins. I think, uh, the, the technology definitely has a use case, but the anonymous, it, it kind of delivers to people who are using it, I think will cause trouble at different points of time, which will in turn act as a big hindrance on this becoming a more widely accepted currency.

John Darcie: (33:40)
Yeah. I mean, we've talked to some of the smartest money managers in the world who have a similar, uh, point of view on Bitcoin where they now embrace the story. They understand why it has rallied and in the midst of historic money printing and, uh, and money creation in the midst of us moving to a fully digital world for a year, a year and a half, they fully get it. But, uh, you know, there's some, some ego that comes in when they don't want to be the one holding the bag and chasing, uh, Bitcoin around this $60,000, uh, area. But we try to impress on, on people, our belief that it's still very early, uh, for Bitcoin and, and this entire movement. I want to talk about access to financial markets. And Anthony talked about GameStop for a moment. Um, in general, I think there are differing views on Robin hood, as you mentioned, a lot of the retail investors that invested in GameStop lost their shirt.

John Darcie: (34:33)
You know, they, they, uh, thought that this was some type of game that Robin hood has definitely gamified, uh, people's participation in financial markets and given people access that didn't have it before. On one hand, that's very positive that you have more people that are participating potentially in, you know, asset inflation and, and able to invest in companies even with small dollar amounts. But at the same time that gamification has also Lord people into a game that is very difficult and psychologically challenging. Do you think it's a double-edged sword when it comes to increased access to financial markets or things like Robin hood or zero dot, uh, or do you think it's, it's just overwhelmingly positive to have more people participating? Uh, in that system

Nikhil Kamath: (35:14)
Personally, me, I am kind of a fan of three markets. I think we should have, uh, as much access possible, but what we need to be careful or is, you know, the amount of leverage that is provided and stuff like that, I think that's where the regulators need to step in short, is looking for people to buy games, stop it's okay for people to short game and stuff. But when you allow for someone with $1 to short $50 worth of stock by virtue of leverage, I think that's when things get a bit unnatural, maybe the cap, you know, the natural that can be available on a certain company to the market cap of that company is probably a fair thing to do. Uh, many regulators have done a great job. Some have not. Uh, I don't think in America, the regulators have done a great job. On the other hand in India, some countries in Southeast Asia have been a bit more proactive and kind of like, uh, mitigated risks before large events occurred, but I'm sure, uh, you know, the V or the American regulators are going to turn around and make it harder for these sessions, these scenarios to occur in the future

John Darcie: (36:27)
Only keel. It's been an absolute pleasure to have you on again, just to reiterate, we couldn't agree more with you about, uh, interpersonal interactions. So we're looking forward to next time we see you not be on zoom, but either at the wine party in Davos or potentially at our salt conference in September, uh, we would like nothing more.

Nikhil Kamath: (36:45)
Thank you so much on thank you, Anthony. Lovely catching up. Yeah. It's a

Anthony Scaramucci: (36:49)
Pleasure to have you on with us and we're looking forward to seeing you live and I promise you very good wine the next time we get together.

Nikhil Kamath: (36:56)
Definitely looking forward to that. You're welcome. Thank you. Fantastic.

John Darcie: (37:01)
Thank you again to Kiel and thank you everybody for tuning into today's salt talk, uh, within the Nickeel come off, who is the co-founder with his brother Nitten of both zero dot the leading a broker brokerage platform in India, as well as true beacon. Uh, one of the top emerging asset managers in India, as well as incubating, uh, tons of exciting FinTech companies. Just a reminder, if you missed any part of this talk or any of our previous salt talks, you can access them all on our website@salt.org backslash talks and on our YouTube channel, which is called salt tube. We're all on social media, on all the different platforms. We're most active on Twitter though, at salt conference, we'd love for you to follow us there. Uh, but also on LinkedIn, Facebook and Instagram as well. And please spread the word about these salt talks. Uh, we love meeting new people and introducing our audience to new people like Nickeel who are young people doing exciting things in the world of finance and technology, but on behalf of Anthony and the entire salt team, this is John Darcie signing off from salt talks for today. We hope to see you back here soon.

Cathie Wood: Investing in Disruptive Innovation | SALT Talks #199

“In the sharing economy, if you don’t give, you don’t get. We are sharing our research because we want to be part of the communities that are doing the research. We get so much back from them.”

Cathie Wood is a legendary investor and most recently founder of ARK Invest. ARK is focused on disruptive innovation that can identify large scale public market investment opportunities centered around DNA sequencing, robotics, AI, energy storage and blockchain technology.

For years, technologies like DNA sequencing were too costly and time-intensive to warrant real investment. Investors did not own enough in the innovation markets because up until recently, the advancement of technology had not reached viable investment levels. Also, there was not enough research to build on, so ARK set out to create an open research ecosystem, making it the first sharing economy company in the asset management space. “In the sharing economy, if you don’t give, you don’t get. We are sharing our research because we want to be part of the communities that are doing the research. We get so much back from them.”

An open research ecosystem creates a collaborative environment where researchers and investors can get quicker crowd-sourced feedback. This is vital in making necessary corrections or pivots early on. “In the world of exponential growth, if you make an incorrect assumption early on and you carry it on too long, you’ll make an exponential mistake.”

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Cathie Wood.png

Cathie Wood

Founder & CEO

ARK investment Management

MODERATOR

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

How to Recognize, Attack & Eliminate Workplace Injustice | SALT Talks #198

“The root causes of workplace injustices are bias, prejudice and bullying. Bias is not meaning it, prejudice is meaning it, and bullying is meaning harm.”

Trier Bryant is the co-founder and CEO of Just Work, an executive education company, and is a combat veteran of the US Air Force. Kim Scott is also co-founder of Just Work and creator of a workplace comedy series based on her best-selling book Radical Candor: Be a Kick-Ass Boss Without Losing Your Humanity.

We all want to do good work at our jobs, but many times workplaces injustices or inequities can get in the way. The root causes of workplace injustices are bias, prejudice and bullying. Developing shared vocabulary can be effective in identifying and addressing these instances. “Bias, prejudice, bullying; There are no organizations in the world where these problems have been eliminated. It’s like staying in shape or eating well. They’re things you have to do every day, but they’re worth doing.”

Leaders and decision-makers in organizations play a major role in creating healthy workplace environments. This includes creating checks and balances that allow people to speak truth to power.

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKERS

Kim Scott.jpeg

Kim Scott

Author

Radical Candor

Trier Bryant.jpeg

Trier Bryant

Co-Founder & Chief Executive Officer

Just Work

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darcie: (00:07)
Hello everyone. And welcome back to salt talks. My name is John Darcie. I'm the managing director of salt, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance technology and public policy. Salt talks are a digital interview series that we started in 2020 with leading investors, creators and thinkers. And our goal on these salt talks is the same as our goal at our salt conferences, which are resuming in September of 2021. I might add in New York and we'd love to have our guests join us at that event today, assuming that we're able to host that safely, but our goal is to provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future. We're very excited today to welcome two guests to salt talks again with our guest moderator, uh, Sarah Koontz.

John Darcie: (00:56)
I'll read you a little bit about our two guests and also, uh, introduce Sarah before I pass the Baton. But tree or Brian is the co-founder and CEO of just work. Uh, she's a strategic executive leader with distinctive tech wall street and military experience spanning over 15 years, she's previously held leadership roles at Astra Twitter, Goldman Sachs, and proudly serve as a combat veteran in the U S air force as a captain leading engineering teams while spearheading diversity equity and inclusion initiatives for the air force academy, the air force and the department of defense. Additionally trigger advisors, leading companies like Equinox, Airbnb, SoundCloud Alto, Rockefeller foundation, and others on their talent and DEI strategies, uh, trio earned her bachelor's in system engineering with a minor in Spanish. You're all doing poquito Espanol Tomby entry or from the United States air force academy, beat army sink Navy, right.

John Darcie: (01:53)
Um, where she played division one volleyball. Uh, Kim Scott is our other guest today. She's the co-creator of an executive education company and workplace comedy series based on her bestselling book, radical candor, be a kickass boss without losing your humanity. Kim led ad sense, YouTube and DoubleClick, online sales and operations at Google, and then joined apple to develop a, uh, to develop and teach a leadership seminar. Uh, Kim has been a CEO coach at Dropbox at Qualtrics Twitter, and several other major tech companies. Uh, Kim received her MBA from Harvard business school and her bachelor's from Princeton university. I feel very unaccomplished sitting in this virtual room here today with Trisha and Ken, but we're very grateful to have them here. And as I mentioned, uh, hosting today's talk again is our recurring guest host Sarah. Uh, Sarah is the managing director and founder of Clio capital, a venture capital firm. With that. I'm going to turn it over to Sarah to begin the interview and I'll pipe in, uh, at the end, if I have some, some questions I'm always lurking during these interviews, Sarah.

Sarah Kunst: (02:57)
Awesome. We love your lurking. Um, well, so excited to be here today, um, with, with two friends who are just doing something really, really amazing that the workplace desperately needs, uh, always, but, but maybe even more now, uh, in the crazy world we live in. So, you know, let's, let's just kind of jump right in. Um, so Kim, how did you go about writing from giving about writing about giving feedback in, in radical candor, a term that I use as a radically Candice, uh, candid person, a lot in my life, uh, to, to addressing kind of workplace injustices with just work, you know, what Sarah,

Kim Scott: (03:35)
You played a huge role, probably a bigger role than you realize in that. You and I were on a panel together, and I was sort of making some comments that were encouraging people to kind of go along and get along, which is not really in the radical candor. Uh, I was not walking the radical candor walk and you, and you said to me, you know what the problem here is, Kim, the problem is people will listen to you. And I had never thought of that as a potential problem. And you helped me understand that I was kind of in denial about the things that were happening to me in the workplace and the things that were happening to other people in the workplace. And, uh, and I was also sort of succumbing to the default to silence. And there is the thing that gives me optimism about the world today is that people are speaking up more than more than they have in the past. And you can't solve problems. You refuse to notice. So thank you for forcing me to notice this problem of workplace injustice.

Sarah Kunst: (04:42)
Yeah. That, that

Sarah Kunst: (04:43)
You are welcome. Um, there's a lot of it. So that's awesome. And interior with your kind of deep expertise in sort of DEI, you know, the, this partnership, uh, seems ideal. So, so one, you know, kind of tell us about the partnership and, and how, you know, you kind of got excited about, about working with Kim and Kim, you know, how you found trickier and then like how, how did sort of creating the company come about?

Trier Bryant: (05:06)
Yeah, so I, uh, I've known, uh, about cam and radical candor. When I first read the book, uh, coming from the military, I was like, yes, civilians, this is how we do feedback in the military, do this, read this book care and just give direct feedback. And so I feel like, you know, if you're don't have radical candor in your leadership toolkit, you're kind of missing out. So it was already a huge fan. Then Kim passed on, you know, an early edition of just work, uh, her new book. And I really just had several aha moments. Um, I really reflected and, you know, put my own stories and experiences from the military wall street tech, putting them on the framework and realizing there were things that, you know, I wasn't taking responsibility for, of like causing harm, but then also a person who has been harmed and not being able to name certain things.

Trier Bryant: (05:56)
And I thought it was incredibly powerful because in the DNI space, we don't have a lot of frameworks, right. We don't have a lot of frameworks that people can add to their kits that organizations can use to say, Hey, this is a methodology. And so I was like, Kim, this is really good. Like, how do we get this into as many organizations as possible? Now I also give Kim a lot of radical candor, um, on, as a chief people officer things that she recommended being like, Kim doesn't really work that way, but I think we get understand what you were getting at. Um, and so then we just started discussing how we could partnership and do that. And that's how just worked. The company came to be.

Sarah Kunst: (06:32)
I love it. And then Kim, tell us a little about, or kind of how, how you, as you were thinking through the process of, of bringing on a CEO for this effort, you know, how, how did you realize like, drear is the one I need this person?

Kim Scott: (06:45)
So several things, first of all, it's hard for an author to admit this, but people rarely change their behavior because they read a book. It usually takes a few other few other interventions. And so I knew, I knew that we needed to help leaders roll out the ideas that, that I had put forth in the book. And then a lot of ways, actually, Sarah, once again, you helped me realize this. I was, I was talking to you about this idea and you said, you really need someone with deep DEI experience because in some ways I'm sort of like a person who's had several root canals, but I'm not a dentist. And so, so I needed to go to, to go find someone who had real deep DEI experience, but I also needed someone who had been an operating leader and great companies who knew what greatness looks like.

Kim Scott: (07:42)
And I also really love working with people from the military because I find that people who are in the military have two things going for them in terms of their leadership skills. One is that they got leadership experience. Hands-on leadership experience management experience, usually very young, very early and two, they got exceptional training, much better training in the military than we have in the private sector. And so when I saw tree resume, I, I, you know, I was already sold. Uh, and then when I met Treer I loved her even more. And then when I started working with tree air, I really got, uh, I really got a sense of what it's like to work with with, with a leader who knows what it means to walk the walk. Yeah,

Sarah Kunst: (08:29)
Yeah. That, that authenticity is so great. And I, I, I agree. Um, I love working with people military or anywhere, you know, where being very direct is, is just good. Um, and versus I I'll never forget my, my dad was in Vietnam and I was talking to him once about basic training. And he was like, oh, you know, like when you're crawling through, on your stomach and there they shoot real bullets. And like, what happens if you stand up? He's like, Sarah, you don't stand up. Right. Like the I'm like, oh, okay. People learn how to do things, because there are real things at stake versus often in workplaces, particularly in technology, you know, it's people have, I'll never forget a friend of mine talked about how there is a huge mutiny at a huge tech company once because, um, the quality of their lunch had gone down a little bit and, and the engineers were threatening to leave.

Sarah Kunst: (09:21)
Right. So there's a slight difference in, um, of different places that we, that we work in. Um, so that, that's awesome. Um, so, you know, give us a breakdown of kind of the, the just work framework, right. And, and the title says a lot, but, but really walk us through BR IRL cliff notes of kind of, you know, what's, what's the book about, and, and you know, who should read it and what do you come out the other end knowing, and then what's the kind of framework in it. And then to really turn it into like a quadruple question, you know, what are the various roles that people can play, you know, inside of these frameworks, inside of these, these situations and in candidly inside of these injustices, you know, in the workplace.

Trier Bryant: (10:04)
Yeah. So, um, one thing to think about is that we all want the same thing that organizations that we work at, right. We want to do our best work and that's what companies want from us, but yet something gets in the way. And oftentimes what gets in the way are these workplace injustices that just it's noise. It, it, you know, detracts from getting the work done efficiently and equitably. And so this framework, you know, gives people, um, you know, something to put, to, to have, and to leverage, uh, thinking about how it shows up, but then not only just how to name it so you can solve for it, but what are actual tactical practical solutions? We know that that is Kim's superpower is taking nuanced things that we have in our life experiences, and really being able to organize it in a way so that we can actually do something about it. So the root causes, the, the, the, the basics of the framework are the root causes of workplace injustice, redefine as, you know, bias, prejudice, and bullying and simple definitions. Our bias is not meaning it prejudices, meaning it. And then bullying is just being mean. Right. Um, and so, but to kind of like bring that to life, there's all these things that you can think about in your own professional experiences that really, um, contextualize like, okay, what does bias really mean? So

Kim Scott: (11:21)
It is, it is so common bias happened pretty much in every meeting and every day in every company. So here's the UN. And very often we respond with silence, but here's, here's the situation where somebody didn't respond with silence. So a friend of mine, Ayleen Lee wa walked into a meeting with two, two colleagues, both of whom were men. They sit down at the table and they're waiting for the people to come in on the, from the other company who they were hoping to do a partnership with. And the first guy comes in and he sits across from, from, from the guy to aliens left. And then the next guy comes in and sits across from the other guy. And then the others filter down, leaving a lean sort of dangling off by herself. So kind of unconscious bias in the seating and unconscious exclusion and the, and just in the way that people sat down and then Eileen starts talking and she has the expertise that's going to win her company, the deal.

Kim Scott: (12:21)
But as soon as she opens her mouth, the, they were all men. The men from the other company just ignored her as though she hadn't spoken and started talking to her colleague, and this happened two or three times. And eventually her colleague realized what was going on. And he stood up and he said, I think Elena and I should swap seats. And they swapped seats. And the whole tenor of the meeting changed because everybody realized what they were doing. So, so he was just sort of holding up a mirror and using an I statement to, to help people understand what was going on and to change it. However, this almost never happens. It sounds so simple, but it almost never happens. So what can leaders do to make that kind of thing happen more often?

Trier Bryant: (13:07)
And so, you know, one of the things that we recommend is having a shared vocabulary and a shared norm when bias happens. So for example, we call these bias interrupters. So a shared vocabulary, it could be, Hey, as a team, when we see bias, either being exhibited through behaviors or attitudes, there's a word or phrase that we're going to use. And then everyone knows, okay, that's an alert. So it could even just be biased alert. Um, one of the things that we've been doing in our course is we throw a purple flag and Kim actually went and got purple flags for people in the course. And you, you, you, you say like purple flag, or we drop it in chat. And then, because it's zoom, which is really great. Someone says what the bias is in zoom or drops a link to educate. So that it's a learning moment for everyone, but, you know, we can continue to do the work.

Trier Bryant: (13:53)
So that's the norm for us, but also understanding what is the norm, if someone doesn't understand. So what happens if someone throws a purple flag and they're like, um, I really don't understand what you just said, but let's connect after the meeting. And then a conversation can be had, but then again, really following up to make sure that that can be a learning experience for everyone. So that's bias. Um, and, but what's harder is prejudice, right? Um, and so the next and the next, um, workplace injustice that we call is prejudice, which is not meaning it. And that's harder. I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Meaning it. Um, and that's harder because people do mean it, and it's not unconscious bias and people can believe whatever they want, but you can't bring those thoughts and attitudes into the workplace and force others to believe what you believe.

Trier Bryant: (14:37)
Uh, so, you know, I recall a time I was working at a company that is very much known for hiring the best and brightest talent. And at the end of the day, when we were debriefing on the candidates, the strongest candidate that, you know, we had interviewed was actually a black woman who wore her natural hair out to the interview, the way that I'm wearing mine. Um, I was not wearing my hair like this at the time. And, um, so at the end of the end, at the end of the debrief, it was very clear that this black woman was the top candidate, except for the hiring manager said, I'm not quite sure we're going to be able to go out to offer with her. And so I dug into that to say, well, why not? Like what's the issue? And, uh, the hiring manager said, well, TRIA, her hair is not like ours. We can't put her in front of the business. Right? It's not professional now that's prejudice because she really meant that she really thought that a black woman wearing her natural hair and working in front of the business was not going, it was not, you know, professional. Um, and so I had to, you know, we had to, um, confront that and deal with that. And so that's where we talk about using an it statement. So I

Kim Scott: (15:38)
Would love to think that if I had been on trainers team at the time, I would have used an it statement. And then it statement as an upstander. And then it statement can either appeal to the law. It is illegal not to hire someone because of their hair. It can appeal to company policy. It is an HR violation not to hire someone because of their hair, or it can appeal to common sense. It is ridiculous not to hire the most qualified candidate because of her hair. And so there are things that, that leaders can do to combat bias and prejudice, but there are also things that we as upstanders can do, or, or even we, as the people who are harmed can do using this I statement or the it statement, but sometimes it's bullying. So what do you do if it's bullying?

Trier Bryant: (16:25)
So with bullying, you know, just being mean, and this was really Sarah, my aha moment with like the strongest aha moment is because if you would've asked me true, have you ever been bullied in your career? I'd have been like, have you met me? Have you worked with me? Like, no, like you come from me, like I'm going to come for you. Right. And then you're reading this chapter on bullying and being mean, and Kim, again, brings it to life with their own personal stories. And then I was like, oh my gosh, I've actually been bullied a lot in my career. Um, and I couldn't name it in that way, so I didn't stand up for myself and I couldn't address it. Um, and it could even be something as simple. We've probably all been in this situation. I was at a company you're hired to build out a new team.

Trier Bryant: (17:05)
And when you build out a new team and, uh, you know, they may take budget and headcount from other teams and that's not going to make other leaders happy. And so this happened at that company. And, um, and so this leader who was more senior than me ended up just being really mean and bullying, um, and you know, making comments like, you know, they, they, uh, also part of their strategy got shifted to our team and they didn't like the way that we were executing it. And at one point made a comment will trigger. Whereas you, in the military, don't, you just know how to do what you're told and take daughters. Right. That is just mean. Um, and so, you know, what do we do in those instances? And so in those instances, you know, we encourage folks. If you're the person being harmed or an upstander where you can use a use statement.

Kim Scott: (17:50)
And it was my daughter who actually explained this to me with a use statement. She was getting bullied. She was in third grade, she was getting bullied on the playground. And I was sort of encouraging her to use an ice statement. I feel sad when you do this. And she kind of banged her fist on the table. And she said, mom, he is trying to make me sad. Why would I tell him that he's succeeded? And I realized, gosh, you're exactly right. So we talked about it and we realized a use statement was going to work much better than an I statement. So if an I statement invites the other person in to understand things from your perspective, a use statement kind of pushes them away. So you can't talk to me like that. Or if it feels like that's going to escalate in a way that's not productive, you can say what's going on for you here. Actually tree are explained to me, this was part of her training in the military. That very often you're dealing with people who, who are hostile and so sort of to calm them down. You put the spotlight back on them, but you're making them answer the questions. You're you are not in, in the sort of submissive position of responding to how they behave. You're you're asking the questions now. So that's a use statement for bullying

Trier Bryant: (19:03)
And then for organizations, when you're dealing with bullying. And this look, when I think back into my roles as a chief people, officer leading people, organizations, this is really hard to do, and we want to acknowledge that I'm dealing with bullies, but the way that we deal with bullies are consequences, right? And so we have to have consequences. We have to, and there's three types of consequences that we talk about, conversational consequences, compensation, consequences, and then career comp consequences. So conversational consequences, get rid of the platform, remove the platform from that bully to keep bullying, right? Maybe it's someone in a meeting where it's like, okay, you know, tree, or we've heard from you enough, why don't we hear from Kim, right. Removing that platform, um, and compensation consequences, or why do we keep, you know, giving bonuses to the brilliant jerk, right? Who's causing so much harm in the organization, but, um, giving them more money based compensation, equity, and then career consequences are promoting them, right.

Trier Bryant: (19:58)
Are we looking at, we definitely don't want to make them people, leaders and managers and give them more responsibility and more opportunity to engage more people. But ultimately if we can't change those behaviors and attitudes, then the career consequences getting rid of them, right. Removing them from the organization, which we acknowledge. You know, I I've been in organizations where, um, the, the biggest bully that was causing the biggest harm was also like our critical point of failure of our, what we needed to get done. So it was like, how do you do that? Right? But there's that tipping point in an organization where if we don't manage those attitudes and get rid of those boys in an organization, they truly can just impact the culture in a very, very negative way. So that's,

Kim Scott: (20:36)
Those are sort of the core, the core problems, the, the, the root causes of workplace injustice. Because of course, when you layer power on top of bias, prejudice, bullying, things get much worse, much, quickly, very quickly. And so when you layer power on top of bias or prejudice, you get discrimination. When you lay our power on top of bullying, you get harassment. And when you lay our power on top of touch, you get physical violation. So, so we can talk more about that, but Sarah, it looked like you had a question. Yeah,

Sarah Kunst: (21:11)
No, this, this is great. Um, I, yeah, workplace bullies, man, this is, this is like real, real stuff. Um, but my personal favorite intervention, which is, is, uh, probably more effective outside of organizations and insight is like, I'll just go full Karen. I go talk to people's bosses. Nothing makes me happier than when I'm like, oh yeah, I know your bosses boss. And guess who's about to have a conversation. And you know, it, it's a great way to help. Uh, I used to watch a lot of, of like rehab TV in college. It was very popular, like intervention. You bring the bottom to someone and you help them understand that their behavior is just not really going to be possible much longer, you know? So, so that's my favorite.

Trier Bryant: (21:55)
I, and I think that's a consequence too, right? Like bullies have to understand within organizations that if you are going to engage and treat people in this way, there's going to be consequences. Right. So I love that. The

Kim Scott: (22:05)
Key, the key thing there though, Sarah is you've got to, you've got to have some faith that their boss is going to create a consequence for them, which is not always the case. And

Sarah Kunst: (22:14)
Oh, totally. It is a very privileged and in kind of odd least it's an interesting situation to be in. Right. Um, as, as somebody who has both a kind of a parent or visible lack of privilege, but then sometimes, you know, behind the scenes actually has that leverage is, is not something that most people are in. And so when I'm in those situations, you know, sometimes they just sort of explained to myself and other people like, you know, I might be the two or the three, but I am not the one today. So, you know, you find something out. And I think that those are good reminders to people that, you know, no, no, no one is above. Uh, no one is out of reach. Uh, if there's somebody, you know, more powerful who decides that they don't get to behave that way anymore, but you know that that's not always the case, but sometimes it is. Um, this is great. So, so perfectly dovetailing with that, Kim, you know, there are a lot of personal stories in the book, you know, for you, other people, um, you know, you write about, about conversations between us even, you know, w was this book harder to write than radical candor. And then also was harder to get permission to include anecdotes than radical candor.

Kim Scott: (23:23)
This book was, was way harder to write than, than radical candor. It was, it was really, at some point it was me wrestling with, with, with all my own demons and, and, and really struggling to overcome this sense of denial that, that had pervaded too much of my career, but it also was way more meaningful, more satisfying than writing radical candor. I really felt a sense of, I felt a sense of accomplishment when I finished that. I mean, I felt that with radical candor too, but I felt a greater sense of accomplishment. I think it's also a harder book for people to read, frankly, than, than radical candor. There, there are a lot of hard stories in there, but the people, the thing that has been really satisfying to me talking to readers since it came out is that people are starting to take action.

Kim Scott: (24:16)
And in very specific ways, Alan Eustace, who is a, an engineering leader here in Silicon valley sent me an email. And he said, you know, I read the book and I, I just made an offer to a woman yesterday. And he said, before I read your book, I would have asked her what her salary was and matched it. And now I asked her what her, the salaries of the men who she worked with was, and I matched that. And I'm like, yes, success. Uh, that is, those are the kinds of, of simple things that people can do. Reading the book. I also have found it really interesting the way that this framework plays out in different cultures. One of the companies that I advise is a, is a unicorn in Turkey and, uh, Turkish gaming company. And, and the leader there said, you know, this is really helpful for me to, to not just work on, on gender bias on the team, but also there's regional bias. There's religious and, and we all have to work together as a team. And so that, that was very satisfying for me, uh, to, to hear that. So that's been really, really cool. And then you had a third part of your question, which I've forgotten

Sarah Kunst: (25:27)
About. Uh, so, so was it harder to get permission from people to tell their stories this time? No. What it

Kim Scott: (25:34)
Really wasn't. I was really inspired by, there was not a single person who I sent. I said, I want to, I want to write this. There was not a single person who said, no, you can't write it. I mean, there were a couple of people who said, maybe take that part out, but this part out, I didn't name organizations or people in the story for the most part, except when it was a very good story as with you. But, but there were a lot of bad things that happened. And the reason why this is a controversial decision, so feel free to push me on it. But the reason why I didn't is because the kinds of things that I describe in the book don't just happen in one place. And they, that they, it's not just, it wasn't just one company or one person they happen everywhere. They're sort of universal, universal kinds of things. So I wanted people to realize that what I want to focus on in this book is solving the problem, not sort of calling out one individual or one company.

Sarah Kunst: (26:33)
Yeah. That that's so true. You know, I was in involved in, in a me too situation. And after there's sort of this big IX, like, you know, oh, good, we got the bad. And it's like, no, no, no. Like we are all bad guys in, like, we all are a part of these power structures. Um, white male, patriarchy is not a person. It's a power structure. So, you know, John, John can be fighting against it. And somebody who looks like me can be helping uphold it because that's how it works. You know? And so, so I, I, you know, I always want you to tell me the names, but that's for like, you know, wine the mountains. But, but I think in general, it is important to globalize that it's not just one bad actor. It is, you know, uh, an entire bad theater production that we are a part of. So, so I agree with that. Absolutely.

Trier Bryant: (27:19)
And the thing about that is it Sarah, like I get the question very often, like what the company is doing, you're right. You know, like what's the company that's doing it, right. It's not having these issues. And the answer is there, there isn't right. Are there some organizations that are doing better than others? But what I also have told my recruiting teams and my people teams in the past is that people join great companies and then leave bad bosses. Right. And so we really have to be thoughtful about who are the leaders and the decision makers within our organization, because they have such a huge impact on, you know, um, preventing and mitigating these workplace injustices. And so, you know, I always tell people like, yeah, go work at a great company, but really gets to know the leader that you're working for and how they would handle with these situations and not put you in a lot of these situations. Right. And so having those conversations, when you're thinking about your next role or taking something on or who you partner with on your next, you know, um, company. So those are, those are some of the things that, you know, I encourage folks to think about as well.

Sarah Kunst: (28:16)
The reverse is interesting that I've seen too where, you know, sometimes if you're really disillusioned or if you're not sure you love somebody, who's like five levels above you, you can be nervous. But if you like your manager, then you know, that is better than going to a job where your manager might not be great, but you idolize the CEO. And I've, I've personally had that happen to me where a founder, I was just, I wasn't a fan, but I never, you know, I would have talked to him three times over my entire 10 years. So that might've been a miss. So it's, it's interesting how, how much importance we place on good companies when the companies are just a bunch of people who all get paid by the same company. Yeah.

Kim Scott: (28:52)
And also companies are not monolithic, uh, bad things happen at good companies, unfortunately. And even within a company, you may be, as, as tree are said, working with someone who is going to shield you from a lot of other bad stuff, but that doesn't mean bad stuff isn't happening. And I think it's, I think it's also really important with these things. People, people really want this example of this perfect place. And I think it's dangerous because because bias, prejudice, bullying, these are not problems. There's no place in the world where these problems have been eliminated that that I can imagine. And to say that they have been at a particular place is, is a form of denial. I think that rooting these things out. It's like staying in shape or eating well or doing the dishes. Like these are the things we we're going to have to keep doing every day, but they're worth doing every

Sarah Kunst: (29:50)
Day. There's no crash diet for injustice. Um, yes, yes, yes. I love it. So the tree, or when it comes to the power dynamic, like where do you see organizations just completely fall short most often.

Trier Bryant: (30:05)
Yeah. So when you introduce power and then you get discrimination, harassment, and physical violations, and then even with, you know, the root causes of workplace injustice, I think where we fall short, where a lot of organizations fall short is actually thinking about what do you do when these things happen at the very top? Um, even the organizations that look down and to say, Hey, how are we taking care of our employees? But like, what happens when your CEO is the bully? What happens when, you know, your, your chief people officer is a person who is being harmed, right? But there, there was a person responsible for solving it, or it's really interesting. We've had the opportunity to talk to a lot of groups of, you know, um, we, we did a, um, a talk with a, uh, an organization of museum directors and we got so many questions about injustices incurring between them and their trustees.

Trier Bryant: (30:58)
Um, and also, you know, um, founders talking about engagements with their investors or board members. And so I think that's where we're not thinking about the pirate ha the power dynamic. And we're not thinking about like, you know, what happens. I don't recall the first time I was in a board meeting as a people leader at this company. And I was one of two women in the room, but it was, we had both recently just been hired. And that first meeting was so terribly uncomfortable simply just because of language, like the language that these men had been, you know, very comfortable using. And now you have two women and no one really thought twice to just continue to use some very inappropriate language. And, and it was that moment. And I was taking notes, you know, cause this is my first board meeting meeting. Um, you know, some of the other board members and afterwards I went to the CEO and I said, so look, this is not going to happen again.

Trier Bryant: (31:51)
Right. Here's here's what happened. Here's the feedback. You can send the email, I can send the email, but next time I'm going to call it out in real time. And next time I need you to step up and call it out as well, because you do, you do acknowledge that this is not appropriate. Like it shouldn't have been appropriate before you had no women in the boardroom, but it is definitely not going to be tolerated now. Um, and so those are the conversations that we need to start having before the injustice occurs before the bias pops up, or, you know, the, the, the harassment, um, so that people in these leadership roles know how to handle it though. That's where I think that we're not having the conversations, not creating

Kim Scott: (32:28)
The kinds of checks and balances that make it, that make it, it's never going to feel safe, but that make it at least not suicidal to go and, and call this kind of behavior out because, because it is, so it is hard. It's hard to speak truth to power. And the only way to make sure that people will do it is to limit power with checks and balances. So I think that is one thing that's really important. And even in organizations that have done a really good job creating checks and balances, so they've sort of systematically stripped a unilateral decision making authority away from managers at the company. So a manager can't hire somebody unilaterally. They can't fire somebody unilaterally. They can't promote somebody in a there's checks and balances in every system. So that at every, at every point in the process of the employee life cycle, so that if a manager has a problem, the employee has someone to turn to and somewhere to go.

Kim Scott: (33:33)
But even at those companies, there's, there is a problem which is money basically. Uh, they, they haven't created the CEO is, is a billionaire many times over and some of the entry-level employees at one point I was, I, my husband was at a big tech company and I was at a fast growing hot startup. And we both had employees who were living in their trucks. And that just shouldn't. And we, both of those companies, the CEOs were billionaires many times over. And so even when there were good checks and balances in terms of power, when there aren't, when there's, when there's that level of, of inequality, uh, it's a real problem.

Sarah Kunst: (34:18)
Great time for me to push my favorite topic, which is build more housing because the sad, terrible thing is those people were probably making six figures. It's just in major cities where that plus a million bucks can help you try to get in a down payment on a house. So yes, um, that, and, and rant and soapbox. Um, so, so Kim, what radical candor feedback have you received since just work was released? So

Kim Scott: (34:47)
Some of the feedback on just work that I've gotten is that it is very hard to read that, that people, several people have said, you know, what if I didn't know you, I, I may not have gotten through the book. In fact, and one person in particular said, the reason that he wouldn't have gotten through the book is that he didn't think that these issues applied to him. He didn't think he was biased. He didn't think he had any prejudices. He didn't think he ever bullied anyone. And he said, I was halfway through the book before I had this revelation that, uh, oh, this does actually apply to me. I'm not reading this as a favor to Kim. This actually is helpful. So he said, you need to make, you need to figure out a way to help people understand, to help people notice that these, these are problems that, that apply to them.

Kim Scott: (35:40)
So I think that's one of the issues. I think the other feedback I've gotten is that we are all exhausted. We're all tired. And when we want to read something right now, we might want to curl up with a good novel or a mystery, more of a beach read. And so I have no solution to that. I don't know how to turn this book into a beach read, but, but the one thing that I will say that, that I'm trying to do is tell more positive target identification stories. So there are a lot of stories out there of people getting this stuff, right, doing the right thing. And I, and I think that part of the reason why we have such burnout around these topics is that it feels a little bit like being stuck in traffic. It's not clear what you can do about it. And so by focusing on stories about people who are doing the right thing, and it wasn't even that hard to do like the alien Lee story at the beginning of, of our conversation and it made a big difference. And I think if all of us can take a couple of little steps every day, we can actually begin to turn this, turn this thing around. I love it.

Sarah Kunst: (36:50)
Um, John, what steps are you taking?

John Darcie: (36:55)
Well, um, I'm, uh, learning a lot from this conversation need to pick up Kim's books. You know, I'm not yet a, I wouldn't say a senior executive at the organization in which I work, but as somebody who increasingly manages people, I love some of the conversations, especially that Sarah brings onto salt talks. And one of the things that, that bothers me to hear stories of his situations, you talked about checks and balances. You've had a couple of guests on Sarah that have talked about this, where they're brought in to, you know, do DNI work, DEI work, or, or be chief people, officers. And they come in and they observe an environment that's extremely toxic and, and in a lot of ways offensive and they're fired within three months of working there because the CEO says, oh, this is not what I signed up for. I was trying to tick a box, not actually hear truth to my face.

John Darcie: (37:40)
So this just, it's fascinating to hear you guys talk about how do you construct those systems without creating the fraud stabbing? I was, I was laughing at that Kim because my, my boss, uh, Anthony Scaramucci, who you might know, um, he used that term during his brief time in politics, but, you know, front stabbing, isn't productive either, uh, where people are so, so aggressively, uh, obnoxiously aggressive, as you say. Um, but yeah, it's just fascinating to hear these stories. A couple of questions I have for each of you. Um, you talked about how bad things happen at good companies. And a lot of times that happens at scale. And I think when I, when we've talked to other people on salt talks, or I've talked to other people that work at big organizations, you've also read news stories about founders at startups that get acquired by a big tech company. And they, they struggle to translate that culture into a bigger environment. So my question Kim is when you get into these massive environments and you've worked at big tech, how do you maintain a culture in a large organization? How do you, you know, not let it run a muck where you have managers that, that ramp up the level of politics and the different destructive behaviors that you mentioned, the matrix, how do you create that strong culture at a large organization? So you don't have to go around putting out fires so frequently.

Kim Scott: (38:54)
So I think there's several things you can do. And in big organizations also useful to do this in small orientations. But one of the things that we recommend is that you start to quantify your bias. So if you, if you start to look at who you're promoting, and then you cut that data by, by gender, by race, you will begin to notice that there is some bias. Yeah, you can believe one of two things either. Uh, the, the, the underrepresented people in your organization don't deserve to be promoted, or there's some bias. And I choose to assume that there's some bias. So how can you begin then? So now you've you see it, you get what you, and so now you're going to fix it. And it's, it's, you're probably not going to fix it right off the bat. You're going to have to do some digging to fix it.

Kim Scott: (39:46)
You, you, for example, in orchestras, they, they realized that it couldn't be the fact it couldn't be right, that they only had 6% women. They didn't believe that that women were worst musicians. And so they really worked on solving the problem and they kept digging. First. They put a sheet up when somebody was auditioning so that they couldn't see the person, and it didn't have an impact. And so they kept, but they didn't say, oh, well, it couldn't be biased. Then they kept digging and, and they made people take their shoes off. It turned out that the high heels were giving away the gender of the person who was auditioning. And so I think if we're willing to really do the work, there's a great story, uh, about Salesforce. So mark, a couple of leaders on Marc Benioff's team went to him and they said, we think that we're systematically underpaying women at Salesforce. And mark just couldn't believe that this was happening. He was certain that it was a meritocracy and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And they said, well, okay, we'll do the, we'll do the analysis. We'll run the numbers, but you have to promise us that if we run the numbers, you'll fix the problem. If we identify that and, and to his credit, he did promise and he did fix it, but it's not trio has a lot more detail about how you fix it. Cause it's not enough to fix it once.

Trier Bryant: (41:11)
Yeah. One thing, John, also the organizations, even large organizations that have been around for a few years, it's, it's really odd and strange to me that they haven't done this. But one of the things we talk about is also, you need to have a code of conduct, right? And it doesn't need to be called a code of conduct, but there needs to be something with some teeth in there that your people, HR team can hold people accountable to that peers, everyone, colleagues can hold each other accountable too, to say, this is how we expect, you know, people to behave and act at work. And somebody will say, oh, well we have values. But the thing is, is that yeah, values are great. You can put them on the wall, but you need to be a little bit more specific. Right? So for example, at one of our companies, we had six values because they were important.

Trier Bryant: (41:53)
They should be short and clear for everyone to understand, but under each value, there was a, we statement three we statements and that really helps people identify. What does that value look like of how it shows up every day as an employee in this organization? So you can have a value that says communicate fearlessly, but you also need to have some statements of what that means because people can take that and be really disrespectful and say, well, I'm communicating fearlessly, right? So we need people to understand. Um, you know, and so what is it that we expect day to day from our employees? And then we don't have to run around and put out fires when we manage people's expectations and set those expectations up front of what we expect in our organization.

John Darcie: (42:32)
Right. And trio, you've worked in a lot of different environments. So you have a military background. Uh, you worked at Goldman Sachs, you worked at Twitter. So you've worked across a variety of different industries and in different environments, are there different industries that you think do a better or worse job at rooting out these biases and prejudices and you know, why do you think some of those industries are more successful? And, and where do you think the ones that are lagging behind, first of all, why do you think they're lagging and how do you think they can reverse that? Yeah.

Trier Bryant: (43:01)
Um, I appreciate the question because I do think that there is a difference. And I think that, that comes down to when organizations understand and tie this work to their bottom line. That's when people are held accountable and that's when things change. Right. Um, what I have found is Goldman and no organization is perfect, right? Goldman does a really good job in a lot of these areas because when they find out that this impacts their bottom line, cause everything a Goldman is about making a dollar or losing a dollar and where they're trying not to lose a dollar. Right. So when they find out that these things are impacting their bottom line, oh, they handle that very, very quickly. Right. Versus, um, in tech, it's so interesting that a lot of organizations in tech are like, it's the right thing to do. Like, it's, it's, it's nice, like all the softness of it.

Trier Bryant: (43:49)
And it's just like, that goes out the window. When you have a bearish quarter, a bearish, you know, year it's the first thing that gets cut. We saw that with COVID right. Um, COVID revenues started changing D and I programs and, and programming initiatives and teams were getting cut left and right. And then what happened? We had the summer of 2020 with all the black lives matter protests and demonstration. And then companies were scrambling because they had just cut their DNI budgets. Right. So when you can tie it to the bottom line, when you tie it to your revenue, the things that you actually care about and that your, your leaders care about and your board cares about that's when you're going to hold people, that's when you're going to really start to drive that change. Um, and we just have to stop talking about it and we got to get tactical. And that's why that is what really excites me about just work by no means is this one framework going to solve all their problems, but hopefully it gives people something to add to their toolbox. And also, hopefully it inspires others to give us more tools that we can add in the DNI space that organizations and leaders can leverage.

John Darcie: (44:52)
Right. And I would love to have you guys both at our salt conference in September that I mentioned, we're having a couple of panels on this exact topic. One with, uh, Les brown, who's the CEO now of Ariel investments. Project is called project black, where they're investing in, in black leaders, um, and using data that shows that investing and diversifying your companies, uh, just increased to the bottom line. We're also going to have representatives from Goldman Sachs. They're your, uh, my mater, uh, they have a new initiative, 1 million black women. Uh, so we're going to have them, they're talking about that. There was also a study. Our conference is actually right before the UN general assembly that the UN commission it's called Capitol as a force for good, that studied empirically all this data around impact investing, uh, you know, diversity and inclusion and equity being a big part of it.

John Darcie: (45:37)
The URL is forced for good.org, a very comprehensive report. So it's just, it's great to see data, more data coming out about these topics. And it's going to be a featured part of our, uh, discussion at the salt conference. I would love to have you guys there, Kim and, and prayer, you can respond to this question as well. But as I look at the radical candor matrix, which I find fascinating ruinous empathy is on there. And I also find, I think maybe personally as I manage people sometimes, and I've seen this around organizations that I've worked in, you have people that are extremely nice, but they don't communicate clearly in a way that sets expectations. This is both in terms of eliminating biases and maximizing performance. So how do, how do you observe ruinous empathy and what does that do in an organization when you have leaders? That, that aren't honest. Not because they don't care, but because they don't know how to communicate properly.

Kim Scott: (46:28)
Yeah. It's a really great it's, it's a really important and, and all too common manifestation of, of unconscious bias, this, this ruinous empathy. So I'll, I'll give you an example that, that someone shared with me, he was working on increasing diversity at, uh, at a big bank. And he said, I would observe the following over and over and over again. Senior banker goes to a meeting with a client and brings along and analyst week one, the analyst is a man and the senior banker is a man. The analyst screws up makes a mistake. And after in the cab ride back to the office, the analyst hears about it in no uncertain terms and the next week, similar similar clients, same senior banker. This time, the analyst is a woman. The woman makes the same mistake that the analyst the week before did, but this time the senior banker does not tell her in a way that she understands what went wrong.

Kim Scott: (47:26)
And not because he's a misogynist jerk bent on ruining her career. But because he's been taught since he was a child to be gentler with women, and maybe in this environment, he's, he's concerned that he'll get in some kind of trouble if he offers feedback. And this is, uh, an irony that we have got to fix, because especially when you're underrepresented, you need that performance feedback. You need it even more. And it is the job of the leader to give that performance feedback and not to be ruinously empathetic. And, uh, and yet all too often leaders leaders fail to do that. They, they failed to do their job and they, and usually it's because they're afraid of being seen as sexist or racist, but then ironically they do the sexist or racist thing by not giving the feedback. So I think it's really important to, uh, to, to focus on this. One of the best, uh, one of the best descriptions of this problem is in Claude Steele's book whistling, Vivaldi, where he, he talks about how this happens over and over and over again. So, so really important to be radically candid, not only about things like saying, um, too many times in a meeting, but about bias that I say on that many times, I wasn't, I did not. I said, that's my canonical radical candor story. I don't

John Darcie: (48:51)
Imagine that ruinous empathy is a problem in the military, which is maybe why the military is such a highly effective, but, but is it a problem in the military or how have you observed it in other environments?

Trier Bryant: (49:01)
You'd be surprised. Um, actually in some cases it is for the same reasons that, you know, Kim just explained. I know for myself, I remember the first time, um, this white male general sat down and gave me a lot of feedback very directly. And I was about all, I was, uh, I was a first Lieutenant, so I was like probably two and a half years into my career. And it was like obvious stuff. Right. It was so obvious. I was like, Sarah, thank you for that. But like, why hasn't anyone told me that? Right? I mean, it was, so it was obvious stuff as if I had spinach in my teeth for two and a half years, and no one told me to take it out, how obvious it was. Um, and he's looked at me and he said, wheelchair. He was like, you're intimidating.

Trier Bryant: (49:44)
And I was like, okay, sir. And he was like, and he was like, and I don't think you are, but you like, you are a black woman. You are an officer, you're an air force academy grad, and you are intimidating. And he said, so people are not going to give you that feedback. And, and he gave me, um, he gave me a lot of advice and one of my best mentors and sponsors, but one of the things he said is he said, you know, because of that bias people, aren't going to give you feedback. So you have to go out of your way to go and get that feedback. Um, and then the other thing that he told me that I will share, because I think that this is powerful on either. Are there ways he said you should always have a strong white male mentor.

Trier Bryant: (50:21)
And he said, because that you can have a really good relationship with that will mentor you the way that they are mentoring other men. Because like a lot of times we mentor, we have bias through our mentoring as well, right? Like, oh, well, I'm not going to tell you what to do that because you're a woman. So I'm gonna tell you something different or you're black, you're going to do something different. And so he would mentor me. He was like, I'm going to tell you what everyone else is telling all the other white guys that you have to compete with. And I took that with me throughout my career at Goldman. I found someone like that at Twitter. I found someone like that in tech, you know, and it's just been really powerful. But the other thing that's powerful is that when I do have those conversations, I also go and encourage them to go and mentor more people that don't look like them and to not have that bias filter when they are giving them, you know, perspective and guidance.

Kim Scott: (51:04)
Can I throw a purple flag on the general? Like, do you think that I thought

John Darcie: (51:08)
I was getting a purple flag for a second carry. I

Kim Scott: (51:10)
Was nervous. The General's getting a purple. Do you think that him telling you that you were intimidating was, was bias, was a reflection of, of racial bias? Or do you, I

Trier Bryant: (51:23)
Think that he was just naming a stereotype and like a just obvious stereotype. Yeah. I think he was just naming a stereotype. That is true. Right. Um, I don't have to, Sarah, I don't have to open our mouths. Right. Like, it's just like the stereotype of the angry black woman, you know? So, um,

Sarah Kunst: (51:41)
And that's just, what I heard is when like a thousand years ago, I'd be like at a bar with friends for happy hour and guys would come up and they'd be like, like that, one's pretty, but she looks scary and they just say it. And you know, it's like, I don't want your, you know, small man energy around me, so that's fine. Um, but, but it, it, it is if people don't name something, you know, I always love the quote that are you, are you intimidating? Are they intimidated? But naming that is, is a lot more important than not because you, you otherwise, you're a sort of shadow boxing. So, so it's great to hear somebody say it out loud. It like takes the gaslighting out of the moment. Um, and I, I totally agree. I, I call it white dude energy, like having some white dude energy around you will, you can do whatever you want with it, but understanding like, you know, what, what, what the average white dude would do in this situation, in any situation. I, I get that when I, when I get to hang with, with Anthony, there's so much white dude energy, it's helpful. It's good. It's interesting. And you know, there there's, there is a place in the world for everyone and even white dude energy. So, you know, we're, we're glad to have it. And I agree it's important to seek it out.

John Darcie: (52:52)
Well, I'm still there. I'm still glad there's room in the world for white dude energy. Sarah, I, you didn't call me out. I appreciate that you call Anthony. So, um, but thank you guys so much for joining us. I feel like I got a free coaching session here. I hope you don't send a bill after, after the session, but, uh, it was a pleasure having you guys on and, and love Sarah bringing on, you know, one of the pleasures to having Sarah as sort of a recurring guest moderators meeting. People like yourselves that I don't know that we would necessarily meet, uh, in the other setting, but we would love to have you guys again, in our in-person conference, assuming it's healthy and safe and everything to do. So in, in New York, uh, you know, I think you'll meet a lot of people that probably need a lot of your advice.

John Darcie: (53:29)
So, uh, and we're, we've struggled with that at our conferences over the years in an industry that's so white. And so male dominated, we, you have to work extra hard to, to create an environment at those events that a woman and a person of color even feels comfortable coming into, or else you just gonna, you're going to extinguish any ability that you have to diversify your audience if you don't create that environment, uh, proactively. So, uh, thank you guys for doing this and it's a pleasure to meet you and hope to see you in person sometime soon. Thank you so much really enjoyed it. Thank you, Sarah. Thank you, John. Thank you guys. Thank you. You everybody for tuning in to today's salt, talk with Kim, Kim Scott, and tree or Bryant, uh, of just work. And Kim also authored the book, radical candor, both great books that I would highly recommend that you pick up.

John Darcie: (54:13)
You can see them over Kim's shoulder. If you weren't observing that during our talk. I just remind you if you miss any part of this talk or any of our previous talks, including all of our, our talks with Sarah, some of which have covered these, these topics around, uh, you know, uh, the workplace and diversity inclusion and equity, uh, just reminder you can access them all on our website@sault.org, backslash talks as well as on our YouTube channel, which is called salt tube. And please spread the word about these, these talks, these talks in particular, and we're covering subjects that people often don't like to talk about it in the workplace. We think it's important that you share these with your friends, your coworkers, and your family, uh, but just on behalf of the entire salt team and for Sarah, this is John Darcie signing off from salt talks for today. We hope to see you back here soon.

Gabriel Radzyminski: Activist Investing | SALT Talks #197

“Activist investing is about being an active owner in the companies you invest in, more than just a buyer of shares and you are prepared to try and do things that improve the outcomes. “

Gabriel Radzyminski is the founder and managing director of Sandon Capital, an Australian firm that specializes in activist investing.

Being an activist investor is about being more than just simply an owner of shares. This means being active in a company’s performance and outcomes. Australian firms can have a reputation for being forgiving of underperformance in part because of the country’s smaller population and even smaller financial community. This has brought about a need for a greater emphasis to be placed on activist investing that holds company’s performance to stricter account. “Inertia is one of the biggest challenges we face as an activist investor. The status quo is what we confront.”

Australia has financial laws and regulations conducive to a healthy investing ecosystem. This presents an opportunity for the growth of activist investing in Australia.

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Gabriel Radzyminski.jpeg

Gabriel Radzyminski

Managing Director

Sandon Capital

MODERATOR

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

Rachel Pether: (00:07)
Everyone. And welcome back to salt talks. My name is Rachel Pether, and I'm a senior advisor to SkyBridge capital based in Abu Dhabi, as well as being the MC for salt, a thought leadership forum and networking platform that encompasses business technology and politics. Salt talks as a series of digital events that we launched during the work from home period. And just as we do at our physical salt events, we aim to provide our audience a window into the mind of subject matter experts. Today, we'll be focusing on activist investing and I'm very excited to be speaking to Gabriel Redmond ski, the founder, and managing director of Sandra and capital and Australian firms specializing in activist. Investing Gabriel has been involved in the financial services sector for more than 20 years, and he has significant investment experience across a range of asset classes. He serves as the executive director of mercantile investment company. And as a non-executive director of future generation investment company, he has a BA in honors and a masters of commerce from the university of new south Wales. Gabriel, welcome to Salta.

Gabriel Radzyminski: (01:20)
Thank you, Rachel. Good to be here.

Rachel Pether: (01:23)
No, I profusely summarized your biography there. So maybe we could start by telling me a bit about yourself and your background.

Gabriel Radzyminski: (01:32)
Uh, okay. That's a good place to start. So I founded San and capital, uh, nearly 12 years ago. Um, before that I'd worked, uh, for quite some time in a, a larger organization with, uh, private wealth management and funds management. And I ran the funds management business there. Um, that sort of was what led me to start sanding capital and particularly, uh, uh, down the path of activist investing. Um, there were a few investments that we'd made, uh, over time and, uh, you know, as much as I'd like to forget about the bad ones, not everything always went to plan. And what I found was that when we looked through, I developed the habit of always going through a post-mortem to work out, you know, what went well, what didn't go well, where we, right, where were we wrong? Or did we simply encounter bad luck?

Gabriel Radzyminski: (02:17)
And what we found was that there were some investments where had things been done differently. We may have experienced very different outcomes. And for me, that was the beginning of the evolution into being an activist investor. Um, I also very quickly found that, uh, working in a firm with other objectives simply didn't work, uh, with activism. Um, I was very quickly tapped on the shoulder and told, but you know, that's not what we do here. Um, we don't want to upset, uh, relationships we might have. Um, and that was the impetus for getting out and starting saving camp. Um, and so we've been at it ever since. And

Rachel Pether: (02:54)
So I'd love to dive a bit deeper into sort of this pushback that you had in your previous company and maybe how that relates to some of the cultural idiosyncrasies in Australia, but maybe we just take a step back and for the benefit of those in the audience that don't know much about activist investing, how do you, how do you describe it?

Gabriel Radzyminski: (03:15)
Look, I think activist investing, uh, you know, has certain connotations. I think the way I would describe it at its core, it's about being an active owner of the companies that you invest in. Um, it's about trying to be more than just a buyer of shares, a buyer of interests ticking up and down on a screen on any given day. Um, and being an active owner means that you are interested in what the company is doing, of course, but that you're also prepared to do and try and do things to improve the outcomes, to improve the, the, the experience of being an owner of those companies. Um, it's about being more than just an owner of a piece of paper owning part of the business. Obviously it's a proportional ownership because we're invested in listed, uh, entities. Um, but we do believe it's fundamentally about being an active owner, uh, you know, labels need to be applied. And the label that is applied to those active owners is typically that of activist investor.

Rachel Pether: (04:16)
And so when you look at the us market, for example, there are quite a few large well-established activist investments firms who have got Elliot. I can capital a downloads third point, but you're one of the only activist investing firms in Australia. Why do you think it's not so well known or practiced in the region?

Gabriel Radzyminski: (04:38)
Look, I think there's a couple of aspects to it. There is some culturally there's some cultural issues and there's also an evolutionary, uh, aspect, um, touch on the evolutionary aspect first. Uh, you know, we did some work a little, a couple of years back, um, with Jeff Graham, who's a U S hedge fund manager, best known for writing the book dear chairman, which was an anthology of what Jeff, uh, considered to be the, the, the best activist, uh, letters, uh, in us history. Um, and what we found was that activism evolved in America, largely started with Ben Graham and evolved over the years into what it is we know today, um, went through the, the, you know, the, the path of the corporate writers, um, and then evolved into what we know today in Australia. We're probably 20, 30 years behind the U S in that evolutionary process.

Gabriel Radzyminski: (05:33)
Part of it is about understanding what you can achieve being an active owner, being an activist. Um, but then we've also got the cultural aspects. Um, I don't know for those who don't really know Australia, it's a great place to live. It's a great place to work. Um, but sometimes that can be, uh, at odds with what you expect from the companies you invest in. Um, there's a great, uh, Australian idiom, uh, that's, uh, often used, I don't know if it's even used in a crocodile Dundee movie, but, uh, she'll be right. Uh, which is to say, you know, don't worry, things will get better. And I think that can be one of the problems in pushing to get the best of your companies pushing for the best outcomes. Um, investors here, I find tend to be, uh, quite forgiving. Um, the worst they'll often do is simply sell out of the shares. Um, they'll give them up because it's all too hard and move on to something else. Um, we think that, you know, being an owner has responsibilities, um, and we do look to try and maximize and get the best outcomes for ourselves, of course, but also for other shareholders. So there is that cultural aspect where we have a quite relaxed, uh, attitude to, uh, uh, ownership and the, uh, particularly the issues of underperformance.

Rachel Pether: (06:47)
And so then taking all these factors into account, how are you viewed in the ecosystem? You know, I'm, I'm someone from who's from New Zealand originally. So I appreciate it. It's, you know, one or two degrees of separation with almost anyone in the entire country, specifically when you're looking at, say the investment landscape. So how are you viewed in this regard?

Gabriel Radzyminski: (07:10)
I think you've hit on one of the key problems here. Rachel is we're a small country, you know, we've got 27, 20 8 million people, the business community, the investment community are an even smaller microcosm. And it means that most people and you quoted some figures, most people here in those fields know each other within three, quite possibly two degrees of separation. And so you've got the human issues, you know, the, the people issues about confront confrontation about taking companies to task. And I think that's part of the aspect is that when everyone knows each other or when everyone knows someone who knows someone, there's a reluctance to really ever truly sanction, uh, accompany football performance, um, I think one of the things to, uh, always think about is, you know, directors aren't necessarily setting out to do badly. Um, they're not setting out to do bad by shareholders and investors, but often it happens. And part of it is simply that they're human. Um, I think the, for the system to work well for the, the, the market, the ecosystem to work best, you need effective boards who oversee management effectively, but you also need effective shareholders to oversee boards and management as well. And

Rachel Pether: (08:24)
I think that's a great point, which ties back to where perhaps Australia is in this evolution. I was listening to a great podcast of was Peter teal, unlocking impact. He was talking about the education system, which, which is slightly different, but he was saying that many people don't take action because they don't even realize there's another alternative. So there's a sort of inertia and just staying with the status quo

Gabriel Radzyminski: (08:50)
And look, you're, you're sort of taking my buzzwords out of the presentation, but inertia is one of the biggest challenges that we face as an activist. The status quo is what we confront, um, you know, died for a moment. Think that Australia is a terrible country with lots of, uh, uh, you know, where the majority of corporations are underperforming and delivering, uh, poor shareholder outcomes. It's not true. The vast majority are functioning well. Um, otherwise we'd be a country going backwards. Um, but where they don't work, often, people are simply, you know, like deer deer in the headlights. They'd rather do nothing either because they don't know what to do. Or they're scared that if they suggest an alternative and it doesn't work, they might be held accountable. We agree. You know, if you, if you suggest an alternative, you should be held accountable, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't do it.

Gabriel Radzyminski: (09:44)
I think it's also worth touching on the fact that for most institutional investors, they simply don't have the bandwidth to devote the amount of time necessary to engage actively with the companies they invest in. Um, you know, most investors I'm generalizing grossly here, but, you know, they might have 50 to 150 positions in a portfolio. We tend to have very concentrated portfolios. For example, at the moment in most of our portfolios, our top five holdings represent nearly 50% or more of each of the funds we manage. So we're very heavily invested in the companies that we buy into and the companies into which we engage. We do deep research where we're really all in, as opposed to just sitting back and sort of indifferent to what the actual outcome might be.

Rachel Pether: (10:35)
And when you look at these top five companies that make up, uh, around half of the portfolio, are they do they tend to be in a certain sector or area of the economy? No,

Gabriel Radzyminski: (10:46)
Look where we're broad. And, uh, and you know, we brought in our focus, um, we'll invest, or we are able to invest in anything. We won't invest in just anything, but we're broad. So, you know, we're, we're a value investor at our core. So obviously it has to have for us some value characteristics. We do need to feel that we're buying something for, you know, pennies on the dollar, or at least a, a reasonable discount to what we believe the intrinsic value of the company might be. But we also then need to see that there is a way that we might be able to influence the status quo, that we might be able to overcome the inertia of today to get a better outcome tomorrow.

Rachel Pether: (11:29)
And it does pay, pay me to say this as a new Zealander, but yes, there are definitely a lot of great things about Australia. And I know that when you look at the sort of focus areas for your investments, you typically look at the common law areas. So say Australia, New Zealand and the UK, maybe you could talk me through why you focus on these specific, is it sort of regulatory related or what, what are the reasons for that?

Gabriel Radzyminski: (11:58)
Look, there's, there's a number of reasons. Um, what I've come to conclude over the years is that activism is a very parochial endeavor. Um, a lot of your, a lot of your edge, a lot of the skills that you develop, come from understanding the local laws and customs, as well as the local laws and regulations. Um, one of the small ironies, uh, or not so small ironies of Australia and activism is that despite the fact that not many people do it, and it's not widely understood down here, we've actually got some of the most conducive, legal and regulatory frameworks for shareholder rights anywhere in the world. Um, so maybe it's a case that because we have those rights, we don't need to, uh, challenge them too often, but we do have, you know, for example, we don't have, uh, poison pills. Um, we don't have staggered boards.

Gabriel Radzyminski: (12:49)
Shareholders can, you know, with the requisite majority or the requisite, uh, uh, percentage holdings in the company's shareholders can easily call general meetings, nominate directors put forward resolutions to remove directors and put forward other resolutions. So we've actually got a good framework within which to operate. Um, it is largely influenced by the UK legal system, as you said, the common law system, um, as are the regulatory aspects. Um, you know, for example, in control transactions way governed here by takeovers panel, um, which tries to get controlled disputes out of the court system. Um, so it means that activism here can be conducted quite cost-effectively, um, in all the years that we've been doing it. So we've been running this fund, the strategy for, uh, more than 11 years now, we've never actually had to go to court. Um, and we've only really come close to going to court once. Um, and in the end we didn't have to, because, you know, things worked out that, you know, we'd pushed far enough that there was no need to, but, uh, I think that's a contrast that we like is that ultimately, uh, activism here is something that is ultimately determined in the court of shareholder opinion. So if we can persuade enough shareholders of the merits of what we're proposing, the boards will ultimately bend to the will of those shareholders. No,

Rachel Pether: (14:17)
I guess an activism going through a illegal battle is always really the means of last resort. Isn't it? It's not something that they sit out,

Gabriel Radzyminski: (14:28)
Sorry, sorry to interrupt. Um, absolutely. And also, I think in Australia, in particular, if you have to resort to legal action, it means that you really haven't been able to persuade enough investors to back your particular course of action.

Rachel Pether: (14:44)
Yeah. And those are the guys you don't want to see on the school run.

Gabriel Radzyminski: (14:48)
Absolutely. Oh, look, that's, you know, that's I long ago gave up on, um, it was pointed out to me once that, uh, you certainly don't pick this kind of investing to make friends.

Rachel Pether: (14:59)
No, you do it to create good returns and long-term better companies.

Gabriel Radzyminski: (15:03)
We've got very, very happy investors.

Rachel Pether: (15:07)
And so just a few look at the macro economic picture for activist and investing now and given sort of Australia's expansion has slowed down record breaking expansion has slowed down in the last few years, are using this create more or less opportunities for you, or is it a bit of a neutral outcome? Um,

Gabriel Radzyminski: (15:28)
Look, I think overall it's a moderately positive. Um, I think it's worth noting that, uh, you know, Australia had a, you know, an unprecedented really long, uh, economic expansion. Um, it was only really stopped by uh COVID. Um, and since, uh, since the, the, the depths of the crisis, certainly here in Australia, um, we've picked up the economy has done particularly, uh, uh, well obviously some sectors have done poorly, particularly tourism and travel. Um, but overall it seems that economic activity has picked up. We seem to have, you know, being an island nation, um, we seem to have dodged the worst of COVID. Um, and frankly at the beach, you know, in, in the depths of last year, sort of February, March, April, and intimate, um, you know, early on the government, the prime minister had, uh, encouraged everyone to play for team Australia. Uh, we took that to heart in that we decided that the focus for us was on our company's survival.

Gabriel Radzyminski: (16:27)
So we went through a process of assessing the companies in our portfolio and whether they were likely to survive, what were the scenarios that they might face, and if they needed more capital, would we put more in, fortunately we, you know, we're, we're very, uh, w we were fortunate that we didn't really have much trouble in our portfolio. We're very heavily exposed to the industrial economy. Um, but we also decided that we would just keep our heads down for a few months and not really criticize anyone. Um, we were very, we're more supportive than we've ever been of all of our companies by spy sort of August, September when we realized that the, um, COVID crisis was rapidly, uh, being overcome in Australia. That's when we ramped up again. And so there was a couple of engagements that we re reactivated re-engaged with, uh, towards the end of last year that came to fruition. Um, they were largely in private, but we worked, you know, we pushed really hard because we felt that there were a lot of companies that were going to use COVID as excuses for poor results. Not all of them were justified in doing so.

Rachel Pether: (17:33)
Right. Yeah. Easy thing to point to, if maybe your results have fallen short of expectations, and the question for you, Gabriel, I know that some of the activist investor firms have been sort of caught up somehow, and let's say the Reddit crowd and the Robin hood traders, does that retail market, is that so prevalent in Australia? And has that sort of trading from sort of mass retail investors had much of an impact on the market? Well,

Gabriel Radzyminski: (18:04)
Not, not in the same way. Um, you know, the, I'm not an expert in that area, but I, you know, obviously I've read about what was happening in the U S with, uh, GameStop, all the, all the re the Robin hood, uh, investing. Um, it doesn't seem to be as prevalent here. Um, you know, there's, there's stock promotion that goes on here. Um, we don't have, for example, as I understand it, there was a fascinating interplay in game stock between, you know, the physical market, the day traders, but, you know, private investors and the options market, you know, our options market here is nowhere near as liquid or deep as the market in the U S so I don't know that we have the same circumstances. Um, I'd also, uh, uh, uh, highlight the fact that, for example, for us, um, we're not, w you know, we do short, we are a little bit short, but it's, for us more on the periphery. It's a hedging exercise. We do have a few alpha shorts from time to time. But for example, at the moment, we've just got a, you know, a small, short exposure, uh, to an index, which hedges out one of our, uh, closed end fund, uh, exposures. Um, so look, it, it's not really something that we see in, uh, in our neck of the woods. And

Rachel Pether: (19:18)
I would love to sort of ask it, or go into a little bit more further detail on how you see the outlook for the Australia market, but I'll be interested in that book that you referenced, dear chairman, the letters from activist investors, what were some of the examples of the letters in that book? Like, was it a cherry picking of some of the most, I guess, uh, persuasive sort of letters or, yeah, Jeff

Gabriel Radzyminski: (19:47)
Looked at the whole space, uh, in the U S and he pulled together a series of what he considered to be some of the, you know, the landmark letters. I mean, it starts off with, uh, Ben Graham and I think finishes off, uh, with, and I've actually just got the book in front of me. I'm not doing a plug for Jeff, but, um, I think the last one is either Dan Loeb. Yeah. So he covers them all. I mean, he's got bill Ackman, uh, you know, Carl Icahn, uh, Ross Perot. Um, so it gives, it gives a progression of activists, newsletter of activist letters over, uh, you know, effectively the last 90 years or so.

Rachel Pether: (20:27)
Hmm. But that sounds, it sounds very interesting. It sounds like it would be, and again, not a plug for the specific book, but it sounds like that would be quite an interesting read for people. Right.

Gabriel Radzyminski: (20:37)
Get anyone who's interested in this kind of investing, uh, should read it. Um, I think anyone who's interested in activist investing, uh, should probably go back if you want to the Genesis and I'd rate that as being, uh, uh, uh, a good way of getting to that Genesis of activist investing is to read, um, Ben Grames, uh, letters that he wrote for Forbes magazine in 1932. So he wrote a series of three articles, um, which basically asks the, you know, sort of highlights the issue of ownership management returns. Um, you know, it's well worth reading those, uh, those Forbes articles they're nearly 90 years old, but they're frankly still current today. I was just

Rachel Pether: (21:25)
About to say, it's so impressive that something that was written almost a century ago can still be used as a learning reference point in today's markets, given how quickly markets change.

Gabriel Radzyminski: (21:37)
We would say that good ideas are good ideas. Exactly.

Rachel Pether: (21:41)
And so just coming back to Australia for a moment, given the points that you've made about where you are in the evolution and the macro economic environment, where do you see activist investing heading in Australia in the medium to long-term

Gabriel Radzyminski: (21:58)
Look, I think it will continue to evolve. Um, you know, at the moment, for example, there is so taking a step back on our regulatory framework, uh, a number of years ago, they introduced some laws on executive remuneration, um, where companies can get, uh, you know, have to put a nonbinding vote to the shareholders at every annual meeting. Um, and if you get a number of strikes against you, uh, it can cause a spill motion. Um, that's, that's emboldened a lot of institutional investors to feel as though they can be activists by voting against remuneration reports. Now it's a great tool, but remunerations on any one aspect of what the activist investor looks at, um, for us, we're more focused on w we don't underestimate the impact of remuneration, but frankly, in terms of value destruction, there is far more value destroyed through errors of omission and commission in strategy and execution.

Gabriel Radzyminski: (22:56)
Then there will ever be paid in exist in excessive executive remuneration. Um, so we can see the landscape evolving. We know from discussions we have with, uh, large investors and allocators that they know there is that opportunity. They know that there are problems that need solving. They simply haven't quite gotten around to working out how to do it. And we can't simply say that Australia will evolve in the same way the us has, will evolve in our own way and we'll develop our own, you know, activist ecosystem. Um, but I think ultimately it will continue to, uh, uh, in, in improve and increase. I think, uh, someone asked us once how we could ensure that there was a persistence of opportunities for our, uh, investment approach. And my response was simply not to be a glib was to say, as long as people are running companies, there'll be opportunities for people like us.

Rachel Pether: (23:51)
Yup. Absolutely. And back to your remuneration point, you could also argue and pardon the slang paper, that's getting monkeys. So if you do want to have a company stared on a good strategy, you often do need to pay for someone or people to, to lead that charge.

Gabriel Radzyminski: (24:09)
Yeah, I think I agree. I think it's also, uh, important, you know, again, as a value investor, we think deeply about the value of things and the remuneration discussion is more often than not thought of simply in absolute dollar terms and not value for money. Um, that's how we look at it. We think it's a, it's, it, it is a complex and nuanced, uh, debate and discussion that is far too often reduce to me envy, you know, you're paid more than me and I don't think that's fair. You can't invest on that basis. Um, there are some people who are paid large amounts of money and have performed well and where we would say there is value for money as an owner. In those, in that management team, there are other companies where they're not paid particularly well. Um, the value is poor and, you know, we think that the, the, the owners are getting very poor value for money there. So it's not just about absolute dollar terms or, uh, uh, you know what, yeah, it's a nuanced conversation. Um,

Rachel Pether: (25:18)
And you know, you raised a great point there about the, the envy aspect of it. When I think of activist investing, there's so many interesting aspects of behavioral finance and personal biases that come into this as well. Right. You must be very good at, well, I guess, acknowledging these biases and then actually working proactively to not-for-profit.

Gabriel Radzyminski: (25:42)
Yeah. And I think one of the things that we've learned over the years that is a huge advantage, and it is actually really important when you, you know, when you want to be an activist investor, when you do it is you've actually got to have a huge, a huge capacity for empathy. Now, I don't mean that you feel sorry for everyone, and you want to give them a hug, but empathy. And then the, the, the, the, the most basic sense of the term, which is to understand where the other person is coming from, you know, we try and understand what is motivating our counterpart, uh, in a discussion, what might be motivating an entire management team or a board, you know, individual directors. Uh, we try and think about what their motives might be for going down one path versus another. Um, and I think that's really a powerful tool that you can use, you know, to ultimately to the shareholders' benefit is bringing that empathy, to understand what people, you know, why a company is doing a particular falling in particular course, you know, rare is it that the company is doing something because they're just bad people.

Gabriel Radzyminski: (26:50)
There's usually some reason behind it. Um, and we try and understand that because when we understand it, it helps us to counter it. It helps us to persuade. Um, the other thing that we do is the bulk of our efforts are typically focused on other shareholders. So when we engage with a company, we always start by attempting a private bilateral discussion with the board and management. That'll usually involve, you know, sending a letter, outlining our thesis, or outlining our concerns. What we'll then do is continue those discussions for as long as we think we're making progress. But if we get to the point where we believe we're actually hitting a wall where we're not making, uh, where we're not overcoming the inertia, where we're not persuading, we then pivot and begin discussions with other shareholders. So we go to the court of shareholder opinion, and we spend a lot of time trying to persuade other shareholders that what we're proposing is in their interests.

Gabriel Radzyminski: (27:51)
So when I sit across the table from, you know, portfolio manager of a much larger fund than ours, he's not sitting down because he likes me. He's not sitting down because he, you know, he wants to hear what I want, they're sitting down because they want to hear what we're suggesting and how it might be to their benefit. Um, and we always try and frame our proposals in terms of how it is to other people's benefit. And we're not doing it out of the goodness of our heart. I mean, we're investing for our investor's benefit, but if I simply say to someone, look, I want you to support me on this, because we're going to make money on this. You can imagine what the response is. Whereas if I can, if I can get the same outcome for our investors, by framing it in something that is to your benefit, we're both going to be much happier.

Rachel Pether: (28:41)
Absolutely. And I, what you're saying now, you must have read or listened to the art of negotiation

Speaker 4: (28:50)
Is that it's very good.

Rachel Pether: (28:54)
It's Russian by the former, uh, former FBI director, but he touches on all these, all these points about how, if you really want a successful outcome, you need to understand, truly understand the motivations of the person you're negotiating with. So it sounds like you've, you've got that mindset when you approach the activist investing.

Gabriel Radzyminski: (29:18)
Yeah. And I think the other one, and, uh, this, this, uh, struck me a number of years ago. So obviously we use Bloomberg at work. Um, and when you fire up your Bloomberg terminal, anyone who's got one would know what I'm talking about, there's you, there's the message of the day. Now my cynical view is that they give you that little saying of the day to distract you just long enough to not get frustrated at long, it takes for Bloomberg to fire up.

Speaker 4: (29:44)
Um, and

Gabriel Radzyminski: (29:45)
I don't remember who it was, who said it, because to me it was more important what was written as opposed to who said it, but there was a saying a few years back, which you said, there's nothing you cannot achieve. If you're willing to let others take credit. I heard that in the morning and I thought that that's what rubbish. And I still remember throughout that day, it borrowed it's way deeper and deeper into my mind. And suddenly by the end of the day, I sort of understood what it meant. And that's the other thing. There's things that we do where we might be trying to orchestrate something, but we don't need credit for it. There are people who pick up on our ideas and who claim them as their own, because they think it's a good idea. We're flattered. We don't mind. So again, for us, what matters is the returns we deliver to our investors, not whether we get credit for something, uh, in public. Um, and again, that to me comes down to that empathy where we don't need that sort of public validation, uh, on everything we do. I mean, it's nice to get to plaudits, but at the end of the day, what matters to us are the returns that we deliver to our investors and what we do to get those

Rachel Pether: (31:00)
Well, that's a great quote. God bless the Bloomberg terminal for taking so long to firing. And so just to close, you know, you've obviously been in this area for a number of years now, you made the decision to leave your firm and set up an activist, investing firm. Have you ever regretted it? And what would you be doing if this wasn't the space you were in?

Gabriel Radzyminski: (31:26)
Um, I'm like Cortez, uh, when he landed in the new world and burn the ships, um, you know, I'm all in on this. I mean, uh, it took me a long time to sort of find what I wanted, what I enjoyed, what I happened to be good at. Um, you know, we've been at it for nearly 12 years now. Uh, the fund has delivered good returns. Um, I'm fortunate in that. I'm literally doing my dream job. I could not think of doing anything else. Um, you know, I'm passionate about it. Uh, I enjoy it. I get up every morning enjoying, uh, that, you know, what's ahead for me on any given day. Um, so no, I, I don't know what else I'd be doing. Um, I probably don't live the most balanced life. Uh, there is. Um, but that's fine because I enjoy what I do. It's say it's a hobby, a passion. Um, yeah, I'm very fortunate.

Rachel Pether: (32:21)
That's great. And I guess it is one of the downsides of loving your job is that you're happy to do it at all hours of the day, but

Speaker 4: (32:29)
I just really,

Gabriel Radzyminski: (32:31)
It involves a lot of reading, which is, uh, something that's, uh, uh, can be easily done at all hours of the day.

Rachel Pether: (32:38)
Correct. Well, anyway, Gabriel, thank you so much for joining us today. It's been such a pleasure learning. We'll look at your story and I just hope that next time we have a conversation, that's actually in person. I thank you, Rachel, and appreciate the time.

Brooke Baldwin: "Huddle: How Women Unlock Their Collective Power" | SALT Talks #196

“I was in the middle of the Women’s March, seeing women come together for a multitude of reasons. For the first time in my life, I was basically in the middle of this giant huddle. I realized something special was happening with women in America and I wanted to dedicate the next chapter of my career to it.”

Brooke Baldwin is the anchor of the 3pm edition of CNN Newsroom and also creator and host of CNN’s digital series American Woman. She recently authored Huddle: How Women Unlock Their Collective Power.

The Women’s March the day after Donald Trump’s inauguration was a major inflection point in society. While Trump was not the singular force behind it, he may have served as the tipping point that brought millions of participants together all across the country. These marches acted as a huddle, a way for women to collectively make their voices heard. “I was in the middle of the Women’s March, seeing women come together for a multitude of reasons. For the first time in my life, I was basically in the middle of this giant huddle. I realized something special was happening with women in America and I wanted to dedicate the next chapter of my career to it.”

In competitive professions like journalism, there can be women who adopt sharper elbows, opting to see other women as the opposition. This can result from limited opportunities for women. The goal of a huddle-driven world is to create greater cooperation where successful women drop the ladder back down to help the next generation.

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Brooke Baldwin.jpeg

Brooke Baldwin

Anchor

CNN Newsroom

MODERATOR

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darcie: (00:07)
Hello everyone. And welcome back to salt talks. My name is John Darcie. I'm the managing director of salt, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance technology and public policy. Salt talks are a digital interview series with leading investors, creators, and thinkers. And our goal on these salt talks the same as our goal at our salt conferences, which is to provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future. And we're very excited today to welcome Brooke Baldwin to salt talks. Uh, Brooke is a Peabody award finalist who anchors the 3:00 PM edition of CNN newsroom. She's also the creator and host of CNN's digital series, American woman, which focuses on the stories of trailblazing women who have broken barriers in their respective fields and are now helping other women do the same.

John Darcie: (00:59)
Brooke's new book huddle, how women unlocked their collective power is a blend of journalism and personal narrative. Examining how women have come together in a wide variety of times and places to provide each other with support, empowerment, inspiration, and the strength to solve problems and enact meaningful change. Uh, Brooke is crisscrossed the country to research and write this book revealing how huddling helps women achieve success in the workplace affect grassroots change, build confidence during girlhood, maintain better physical and mental health survive, racial and gender based oppression and weather. The COVID-19 pandemic by speaking with historians and researchers, uh, Brooke also learned ways that huddling has often been key to women's survival across multiple generations hosting today's talk making her debut here on salt talks is a Scaramucci, but not Anthony Scaramucci. It's Anthony's wife, dear Jeff, who formerly was a director of investor relations at SkyBridge.

John Darcie: (02:00)
She left that role to help raise a family. Uh, but she, she also hosted the MOOC and the Mrs. Podcasts alongside Anthony and as a intellectual heavyweight in her own. Right. And we're very excited to have here, have her here on salt talks, and then also want to say, shout out to Brooke for being a North Carolina Tarheel. I grew up, I had to give that shout out. So it's all my north Carolinians out there, but now that introduce Dierdre Scaramucci, this'll be my last Saul talk Brook. Okay. I'm going to be blocked out of this. Thank everybody for listening to me during this salt talk series was very nice. It's been a fun ride. I look forward to be being replaced by Deirdre Scaramucci, but in the meantime, it's all been good, but Dierdre Scaramucci taken away. What a book. Congratulations.

Deidre Scaramucci: (02:52)
Oh, he's still talking. He's always talking, still

Brooke Baldwin: (02:54)
Talking, still talking,

Deidre Scaramucci: (02:57)
Having me two years since I've had like an adult conversation. So this is very special for me. So I'm honored that you asked me to join you. Of

Brooke Baldwin: (03:06)
Course. I said to your husband, it's a book about, you know, unlocking the power among women. Thank you. Shout out of the book cover. And not that I don't love your husband to death, but you know, I thought Mrs. Mooch could join.

Deidre Scaramucci: (03:18)
Yeah, of course I bring the funk. You do. So I love the forward by the way. Cause moms go to bed

Brooke Baldwin: (03:26)
Who, by the way, does any of it's just texting with her? The book has not landed at her front door step yet. So she doesn't even know. I dedicated,

Deidre Scaramucci: (03:32)
Let me not say anything, but that's very sweet. Thank you. It will make her life. She's my original huddle. Right. And that will make her life. And also she dedicated on the second half to James loving that. Anthony, did you say that?

Brooke Baldwin: (03:47)
What did, what did I re read what? I said,

Deidre Scaramucci: (03:50)
James, my husband, thank you for loving me and Pugsley. And for being one of many good men who support women huddling, we

Brooke Baldwin: (03:56)
Need the men to support the ladies. Right. It's

John Darcie: (03:59)
Very beautiful. And you know, you know, you know, James is our kind of guy he's, but it's usually helpful to us and salt stuff in 2019,

Deidre Scaramucci: (04:07)
I crack up because I watched, you know, I follow you on Instagram. So I watch you like stalk him and annoy him.

Brooke Baldwin: (04:16)
It's like really, Brooke, do we need to do another ID story? Like I just, can I just make your breakfast or can I just eat my food? And you know, me, I just have

Deidre Scaramucci: (04:25)
Like very fun, uh, dynamics. Cause he's so and English and you are just spunky. So it's funny. Um, okay, so getting out, let's get to it. So tell us about the book, obviously the huddle, how women unlock their collective power. And so how did you come up with this idea of a huddle?

Brooke Baldwin: (04:43)
So I think growing up in Atlanta, um, I I'm, I am, I'm a Georgian, but yes, chapel thrill, undergrad. So growing up in Atlanta, I had, um, I had just a really happy girlhood. I was involved in all kinds of things, whether it was everything from gymnastics before I realized I would be five, nine, whoops, or, you know, tap dancing or soccer, whatever, I was like, I was all about it. And I had lots of awesome huddles as a girl. And I think ultimately then played sports in high school, had huddles, went off to college and then made career my number one. And so when I was graduating Carolina and all of my girlfriends were moving off to New York city and living in, you know, like the east village with like illegally with five women and then having a good time and living their best sex and the city life, I was moving to small town America where I was pursuing my dream of journalism and, you know, growing up too, I admired women journalists like Jane Pauley and Katie Craig and Barbara Walters.

Brooke Baldwin: (05:39)
And of course Oprah, like we're all still living in the, in the era of Oprah. And I just assume that it would, it was a women friendly profession, little did I know that, you know, when I got into my first job would just be some women with some really sharp elbows. And so I w that's like my, my early arc. And then after I'm just going to skip a bunch of years and a lot of hard work and sacrifice and crappy hours. Um, you know, I wound my way up do with my dream job at CNN and I was covering the Trump inauguration and, and w the one day, like on the back of the sweat peg truck and embedded in this Trump motorcade is he's going to the white house for the first time. And then the very next day there I am in the middle of the women's March and seeing women coming together for a multitude of reasons for the first time in my life, I was basically in the middle of this giant huddle.

Brooke Baldwin: (06:26)
So number one, I realized something special was happening with women in America. And I wanted in on it, and I wanted to dedicate the next chapter of my career to it. And then two, I had my own like took my reporter hat off and was like, well, do what I show up here with a bunch of women do even do even have a huddle of women who would have shared a tank of gas to go to Washington with me. And the answer Dierdra is I didn't. And I knew that in that moment forward, I would need to activate my own huddle. And I want readers to learn how to do the same.

Deidre Scaramucci: (06:55)
Right. It's an important balance. My mom always tells me no matter what you do, make sure you keep your girlfriends. And I, I mean, it's important, but when you're building your career, when you're working super hard, I remember, you know, when I first started working, I never saw my friends. Um, and it's a really hard thing to maintain, but I think as we get older, um, it hits home and you probably become more focused on it, but it is something we need for hard times. I mean, there's just some things, a husband or a friend that's a guy, or they just can't

Brooke Baldwin: (07:26)
Everything to us at all times. And also, like, I think looking back to my twenties and early thirties when I was super lonely and putting career first, and I don't regret that time, but I had amazing singular girlfriends, but they were living all over the country and they were becoming first-time mothers or working on their own careers. And we just didn't have, I didn't have a huddle. I did not have a girl group, a tribe, a sisterhood in the way that I do now. And it has changed my life.

Deidre Scaramucci: (07:54)
Right. I mean, time, time does help that out though. You meet people as you go along and then you kind of introduce them and they come together. You know, we don't, we're not born with a huddle, you know? I mean, I have a bunch of girlfriends from high school that are still friends and that's like a one in a million thing. Most people don't have that. I'm very fortunate, but as time goes on, I have a friends of, um, that I've made through my kids and school and, and you build it as you go along. But, um, Anthony, are you there? What do you think about a girl huddle? Because I'm surrounded broke. I don't know what your siblings are.

Brooke Baldwin: (08:33)
I have a younger brother, so it's

Deidre Scaramucci: (08:35)
Another, it's just a guy, another guy I got, I'm surrounded by only guys. I have brothers, sons and nephews. So yeah, it's a lot of testosterone, man. That's what I'm saying. Um, so I'm interested in knowing what Anthony thinks about girl huddles, because I don't have any of that going on in the home place. And now Brooke is stuck with James is boy. Oh,

John Darcie: (08:56)
You know, I'm going to say something that's obviously going to get, it's going to obviously get me in trouble. I feel that like, there is a different way that women bond with each other than men. So obviously that will probably get me in trouble perhaps as politically.

Brooke Baldwin: (09:13)
This is super interesting. This is interesting. I, I, I bet you came from, I mean, I think it traditionally, right? I think men have for so long gotten together, whether it's playing sports or, you know, going and having a golf game and networking or having that happy hour, I think it just kind of has come naturally to you guys.

John Darcie: (09:33)
So let me, let me say something that's very stereotypical and very general. And then the, both of you, you can yell at me, but this has been my 57 year observation that men sort of bond in like sort of a hunter gathering mode. And so we're fighting with each other. We sort of get over it pretty quickly. I feel like women have a little bit of a shell in the beginning, but then once they've shared some level of vulnerability with each other, Katie coming credibly close, and in some ways their bond, their sororal bond is tighter than a fraternal bond because they've, they've seen each other's vulnerability and then they fuse together and are in a complete huddle. And I feel like men are more in like a bee swarm. Anyway, I don't know if that's going to get me talk anyway. Darcie knows that deer just out shiny me every second of this. So this is my last salt, but I just thought I would just point out that. And what is your observation to that, Brooke? Am I wrong in saying

Brooke Baldwin: (10:31)
That, listen, I can only speak from my own experience, but I think you hit on the key word on vulnerability. And that is one of the key pillars of, of having a huddle is showing up vulnerably. And also I would argue that, yeah, man, I

John Darcie: (10:43)
Got that out of your book, by the way.

Brooke Baldwin: (10:45)
Yeah. But I think that's key. I mean, I'm a big Bernay brown follower and she talks a lot about vulnerability and courage. And I think you have to show up vulnerably authentically. Um, and you have to ask for help, which I think we as women, especially I look to my, my women, friends who are mothers. I mean, women wear a lot of hats, right? Especially now in the pandemic mothers caretakers, in some cases, breadwinners community leaders, suddenly at home teachers, there there's a lot happening for women. And so I just think women, uh, aren't really good at raising their hands and saying, Hey, can you help me? But that's the whole, that's part of the, the, the, the magic within the huddle is when you decide to link arms with one another and help one another and show up vulnerably and ask for help. And if you've lost a job because of this horrible time we've been living in, like, I believe your, your sisters will truly want to share the wealth and help you out. I think our culture loves to pit women against one another, like think of all the movies and the Broadway shows and everything else, but that's not the, that's not the whole story. And that's, that's not the focus for me. It's the opposite.

Deidre Scaramucci: (11:56)
Do you think COVID, um, kind of shined more of a light on this kind of thing, given the crisis that we're all in and the help we probably need more than

Brooke Baldwin: (12:05)
Ever now. I think it's shine two lights. Number one, it showed that, you know, women and especially women of color were disproportionately affected by this pandemic and losing jobs and having to give something up as they were, you know, spinning a lot of plates at home. Number one, and acknowledging that. And just number two, I don't know about you Dierdre, but for me, I've never been closer with my girlfriends than this pandemic. I totally took for granted the gift of connection and physically hanging out and taking girl trips and, you know, networking with a group of women in person. And so for me, I've really had this opportunity as if we've been sitting still at home and flexing my huddling muscle flexing, the muscles of, you know, doing, doing things like zooming in Marco polo and these technology things. I was super not hip to prior to the pandemic. And now I think once we, I, my hope is then when we come out of this thing that ultimately after flexing these muscles, women will really have space to kick and bring about change. And I'm really hopeful for that. What do you think?

Deidre Scaramucci: (13:11)
Well, I think so. I mean, I've never spoken to my friends as much as I have now. Isn't that interesting? Yeah, because we're at home and we're like, Hey, this is going on. My, my son is going through this or my daughter's going through this, are you going through this? Or, you know, you're around your husband all the time. He's home all day. Like, are you guys, are you okay? Are you, you know, on each other's nerves, just bouncing stuff off of each other, um, just ways to make like best

John Darcie: (13:37)
You shouldn't as permanent broke ball. One desperation is

Deidre Scaramucci: (13:42)
In the Scaramucci. Yeah. But we've really uplifted each other. We've maneuvered and found ways to eventually see each other after many months. Um, and it was just so nice. And your girlfriends. Yeah. And, you know, just to have to come together safely and have our kids interact and just for me, or for them, or for anyone just to talk to an adult, like I said, in the beginning, I was half joking, but half not. I mean, um, it could be worse, but I spend most of the time talking to young people, which is great, but you need to have adult conversations. I mean, to stay stimulated, to stay alive and happy. Um, so I've, I've looked to them for that, a lie,

Brooke Baldwin: (14:22)
A follow up on that, which is to, to your husband's point about vulnerability. Like what kinds of, because I think of my own text chain, which I didn't even have a group text chain with my, with the ladies in my life before this, before, right. Like the journey that was huddle. And I mean, we text about everything from, are we too old for Jean shorts? What we think about the election to, you know, mental health and depression through the pandemic, to the racial reckoning in this country, like nothing is off limits to our marriage.

Deidre Scaramucci: (14:55)
We talk about all of that. And the interesting thing is we are coming from many different places, ideologically, surprisingly interesting. So we have had some really interesting conversations, whether it be about the vaccine, about quarantining, about how we're handling school. I mean, everything has been so interesting to hear people because we're so similar and in many ways, and we grew up around each other, but life has brought us to different places and we've made completely different choices during this whole thing. And she's been so interesting to see. And also you're saying about vulnerability being vulnerable, to be honest about how we feel about certain things, whether it's the riots, um, you know, women's empowerment, whatever it is, um, the election. Um, and we've just been really honest, without judgment, which I think judgment, judgment, judgment is another thing. Vulnerability is one and people are afraid to be vulnerable because of judgment.

Deidre Scaramucci: (15:52)
And I'm not when you're in a safe space, like a huddle. Right. But to be honest, um, as an adult, um, navigating the waters of adulthood and meeting people, I have yet to meet many people at this stage in life that I've been able to break through. I think people assume things about each other. Um, they prejudge and I think it's really inhibiting. I really do. Um, I think it stops a lot of people from gaining relationships and also just making differences. Cause they're like, so bound up that you don't, you don't get past a certain point. I don't know if you've ever witnessed that cause you're pretty open and

Brooke Baldwin: (16:30)
Try to be really open. And I, and I think I attract other women in my circles too, are equally open. I, I don't, I'm trying to think of, I don't have any friends who are just sort of like myopic or singularly minded. I can't, I don't have time for that. And I come from, you know, I, I come from Georgia. I come from, you know, a lot of Republicans in my family and here I'm living in Manhattan, you know, surrounded by a lot of like left-leaning folks. And I, and I, I remember my mom, when I was a kid, she was always like, Brooke, you should be a judge. That was what she always thought I should become. And instead I became this journalist, but similarly, like trying to maintain my objectivity and always listening to the different sides and believing the truths in some cases lies somewhere in between. But I want to come back to a point you said about like your, so your huddle is comprised of women who are of various ideological backgrounds. Because that to me is another key point of a huddle is either a diverse ideological backgrounds or making sure, you know, members of your huddle. Don't all look like you. Yeah.

Deidre Scaramucci: (17:34)
Yeah. Well, it makes things more interesting to be, I mean, obvious. Yeah. But, um, yeah, I mean, we're just, we're the same, but we're not, and it's been trying at some points, like I'll, I'll tell Anthony, you know, like, I don't know if we could see so-and-so cause they think differently than weed and it's, you know, sometimes it's thrown up some obstacles, but at the end of the day you still remain close. Um, and, and that's basically what we've done, but it's just interesting. We're very different. And um, one thing to say about you is following you on Instagram, you do attract that because you're very open, uh, transparent. You're not always trying to, um, play a character. You're, you're very real. Like, you'll go on after a workout. There'll be like, you know, you know what I mean? But like, that's cool because that makes people know that they can be real around you or they can, you know, they can pick up something from you. I always pick up something from your posts because they're just, there's honest and I'm authentic. And I like that obviously. Thank you sister fan. So,

John Darcie: (18:40)
So Brooke, I want to ask something, you know, I, uh, Don lemon wrote a book as well. Uh, and John and I interviewed Don, he said something about the Trump era. It's not a political question. It's a sociological one. He said that the Trump era exposed levels of racism that was probably passive aggressive, rip the cover off of it. Now we've gotten to see things and in a weird way, he thinks that will actually make things better because now we're having a full frontal conversation. Do you think something like that also happened for women and in terms of the progress that women are making in the country? Well,

Brooke Baldwin: (19:18)
Totally. I, I, I go back to the women's March in 2017, a day after he was inaugurated and went to the white house for the first time. And I, I do, I am mindful of activists, Tamika Mallory, who was on the stage, who said something to the effect of, you know, we are not here just because of one man. So I, I do agree with that. I think like any sort of moment in momentum is not all because of Donald Trump. I think having covered the 20 15, 20 16 presidential race and crisscrossing the country and being rallies and showing up for various candidates. I just noticed women were showing up in ways. I had never noticed in my career. And it wasn't just because they all were in it for Hillary. A lot of people were showing up for a lot of women were showing up for Bernie Sanders.

Brooke Baldwin: (20:03)
A lot of women were showing up for Donald Trump. I think that the, what was the final vote, it was like 52% of white women voted for Donald Trump. So I just noticed women showing up. And then I think at the end of the day, you had this like wave as a, as a result of the election and then came, you know, me too, and time's up. And then we had never seen more women run for office in the 2018 midterms as we had before. And I remember going on Stephen Colbert and the wake of that. And we were talking about, um, my series that I'd done here at CNN about how many of those women are Democrats. And I remember going on TV and saying, you know, we need more women in office left or right. And I was in touch with a couple of Republican women at the time and were saying it was really in the Republican party.

Brooke Baldwin: (20:49)
This was like 2018, a really breakthrough because there were so many older white men in those dark smoky rooms who weren't as progressive. And open-minded for these women candidates coming up and sharing the power with them. And they wouldn't even tell me anecdotes about how they were the candidate. And they would be sitting at the table at a, at a rally for themselves. And some of these guys would come up to the table and they'd be like, hi, what's your name? And where's the candidate. You know, they just it's, it's, uh, they, this is their own personal experience. And so I think it was wonderful that after the 2020 election, that a number of Republican women won seats, uh, on Capitol hill. And so I, I do think that that momentum is shifting for Republican women as well. At the end of the day, we only make up a quarter of the seats in Congress and that number needs to improve as well. I feel like we're

Deidre Scaramucci: (21:41)
Living in a weird time though. It's like, I'm not sure what's going on, but there seems to be a shift in many ways. Health-related, um, women's rights, just all these things. And so I'm just trying to figure out, are we living in the transitional period where we go through all the mess?

Brooke Baldwin: (21:57)
Like, are we in the mess right now to make it better for the next generation, right? Or

Deidre Scaramucci: (22:02)
Will we ever, will we ever be living in a time where it's less messy and just don't matter the mess,

Brooke Baldwin: (22:10)
Like the mess a little bit, like the change.

Deidre Scaramucci: (22:13)
I mean, I like the mess. I like the change, but I would like it to be this, the situation and the circle to be settled and more natural because I feel like right now there's a tug of war and a push and pull with a lot of things. And I just feel like it's very unsettled. So I'm just wondering if we'll ever live in that time or will we see that time?

Brooke Baldwin: (22:34)
And who's got a crystal ball. Who's got a crystal ball. I don't know.

Deidre Scaramucci: (22:38)
Do you think we can make enough, um, of a debt? Yeah,

Brooke Baldwin: (22:43)
I hope so. Dierdre I hope so. Um, I hope that women will it at the end of the day for, for me and for this book, what I heard from various, everyone from CEOs to politicians, to Hollywood, actresses, to women athletes at the end of the day, they want to make sure that women have a bigger table, that it's no longer women fighting for few seats at the, the male table. But in fact, like let's just build our own down at your table. And, um, I think that slowly but surely that is happening. And I think one of the secrets to doing that is being a Huddler and subscribing to this abundance mentality, ethos. And I do hope that if I really want to create a movement of women subscribing to this versus the sharp elbow mentality, so that I do believe we can reach what you're describing, where we do build this table. And we have a table full of women from all shapes, sizes, colors, creeds, ethnicities, everything, and it's sort of like adjacent to the men and we need, you know, we started they'll go the whole conversation, or you were reading the dedication to my husband because we need our men and we need our men to support the huddle. So hopefully yes, in our lifetime, we will, we will have built this big, beautiful table for, for women. Um, it's just a matter of everyone jumping on and going with it.

Deidre Scaramucci: (24:10)
Do you think women that are in power right now are doing enough to, to make that kind of happen? Or do you think it's still could be worked on? I mean, I know there are obviously people that stick out in our mind that are always moving forward with this, but, um, I feel like there could be more

Brooke Baldwin: (24:28)
Sure there's a mix. I can only speak to the women I interviewed in this book. And so the women I interviewed in this book are all in it for everyone to win it. You know, they're all, if they're not, you know, many of them have the access to power and her, then, you know, as Megan Arpino famously said are throwing down their, their ladders for, for younger women coming along. Um, but sure. I mean, haven't you like in, in my own career, I have experienced those women who are not the women's women who are icy and wanna have their sharp elbows and hold on to that lone woman position up top. And it's like, on the one hand you sort of were like, listen, man, I understand where you are and why you're so icy and, and don't want to help other women because you've had that claw girlfriend, you have had to work your off to, to get to where you are. But then I think why aren't you, now that you have this power, like help others help others achieve just a slice of what you have. Yeah. I think there's still an, if I'm just being realistic, I think there's still a mix. What do you think?

Deidre Scaramucci: (25:33)
Oh yeah. A hundred percent. No, that's what I was saying. Even just right now, I'm not working. I did experience that when I was working. Um, but even just navigating, um, moms or whatever, I don't know, not to stereotype or whatever, but just interesting. You know, it's very hard for me to understand. And Anthony, you know, I talked to him about it all the time and he's like, well, for some reason, women are intimidated by other women. And I don't know what it is. Like they automatically assume you are not going to be nice or you, they automatically assume that you don't like them. And there's something that we are, I don't know. Women

Brooke Baldwin: (26:10)
Can be the worst to one, another account. We,

Deidre Scaramucci: (26:13)
But I am not under, um, I'm always trying to figure out, is it a taut or are we, is it like a survival thing or is it something innate or something that we're taught? Um, but I I'm, I'm sure it's a combination of all those things, but I just wish we could, but people like you are because you have a platform you're showing people how to be successful. Um, brilliant, attractive and not, um, too cool for school. Like still approach you.

John Darcie: (26:42)
Imagine if I calling Brooke brawl one successful and attractive on the assaults, I mean, that would be it for me. Right? Anthony's the head of HR here. I would take it as a compliment. Mr. [inaudible]. I appreciate that, Brooke.

Deidre Scaramucci: (26:57)
Um, obviously that's an interesting thing I wanted to ask Brooke about. Um, I think sometimes we are striking, we're not striking enough of a balance between, um, and I'll get all Tony Robbins here, but like female energy and male energy, because I do believe, um, and you and I are born around the same time that there is a distinct difference. And sometimes, and it doesn't mean any difference between male, energy and female energy. And I think sometimes we need to keep a little bit of that because sometimes I feel like we have like an overbite where we're trying to make everybody exactly the same. Um, so like what Anthony was saying, if he complimented you, I personally would never get offended. If somebody come home, I wouldn't take it as a compliment. Right. But I feel like, you know, when I was coming on to this, I'm thinking, what can people say? Not particularly in this conversation, but what doesn't offend somebody, what is still funny? You know, I was just thinking about the time we live in and you face that every day. Cause you have to be on TV every day and, and ask questions off the cuff. Like, how do you know you're not offending somebody now? I feel like we are overly sensitive in some ways, right?

Brooke Baldwin: (28:08)
I mean, that's a whole other conversation and I am certainly not an expert in it, but, um, I mean I try to just maintain objectivity and you know, I, my, my, my, my gut just knows if I'm being offended. And, and I think the bigger thing for me is if I'm being offended to just speak up and say something about it, but I think you're asking like, is the, has the pendulum swung too far? And that people are getting so offended and it's this like hyper PC culture. And when did that become a thing and when can the pendulum swing back? And

Deidre Scaramucci: (28:44)
It's a, it's a weird thing because we're you and I are living in a zone and the zip code where we transferred somewhere in between, where, when we first started our careers, it was like borderline mad men, Nish still, still acceptable. Um, I worked on a trading floor and it was insane. Um, and then now

Brooke Baldwin: (29:04)
You've experienced it totally.

Deidre Scaramucci: (29:08)
And, um, and now I'm like, I don't think anybody could say anything anymore. And I haven't been in an office environment, but it's just, it's really at the opposite end of the spectrum. So I just find it fascinating that that has happened in probably a time pair, a period of 15 years.

Brooke Baldwin: (29:26)
Do you think that it Lee and I, and I hear you loud and clear, and I feel like what I'm hearing is a little bit of an eye roll of like, come on, you know, can somebody just say somebody as attractive? I think that there are many, many shades of what you're describing, but at least I would prefer the pendulum be swinging more on the let's be appropriate side versus the, Hey, you're a hot chick working on the floor and I'm going to be really inappropriate right now. And it's gonna be swept under the rug because it's 1987, you know, like,

Deidre Scaramucci: (29:53)
Yeah. Yeah. I agree. Yeah, no, I agree,

John Darcie: (29:57)
Brooke, 2007 and possibly 2017 on wall

Deidre Scaramucci: (30:01)
Street. Yeah. Yeah.

Speaker 4: (30:03)
I've just not been around the wall street culture.

Brooke Baldwin: (30:06)
I mean, I can't even imagine. I can't,

John Darcie: (30:09)
When you say that there's a, there's a, when you talking about like, you know, intuitively when you're being offended or not, I've we, we have four, we have four sons and I tell my adult sons, a woman knows right away, charming versus creepy right away. You can tell a woman, her dress looks great. You look great tonight. You're saying it totally complimentary out any, you know, a front or anything like that. But then you could say this same sort of thing in this sort of leering weirdo

Brooke Baldwin: (30:41)
In the wrong places.

John Darcie: (30:43)
And then all of a sudden the woman is like, okay, this guy is out the lunch. You know, I, I'm hoping that we can keep the 5,000 year conversation between men and women. Yeah. Make it more appropriate, make women feel comfortable and make women feel safe. But the flip side is we also should be able to talk to each other in a way that is authentic without agreeing offensive. Does that make sense? Totally, totally.

Deidre Scaramucci: (31:09)
Perfectly. Totally agree. Yeah.

John Darcie: (31:11)
Right. In the book about growing up and learning in an all woman's environment, tell us about that because I think it's a fascinating thing and I think it's somewhat helpful to women to think about it in that perspective. What, tell us that your insights

Brooke Baldwin: (31:26)
There? Well, I think I wrote, I wrote, I wanted to make sure I wrote a whole chapter about all girls learning environments, um, and mentioned a little bit about my own. And I tell this story. I did gymnastics for years and years, and there was one point when I was, I dunno, I was probably like eight or nine when I'm just like, I'm a sweater. I sweat, I work hard sweat. It's not cute. It's still not cute, but I've embraced it. All right. And I'm this eight or nine year old and my, my leotard and my spandex or whatever. Um, you know, doing the things around the bars and I'm soaking wet. And I remember this like precious bun in her hair, not a hair out of place, not the sweat stains under her armpits that I was rocking at the time. And I remember her saying to the coach, like, coach, why does Brooks sweat so much?

Brooke Baldwin: (32:14)
And I was mortified. I mean, I could still feel it now. And she turns to the girl and just quips back because Brooke works twice as hard as you. And that was just a snapshot of what I remember from my youth, but being surrounded by girls, doing gymnastics or girls in dance or whatever other sports I was I was doing at the time. And, and what I, what I write about in the book is how now, if you're, if you have little girls, how there is such a broader spectrum of opportunities for them to step up to bat and fail and try, try again. Rushman, Sujani amazing woman, incredible Ted talk, founded girls who code. She talks a lot in her Ted. Talk about how, when boy boys are brought up to jump to the fifth rung of the monkey bar fall and jump up again, like be messy, fail, it's fine.

Brooke Baldwin: (33:05)
Try again. And girls are brought up to be a bit more perfect and she wanted to start girls who code. So to create a safe space for just girls who would do something really, really hard, like learn, learn to code and fail and, and create that space in which they can do that. And, and also build that like precious, you know, those early days of confidence in, in girls. And so I read about in my book, other examples of that, where I talked to Karlie Kloss, the famous supermodel, who is such a hustler too, and I'd have her whole backstory, but she took me inside. One of her coding camps, Kode with Klossy. And I met all these girls who were doing something very similar. I mean, they'd never, some of them didn't have access to computers. Certainly none of them had learned to code before and creating a safe space where they can raise the, raise their hand without boys around and, you know, feeling, feeling like they could fail and then succeed.

Brooke Baldwin: (34:01)
And similarly, Reese Witherspoon does this awesome film, young filmmaker lab with a bunch of girls in LA once a year with the help of at and T. And so all these girls get to come out and they they're carrying around all this fancy equipment and they shoot a film and they all take turns, playing different roles, um, hosting the thing, shooting the thing, editing the thing. And it's the similar, it's the similar idea. And just how nowadays having girls, and I know you guys have boys, but having, having girls, having these opportunities to fail and, and, you know, just from the, all the spectrum of things that are out there, it's just awesome.

Deidre Scaramucci: (34:40)
Well, having boys, I feel like we're part of this. Like you said, we have men to support. Yes. And, um, I was reading something yesterday. It was, um, somebody wrote about their husband and they were saying, thank you to his mom for teaching him to be somebody who, uh, supported her and let her fail, cheered her on when she succeeded. And it made me think, you know, we have our responsibility as parents of boys to raise people. We'll do that. And also, um, you know, cheer on the girl, like do what I'm doing, go for it. You know? Um, like our young son is seven and he always says, I love this girl in my class. Like she plays Fortnite, you know, so cool. And she's like, I don't know any girls that do that mom. And that is so cool. And, um, she's the one girly invited to his birthday party. And I want to always be that way, like do what I'm. That's awesome. So, um, I think as parents, as adults, we just have to always set an example, whether you're raising, uh, girls or boys, or whether you have nieces and nephews, whatever it is, you have to set them straight, you know, that they can all do the same stuff. W Rudy, each other root each other on. Yep. So, um,

John Darcie: (35:58)
We want you to talk a little bit about your mom. Tell us about your mom.

Deidre Scaramucci: (36:04)
Let's the original huddle, as she said,

Brooke Baldwin: (36:07)
Christy B was born in 1949. No, she's one of five sisters, grandfather. My grandfather, her, her father was a Presbyterian minister and they grew up in Miami and yeah, my mom met my dad. He was at Georgia tech. She was at Agnes Scott to Atlanta, Atlanta colleges. They met dated married voila here I am. And, um, I've always been really, really tight with her. And my dad was a management consultant with Deloitte. He was out of town Monday through Friday, and I just totally grew up thinking that was normal to have a dad on a plane somewhere exotic Monday through Friday. And I remember he would come home and I would like rifle through his bags for all the little trinkets from hotel rooms and the change. And my mom was my, my original huddle. And she was someone who, you know, I was like a four year old kid doing backflips off the neighborhood pool.

Brooke Baldwin: (36:58)
And I'm sure the parents were like, who is this girl? And where are her parents? But my mom supported it and cheered me on. And, you know, as a little girl would, you know, let me, she'd crawl into bed with me and tell me stories in which I was the protagonist. And I was, you know, I'm being brave and whatever story she would tell me. And that's the stuff that matters. Those are the building blocks of that. The confidence is a young girl. And then just coming through this crazy, amazing, challenging profession of TV news, and having a moment when I was living back at my parents' house at the age of 29, because I moved to take this chance on becoming a correspondent at CNN. And, um, of course it was right in the middle of the recession. It was 2008. So I landed in Atlanta and CNN basically said, Hey, we think you're really great.

Brooke Baldwin: (37:53)
And we're really excited to have you work for us. But yeah, although all the positions are frozen. So hang tight. And I ended up working odd hours at various other networks within the building for awhile and had a moment which I described in the end of my book, which my mom and I affectionately refer to as the yellow chair moment where I'm living at my parents' house. And I'm having a giant cry in this sunshine, yellow chair in her bedroom. And I'm not a quitter, but I was on the precipice of quitting. I just thought I left a perfectly good job in Washington DC for this to take this leap. And it wasn't really panning out for me. And she refused to let me quit. And that is my mom in a nutshell. And we've had several yellow chair moments since, um, and she's even become closer to her sisters in the later years. And she's my

Deidre Scaramucci: (38:46)
She's the best. Do you think coming from a family with that many sisters, she was so, um, aware of what it took to be like a brave girl, because she was surrounded by so many girls. I'm sure that used to help her. Right.

Brooke Baldwin: (39:03)
I think she came from a time where they didn't have much, he was a Presbyterian minister. The church would provide the house. She had to bunk with another sister at all times. They had to take care of the younger sisters. It was very Southern in the way of, okay, don't make a fuss if something's going on. Like, just keep it under the surface. You know, it was of the, like child of the fifties, just don't talk about it, that kind of thing. And she actually wasn't super close with her sisters, like growing up. I remember she had, we had this one neighbor who she was really close with, but beyond that, I never remember having huddles of women over to our home to drink wine or anything like that. And so I didn't grow up seeing that, unlike maybe some of my other girlfriends moms who did have that. And I think only later in life, has she, um, grown in her own way. And then of course having her daughter writing an entire book about this, I think she's become much more intentional about really becoming close with her sisters and having a, an all women's Agnes got book club and things like that. So now she, she really walks the walk.

Deidre Scaramucci: (40:10)
It's so interesting as we keep changing as we go along. Yeah. Which brings me to my next question. So what are you doing now? I know you're leaving CNN soon. What do you go off to do?

Brooke Baldwin: (40:26)
I'm trying to figure it out. If you guys know anyone in executive positions at streaming networks, um, I, a couple, a couple of things. I, first of all, this has been such a privilege position and truly a dream job that I have earned every single day and has been like beyond I'm going to be waterworks walking out of this building next week. Um, but I have surrounded myself with these trailblazing women and they have, I can't, I can't hold space with them and not be the bravest version of myself and the bravest version of myself. I remember my dad telling me when I was like, just starting out in TV. He was like, Brooke, when you, as soon as you get too comfortable somewhere, you gotta go. And while this has been such a privilege to have this platform, I gotta go, I gotta take a leap.

Brooke Baldwin: (41:13)
I gotta do my back, flip off the high dive, and I want to stay, stay in journalism, stay in the space of storytelling, like the deep end of storytelling, having time to really sit with whomever. It may be, um, famous people, ordinary, extraordinary Americans, uh, tell their stories, shine lights in places where it's not so bright. And, um, do I do believe that streaming is like the next generation of storytelling and having that space to do that. So I have been working with a production company. I am pitching some folks very soon, some ideas. Um, so that number one is a dream. The next dream. And number two, after I announced I was leaving, um, the Ellen degenerate show called me up and asked me to come to LA, to guest host that talk show. And it was such a bucket list check. And I would love to be able to go back. And I think something in that space could be interesting to stay tuned.

Deidre Scaramucci: (42:13)
That's a major thing if you're going to they'll do it on Ellen, right? It's

John Darcie: (42:17)
Ms. Ms. Dierdre hold up the book. Let's show off the book before we blast out of here. So this is the book title by Brooke Baldwin and Brooke. We are, uh, super proud to know you. We're super proud to be friends with you. Love you guys. And, uh, you know, I sometimes get out shined by John Dorsey and it me off the fact that I have the two of you out shining me today. Doesn't me off at all. I just want to point that out that John Dorsey, before we break, I'm glad there was some makeup left for Dierdre in the house. You know, you're going to be on cameras at the barely any makeup. And there certainly wasn't any Botox left for Dierdre Brooke. I can D I can assure you that. Okay.

Deidre Scaramucci: (42:59)
Oh my God. I

John Darcie: (43:02)
Can't drink without a straw, but the top of my forehead doesn't move. I just want to make sure everybody knows that in all seriousness, Brooke, we wish you great success with the book. Thank you so much for joining us on. Thank you guys so much and going forward to the next career. Can't wait, John, you want to take us out of here? Yep. Uh, thank you everybody for tuning in to today's salt talk for Dierdra Scaramucci is a steamed debut here on salt talks. Just a reminder, if you missed any part of this episode or any of our previous episodes, you can access them all on our website, salt.org backslash talks or on our YouTube channel, which is called salt tube. Uh, please follow us on social media. We're most active on Twitter. You should also follow Brooke by the way. Uh, she's a great follow on social media as Dierdre I think alluded to before long the show or during the show.

John Darcie: (43:52)
Uh, but we're at Saul conference on Twitter. We're also on LinkedIn, Instagram, and Facebook as well. And please spread the word about these salt talks. I'm the proud father of a daughter with another daughter on the way. So I love seeing these types of resources and we'll make this required reading for my daughters as they grow up. So please spread the word about these salt talks and topics like this are especially dear to our heart. You know, Anthony has a daughter as well. So these issues are very important to us, but no question on behalf of Anthony, dear Joe, the entire salt team, uh, signing off for today, we hope to see you back here soon again on salt socks.

Josh Rogin: "Chaos Under Heaven: Trump, Xi & the Battle for the 21st Century" | SALT Talks #195

“I don’t think the goal is to stem China’s rise. I think the goal is to shape it… It’s going to be a long game. It’s going to last a generation.”

Josh Rogin is a political columnist for the Washington Post, analyst for CNN and author of his new book, Chaos Under Heaven: America, China, and the Battle for the 21st Century.

China has become the main geo-political rival of the United States and the 21st century will be defined by the United States’ ability to manage the relationship. Donald Trump showed correct instincts in seeking to confront China aggressively, but the administration’s general dysfunction undercut efforts. This presents a valuable opportunity for the new administration. “Biden’s administration has a chance to take the ball and run with it and do a better job. Trump was great at flipping over the chess board, but he couldn’t set it back up.”

By integrating China into the global economy, the hope was that global influences would ultimately liberalize the country’s politics. This did not happen and the communist party has nearly total control over China. “I don’t think the goal is to stem China’s rise. I think the goal is to shape it… It’s going to be a long game. It’s going to last a generation.”

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Josh Rogin.jpeg

Josh Rogin

Global Opinions Columnist

Washington Post

MODERATOR

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darcie: (00:07)
Hello everyone. And welcome back to salt talks. My name is John Darcie. I'm the managing director of stall, which is a global thought leadership forum at the intersection of finance technology and public policy. So talks are a digital interview series with leading investors, creators and thinkers. In our goal on these salt talks is the same as our goal at our salt conferences, which is to provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future. And we're very excited today to welcome Josh Rogan to salt talks. Uh, Josh is a columnist for the global opinion section of the Washington post and a political analyst with CNN. He's also an author most recently of a great book called chaos under heaven, Trump, she and the battle for the 21st century previously, Josh covered foreign policy and national security for Bloomberg view Newsweek, the daily beast foreign policy magazine, congressional quarterly federal computer week magazine and Japan's Asahi Shimbun.

John Darcie: (01:12)
Uh, he was a 2011 finalists for the Livingston award for young journalists and the 2011 recipient of the interaction, uh, award for excellence in international reporting. Josh holds a bachelor's degree in international affairs from George Washington university there in Washington, DC, and studied at Sophia university in Tokyo, Japan today, he lives in the nation's capital, Washington, DC hosting. Today's talk is Anthony Scaramucci, the founder and managing partner of SkyBridge capital, which is a global alternative investment firm. Anthony is also the chairman of salt. And with that, I'll turn it over to Anthony for the interview. So

Anthony Scaramucci: (01:49)
Josh, even though you have the book behind you, I like holding these things up here for our people. Cause you know, I'm not all that self promotional as you know, but, uh, I will say to you that this is, and we were in the green room before we got started here on this salt talk. And I said to you, this is the next 10 years of the United States. Whether we like it or not, there's still be a backdrop of a border crisis. There'll be issues we have to deal with internally with the us. But the next 10 years of the global drama will be between the us and the Chinese. Why did you write the book and am I right after reading your book? Uh, that was my conclusion. I said, man, this is what we're going to be doing over the next 10 years.

Josh Rogin: (02:37)
Right? Well, uh, thanks guys for having me on, basically when I got to the Washington post in 2016 and Donald Trump was elected president, you know, 95% of the foreign policy media was focused on Russia, Russia, Russia, for a number of obvious reasons that we are not going to be able to get into now, but I turned to my boss and I said, well, I gotta do something different. They said, what do you want to do? And I said, I wanna report the story, which I was pretty sure it was going to be pretty crazy considering what the Trump administration was shaping up to look like. And of course I wasn't disappointed little did I know though that not only would we have a trade war and a tech war and sort of a broad awakening in various sectors of American society to the rising challenge that arising China presents to us in our industries, in our schools, in our markets, uh, all of that played out in the craziest way.

Josh Rogin: (03:27)
You could imagine it's a lot of that you know about personally, but then the pandemic hit. And then all of a sudden the fact that China's government is, you know, internally repressive externally aggressive and interfering in our societies toward their political ends became obvious not only to every American, but to every citizen of the world. And there's nobody who's stuck in their basement for a year who hasn't seen their grandma who doesn't realize that, oh, wait a second. We've got to figure out this China thing before it's too late. And it looks like the Chinese government is taking that country in a bad direction. And that doesn't mean we have to have a cold war. It doesn't mean we're going to have a conflict forget about through trap. That's all bumper sticker nonsense. What we have to do is we have to have a national conversation about the challenge that rising China presents to our society and then figure out what we're going to do about it. And this book was a first attempt to start

Speaker 4: (04:17)
That conversation. So you

Anthony Scaramucci: (04:20)
Mentioned that you said that he straps. So let me just explain that to our viewers and listeners, I think is important. Uh, Graham, Alison wrote about this and destined for war. He basically says a rising, super power, uh, basically threatening the existing power structure usually ends in a calamity 12 out of 16 times over 2000 plus years that that's happened. We've gone straight on to war. Uh, and you write in the book you write in the book, which I think is, uh, elemental here that these problems were going to be there with, or without Donald Trump, we are in a economic struggle, we're in a technological struggle. And so what, what, what would you say to your fellow Americans now about what their government missed over the last 20 years as it relates to China?

Josh Rogin: (05:14)
Right. I mean, the facilities traffic's like interesting, but we shouldn't base our strategy on it, but you know, Graham, Alison picked 16 conflicts and then 12 of them matched his theory. So that's all well and good, but you know, the U S China competition is going to be a lot different for a lot of reasons, mostly because if you think about it, it's really not about the U S versus China. It's about an international response to China as it rises. And that means that we're in this together with a lot of other countries that have a lot of things that they need to protect and a lot of interests and values that we believe, believe in and have defended for the last 80 years or so that we would like to keep, you know, that the Chinese communist party is working to erode the mistake that our government made over the last 20 years.

Josh Rogin: (05:57)
You know, not realizing that the large bet that we made, which was essentially, and I'm boiling it down a bit, to be sure that if we gave China all the help, we could and integrated them into our systems as much as possible that the Chinese system would, uh, liberalize is economically and that would lead to it liberalizing politically. And that would solve all the rest of the problems. And we would live in peace and coexistence. And, you know, some people say that was the only responsible thing to do 20 years ago. Some people say it's still the only first possible thing to do right now, but even in 2016, even before Trump was elected, there was a growing feeling inside the U S government and later on in other parts of American society, that that bet had not worked out that choosing paying had taken, decided to take his country in a more authoritarian direction and decided to exert the Chinese model and export it and use it to sort of change the rules of the road in a way that serves their liberal model and not our model, and that we have to respond to that.

Josh Rogin: (06:49)
So, you know, now we sort of the Trump administration to its credit, you know, realize that it, but as you know, it was such a chaotic mess that they've missed a lot of opportunities. They failed to really use a lot of elements of American power. They disrespected allies, there was constant turnover. It was factional infighting from the get-go and the, their response to the China challenge got mired in the overall dysfunction and mismanagement that president Trump brought. And that's a shame. That's something that we, our leaders now have to fix. Josh,

Anthony Scaramucci: (07:19)
That's sort of breaking news. There was constant turnover because I wasn't aware of the turnover or the infighting. I didn't realize that. So that's sort of breaking news for me, but you know, one of the funny things it's April of 2017, it's Mar-a-Lago president Trump and president Xi are meeting down there. He's got the book with them, destined for war. President Xi has obviously had an impact on him. Trump has no idea what's in the book. Take us to that meeting. You write about it. Yeah.

Josh Rogin: (07:47)
So you would think if you watch the campaign and that Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro and Stephen Miller would have been in charge of the China policy, cause that's how the campaign speeches play it out. But as soon as Trump became president, uh, he turned on a diamond handed, much of the policy over to Jerry Kushner. And to an extent, Rex Tillerson, by the time they got tomorrow Lago for a lot of complicated reasons, he wanted to make a deal. And basically what happened at Mar-a-Lago is he established this friendship over the most beautiful piece of chocolate cake you've ever seen according to Trump, uh, to make a deal with changing paying. And then he set us Steve Mnuchin, Gary Cohn, and Wilbur Ross on the path of making that deal. And if you just think of that moment in time, and, and, you know, you could imagine that if the Chinese leadership had just realized what an opportunity they had, if they had given president Trump and his economic officials, a deal that they could sell, that they could run on, that would actually have done some good, they might've avoided what happened next was that was, which was pled.

Josh Rogin: (08:45)
Trump turned on them and turned on the Chinese leadership and then handed the policy over to a Lighthizer. And then to an extent to the Hawks and Bolton and Pence, and, you know, it just went downhill from there. And then when they finally did make a deal in June, January, 2020, it seemed like everything was going to be copacetic again. And then the pandemic hit and the relationship was destroyed. So Mar-a-Lago was that first sort of instance where president Trump and president Xi decided that they were really good friends and that this was going to be a big thing. And that relationship not only ended up being destroyed, but it also ended up having a real horrible effect on our pandemic response. Because later on presented, she lied to president Trump about the coronavirus, told him it would go away when it got warmer, told them that it was under control, herbal medicine could be used to, to secure it. And that fed into Trump's garble in his head, which came out of his mouth, which came out in our policy, which exacerbated the problems that we're having today. Those are excuse the Trump administration's pandemic response, but it explains it just a bit.

Anthony Scaramucci: (09:44)
So, I mean, you're doing, and you do a brilliant job of this in the book. So I want you to pretend I've now landed from Mars. And these are two very important world leaders. And I want you to give me the baseball scouting report on president Xi and president Trump. Go ahead, Josh.

Josh Rogin: (10:05)
You know, there's, there's two scattered reports on president Trump, right? Some people believe that he was just, uh, a neophyte, you know, inexperienced moron who was stumbling through the most important relationship at a critical time setting his advisers against each other in a Coliseum, you know, battle for sport, right? Other people will tell you people who are closer to Trump will say, no, no, no, no. He actually had a firm view on China and he knew what he wanted and he cared about trade, but he didn't care about human rights. And he could just never get the thing that he wanted because his advisors were fighting amongst themselves. And I think there's truth to both of those narratives actually, you know, I went back and I read all of the Trump books, not that he wrote them, but the ones that had his name on them.

Josh Rogin: (10:47)
And, uh, there's an amazingly consistent message on China that actually you can find in all of his statements and speeches and tweets and stuff. Um, at the same time, it's clear that he didn't know anything about the tactics that he got fooled by presidency. And if you're doing this county report on the presidency and you would have to say that, you know, he masterfully played Trump like a fiddle and abused their personal friendship in order to advance China's interests against America's interests. And, you know, sort of, you know, uh, on the other hand, you, you have to say that the Chinese leadership never really understood how the Trump administration works, but you could kind of forgive them for, cause we were all in that same fog. Uh, and because they play so much faith in their billionaire friends and started basically just hoping that the billionaire friends and the wall street guys would, you know, fix everything. And that became their main channel that w once that didn't work, they really had nothing left to fall back on. And when the pandemic hit, it was the, the, the back channels were useless and it was all over.

Anthony Scaramucci: (11:46)
I'm gonna say two things for editorial comment, my observation, uh, th our standing joke, Trump has never read a book and he's never written one. Although we had several best-sellers, we used to always tease about that, even when Steve Mann and I used to talk to each other, but he had very good instincts. I will always say that about him. He had very good instincts and his instincts were that we needed to do something to stem China's rise. I guess my question to you, was it too late where the forces already in play, where China is exponentially rising, and there's really not much that the Americans can do about it. Yeah,

Josh Rogin: (12:29)
No, I, I, I don't think, first of all, I agree with you on your analysis, but I don't think the goal is to stem, trying to thrive. I think that the goal is to try to shape it, you know what I mean? And then if we can't to protect ourselves and protect the things that we care about and the things that are important to our security and our national security and to our public health, by the way, and, you know, uh, it's that, that effort is just beginning and the Trump administration just played the first inning of it, and it's going to be a long game. Okay, it's going to last a generation. And when you see the fight in industry, and again, the big, what you read about Trump's political instincts is, is, is pointing to, is that, you know, the polls show that Americans want a tougher China policy.

Josh Rogin: (13:10)
They see the Chinese government's actions affecting them in their schools, in their markets, uh, in their tech companies and their social media, everything, right. If they're everywhere and in their public health. So they want somebody to do something about it. Um, so actually the Biden ministration has the chance to take the ball and run with it and actually do a better job if they choose to, but we don't know what they're going to do. I think, because I don't think they know what they're going to do. Um, but yeah, I think Trump diagnosed the problem. He was great at flipping over the chess board. Right. But he couldn't send it back up again,

Anthony Scaramucci: (13:40)
Is that analogy because he was flipping chess boards and card tables and kicking slot machines. And so, uh, the Western world is mostly in agreement about the horror of a potential human rights violation in parts of China. Right. But do countries outside the United States have the will to demand a change, uh, given its economic importance, particularly in Europe and Asia. Yeah, no,

Josh Rogin: (14:05)
It's kind of a weird dynamic in that sense, because you're going to have the United States in Europe being the champions of human rights, but it's actually, you know, the Muslim majority countries and the Asian countries that are most directly affected by China's human rights abuses because there are using Hong Kongers and Taiwanese and Tibetans and weekers and, you know, Kazakhs and all other types of minorities that happens that find themselves living inside China's borders. Those countries are, are, have a problem because they live there. They're not moving. So they got to deal with China one way or the other. And I guess the answer that I could give is that, you know, while we all want to change China, we have to re you know, resist this Eucharistic idea that China's going to become more like us and China's development will be determined by the Chinese people one way or the other.

Josh Rogin: (14:48)
So the thing that we actually have to focus on first is trying this in our countries, right. And on our soil. Right. And that's the, that's the most important thing. That's the thing we have the most influence over. And that's the thing we can really join with both Asian allies on and European allies, because they're facing the same thing. You know, whether you were in the Netherlands or you were in Japan, you know, when the pandemic hit and you wanted your factories in China to send you the masks that you thought you owned, because you thought you were in the factories, you realize that you didn't really own the factories. Right. And then all of a sudden you realize that, oh, wait a second, we've got a problem here. And so that's going to take the, the bigger solutions to sort of not decouple, which is, again, it's kind of a bumper sticker, but to reorient the way that we do business, to recognize the fact that there are certain things that we're going to have to route outside of China.

Josh Rogin: (15:35)
And a lot of that is the money by the way. And I know we're going to get to that, but you know, how the markets deal with Chinese companies, especially those companies that are committing atrocities, right? You want to fight atrocities. Well, it's probably not a good idea to funnel trillions of dollars of American and retirement funds into those companies that are building the concentration camps and shipping the human hair over here. Right. And, uh, you know, when you just think about the scope and scale of that challenge, you realize that it's really something that the United States really can't do alone.

Anthony Scaramucci: (16:04)
You said we're going to get to the money. So, so I want to get to the money. And I want you to tell us what you'd like to say about the money. So I'm not going to ask you a question. I want you to frame it in the way that you want our viewers and listeners. Yeah,

Josh Rogin: (16:18)
Sure. Well, let me start. And, you know, by alluding to the story about you and my book, which is, you know, the story of when you came into the Trump administration, when the first time you tried, you decided to sell your, uh, firm to a Chinese company. And, you know, when that was reported, it was all reported wrong. But then when I read the reported it for the book, I came to an epiphany actually. And based on the research that I did with your help actually, and, you know, I, it seems to me that at that time, in 2016, you really couldn't blame wall street firms for thinking about these kinds of transactions were AOK because they had been going on for all this time. And no one had said boo about it. And when the national security community came and knocking on wall street store and said, oh, wait a second, you can't do this type of transaction. Now you can't do this type of transaction. Uh, for sure there was a lot of confusion and there was a lot of conflict and people didn't know what the rules were and the people inside this system didn't know what the rules were. And it was just a total mess. Okay. So I we'll go

Anthony Scaramucci: (17:16)
Back for a second there because I think it's important for people to understand the transactions were happening in a, bought a piece of Hilton. They had a piece of Georgia bank transactions were happening. They were actually referred to me by some very well known private equity people,

Josh Rogin: (17:31)
But you were a relatively small player compared to the billions and billions of dollars.

Speaker 5: (17:36)
Yes. No more training, no, every question.

Anthony Scaramucci: (17:39)
And I never complained about the Syphius decision to block it. There was never any whining on our part. We just moved on. And in many ways I'm grateful that I was able to keep control of the company, but yeah, it all worked out in the end point that I would like to make, or I'd like you to observe. And then you opine upon. And that is, I think wall street was going with the wave of the, the transactions. But I think the NSA was basically saying, wait a minute, some of these companies may be controlled by the Chinese communist party or the Chinese communist army, but the people's Republic, army of result of which they wanted those transactions to stop. And what's your opinion of all that, should they have stopped? Should they?

Josh Rogin: (18:27)
Yeah. So I, so I think what was happening was that the national security community was waking up to this idea that a lot of these investments were problematic for national security reasons. And they were having an internal debate over what to do about it at the same time. They're trying to deal with wall street, not just wall street, by the way, this happened with the tech industry with Hollywood, to an extent or on American campuses. So as the FBI goes around, knocking on all these doors, all these institutions, which protect their independence fiercely, and rightly because we live in a, uh, a pluralistic democracy, it's not the Chinese system, the government can't tell private companies what to do, but at the same time, these national security officials were trying to grapple with what was a real problem. And that real problem was that these acquisitions did have a national security implication and not everybody agreed on what it was.

Josh Rogin: (19:12)
So in that moment, in time that you had Congress dealing with it through Cepheus reform, you had wall street resisting, dealing with it, frankly, because they didn't trust a lot of what the Trump administration was doing because the Trump administration didn't have a lot of credibility. And then you have the national security community trying to manage all this stuff and in the dysfunction of what was going on in the administration. So again, that's my sort of, you know, uh, admission that like, you know, there was, there were plenty of blame to go around. And at that point you couldn't blame wall street for not just falling in line and saying, okay, well we'll just stop every transaction you don't like, but yeah. But when, once you got to like 20, 19 and 2020, I think the story changed. Okay. And basically what happened is you had a much better understanding and discussion of the ways in which wall street was funding Malaysian Chinese companies.

Josh Rogin: (19:57)
And by these, I mean the worst actors I'm talking about, the ones that build the camera's on the concentration camp walls, the ones that build the AI that find weekers in a crowd, and those makers disappear forever. And the ones that are building the missiles and the cyber spies that are attacking us all the time. And now the problem was that you had the commerce department and the NSC and the state department sanctioning those companies. Okay. And at the same time you had wall street increasing its investments in those companies through all sorts of vehicles, not just the CEOs, not just the reverse mergers, I'm talking about the index funds. Okay. I'm talking about directing huge amounts of pensions and other passive institutional investments. So what's the point of sanctioning a company like hick vision for a few billion dollars. If the index funds are going to bake that up for them, tenfold, you know, it's ridiculous. It's, it's a, it's a, it was a total contradiction and that still hasn't been resolved. And that's where the, the bleeding edge of the fight is now. And these wall street firms are still resisting this idea that, wait a minute, we're going to have to merge these two things. The natural, real national security concerns without overreacting. And the fact that these firms have are independent and have to look out for their investor interest. And that conversation is really hard, but it's really not going very well, to be honest.

Anthony Scaramucci: (21:12)
Well, you know, it, it brings up this question and you write a lot about it in the book, and this is basically the foreign influence operations of the Chinese government. So describe that. What does that look like?

Josh Rogin: (21:25)
It means that, you know, if we don't have the same standards for Chinese companies that we have for all other companies, especially American companies, if we can't audit their books, if we don't know how much the Chinese communist party is involved in these companies, spoiler alert, they're involved in all the companies, right? Because the subtext here is that what changing thing has done is he's installed Chinese communist party committees and all these corporations and the ones that don't talk to the party line gets squashed. Okay, look what happened to Jack ma okay, look what happened to H and a, the guy that fell off the wall. Right. Look what happened to the head of, on bond who met with Jared and at the Waldorf, his story, he's gone 18 years in prison, right? So there's something going on in China that we've got to just be honest about.

Josh Rogin: (22:04)
And that's the fact that these companies are no, are all under the thumb of the Chinese communist party, but not all to the same extent. Okay. And so that means we have to think about what it means to do business with them. And, you know, right now that conversation is just impossible to have because we can't even audit their books. And there's been so much lax, uh, attention to the, how much they're in our markets and how much of our capital is going into their coffers. And so the panic amongst the national security people was like, okay, well, we just got to turn off the spigot. Okay. And that's kind of like an overreaction in a sense, but until the wall street firms, you know, get it in their head. And now I'm talking to you guys directly that this is not going away. And that the calls for increased transparency, accountability, and to stop Americans from passively investing in Chinese companies that are committing atrocities are not going away there.

Josh Rogin: (22:56)
You're going to have to deal with it sooner or later. And the argument is that this represents a material risk for your investors, whether you admit it or not, because eventually, you know, changing thing, when you squat squashes, Jack ma, that's going to affect our investments. Eventually when the guy falls off the wall, that's going to affect that company. You know, and eventually when people in America realized that his vision is building the cameras that go on top of the concentration camp walls, regular American investors are going to be like, wait a second, that we don't want to be involved in that. So I think the resistance to dealing with these problems on wall street has got to give, and then on the national security side, there's gotta be more understanding of the competing interest evolves.

Anthony Scaramucci: (23:35)
Yeah. I think it's fast. I'm going to turn it over to John and a second, but I want to talk about the south China sea. And I want to talk about some of the bellicosity of rhetoric that I hear from time to time about a potential military strike on Taiwan and the United States, uh, falling back on its obligations to the time when he's, what are your thoughts there?

Josh Rogin: (23:58)
Well, I have a quote in the book where a GOP Senator goes to president Trump in the oval office. And he says to him, it was just told to me by the Senator himself. And he says to him, listen, you know, I know you don't really care about Hong Kong, but if you let Hong Kong go, Taiwan is going to be next and that's going to be on you. It's going to be bad for your reputation. It's like playing to Trump's vanity is many officials often did, as you know, and Trump looks at me in the eye and he says, uh, we're 8,000 miles away from Taiwan. China's two feet away. If they attack there, isn't an effing thing we can do about it. That's what he said. That's what he thought. That's what the president of United States believes that it actually defending Taiwan as is our policy is not really the thing that we would do if push comes to shove.

Josh Rogin: (24:38)
Now, my opinion is that when you sort of backed down on things like Taiwan, like Hong Kong, you know, you emboldened teaching things, appetite, his appetite, rose with the eating and he'll push as far as we let him. And that actually the way to avoid a conflict in Taiwan is to deter choosing thing from even trying, right. And that means being a little bit tougher up front, rather than having to decide later, whether you send American or Japanese or Korean, uh, boys and girls to go fight the Chinese. Cause that's a horrible situation for all involved. So, you know, is the, are we over, you know, uh, hyping the Taiwan for it, perhaps, perhaps, but it doesn't mean that we can ignore it. And it doesn't mean that if we just say we're ignoring it, that they won't take that as a clear signal to advance.

Anthony Scaramucci: (25:27)
So you didn't really a hundred percent answer the question. I'm not a journalist, but I'm going to give you a follow up now, go for it. They, they invade Taiwan. Yes or no.

Josh Rogin: (25:36)
Uh, eventually, but the question is whether it's in two years, five years, 10 years, 20 years. Right. And what we want to do is we want to deter that as long as possible, because we don't know what's going to happen in China choosing things king forever, but he doesn't live forever. And that system is got its own challenges. So it's not a question of if they will want to evade Taiwan, it's a question of when do they think they can get away with it right now? They don't think they can get, if they thought they could get away with it right now, don't do it right now. You know? And we'll see what happens in two years in four years. But I think our, our, we have to make it clear to them that they wouldn't get away with it to make sure they don't try

Anthony Scaramucci: (26:12)
It. I, I understood, you know, my, my thinking has always been that they have such strong integration in the economies that it just eventually falls into their hands one way or the other without a military invasion. But yeah,

Josh Rogin: (26:27)
But that's, that's what we saw in Hong Kong. Right? Exactly. So that's a cautionary tale. That's not a, that's not a model, right? The Taiwanese looked at the Hong Kong model. We

Anthony Scaramucci: (26:36)
Don't want that. No, I'm not saying I want that even for a minute because there's a great amount of freedom and independence in versus, you know, and, and, you know, believe it or not, I'm old enough to remember when the British controlled Hong Kong and visited there. And it was a totally different city than it is today. Um, but here's my last question. Before I turn it over to John, one thing on Hong Kong before, please, please.

Josh Rogin: (27:01)
So another, here's another decision for the wall street community. Are you going to, uh, are, are wall street firms going to continue to treat Hong Kong as a bastion of rule of law and justice and accountability and free markets though? It's not the case anymore. In other words, it is the Chinese government who are going to be able to have Taiwan and eat it too. And I think that's a, right now, the signs are that the big firms are trying to make it okay to do business in Kong Kong in the middle of the crackdown. And then I think there's a lot of people who don't like that at all.

Anthony Scaramucci: (27:32)
You want my opinion, Josh? Sure. Uh, the, you know, they, they will continue to try to do business there because they, uh, and they will, you know, use cognitive dissonance and say, they're doing that because they think they're in the camp that you described of people. The more business, more commerce will lead to more freedom, which will lead to a breakdown of autocracy. So not that that's true or that's an alibi to do the business. That's what they'll say, but, but I have a different question, you know, can Tom Patel, who John and I interviewed about six, seven months ago is a strategist wrote a great bestselling book on strategy that actually Nelson Mandela praised. He said that China is seven balkanized provinces, and there's a lot of independent streaks in those provinces. And it's not clear that the Chinese communist party can keep its hold on what we formerly know as China forever. Moreover, and I'm interested in your take on this. A one party systems have about a 70 year life expectancy, the Russian, uh, CCP, the USSR 70 years, one party system in Japan folded after 70 years recently, one folded in Malaysia about three years ago, Mexico, 70 years, the Chinese are in overtime 72 years in clocking. So is there any truth to what he's saying that there might be false under the surface of what looks like a fairly well knitted, uh, autocracy.

Josh Rogin: (29:11)
Yeah, no, I, I mean, I take a different view. So I mean, there's no doubt that there's severe challenges in China and challenges to the governance, but if you talk to the people in China and I do as much as I can, especially those Americans in Western who were still out to go there, but also regular Chinese citizens. It's clear that the Chinese communist party has a firm grip on power and a firm grip on the economy, in the military and on society. And in fact has expanded its control over those other provinces, right? What are those provinces to bet Jinjiang inner Mongolia, right? These are the places where the repression is the worst. There's a reason that they're sending millions of Han Chinese there and putting all the native people in camps, right? Because that they're, they're avoiding what this guy is proposing. And you know, bottom line is that, you know, we can't base our strategy on waiting for them to collapse because that may never happen. And you know, if you're a, uh, a 40 year old, uh, I'm 42, if you're a 42 year old person in China, you've lived your whole life receiving almost nothing but Chinese, uh, propaganda. And you probably support your government. You probably believe that everything's hunky Dory. And there are some people who know the truth is still support their government. So I, we can't just wish away this problem. We're going to actually have to deal with it.

Anthony Scaramucci: (30:25)
Okay. Well, you, you, uh, I'm turning it over to John Dorsey. Who's dying to ask questions and I might point out he has those designer millennial eye frames now. So he's going to try to look hip today. Go ahead, John.

John Darcie: (30:39)
I had to work on my appearance for the cameras now that we're, we're all movie stars in the zoom era, but, um, I want to talk about the future a little bit. You know, your book has a lot about Trump. You do. And we talked a little bit earlier about the Biden administration, but it seems like the Biden administration has been dealt a stronger position than maybe the Trump administration was dealt in terms of their leverage over China, with things like tariffs current fully in place. How do you think the byte administration is going to proceed on things like tariffs and other, uh, other things that maybe the, the Trump administration did related to China, they might use as leverage in the future. Right.

Josh Rogin: (31:16)
Great question. So right now I identify three camps on China inside the Biden administration. Roughly one is sort of the, uh, engagers, the optimists, right? This is led by people like John Kerry and Susan Rice who were part of that Obama administration last gasp strategy to focus on cooperation. Now, you know, of course, when you hear 20 blankets, we need some cooperation. We need some competition. We need some computation. That's true as far as it goes, but it's also kind of like, it doesn't tell us anything at all, of course, where it's going to be a mix of all of these things, but the people who wanted to focus more on cooperation, uh, those people don't have the ball right now, right? I'm the relationship. The people who are running the policy are Jake Sullivan and Tony Blinken and Kurt Campbell. And, uh, they're in the competition camp.

Josh Rogin: (32:00)
And because they've been given the ball because they're in control of the policy, you've seen a lot of the Trump administration, uh, uh, initiatives continued, right? They haven't traded away of the tariffs. They haven't, you know, they, they actually increased the sanctions there. The commerce department is keeping up all of its Walway restrictions. Uh, by, in large with a couple of the genocide, determination is reaffirmed. So as long as this camp has control, uh, you're going to see a lot of continuity, more multilateral. It's going to be a little bit nicer that could actually make it more effective. You know, there'll be more values stuff in there. The third camp of course, is the political camp, right? And these are actually, this is actually the most powerful camp. These are the people close to the president, uh, who were in charge of protecting the presidency and protecting his political agenda.

Josh Rogin: (32:47)
And right now they're siding with the competitors because they can read the polls, right? And the polls show clearly that Americans want a tougher approach towards China. And that's partially because of the pandemic, but not all because of the pandemic. So as long as the two out of three wins the day. So as long as the politics of the China issue, favor a tougher approach. And as long as the, uh, competitive camp, uh, is in control of the policy, uh, w we should see a bunch of continuity and not total continuity, but the test will come when the other camp mounts, its offense like when, and when the dangle comes and eventually Beijing will come with a dangle and they'll say, okay, do you want a climate field? Do you want it to Randy? If he wants something else? And then president vinyl will have to decide whether or not to take that dangle or not.

John Darcie: (33:30)
Right. I want to talk about president Obama. You talked about how there's that camp within the Biden administration of ex Obama officials that generally take a more conciliatory collaborative, if you will approach to China. Uh, they also drew some red lines in the middle east that weren't enforced gruesome red lines as it relates to the south China sea that weren't enforced. How much do you think over that eight year period when president Obama was president that China, since his unwillingness to confront them in places like the south China sea and were able to sort of consolidate power in a way that we had a general, I'm not going to name his name that we spoke to on the sidelines of one of our salt conferences that basically said when Obama began his presidency, if, if we had decided to invade China militarily, we could have probably succeeded in that invasion and subdued them on, on a certain level. Uh, you know, at the beginning of that presidency today, that is absolutely impossible to do. They've strategically built out all these military installations in such a way that we, we have no military leverage over them. How much do you think, uh, during that presidency, uh, China was able to ascend and, and, uh, and create that power structure that prevents us from really confronting them in a meaningful way.

Josh Rogin: (34:41)
Right? Well, you know, there's no doubt that, you know, the, the first big opportunity that the Chinese leadership saw was during the 2008 financial crisis. And then the next big opportunity was during the coronavirus prices, but in between they executed a number of five-year plans, as you know, uh, to advance their interests on a global scale. Now, you know, Gigi pink came to power in 2013, right? Even in 2013, he didn't have real good control. Uh, it took him a while to consolidate that control. And all during that time, when he was weak, uh, he was telling the Obama people, especially vice-president Biden, by the way, who we had 25 hours of dinner with when they were both vice-presidents, uh, that everything was going to be fine. And they signed a, uh, cyber security deal and they signed it. He promised not to expand militarize the south China sea.

Josh Rogin: (35:28)
And we now know that he was lying about all of that stuff and that he was abusing their, uh, trust and confidence and consolidating power the whole time until the point where he could, you know, throw off dang shopping's mantra of bide your time and hydro Spanglish, and actively promote what he now calls the rejuvenation of the China dream. And, you know, at that time inside the Obama administration, again, you have the same camp, right? You had the same divisions, you had the same people, right. And if you think about it, you know, back then rice and Kerry were the bosses. They were the national security visors secretary of state. Now they're the staffers and their former staffers are their bosses, if you believe that. Right. So the, the camps actually switched offices literally, but in the same building and they're sitting there. And so, you know, I, I, you know, again, just like everything else, like you could make an excuse for why they wanted to let that optimism play out. And there were, there were plenty of people inside the system, even in 2015 and 2016 that were like, Hey, wait a second, we've got a problem here. We gotta do something different. And I think my opinion is clear that the Obama administration was slow to respond to that evidence.

John Darcie: (36:40)
Right? Switching gears a little bit, you write a lot about China's digital despotism about how they've used technology, both domestically to, uh, control and surveil its population, and internationally been very aggressive in terms of stealing intellectual property, uh, and conducting all types of foreign influence operations. Uh, how does China, just for people that are less familiar with those operations, how do they use technology domestically and also internationally in their influence operations? And how is that a template for other dictators around the world in terms of, uh, digital despotism, as you talk about,

Josh Rogin: (37:14)
Right. Well, this speaks to Anthony Anthony's questions perfectly because you know, it, this is how they break out of that cycle of, of these, uh, dictatorships that ended up folding is that they buy their way out of it and they tech their way out of it. And, uh, you know, we've never seen a totalitarian authoritarian dictatorship that had these kinds of resources and those kinds of technology. And, you know, when we blasted radio free Europe and radio Liberty over the iron curtain, you know, into east Germany, uh, we have the technological advantage, you know, they couldn't stop it. And now they have the technological tool advantage in a lot of ways, especially on their own tariffs. And we can't get through the grid firewall, except in certain cases. And their tech companies are actually beating our tech companies. And then our tech companies can't compete because they get robbed blind.

Josh Rogin: (38:01)
And even when they don't get robbed, robbed blind, uh, they become hostages. I mean, just look what happened to H and M and Nike, the latest hostages, right? So what they do is they take this control over their populous, right? They represent a 1.4 billion Chinese people, and they get that those people have no choice. They have to buy whatever they say, do whatever they say, read whatever social media they say they have to, the party controls everything in a way that we've never seen before. So if Nike says, Hey, I don't really want to use slave labor produced cotton. Uh, okay, well then your whole businesses could put in a second and apple says, oh, well, we don't want to give the privacy data of our users make that available to anyone with an app. And then 10 Chinese companies come together to build the technology to get around that.

Josh Rogin: (38:46)
And apple can't do anything because the giant Chinese communist party, uh, holds, uh, an ax of literally over their head and could bring it down on them any time. Uh, so that just, and then how did they use the technology at home? Well, what they do is they are developing. I mean, when you talk about artificial intelligence, they take all of the data that because people in China don't have rights to their own data. Now that we have total control over a debt, but I'm just saying there it's worse. And then they use it to scoop up minorities and put them in internment camps. Okay. They have, they're using the technology to implement a racist mass atrocities, and then they're using it to go find those people in other countries. And if you're a weaker living in France and you get on a Facebook group and Francis pass, the link you clicked on is actually a malicious link that will compromise everything you have and lead to your family, getting scooped up.

Josh Rogin: (39:38)
So that's about as, uh, as, as malicious as it gets. And the social credit aspect is particularly pernicious because, you know, if you're the NBA or if you're Marriott hotels, or if your coach, and you dare to run a foul of like the unpredictable and delicate sensibilities of the Chinese communist party, you stand to lose billions of dollars in the, in the blink of an eye. And again, I would just, again, point to your, uh, wall street risk calculations. Is that factored in, is that factored into the cost and risks of doing business? I don't think so. I don't think that that most wall street firms or most corporations in America are looking at that and saying, oh, wait a second. Did the MBA factor in that one tweak, we cost them $400 million. Well, that's what happened. Okay. So as they get more repressive and use their technology in more insidious ways, that has an effect on our businesses and our impacts on our pocket books and our freedoms.

John Darcie: (40:34)
Right. Last question I want to ask you, and it's, you know, you talk about it in the title of your book. It's the battle for the 21st century between the United States and China? What is it that, that China is fighting for really, you know, do they have a different vision for the world? And they want to impose, uh, you know, th their communist system on the entire world. They, they want the Chinese culture to pervade every corner of the world. What is it they're really fighting for? And what is the battle that they're trying to win you? The United States, at least there's the perception that we're trying to fight for, you know, our, our liberal values, uh, that our country was founded on. But what is China? What is China's end game here when you talk about their 50 to a hundred year plans?

Josh Rogin: (41:15)
Right. Well, I mean, if you listen to what changing things says and read what he's written, uh, what you see is a very clear pattern of him talking about an ideological and political struggle with the west, where the values of like freedom of speech, journalism, you know, freedom of assembly, religion, that all of these things are seen by him personally, uh, not only is things to compete with, but as direct threats to the legitimacy of the Chinese communist party and its rule. Okay. So that's a way of saying that China's goal China will, the Chinese government will always say, well, we don't interfere in free societies. Well, what about the fact that they're exporting all of those technologies, uh, to, to dictators all over the world, that they're trying to recreate their model of repression and aggression, uh, and expanding their economic reach in ways that put these countries at a disadvantage?

Josh Rogin: (42:06)
You know, I think the, the, the best way to think of it, and I think is a very fair way to think of it is that China doesn't want to rule the world. China wants a world where its rule is uncontested. In other words, they want to make the world safe for autocracy. Okay. And that means not that we can't have a world order and international norms that can be enforced. So if they can just change the world, order enough so that their model, uh, is not challenged, and they're able to do what they want all over the world, while still enjoying the benefits that our world order gives them. They still want the access to our markets. They still want access to our capital. They still want all of that soft power influence. They just don't want to play by any of the rules.

Josh Rogin: (42:47)
That's the goal is to destroy the rules so that they can do whatever they want. And that's not a Chinese led world order, per se. That's just a world order that probably we can't live with. And I just to finish the thought, you know, that, I think what that tells us is that, you know, we don't, we shouldn't be in the business of trying to force the world to choose between the United States and China. We can't get into one of these situations where only one of us can survive. We have to somehow find a, uh, a relationship that both sides can live with to avoid the conflict that neither side seeks. And that involves convincing the Chinese leadership, that they can't have their cake and eat it too. And that involves fixing our democracy and fixing our, our systems so that they actually are better. And that they actually do what they say they're going to do and deliver for our people.

John Darcie: (43:34)
And do you think there's a path to that outcome? You know, talking about the acidities trap and avoiding a greater confrontation, is there a path to, it seems like China is enjoying a lot of the economic spoils that come along with, with their system and people while they pay lip service to human rights issues that people still still commercially do business in China. Are they not enjoying those spoils today? And is there a path to equilibrium,

Josh Rogin: (44:00)
Suffice to say, we're not doing well, we're not rising to this challenge. They bet they've got a 20 year head start, at least. Uh, but the first thing to do is to admit that you have a problem. And I think that is the, if you want to say silver lining of the chaos of the Trump years is that everyone sort of immense. We have a problem. Now we have to figure out what we can do about it. And, you know, the, the, the thing that we can do by the way is to actually live up to our principles. And if we actually enforced, you know, transparency, accountability, rule of law, justice, human rights, democracy of speech, true journalism, all of those things are not aimed at China, right? We don't have to make them about trying to those are about us. And if we just did all of those things, we'd be in a much better place than we are today. But no, to answer your question, we're not doing those things. And right now it's not going well.

John Darcie: (44:47)
Well, Josh, you talked in the opening about how you hope to kickstart this conversation. I think you did that in a great way with your book. Um, so thank you for writing it and thank you for coming on salt talks. We think these topics are going to be continually more relevant over the coming decades for, for young people like you and me, Anthony, you know, he's, uh, we're going to put them out to pasture soon. So he doesn't have to worry about these things quite as,

Anthony Scaramucci: (45:09)
Um, I'm younger than president Shea, be careful. Okay. I'll give you, as you both know, president, she is listening. He didn't like the last comment that you made Dorsey. So let me pull up the book. I think it's a brilliant exposition of what is going on. I congratulate you on the book, Josh, before we do let you go, what's next? What are you working on next?

Josh Rogin: (45:31)
They say writing a book is like having a baby. It takes two years for the pain to wear off before you want to do it again. Uh, I'm looking forward to, uh, you know, uh, a period of covering this administration, holding them to account, making sure that they don't, you know, forget everything that happens in the last four years, but also making sure that they don't repeat everything that happened in the last four years. It would be terrible if the partisanship and toxicity that pervaded our politics and our media continued and even got worse, because that is going to bleed into all of the issues that we have to solve. So we are where we are. You can't go back and fix the last four years, but we can at least get together on this thing and admit that, you know, we can't have the type of politics, uh, that we had in the past. And if my columns and my work and contribute to a common understanding of our shared experience and our shared humanity, and that's my goal, that's what I want to do next.

Anthony Scaramucci: (46:23)
Well, congratulations on the book. I'm looking forward to your byline and other stuff that you work on, and I want to get you to the salt conference. Maybe we can get a couple of people together and get them in the mix and discuss what's going on with the U S and China, apple, have you moderate something like that for us,

John Darcie: (46:43)
One, one name that we spoke about in this talk that we won't reveal that's within the Biden administration that focuses on Asia policy. That's actually confirmed to speak in September on these topics. So, you know, maybe, maybe we get you involved in that conversation. And

Anthony Scaramucci: (46:57)
I'm recommending your book to all of my wall street pragmatists that still liked Chinese Hong Kong cooking. Okay, Josh, we're going to try to get them to rethink themselves. It's a smarter play. It's a smarter

Josh Rogin: (47:11)
Play, to be honest about what's going on in China, it will be we'll end up doing better in the long run. Even if you take a short term hit.

Anthony Scaramucci: (47:17)
I think, I think it's well said, and I think that's probably true about most things in life, Josh. Okay. Most, most things take longer than 11 days. Josh Rogan. Don't forget that. Okay. You want

Josh Rogin: (47:28)
To be right at the, it's not in the beginning, right? Amen. All right. Well, thank

John Darcie: (47:31)
You. Your estimate. Don't talking about chaos. Don't underestimate the amount of chaos you can create in 11 days. Yeah. 11 days I rub it in guys. She's loosening rubbing it. All right. Well, thank you Josh again for joining us and thank you everybody for tuning in to today's salt talk, uh, about Josh's book chaos under heaven about the Trump administration's approach to China and the battle for the 21st century. Just to remind you, if you missed any part of this talk or any of our previous talks, you can access our entire archive on our website@sault.org backslash talks and on our YouTube channel, which is called salt tube. We're on social media. Please follow us. Twitter is where we're most active at salt conference, but we're also on LinkedIn, Instagram, and Facebook. And please spread the word about these salt talks. We love educating people on these issues, uh, and today being another important one, but on behalf of Anthony and the entire salt team, this is John Darcie signing off from salt talks for today. We hope to see you back here soon.

Queering Banking for the Better | SALT Talks #194

“It costs more to be LGBT. When we try to get help, we don’t find it. These things add up so when we look at the long-term financial outcomes of the LGBT community, we find they’re not as strong as in the wider community.”

Rob Curtis and Billie Simmons are co-founders of Daylight, an LGBT+ digital banking platform. Daylight focuses on the LGBT+ community and how to help its customers build a financial plan specific to their needs.

The LGBT+ community faces constant barriers in the financial and banking world. Simply put, the system is not designed for them. There are countless life events and considerations absent in the traditional financial services world. This includes the costs LGBT+ members face in order to have a child. “An LGBT couple will have to pay $55K on average to have a child, a cost most non-LGBT couples will not face… This financial system has not been designed for us. The systemic barriers are huge.”

Daylight is also set up to address the very real financial needs of the transgender community. Gender affirmation procedures require a very specific financial plan not currently offered by traditional institutions. Even credit scores and changing one’s name create a whole host of issues. “Credit scores are broken for trans people. We’re going into the bureaus and saying, ‘Fix it, please.’ And we’ll show you how to do it.”

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKERS

Rob Curtis.png

Rob Curtis

Chief Executive Officer & Co-Founder

Daylight

Billie Simmons.jpeg

Billie Simmons

Co-Founder & Chief of Staff

Daylight

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

Joe Eletto: (00:08)
Hello everyone. And welcome back to salt tux. My name is Joe Eletto and I am the production manager for salt, which is a global thought leadership and networking forum, encompassing finance technology, and geopolitics. It's all talks as a series of digital interviews with the world's foremost investors, creators and thinkers. And just as we do at our global assault events, we aim to both empower big, important ideas and provide our audience a window into the minds of subject matter experts. And we are very excited today to be welcoming. Rob Curtis and Billie Simmons to salt talks. Rob Curtis is the chief executive officer and co-founder of daylight. And Rob has a background in financial services where he delivered technology projects across insurance and banking clients. In the latter part of his career, Rob has been leading LGBT plus consumer businesses. He was previously managing director of gaydar, a dating and social networking platform with over 2 million members worldwide, where he led on brand and customer acquisition and his last startup Hausa connects LGBT plus clients to expert mental health professionals.

Joe Eletto: (01:14)
Billy Simmons is co-founder of daylight and leads operations, and the company's many initiatives targeted at financial inclusion for the trans community. Billy previously founded a startup to help trans and non-binary people access safe services. Her background is in marketing and software engineering at FinTech focus companies such as tech stars and Anthemis group hosting today. Saul talk is Kochi hacia is founder and chief executive officer of lasagna technology. Kogi was previously chief of staff at the block led BCG global FinTech research practice from London and got our earliest experience in capital markets. Kogi is passionate about upgrading financial services across the board, technologically and morally. And now I'll turn it over to Kobe for the day.

Cokie Hasiotis: (02:01)
Thanks so much, Joe. And thank you to small talks for having us as a such a wonderful opportunity to really showcase an important issue. Um, just a little bit of context about why I was asked to do this. Um, I have a strongly held theory that Billy and Rob have really executed on and that there is that banking communities are now moving from communities of geography, to communities of affinity. And that's based upon a number of topics that we'll get into today. Um, but that's why I'm here. So thank you for having me and great to see you Robin Billy.

Rob Curtis: (02:32)
Thanks, cranky. Great to be here.

Cokie Hasiotis: (02:35)
I thought I'd just give everyone a little bit of a, a moment to talk about what daylight is and why it's important. So Rob, I'll turn it over to you.

Rob Curtis: (02:46)
Hi, thanks Cokie. So I'm the CEO and co-founder of daylight, which is the first and only digital banking platform designed specifically for the U S has 30 million LGBT consumers. Now we're going to get into why LGBT folks, uh, need a bank and why they're underserved, but we, uh, really, really privileged to be able to be working within our community, making an impact, not only in terms of financial inclusion, but also in terms of things like healthcare inclusion and other things like that, which we'll get onto. So really, really pleased to be here.

Cokie Hasiotis: (03:16)
Yeah. Wonderful. Um, so I'd love to dive right in. If you don't mind, um, you guys know I'm a little extra, so let's just jump. Um, why does the community meet a bank?

Rob Curtis: (03:29)
Yeah, let me take this and then I'll end up. It's a bit like, so we've all been socialized to believe a certain vision of the LGBT community. Um, and the way we described that internally is what we, what we colloquially referred to as two incomes, no kids, this kind of idea that many LGBT folks are doing really well, that because we don't necessarily be spending our money on school uniforms that therefore we've got a load of extra disposable cash. And I want to start by saying that, um, while this is true for a certain segment of our population, a lot of this came out of magazines and advertisements and companies that were targeting big corporations to try and explain that they should go after LGBT people as a valuable segment. And actually what the buried behind that is a really different story. Um, you can look at two incomes, no kids as reflecting, uh, two probably white gay men living in on a coast somewhere, um, doing particularly well, uh, in corporate jobs.

Rob Curtis: (04:30)
But I think if you look at the other end of the spectrum, 20% of people of color are unbanked or underbanked completely. And when you think about the diversity of financial outcomes that our community can have this kind of thought, this kind of sensitivity and empathy to the lived experiences of LGBT people is something that is just missing an industry. So we have 30 million LGBT folks that are going into the financial services industry to get help when they need to plan their lives. Uh, and they're just not being able to get the help that they need. And we boil this down into really three things. Firstly, it costs more to be LGBT second when we try and get help, we don't find it. And number three is, is that these things add up. And so when we look at the long-term outcomes of the LGBT community, we actually find that they're not as strong as, as, as the wider community. And this is really the reason Detra for daylight is just pay special consideration to our community to make sure that they've got the helping hand and the right start to get their financial matters, um, taken care of and that this the first-generation of LGBT consumers that can live openly and can really achieve whatever they like from a societal and illegal perspective, but they're gonna need financial support and wealth management to help them get there.

Cokie Hasiotis: (05:44)
Absolutely. Um, thank you for that clarity and Billy, maybe I can turn it over to you to ask a little bit about the particular needs of the community. Yeah,

Billie Simmons: (05:54)
Sure. Um, you know, I think when I think about the LGBT community, you know, Rob mentioned that, uh, two incomes, no kids. And then we, you know, think about, um, the unbanked or underbanked, but there's all of the community in the middle as well. Um, and these are people who, you know, maybe have the potential to, you know, climb the ladder and to create, uh, you know, financial stability and wealth for themselves, but don't necessarily know how to get that. And also, uh, face, you know, larger huddles than non LGBT people. Um, you know, a great example of this is, uh, an LGBT couple, uh, will have to pay $55,000 on average just to have a child. Um, that is obviously a huge cost that most non LGBT people don't have to face. Um, you know, the, the other part of it for me is banking with empathy. This is something that's so core and, uh, important to every, every single thing that we do, but, you know, the system has not been designed for us. And when we think about, you know, some of the actual systemic barriers to accessing finance, um, they're huge. And, uh, something that incumbents can't really, uh, grapple with or even solve for. And so, you know, as they, as they, like, we have a huge opportunity here to rethink banking from the ground up and really design a system that works for us.

Cokie Hasiotis: (07:21)
I want to zoom in a little bit on that kind of specialized market, like childbearing in the community, obviously significantly more expensive. Can you give me some other examples of where, uh, the LGBT community is disenfranchised and not empowered to be able to function in the financial world

Rob Curtis: (07:40)
Turkey? Let me make this really personal for a moment and talk you through the lives of LGBT folks in the first few decades of their lives, because I think this will really set the context for you. So by virtue of luck, LGBT folk are born into straight families. Um, that means that from the moment that they figure out that they're LGBT, um, they're already going to be missing something that we often take for granted, which is the ability to learn from our parents about the things that matter. Um, and so what we therefore know about a 14 year old woman, but she doesn't know. And in fact, most mainstream banks have not demonstrated that they understand this either is that that 14 year old woman should be saving for college. Now you might ask why a teenager should be saving for college. Well, here's, the answer is pretty straightforward.

Rob Curtis: (08:27)
And I think you'll understand this, um, an LGBT person that comes out to their parents has a 40% chance of losing financial support. So that 14 year old needs to be preparing for what is almost a toss of a coin about whether she's starting to have support for early adulthood for her college education. And indeed we see some instances of, of young people being removed from their parents' healthcare. And so that 14 year old we zoom forward until the time they leave college. Um, we find some really, really concerning things. And, uh, indeed LGBT folks have on average 50% more college debt than the general population. So this transition from school to work is always particularly fraught and, um, LGBT people are coming out of that transition, settled with debt. Um, and that's when they start making their first tentative steps entitled life. And they find that their healthcare costs are particularly high.

Rob Curtis: (09:24)
Maybe they're not able to get access to advisory support on just the day-to-day realities of, of how your biology or your gender identity affects your finances. And so by the time we get to our, um, late twenties, only 50% of LGBT people are able to develop a savings habit. Now that's 40% worse than the general population. So we come out of school with more debt. Um, we struggle at the beginning to get the right education and support. We need to develop healthy habits. And then by the time we get to thirties, we're faced with these really difficult choices. And the choices are often very simple. It's, it's, it's this? Do you want to have a home? Or do you want to have a family? You can have one, but not necessarily the other and not everybody's going to be able to afford both. And the reason for that is really simple.

Rob Curtis: (10:12)
The money that we all save for a down payment on a home is the money that LGBT folks need to begin creating children. And 62% of millennials, um, in our community want to expand their family. Um, so right out of the gates, we have higher one-off costs. Um, we face structural problems in terms of things that other people can take for granted, like how easy it is to start families for many people. Um, and a lack of underlying support from our family unit means that these things feel particularly bad. So by the time we get to retirement, you know, home ownership rates are really low. And our ability to prepare for retirement is also pretty low. So some of these one-off costs are things like healthcare, actually, you know, what the cost of sexual health prevention for gay men includes buying HIV prevention medication. Um, either because you're, you're a HIV person, um, that needs, um, that needs antiviral support or you're on prep, which is, which is a prophylaxis for HIV. And these things cost real money. They are often areas of our lives that we take for granted. And I think, um, when you look across the life of an LGBT person from their teenage years until retirement, you find all of these examples of where going into, by mainstream products or expecting mainstream services to really understand how those uniquenesses of our community. We just find that those things are really, really different. And that's where we that's, that's a huge part of that focus.

Billie Simmons: (11:34)
The other thing that really drives it home for me is these are just costs that LGBT people face. So in order to live the lives that they want to live and to be on the same equal footing as non LGBT people, you know, when you think about trans people facing up to a hundred thousand dollars, uh, in gender farming, surgeries, and procedures, that is an incredible financial hurdle to face just to be who you are and just to live your daily life. And, you know, we're not even talking about, you know, moving, moving the goalposts beyond, you know, what, where are we where we currently are all beyond equality. Um, this is just, you know, basic human dignity. This is just, you know, being on equal footing with everyone else.

Cokie Hasiotis: (12:18)
Yeah. And allowing people to live their authentic lives is like pretty much the bare minimum. Right. Right. And once again, we're talking about how the American healthcare system is once again the enemy. Um, but that aside, let's talk a little bit about the products and services and solutions that daylight's put together to help combat some of these like extraordinary, extraordinary costs

Rob Curtis: (12:43)
Sure thing. So I'm going to start by setting some context, and then I'm going to hand over to ability who can walk you through some of our features. So, um, the LGBT community, like we said, it has an incredible range of needs, very, a huge amount of diversity within it. And, um, we're going to take out for now, um, both the, the very top end of our community, people that, you know, there's two incomes, no kids probably earning three, four average home income of $500,000 or more. And we're also gonna take out people for now, um, that are living on the breadline and in our community, that can be 40 or $50,000 average household income. It's a little bit higher than normal because we live in cities, um, more often than not. So they're a little bit more expensive. So we are focused on supporting people in the middle of the market, um, who need to have the resources to access the support that is available to people with a private wealth manager, or maybe who don't experience the pain points of needing to save for things like surrogacies, family and transitions. Um, and, uh, and a huge part of what we do is we try and make the tools that are available to the people that have the most income in our community and make them available to the middle of that community. And Billy, would you like to talk through some of the cool features that we have available today?

Billie Simmons: (13:52)
Um, so I think, you know, the feature that as a trans woman, I get most excited about. Um, and indeed, I think most of us are very excited about is, you know, the ability for trans and non binary people, or indeed anyone within the LGBT community who wants it to have whatever name they want on their card, regardless of if it matches their legal identity or not. And, you know, going one step further, the ability to have that name reflected and represented across all of our systems on the app within customer service, within the social features. So, you know, really think again, when I was talking earlier about rethinking the banking experience from the ground up, something that we were so struck by, you know, when Rob and I first started talking about this problem was how much I had to go through how much money and how much time I had to spend to just update my name or my debit card had to go to court.

Billie Simmons: (14:45)
I had to get doctor's letters. I had to get documents notarized. And then I had to take all documents in person to a branch to eventually get a debit card, but I still have to log in every time with my dead name. And there's no way to change that. And indeed I get emails every month from my bank that dad named me because in that CRM systems, there's also no way to update it. And so I think this really highlights a key flow with incumbents, which is that they struggle to innovate and they struggle to, uh, change fast, uh, because their systems are so clunky and outdated. And, you know, we are able to move a lot faster and build, um, in a lot more of a lean way. And so we're able to just completely rethink this and scrap everything. Um, you know, that it has existed before and start from scratch.

Billie Simmons: (15:35)
Um, you know, beyond that, Rob was talking a little bit about, you know, accessing advisory services and that kind of thing, you know, not only is that a service that is typically only reserved for people who make in the mid six figures, this is also something that is often an alienating experience for the LGBT community. You know, uh, the, the most common piece of feedback we had when we were testing out advisory services was, you know, I'm a gay man and I constantly get asked, what does my wife do? And you'd want to share all of your, you know, dirty financial secrets with someone who, you know, can't even understand that you are dating a man or married to a man. And so, you know, we have LGBT financial coaches on the platform that you can book time with because they understand who you are.

Billie Simmons: (16:23)
They understand your goals, and they're going to help you get to them. And there is immediate shared language and understanding that just inherently comes with being part of the same community. Um, and, you know, beyond that community and social features are a huge part of what has inspired us, what drives us and what is available in the app. So, you know, social and community features, um, being able to ask for advice, um, you know, crowdsourcing information, um, the ability to share your savings goal with the community. And eventually we'll be able to actually receive donations to those goals as well. You know, go fund me as the number one, funder of transition surgeries in the us, uh, the, you know, go from me, it takes a huge chunk of money out of those fundraisers. Um, and you know, they're also, it's not integrated into a banking system or anything it's was kind of, again, a clunky process that hasn't been built for us. So, you know, what does, what does it mean to have the ability to crowdfund for a gender affirming surgery in your banking product? You know, when you have access to your whole community, right. That on your phone? Um, you know, I get very excited when I talk about the possibilities of, you know, creating LGBT wealth and helping people live these lives, because there's just so much that we can do. And sometimes it's like a kid in a candy shop or something, so I'll leave it there for now.

Cokie Hasiotis: (17:49)
I have a potentially silly question if you don't mind answering it. So when you went through the process of changing your name for everything, why is that different than a woman changing her name after she gets married?

Billie Simmons: (18:02)
It's not, um, and it shouldn't be patriarchy

Cokie Hasiotis: (18:06)
Anatomy of today. Yeah.

Billie Simmons: (18:07)
And it's because the, you know, all of these systems were designed specifically, you know, and then, uh, for credit scores from the 1950s for debit cards in the 1970s, um, and the only name changed the most people had conceived of was when a woman updates her last name because of marriage. And so updating your first name is a hugely complex process that, you know, I won't even get into what it does to your credit score, but rest assured it does a lot of damage to your credit score. Um, and you know, does things like flag false positives for KYC? Um, you can end up with mismatched documents, you know, this again, the system is not built for us. I felt like I'm just going to keep saying that this entire time, but, you know, um, there we are,

Cokie Hasiotis: (18:49)
But I think that's the message, right? The system is not built for the community. The system is not built for a lot of communities that are traditionally marginalized in this country. So, you know, if you're listening to this, that's the whole thing.

Rob Curtis: (19:04)
And, you know, Koki, that's the, that's the really, really interesting part is that people are obsessed with comparing us to other banks. Are you going to be chased? But for, for, for gay people, are you going to be chime, but for people? And I think the thing that they misunderstand is, um, that we aren't obsessed about our competitors because we have this once in probably a generation opportunity to really, um, build a financial services company from the ground up the technology, the capital requirements, they're all here to allow banks have affinity to start because otherwise it would have been prohibitive, um, on incumbent banks operate on scale to be able to focus just on a very small community. And this is not a small community. If the LGBT community was a state, we would be the second largest behind California. And we may face financial inclusion, but we're an incredibly wealthy segment.

Rob Curtis: (19:54)
We spend more than the GDP of Mexico every year. And so people think that we are coming along saying, Hey, poor us. We need help, but actually there's real money on the table. I mean, if you take the 62% of millennials, the ones who expand their family, and now let's put 70% of them into couples just for a second. So it experiments 70% in couples, actually only 30% of our communities and couples right now. But let's say most of us are in couples. We have a funding shortfall of $20 billion in order to be able to afford one child each at an average cost of $55,000. So we are talking a $20 billion industry that can help family planning for, for just millennial LGBT folks. Um, and these things has made that have been thought about they've not been designed for. And so, um, when we think not only about how we can provide a great retail service, but we begin to think about how the system itself has a compounding effect on things outside of money.

Rob Curtis: (20:53)
Things like what Billy just very briefly mentioned, credit histories. These things are really, really important. And they start often with the financial services themselves. Because if you know, to elaborate on Billy's point before as a trans person, you go through the process of updating your gender markers and your identity documents, your credit history can split into two parts and even in a world where we can merge those together for a complete credit history, um, employers, landlords, other people want to see these information, right? And so if you look at a world where 20% of trans folk have had problems accessing housing because of their, of their agenda, um, and many landlords are asking for a credit score, which automatically adds them as a trans person. We're creating barriers that start from the bank that exists well beyond debit cards, payments, and so on. And I think we are taking this as a real opportunity to look at the foundations that were responsible for building upon those and making sure that we're not just dealing with retail money, but we're also looking at the secondary and tertiary impacts of, um, of how that can affect the lives about community.

Cokie Hasiotis: (22:02)
Well, that's very, that's really helpful Robin. And thank you. Um, I guess I'm, I'm kind of wondering, I hear about these, there's a myriad of problems, right? And there's only so much that y'all can do right now at your small stage. Tell me what's on the roadmap. What's next. And why do you want to achieve this year? Next year, five years? Let's talk about it.

Rob Curtis: (22:20)
Yeah. Thanks Cokie. So in the real immediate horizon for us is continued investment in social and community features. And Billy briefly touched upon this before, but here's how we look at it. We aren't building a product for 30 million individual LGBT folks. We're building a product for a community of 30 million LGBT folks because actually one of the first things that LGBTQ people do is they reach online into their community when they first discovered that there might be a little bit different from their brothers and sisters. So we live very digitally native lives. And, um, we are starting with some of these really clear and immediate pain points that are fundamental for people's financial outcomes. You know, getting a name on a card is really important for both safety and also self-actualization. Um, but that group of people, 50% of LGBT folks that can't develop, um, regular and sustainable savings habits, that's a really important pain point for us to be resolving.

Rob Curtis: (23:12)
Um, and w there are lots of root causes from this, from a lack of financial education to not necessarily the supportive families and so on, but at its core, the ability to put aside a little bit of money every week is, uh, is as important for financial inclusion and, and financial resilience as anything else. So we've been integrating community features to be able to use behavioral science techniques, um, to be able to help people on their journey to develop savings, because it's much easier when you've got an apple watch to close your rings than it is to just do more exercise. Right? So, um, what the first step of that was allowing people to share what they were saving for in a public forum. Um, and we've seen some really, really fascinating results from that. So it's only been around for about two weeks. Um, and the first week somebody created an emergency fund.

Rob Curtis: (23:59)
Now this is something that is not very sexy. This is something that's very boring. Um, and often people feel very shameful about, so what have we done? We've looked at our community in depth. We know that mental health and social isolation and things are a lot of what many people experience. And so we're using the power of social norming in order to be able to drive positive behaviors because that one person creating a, an emergency fund, um, it was actually called when hits the fan, um, with a nice emoji sat in the middle. What that led to was by the end of the week, a third of the savings funds that had been creating on our platform all around emergency funds. So right there, and then using community is not just a way of building social networking techniques for the sake of it. We've been able to show other people in our community what the new normal looks like, financial resilience as part of that.

Rob Curtis: (24:47)
And we've been able to move the dial in terms of their behaviors. And I challenge any startup at this stage to be able to get a third of their clients, to create a, uh, a savings fund just for a rainy day using content. That stuff is really, really, really challenging. And so we're investing a lot in social. The next frontier is allowing people to, to support each other's goals, because there's a real history of mutual aid in our community. People are constantly supporting people that are, that are, um, doing less well to them, less privileged. And so we're going to be continuing to making social and community and integrated part of our experience. Looking further ahead, we've got loads and loads of opportunities to do around rolling out checking accounts, additional savings opportunities. Um, but right now our, our goal is working with our most, uh, our most passionate customers, um, getting them on boarding, helping them to build some basic financial resilience. And as we move into August, then we've got huge amounts of opportunities around that national launch.

Cokie Hasiotis: (25:46)
Yeah, for sure. Um, you guys are both the experts and you've obviously done your homework, right? Like you spent numbers that they left and right. All the time. That's why I love you. Um, let's talk about a little bit about some of the data you're seeing. We're talking about a huge spending group. Um, and you know, you're holding the cards. Have you noticed anything that you didn't know before you noticed any trends that are emerging, that are appearing out of some of this data you're seeing

Rob Curtis: (26:13)
Population level? We know that LGBT spending patterns are really, really, really different. Um, and so, um, we're pretty early on looking at how our own spending patterns match to what we have seen from existing data sets, but here's the, here's the really important thing Koki is that the reason our incumbent, uh, competitors struggle to serve our community is because nobody even knows who their LGBT consumers are. So the states has a real data problem in this instance, um, there is no centralized data on consumer spending patterns, savings times for our community. Um, so how can you help the community if you don't know who they are, and you've not spent the time to understand how their behaviors change. Um, uh, Billy is doing some great work in order to plug the gaps with some of our partners. Um, and I let her tell you about that, but fundamentally one of the opportunity spaces that we have is this, that we're going to be building the richest data source of transactional, um, uh, data and savings data of the LGBTQ community that's ever existed before. Um, but in the meantime, we've got to plug the gap. And so, um, um, I'll let Billy explain some of the great work we're doing with some wonderful players in

Cokie Hasiotis: (27:19)
This space. Yeah. I'd really like to hear about partnership and some of the big wins that I know you guys have had from, you know, conversations with you, both and press releases that you've had through some really successful partnerships.

Billie Simmons: (27:33)
You know, I, I was going to chime in and talk about this when we were talking about, you know, what's on the roadmap, but I think the other kind of core segment to what we're passionate about and what we see as our mission is our advocacy and research. You know, we would be doing our community at a service if we didn't try and move the needle across the entire industry, um, can't necessarily talk too specifically about what is, what is coming down the pipeline, but, you know, advocacy for our community is a huge part of it. Um, we are able to leverage our position as, you know, the only digital banking platform for LGBT people. Um, and you know, something that I have noticed in the last year or two of, kind of a renewed desire from large corporations to actually start doing some work, uh, you know, for, for, for underserved communities.

Billie Simmons: (28:26)
Um, you know, we're able to leverage that position and start to ask, ask the things, um, from some, from some big companies, you know, credit scores are broken for trans people. So we're going in to the, to the bureaus and we're saying, fix it, please, uh, we'll ask nicely, but, you know, we expect change to be done and we'll show you how to do, how to do it. Uh, but you know, I really think that, you know, there's a, there's a, there's a lot of opportunity for us to leverage our position, to actually start making some systemic change here. Um, you know, the other part of it that Rob alluded to is, you know, is our research. There's where we're spending, spending a lot of numbers and there is some very specific research out there, but we've really had to MacGyver and conduct a lot of our own research and pull together different resources just to get a sense of what the situation is for LGBT people.

Billie Simmons: (29:16)
So, you know, uh, with our partners at visa, we are starting to undertake, uh, what I believe is the largest and, you know, first of its kind, um, study in LGBT money and spending habits to really get a sense of not only what the state of LGBT money is, but also, you know, the calls [inaudible] for that. You know, why, why are we in this situation? Um, is that correlation between, you know, family support and your financial habits later, is that correlation between when you came out and your financial habits, um, there's a lot of hunches that we have from just existing in the community and talking to people. Um, but Rob and I, and indeed actually pretty much everyone on our team, uh, big data nerd. So we want to be able to back this stuff up. Um, and you know, I, I see that data really allowing for other organizations too, to help the community too, because you know, this isn't a zero sum game and we're passionate about, you know, making sure that the, that the state of, uh, finances for LGBT people across the world, uh, improves. Um, we can't do that necessarily alone. Uh, you know, I mentioned visa that they've been such wonderful partners for us. Um, we're on their FinTech fast track program and, you know, they've given us a ton of support, um, and really just let us ask them for things, um, and you know, and helped us, helped us get to this point. So they've been really wonderful partners

Cokie Hasiotis: (30:43)
That is wonderful. And it's great to see you guys really push people you work with to do better, to, to improve and to wake up ultimately, um, one of the things that you mentioned that I kind of want to dive into a little bit is your team. Um, I know you guys have an excellent team. I want to talk about how you have an excellent team, and then I want to kind of get into a broader topic. What's it like to be in banking and FinTech? What's it like? So let's start with your team. Um, tell me about them. How'd you find them,

Rob Curtis: (31:14)
Billy and I were very lucky to meet stage in a Google panel. Um, about two years ago, we were both pitching our previous businesses, which were both kind of in the mental health space, um, uh, for LGBT people. So, um, we were very lucky to meet there. Um, when we began the kind of customer validation phase of the startup, we invite a billion to talk about her lived experience and, um, um, w we're all very geeky in our team. So I had had her interview on my, on my, uh, it was, I was wandering around listening to it like a podcast, and I was like, here's a superstar. So, um, I knew that from the first time we met her and then, um, uh, that's, that's how we met Billy. Our other co-founder Paul, um, was introduced to us by one of the co-founders of pestle, um, uh, David, Eric.

Rob Curtis: (31:59)
And, uh, so he's, he's, he's great to have on the team. Everyone in our team is, uh, a direct person, um, or has a family member that is. So why that's important is because every one of us brings to the table, passion and purpose, um, deep lived experience. And while Billy and I are, wants to have a data story to support what we're doing, because we need to be able to advocate to the rest of the world. Everybody on our team has experienced these things first time. What does your wife do? Um, never seeing yourself represented in an ad. Um, and so, um, we have been really lucky to have, uh, never paid a recruitment, um, to hire top talent from fintechs, um, from across the country because, uh, people opt in because more often than not, we, there, there are people in what we often kind of colloquially call the mafia in every possible business out there.

Rob Curtis: (32:56)
There are folks in there, and many of them are just waiting to be activated to do something great for their community. And as well, are those mind feel like addressing systemic things is a way of undermining your competitive advantage? Actually, it's one of our strengths because when we follow through and we're purposeful that shines a light to others to say, we are the kind of company that you might want to work for, you might want to partner with. And so we've hired a third of our team through slack communities of LGBT folks working in tech. Um, almost everybody has come to us. Um, and, and I think that's been an absolute privilege. We've got top talent from, uh, from Braintree and PayPal. We've got folks from breadth of finance we've, um, even pulled our customer ops, um, a team member from another FinTech focus on student loans.

Rob Curtis: (33:41)
So every member of our team brings deep FinTech experience lived experience, which helps us have the instincts to great build great products and to provide an excellent service. And the certainly Billy and I have been building consumer businesses for LGBT folks. And I think, you know, I pride myself on being the only CEO of a bank that was also the CEO of a dating company. Um, but that matters because I think what we've been doing when we, when we hire somebody, when we onboard them, is we make sure that they align with us on purpose and that they're willing to bring part of themselves to the table.

Cokie Hasiotis: (34:11)
Yeah, that's really awesome. And, um, are y'all hiring? Yes. If you're listening and you're an ally you might want to get in touch because these are probably two of the only founders I would give up my gigs for. So, uh, I'd keep that in mind, given that I don't like very many people that said I do, I do want to talk about, um, being in banking. I mean, I can have, imagine, because when I was in banking, I was 24 brown female American outspoken in London. So I was really already asking for it and adding another layer to that would have been, I think, very, very difficult if not insurmountable. Um, so can we talk a little bit about your experiences in finance and FinTech and in banking kind of trying to live your authentic life while also trying to be a productive member of society?

Billie Simmons: (35:08)
Yeah, it's not good. Um, spoiler alert. Um, it has been, but it hasn't, hasn't been great. Um, you know, I, I transitioned while at my first job. Um, and so, you know, before that was a visibly person, um, for me, uh, you know, it, hasn't always necessarily been a question of if I am visible or not. Um, but you know, it's, it's tough world out there, especially, you know, I think, um, not to discount the experiences of, of, you know, uh, gay people and lesbians, but like peop like five years ago, even people didn't even really know what trans people were. And I would argue that even now a lot of people don't really understand. Um, but you know, I think that, you know, it's, it's made us definitely resilient. Um, one thing I, one thing that I was gonna, but I think it's worth mentioning, um, with our team is, you know, all of us on the team have kind of got to this point by assimilation, by and lodge.

Billie Simmons: (36:11)
You know, most of us have advanced our careers by making myself more palatable to, um, the cisgender and heterosexual people that, you know, decide how much money we earn. And if we get to keep our jobs and daylight is our first opportunity, uh, for most of us to actually rethink that, um, and get an opportunity to fully be ourselves and to bring all of ourselves to work. And we've actually really had to be really intentional about that too. Um, you know, I, I still remember a couple of months ago with, uh, on a call with Rob and one of our investors who, you know, was like, you guys are just so pleased all the time. Like when do you ever just like, let go and just like it up. And it was actually one of the, one of the best things and investors ever said to us, because we suddenly realized like, oh yeah, like when we're not bringing any of our queerness to the table, or we're not bringing enough of our queerness to the table. Um, and it really gave us an opportunity to think, okay, like this is a super power, how can we use it? And how can we make our internal culture, you know, the kind of internal culture that we would have wanted when we were working in various corporate environments and it's been, you know, been wonderful, um, watching, or, you know, everyone on the team get to actually just authentically be themselves. Um, you know, I it's, it's such a privilege and it's so exciting to be able to do that.

Cokie Hasiotis: (37:36)
Absolutely. And I would say that it isn't a privilege. It is a right. Um, and I'm glad you guys have created that space for yourself. Um, and if we think, and of course I don't mean to diminish any of our experiences that are awful in the workplace, but if we think that's bad, imagine being on the other side of that, a huge part of the community, especially the young community is their participation in things like only fans and broader sex work as their main form of income and their bank won't let them be there. So we think about it from that angle. I mean, how are you guys going to approach problems like that, that aren't actually problems, but are perceived problems?

Rob Curtis: (38:15)
Yeah, it's interesting. I mean, to be, to allow customers to have a card in their own name, we had to go and work with, and I have to say a range of really wonderful partners who were incredibly receptive, um, to what we're setting out to achieve. But we had to really challenge, um, many preconceptions about our community. So if I, you know, and in this instance, um, doesn't mean that there'll be loads of trans folk committing identity theft and crime now, um, there's a lot going on in our community right now. Um, and one of the tools that, um, that people that don't want to support LGBT people use is they lean into extremes and they make up these kind of false, um, narratives about how LGBT people are, uh, are bad for lots of different reasons. Plastic one, um, uh, all of the men who are dressing up as women to go into toilets to take advantage of the situation or the moment huge amounts of anti-trans sporting legislation is coming through because of this perception that unsuccessful male athletes will decide to transition, to win an Olympic medal.

Rob Curtis: (39:25)
Like these things don't exist, they're not real problems. And I think we found exactly the same thing going on, um, with our own community. And I think our, one of our good values is tenacity. And I think we have to have huge amounts of patients to educate the people around us, but it is an important part of what we do. And by engaging with our partners and saying that these, this isn't a real situation, this isn't a real meaningful risk. We've been able to move the dial. Um, and that's, that is at a really top level. But one of the things that our community is known for is being shamed, particularly around sex. You know, um, we cannot exist without understanding that the eighties and nineties was an incredibly challenging time through the aids crisis and our sexual selves got demonized, um, in really, really powerful ways and where that's left us, um, is, um, not only feeling excluded about parts of ourselves, but there are many of us that turn to non-traditional trades that aren't going to necessarily be listening to assault talk, or participating in a corporate panel session, talking about how they feel they workers, like you say, Instagram influencers, only fans, go-go boys, um, arts performers, drag Queens.

Rob Curtis: (40:33)
These are not edge cases. These are important parts of our community, and they represent huge and influential parts of our culture. And I promise you then never going to go into a bank and ask for advice and what all of those people have in common is they're all freelancers. And so what our goal of providing an inclusive space for our community means that we want to include them irrespective of what they're doing as long as it's lawful they're welcome. And so our tax events, as we come to the new tax deadline, won't be focused on here's three ways for a freelancer to manage their tax. It'll be stories told by influences by go-go boys, by drag Queens, by these people that are historically, historically historically excluded from the financial system, because they don't support often the values of the teller, or they they're just not in there in non-traditional, um, in non-traditional occupations.

Rob Curtis: (41:25)
And I think we are very much opening our arms to our community, irrespective of what they do, because we think respectability politics, politics, doesn't anybody more often than not. It's used as a weapon against our community and work is work we've seen in the last two weeks. Just how, um, people that weren't necessarily engaged in sex work have been had their fingers pointed in victim blamed, um, over what amounted to, you know, targeted murders that had a racial element to it. Um, and I think we are very much learning and listening to our community, trying to find ways to include them irrespective of what their profession is, because at the end of the day, if you're faced with 50% less parental support, 40% less parental support, 50% more college debt, no one in a bank that can help you. Um, not only is that an opportunity for us, but it's not, it's not a surprise that people are turning to non-traditional occupations in order to get by because, um, too many of us have been stuck at the bottom layer of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, safety, shelter, food.

Rob Curtis: (42:22)
Our goal is not only to serve those people, but to elevate our entire community to the top so that we can self-actualize. And I think that means being seen. And here's what happens when you tell an entire generation of gen ed kids, that they can be whatever they want. They're going to slam into a financial services industry that doesn't have that same view. And we're, we're incredibly lucky that only 8% of the LGBT community is self identify as a Republican, which means that we can progressively push more and more into, into ideas that will, will not be palatable for our, um, for our competitors, because they will struggle in balancing the, the whole customer base I've got, you know, we can provide financial services, advice for non-traditional families. Non-monogamy, um, there are plenty of people that don't exist in two-partner, um, family units. There's, co-parenting all of these people need to be seen. They need to be recognized, they need advice. And I think that's a really, really powerful place for us to sit and it's plus it's super, super fun.

Cokie Hasiotis: (43:22)
Yeah. That's awesome. I'm cognizant of time. We only have a couple of more minutes, so I'd like to rapid fire a question at each of you. This is actually for both of you, um, there's one problem you could solve for the LGBTQ plus community, uh, at daylight that you would be like, great. I can retire. Now. I have done the best I can. What would it be? Elliot? Let's start with you

Billie Simmons: (43:46)
Because so close to fixing a lot of these problems. I need to pick something really lofty. Um, I, I mean, I, I guess I would, you know, it would be solving systemic discrimination, um, for LGBTQ, but yeah, no, I fixed my name and Rob

Rob Curtis: (44:09)
Too many parents suddenly wake up one day and I realized that their 12 year old is. They have no idea what to do to take care of their financial future. They don't even understand suddenly this alien in the family. Um, and I said that in the kindest possible way. Um, and I think if we can get education into not the LGBT people's hands, but in their support network as early as possible, then I think we have a huge opportunity to be getting the right financial habits in place the right financial education in place. And I think even if it is the right risk management strategies in place for what happens in the event of the world, isn't as kind to that child as, as it should be. And I think, um, I often think about how do we educate that parent when their child is 12 so that they not only have positive messages, they, um, about the, the future of their child, because too many of us have been told that we're going to die young and we're going to die lonely, right? Those things that are not true. Um, and I think if we can not only support the LGBT people that we represent, but the support network around the outside of them, there's six 30 million folk have 60 million families, uh, 60 million parents. If we can get into the family unit, we can help them to build the self-esteem, um, of their, um, of their children to make sure that folk have the best possible shot at life. I think I'd be able to sit back and, and call it mission accomplished

Cokie Hasiotis: (45:27)
Also extremely lofty given that education often is the death of discrimination. So as long as you guys are focused on the horizon, I'm sure you'll definitely take steps towards that. Um, thank you so much for being here today and talking to us about, I think in my opinion, one of the most important solutions that's out there today, um, I really admire both of your passion and your full such dorks. I absolutely love it. I love out. So thanks for giving me the shot.

Rob Curtis: (45:58)
Thanks Turkey. And look, you're, you're a wonderful, uh, person yourself. And I think it's been really, really great to talk to you here about what lasagna is doing and to see some of the trends and themes that are happening with other companies just like ourselves. So thanks for participating today. Well, it was great to have everyone cookie Billy Rob, this was a pleasure, you know, never did. I think that first of all, we would have conversations like this at salt on salt talks, but in the goals that you were going over, this is hopefully a very tiny but important first step in having conversations on different platforms that people might not be exposed to. So I'm thrilled that all of you were able to come on today and thank you so much for the time I'm going to hold up my daylight card because I got that and I get to start using it.

Rob Curtis: (46:41)
I, you know, I, I looked at my bank, which is a large bank and a traditional bank. And I was like, why does my money sit there and, or no interest? So now I can put money where it's important and I'm super thrilled that this is a tangible opportunity in the fact that I can hold a card, but also that I can, uh, do something and put my money where my mouth is. So thank you all again. And thank you for tuning into salt talks. If you want to watch this and other videos, we have a YouTube channel called salt tube where we have over 175 of our previous salt talks available to view on demand. We also broadcast all of these on Twitter with live tweeting. So if you'd like to engage in the conversation there, please check us out at, at salt conference. If you want to see what's coming up, you can always visit salt.org backslash talks and for salt. This is Joe Eletto signing off for today. Hope to see you soon.

Sean Bill: Portfolio Management for Institutional Investors | SALT Talks #193

“I’m very optimistic on Bitcoin. I think it should be in institutional portfolios. It’s a great complement to traditional portfolios for those in the pension or endowment space.”

Sean Bill is the CIO at the Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority (VTA) where he’s responsible for the management and oversight of its multi-billion dollar, multi-asset class portfolio. He also served as trustee for the city of San Jose’s pension plan and senior advisor to the San Francisco employees’ retirement system.

Being solely responsible for managing $3B in assets for the Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority requires utilizing financial institutions’ resources. Artificial intelligence and machine learning also are vital in providing the analysis when investing an employee system fund. Being able to trust the existing market research analysis of an institution makes it possible for one person to oversee such a big multi-asset class portfolio. “I’m running $3B without any staff, it’s just me… You can kind of view a fund of funds as an extension of my staff.”

Bitcoin represents a major opportunity for institutions and should make up 1-3% of a portfolio’s allocation. Metcalfe’s Law makes it easy to track its pricing when predicting returns. Bitcoin is best understood to institutional investors as digital gold.

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Sean Bill .jpeg

Sean Bill

Chief Investment Officer

VTA

MODERATOR

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darcie: (00:07)
Hello everyone. And welcome back to salt talks. My name is John Darcie. I'm the managing director of salt, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance technology and public policy. Salt talks are a digital interview series that we launched in 2020, uh, with leading investors, creators and thinkers. In our goal on these salt talks is the same as our goal at our salt conferences, which is to provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future. And we're very excited today to welcome Sean bill to salt talks. Uh, Sean is currently the chief investment officer at the Santa Clara valley transit authority of VTA where he's responsible for the management and oversight of a multi-billion dollar multi-asset class portfolio. He also served as a trustee for the city of San Jose pension plan and as a senior advisor to the San Francisco employees retirement system, prior to entering public service, Sean was a principal at a global macro hedge fund based in beautiful Newport beach, California.

John Darcie: (01:11)
He began his career on the agriculture floor at the Chicago board of trade. Sean has invested in dozens of seed stays technology companies and has been a frequent guest on Bloomberg TV, CNBC and Fox business news. He's a graduate of Indiana university currently replacing their head basketball coach. Again, trying to recapture former glory. Sean, I'm a, a, I'm a university of North Carolina fan grew up in chapel hill. So we're experiencing sort of a low on our program as well. So I can sympathize with you there. Uh, but he's also a graduate of Stanford business school, uh, and now still resides out there, uh, in Northern California and hosting today's talk, uh, is Troy [inaudible], who is the partner, uh, co-chief investment officer and senior portfolio manager at SkyBridge capital, which is a global alternative investment firm. That's affiliated with salt. And with that, I'll turn it over to Troy to begin the interview,

Sean Bill: (02:01)
John. Yeah, thanks so much. And thanks everyone for being here, Sean. It's really great to see you. Uh, John did an excellent job reading out that very, uh, impressive resume, but you know, when you think about your backgrounds, uh, could you walk us through, you know, the journey that you made coming from? You know, I think like myself, like Anthony, like John humble background to be in a position of so much respect and authority in the investment community today. Yeah. Yeah. So, um, you know, um, first and first generation of my family to go to college. So definitely from very humble beginnings, uh, started investing when I was probably about 13 years old, uh, played hooky from school, took a bus to downtown Houston, uh, went to Putin to open an account and he was, my mother had to come down and co-sign that account cause I wasn't old enough to open it.

Sean Bill: (02:50)
And so she, uh, she signed off and I think my first trade was, I bought three shares of Mobil oil using a paycheck from the Houston Chronicle, delivering papers. And so I started investing at a pretty early age and by the time I was in Como in college, Indiana and I started investing in commodities and started treating quite a bit commodities. Um, and after college I ended up at the Chicago board of trade, uh, working for Ratko, um, down the floor, the, uh, corn wheat soybeans and Milano oil floor, which was a great experience. I, I, I really wish that those floors were still open for younger kids to get that experience in the markets because it is, it's kind of like driving a formula, one car, you're learning at such a rapid rate. You know, you just barely turn that steering wheel and you're in the wall.

Sean Bill: (03:39)
So you really, you really do learn a lot faster down there. Um, after about four years in Chicago, um, I decided I wanted to get back to California. Uh, we had, we had lived in California when I was younger in high school and, um, I just really kind of missed the weather and a lot of friends that were out here. So I ended up going back down to Southern California and of course in Southern California, uh, it's all bonds. And so I ended up going into the bond space, um, you know, had immediately before I got there, you know, I sent some resumes out, had an offer from PIMCO and Bradford MarTech and a couple other places. And I ended up going to Bradford and Mars' neck and becoming their senior corporate bond trader on about, you know, think about, about 10 billion. Um, and then left, there started a hedge fund, which was seeded by Panco, uh, and ran a hedge fund, uh, all the way, jeez, almost all the way through 2011.

Sean Bill: (04:32)
And so with quantitative easing and zero interest rates and all that, we were well relative value, fixed income fund. So, um, you know, while those trades went away, so we gave the money back and I wasn't, I, uh, decided that we wanted to get back up to Northern California. That's where she's from, that's where we have a lot of friends. And so we ended up back up here and just very randomly. Some of my classmates from high school were on the city council in San Jose and asked me if I could help out with the pensions. Um, I was basically kind of twiddling my thumbs, so I thought, sure, why not? And so I ended up going over and joining the San Jose board as a trustee, um, for a buck a year. And then, um, uh, the San Francisco asked me if I could help them out with their hedge fund program.

Sean Bill: (05:18)
So I became a senior advisor to bill Coker and the board administration of San Francisco, and then, uh, the CIO spot, um, and Santa Clara was available. So I ended up doing that. And so that's kind of how I went to the pension space. So it wasn't really planning on, you know, going into pensions. But I do think that, you know, pensions are a super interesting area because you get to touch so many different asset classes. So if you're kind of a macro oriented investor, you know, it's a pretty interesting seat because you're investing in public and private equity, you're doing public and private credit, you're doing, uh, you know, real assets, uh, all kinds of different, you know, uh, markets that you get to touch. So I really enjoyed that. And it's been, it's been a pretty, pretty neat experience overall. Yeah. Thanks for giving us color around that.

Sean Bill: (06:07)
Sean, I'll tell you one thing I found fascinating from that re recounting your background was that you voluntarily recognize that the opportunity set for what you did compressed and you gave back the money, right? How often do you see that in this industry? Usually people always try to get blood from a stone and then struggle for years before recognizing that, you know, their expertise just is out of favor. And as you laid out, a lot of it had to do with unconventional monetary policy that took away a lot of those traits. I kind of look at it like as I've had like kind of three iterations on my career, you know, the first one being done in the open outcry system of the floor, you know, the Chicago board of trade. And it was kind of becoming very clear that that would be coming to an end and that this was going to be, you know, uh, digitized in time.

Sean Bill: (06:54)
So I left that area and then I ended up going into what I'll call the alternative asset management area, right. And hedge funds. And, uh, the area that I was in evaporated over time and the zero interest rate policies came into play. And then it was like, okay, well, you know, we're going to evolve and shift and we'll, we'll go this direction. And so I ended up in the, uh, the pension space. So I kind of, this is like my third act. I think, I don't know what the fourth act will be, but I'm sure at some point I'll get phased out here too. Hey, it's still a young man. You won't be a algorithm or algorithm to way, or how is it AI at away anytime soon, given, given your background, it's really fascinating. You're obviously a proponent of investing in front of hedge funds for certain plans.

Sean Bill: (07:42)
Um, and for certain investors, could you walk through who you think they're appropriate for and why, and if there's certain folks in particular that should focus on that path. Yeah. So I, I, I, you know, coming from the hedge fund background where you do have a lot of resources at your disposal and you can do things pretty quickly, um, and then moving into the government space where you don't have a lot of resources. So I, you know, I'm running $3 billion today without any staff. That's just me. I do have a part-time accountant who will book in the month end closing values of the funds into Sal, but that's literally the only support I have. So if you're in that situation, which a lot of public fund managers are, um, you know, you can kind of view a fund of funds almost as an extension of your staff, right?

Sean Bill: (08:33)
So, you know, the fund of funds are going to do the research. They're going to do the risk management. They're going to handle the back office, you know, subscriptions and redemptions and rebalancing and all these things within that, that space. So for me, that was a primary motivator, I think, for smaller asset owners, you know, sub $1. Um, this is an area that makes a lot of sense because you can really, up-skill the quality of the team that you're working with. Um, and you can, you know, you can actually also benefit from the scale of the fund to funds, uh, and they're negotiating with the underlying managers. So if I was to go out and try and build a fund to funds of my own internally, you know, it's probably going to be a five to $10 million ticket per manager, which is very different than say yourselves at SkyBridge or our other partners who are going to be making much larger allocations to those managers.

Sean Bill: (09:28)
And they're going to get a much better B uh, fabric than we could get if we went direct. So I think there's a couple of different, you know, areas to consider there. Um, the other, the other thing I would emphasize, you know, is the speed at which you guys are able to move versus what we can move. You know, if you're in a, uh, it's called a bureaucratic organization, which has a lot of checks and balances by its nature, and a lot of sign-offs that are needed to get money moved around, it can really slow you down. So, you know, that can be somewhat critical. Uh, you know, it can take me six months to get through the process to onboard a new manager or to offboard or offload a new manager. So, you know, I'm sure for you guys, it's probably four weeks or something, uh, very different in terms of the elements of speed that are available.

Sean Bill: (10:16)
And the redemption is always tougher than the entry point, right? Sean, by definition. So hardest thing to get right. Exit points are definitely more challenging. Um, absolutely. Yeah. And, you know, along those lines, I know we've chatted recently about what our favorite strategies are and there was a lot of overlap, but could you talk to the audience about some of the favorite hedge fund strategies you have now, or unique opportunities that you can access necessarily they're just vanilla fixed income or equity markets? Yeah. I mean, I think there are a couple of different, interesting spaces. Um, you know, I think one that's really hot right now is obviously with what's going on with suspects, right. And, uh, you know, also convertible debt funds those two areas. But what I'm probably most excited about, like if I back up and step up to a higher level, look would be investment managers that are deploying AI machine learning, you know, um, I think that, you know, these quantitative strategies are slowly going to be morphed into more AI and machine learning based strategies.

Sean Bill: (11:15)
And it's not going to be just about speed anymore. It's going to become more also, it's also going to become about inference, right? And the ability to, to learn, uh, and predict. And I've seen examples of this here in the Silicon valley with different managers that are pursuing these approaches. And, um, you know, I'm thinking of one in particular, that's a, um, a consumer lending fund. And what they do is they buy loans off these various platforms and, you know, they'll download, you know, a million loans off a database they'll relay a thousand economic barriers over top of it. And then they'll let the machine learning, crawl the data and determine what is, you know, what are the factors that we should be taken into consideration when we're extending unsecured credit to a consumer? And the things that it comes back with are very different than what you or I might think of in a traditional sense, if someone, uh, capitalizes, uh, you know, Chicago is all caps all the way through, and they'll say, Hey, the data shows that that's a 2.4% higher default rate.

Sean Bill: (12:16)
You know, if the guy is agonizing on the payment meter between 2 85 and 3 0 5 a month on his payment versus the guy that just goes directly to max, not the payment, you know, we can show that there's a very different, uh, return characteristic on who pays back that loan. Right? And so there, there are managers in that space, you know what I mean? You know, there's sweeping these, these loans that fit their criteria off these platforms within 20 milliseconds. So, you know, that's where I w I was sat in with those guys years ago. That's our boy, you know, it's like, Marc Andreessen says, it's like, you know, it's like the most evolved dinosaur. And you see the meteor coming in as like, holy crap, you know, uh, by, by the time that I would be selecting a loan off these platforms, they've already picked the vest, you know, or we're the what's left is the second tier, um, for the traditional credit guidance that's going through there.

Sean Bill: (13:06)
So I really think there's huge advantages to be gained, uh, by using, uh, artificial intelligence and machine learning. And that those advantages can be used in equities and fixed income credit, uh, convertible debt all over. So it's more, that's kind of more of what I'm looking for, uh, what I'm looking about and thinking about the future of who's going to have an edge in investing in these markets. And I think it's great. Yeah, that's really interesting that I just had a chat with one of our long-short healthcare funds this morning about that very topic. And that was a, an unrelated to the audience. This is the first time Sean and I had spoken about it. And that's one of their big projects for this year is trying to apply AI to particularly phase one and phase two biotech companies where, you know, many of the factors that lead to approval, the analyst inherently knows, and the portfolio manager inherently knows, but this gives a much more speed for making a determination on whether the price is appropriate or whether they should hold off for a few more weeks.

Sean Bill: (14:04)
So, yeah, that's going to be a big topic. Uh, first, really, as far as the, I can see Sean, I'm glad you here. Uh, I think that, you know, I mean, um, you know, it is the speed at which AI moves is, you know, it's almost incomprehensible to a human, right? So they can, they can review, you know, millions of pages of a document before we can finish reading 20 pages. So, you know, they're going to go through and they're going to look at these, uh, [inaudible] violence earnings filings, or what have you, and look at the scientific research papers, and they'll come to conclusions on, Hey, you know, this is, what's worked in the past, and this is what we should be looking for. And, you know, we should be basing decisions on this. So that's why I say that, you know, AI brings a whole new level of inference and prediction, and I think dad's going to become a big Hodge for, for money managers.

Sean Bill: (14:54)
That's pretty fascinating. And, you know, in the meanwhile, back in, uh, the more vanilla world of asset allocation, you know, clearly the big challenge for everybody today is how low interest rates are, how low bond yields still are. I mean, obviously it's been a really rough go for bonds really since April and the Barclays agg down over 3% year to date. But when you think about that world, what it means for plans like yourselves or endowments, or, or, or larger pension funds, is that a challenge that can be overcome? Or is it just about ramping of your risk appetite and hoping for the best, or, you know, how do you think about that? You pair it on? Yeah, I mean, you know, I definitely think that the first thing that you have to do is you do have to understand where the central banks are coming from.

Sean Bill: (15:39)
And it's like the old Martins Zweig used to say, don't fight the fed, right. Well, if it's the fed the European central bank, the people's bank of Japan and the central bank of China, uh people's bank of China. Yeah. You definitely don't want to be on the other side of that. And, um, you know, with zero interest rates and quantitative easing and the flood of liquidity, we've seen what's happened. There is, you know, that going back to our Chicago board of trade days, right, you learn very quickly, you have to let your winners run. You have to cut your losers quickly. Right. What does that mean in a practical, uh, an a practical way is, you know, it means letting our equity positions tilt further overweights in what we might normally, we want to stay within our bands, but we, we may want to let those things run a little longer and a little harder.

Sean Bill: (16:28)
Um, we refer to that as kind of intelligent rebalancing. A lot of people will just say, Hey, we're going to rebalance straight up the quarter, and we're just going to bring it back to target wherever it is. Well, you know, we, we let our equities run. Uh, we did hauling back in, uh, late January, early February, we took about 8% of the portfolio from overweight equities that have built up and we rang the register and we said, okay, we're going to, we're going to pull that in. Um, that was, you know, um, really a function of what was going on in China and COVID, um, but you know, when it came time to go back in and we wanted it now we had, okay, the markets have sold off, we're overweight on our fixed income. Well, let's get back into our, our equities, right. And so this is where it is pretty critical to have board buy in on these things.

Sean Bill: (17:17)
Um, you know, our board got a little scared and will nervous when they had him. So we had set up very well for the sell off, but it was very hard to move quickly to get back in. So, so I think, you know, um, kind of straight a little bit off a tangent there, but, but, you know, it's important to what the winners run that's important to, um, uh, you know, cut the losers from, so that, that takes us to fixed income. Our fixed income allocations moved from 35% down to 14%. Uh, we have been steadily trimming that over the last five years and what we've done is we said, okay, you know, we are, you know, we still need to make six and three quarters for our assumed greater return. We're not gonna expect to pull more than three, three and a half out of core fixed income.

Sean Bill: (18:02)
Where can we go to achieve our, our goals? And so one of the areas is private credit. So we we've increased our allocation to private credit in that same period to 12%. Um, we have increased our allocation to hedge funds from zero now up to 6%. Um, you know, we basically said, okay, uh, you know, we need to look at fixed income, basically as a balanced to the risk that we're embracing elsewhere in the portfolio. And we'll use it as a counterweight, but it doesn't need to be 30, 40% of the portfolio anymore. Um, 14 is probably about right. We did put a 3% allocation to a pure treasury fund, uh, with the idea that that could cover benefits for a quarter. We got into any real, real nasty markets actually. So, so minimize fixed income, obviously ramp up alternatives, including private credit and hedge funds and allow your equity portfolio to, uh, play momentum driven by the fed.

Sean Bill: (19:01)
Right, right. That's right. That's right. And we, you sit at a 4% allocation to private equity, uh, with the idea that we want to capture some of the illiquidity premium. There that's a new allocation. Do you think a lot of that illiquidity premium still exists? Sean? I think it is harder to capture than it used to be. I don't think it's as, um, prevalent or as big as what it had been. I think it used to be pretty much a four to 600 basis points of illiquidity premium for some of these assets. Um, you know, as investors like ourselves have been pushed out the risk curve, there's more money coming into these asset classes. And by nature, they become more efficient and the, the liquidity premium shrink. So I don't think it is what it was. Um, but I do think there's still some very interesting opportunities in that space, particularly in venture and, and what happened.

Sean Bill: (19:51)
Yeah. You just asked to be much more selective, right. And focus more on growth as opposed to, you know, these bloated workouts, right. That are just levered. Uh, we're not allocating to large numbers, buyout bonds, or anything like that. It's like if we were doing elbows would be smaller, mid middle market elbows. Um, and we're, we're really more excited about what's happening in the innovation economy and in the venture space. Hey, so shifting gears a little bit, uh, you obviously are aware that we've taken a Bitcoin allocation and, you know, it's something that folks like Michael Saylor and Elon Musk and other insurance companies in Dallas, uh, focused on recently, you know, what's your professional view on, uh, Bitcoin Shaun or, or cryptocurrencies in general. And how do you think they could potentially fit into a portfolio? Yeah, so, I mean, this is an area that I was very excited to hear that you guys took that position.

Sean Bill: (20:44)
Um, we had started trying to educate our board on digital assets back in 2019. And we're trying to really kind of present this as a new uncorrelated asset class. Um, now, you know, as more money has come into Bitcoin as the on-ramps have become, uh, more available for retail, I do think the correlations are going to increase relative to other assets. So, so what we saw five years ago, or the last five years, a correlation of 0.1, 4% of the S and P you know, over the last 12 months looks more like 0.3, four, right? So that's, that's a function of, you know, these on-ramps like PayPal or square cash, or what have you. Um, but I do think that, um, you know, it is still a very uncorrelated asset overall. I think it adds a lot of value when you're, when you're putting together a portfolio.

Sean Bill: (21:36)
We always, I always explain this to my board that, you know, it's like baking a cake, you know, we need some flour, we need some sugar, we need some salt and any one of them individually may not taste that great. But, uh, you know, when we put them all together, we're gonna get this beautiful cake and Bitcoin model, all three of those sounded pretty good to me. Shout, I'm not sure if you mentioned rights, but we were going to leave that one out. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. So, so, so from the institutional perspective, Bitcoin might be that raw bag, right? It's a little, it's scary, right? I mean, we, we've all seen Rocky drink it, but we're like, Hmm, I don't know if we should. Um, so, you know, uh, we did, we did, uh, talk to our board about this and we said, Hey, listen, you know, a one to 3% allocation could really enhance the overall return profile of our fund.

Sean Bill: (22:21)
And if you are following McAfee's, you know, law in terms of, um, how the Bitcoin network becomes more valuable as more participants, uh, enter the network, then it's pretty easy to actually track where the pricing of Bitcoin should be. Uh, Dan Morehead and Pantera. And those guys have done a lot of research on that. And, you know, you guys have also done a lot of research on that. So there are several big institutional investors that are, are looking at this, cause this is one of the big questions, right. Is how do you value Bitcoin? It's, uh, you know, uh, there's, there's no intrinsic value, right? We don't have a bunch of industrial assets. We can go down and place a value on this is a, um, it's a digital asset, so it is tricky to value it. Um, I do think that McAfee's law really does stand out as a great way to think about it.

Sean Bill: (23:10)
Uh, we saw at work with telephone networks, we've seen it work with social networks. We've seen it work with all kinds of different, um, network type entities. So, so we, um, we thought that, you know, one to 3% was our official recommendation to the board, uh, in 2019, uh, as Bitcoin began appreciating, uh, you know, we think it should be probably at least half to one and a half percent still in an institutional portfolio. That's great. Yeah. And the other aspect too, that we like is it's liquid, right? I mean, it's small, so it's liquid in most alternatives that can generate attractive, which we'll segue to in a second, you really have to move down liquidity spectrum. Whereas this is one of the few that stands out as, Hey, you have a realistic chance of being a 50% or a hundred percent even from here and it's liquid at the same time, because you might have a different view, but we don't see how equities are up more than 10 or 15 this year, maybe 20, if everything goes well, but given high valuations potential higher taxes, obviously higher interest rates, uh, that, that will serve as somewhat of a break on equity.

Sean Bill: (24:15)
For sure. Yeah, no, I think, you know, we're in the same camp on the equity returns, we do feel like it's still pretty positive with what's happening with quantitative easing and continuing to push investors out in search of return. Um, you know, but, um, Bitcoin, we do basically look at it as like a digital gold, you know, this would be kind of similar to holding gold. Um, I do think that Bitcoin is a little better positioned because I think that, you know, there is a finite number of coins, 21 million, I believe, uh, 4 million of those are out of existence. Right. We don't think they're coming back. Um, so we have about 17 million and we know that the float that actually trades is very small. So, you know, um, I think that, you know, it's pretty realistic that we will probably see Bitcoin at a hundred thousand by the end of the year, just following McAfee's principle on this.

Sean Bill: (25:05)
Um, and that longer term, I think it will continue to appreciate quite a bit more so I'm, I'm very optimistic on Bitcoin. I think that it should be in institutional portfolios. I think it's a great, you know, compliment to traditional portfolios. I think for folks like myself and the pension or endowment space, you know, and this is something that you could put in either as a venture investment, uh, you know, you could put it in the venture bucket because it does have characteristics of a venture back company, or you could put it in as a substitute for gold, uh, in your portfolio. Gotcha. So segwaying from liquid alternatives to less liquid alternatives, you know, we know you're a big fan of angel investing and you focused on that personally and professionally for quite some time. Now, are there any particular areas like other maybe AI we covered already, or perhaps it's still your favorite?

Sean Bill: (25:55)
Are there any other areas that you'd like to particularly I would have invested in some AI companies, um, you know, for all the viewers out there, they should check out Chooch, uh, it's an app on the apple app store or the Android app store. And this is gives you a really good example of what is possible with AI and visual recognition. Uh, this is a company I invested in that when I was at a $10 million valuation, they just closed their most recent fundraising at a $200 million valuation. Um, and I think this will be a billion dollar company within two or three years. Um, but I think that is a great, um, a great way for the everyday investor to see just what AI can do even on your telephone. Um, outside of AI, um, the area that I'm probably most excited about is FinTech and really trying to use my background in finance, you know, having been on the floor of an exchange and worked in the hedge fund side, dealing with commercial banking and treasury operations, et cetera, I feel like I have a little bit of an edge in Vintech.

Sean Bill: (27:02)
And so I generally tend to focus most of my time in that space and the strategy that, you know, I approach or the way I look at it, the framework that I use to look at FinTech is I'm trying to say, Hey, who's going to become the Amazon of FinTech. You know, um, you usually have a winner in each category. Um, I think it's going to continue down that path. I think there will become a digital online entity, financial entity that will be the winner in the end. Um, you know, and so what I do is I look at, you know, the different verticals in lending and payments and asset management or investment management, et cetera, and just, you know, treat them as like a swim lane. And once you, once you begin to dominate that swim lane, they, they move on to the next lane, which might be mortgages and then the next lane, which might be investments and so-and-so, and so, and then eventually you create this a company that's almost like an Amazon of FinTech.

Sean Bill: (27:59)
Um, so that's, that's probably the area that I've spent the most time on, or I have the most, uh, personal investments and the area that I'm most excited about, because I do feel like I can, I can look through those companies and get a general sense of, of how they're performing, um, and how they're, how they're going to perform. Um, the, I, you know, so I, I have a syndicate on angel list, um, where I syndicated these deals. I've done about a dozen on there. And the IRR over the last six years is about 30% and we've not had a single one of those companies that's gone out of business. Every one of them stayed in business, which means we're probably not taking quite enough risk, but, um, but I do, you got to roll the dice more here, come on, gotta be a little more aggressive. I've only got two unicorns in my portfolio. [inaudible]

Sean Bill: (28:45)
Come on. Yeah, yeah. So I've got two, I've got lifts and avant are both in my portfolio from early investments in 2014. Um, but, uh, but yeah, I think, you know, that there's a lot of opportunity in FinTech still. I think it's still very, very early days. I think that this whole defy revolution that's beginning and what's going to happen with the blockchain. And, uh, you know, we can go into how AI works with the blockchain and the cloud and, you know, these things are all interconnected. Um, so I think there's a lot of runway there. Um, another area that I've been investing in, I just did a, um, investment with, uh, Portree Friedman Milton Friedman's grandson, uh, down at, uh, in Honduras. Um, yeah, it, it was interesting. That's like the most violent country in the world. And so the idea was for any new that I've seen the Milton Friedman series free to choose where they go through and talk about the Asian tigers know and Hong Kong and all these things.

Sean Bill: (29:43)
The idea was could we bring a special economic zone to central America and create opportunity down in central America for the residents down there? And so, um, we invested a quarter million down there and, um, I think the total raise was about 19 million. Um, but we got, you know, people like Peter teal and Joe Lonsdale and mark Andreessen that also are participating and really just seeing if we, if these principles can work down there and central America. So we're on the island of Roatan with 65 acres and starting to build, um, this little special economic zone, obviously central and Latin America in general could use help, right? Not only do the pandemic, but it's been an area of disappointment for quite some time for investors, hopefully you guys can, uh, uh, show the way or like the way down there it's

John Darcie: (30:32)
Like assault, destination shot, destination. It's, it's

Sean Bill: (30:37)
Actually like, I think like the fourth, most popular scuba destination, which I learned, um, and th and they do have direct flights from, I think it's Houston to, to the island of Roatan. Um, so I'm very optimistic about that. I mean, I think that, you know, if that, if we can make that model work in central America, um, then we can port that model to other places. So we've seen it in Dubai. We've seen it in Singapore, we've seen it, you know, and why hasn't it? Why not, why not have it, uh, you know, south of the border of the United States? Yeah. He's shown. So, you know, this touches very well with our conversations on Bitcoin being liquid and obviously equities being liquid, private equity and VC, but we've seen a blending to some extent recently between, you know, late stage privates, uh, for companies like chime or, or Klarna, you know, higher evaluations obviously than the early stage investors and still at reasonable valuations compared to the Republic comps.

Sean Bill: (31:32)
And also the emergence of the SPAC market is a unique way to take companies, um, public, w what's your overall period, is this an area, uh, too much risk right now? Or is it just a combination of, um, where we are in a market cycle and calibrating your risk reward objectives? Yeah, I, I D I, I think that, you know, take them separately. I think, you know, SPACs have been a really interesting way to go public, right. And I think that, um, you know, bill Gurley and, and some of the fellows out here in the Silicon valley have been pushing back on, you know, value that's left on the table from these IPO's and the fees they're paying, and what have you, I think this back fees will be con consolidating and compressing over time, and that it will become even more efficient. Um, so if you're, you know, if you're a Spotify or, or Airbnb or something like that big name, then Hey, you can just do a direct listing and, and go public that way.

Sean Bill: (32:23)
Um, but for some of the, let's call it 3 billion to $10 billion companies, you know, spat can be a really interesting way to get public. Um, so I'm, I'm very positive on specs. Um, the, you know, the late stage private investing, the way I view that is more of like, okay, you know, um, over the last 10 years, over the last decade, we've seen a real shift where, you know, when Microsoft went public, you would capture a very large portion of the appreciation at the IPO and, and going forward or apple or any of these others. Uh, in the last 10 years, it's become very difficult, you know, being a public company, right. It was Sarbanes, Oxley and Dodd-Frank, and all these other rules that a lot of them just have chosen stay private longer. Well that as a pension investor, uh, that's, that's something that we're missing out on in terms of, you know, how do we get exposure to this?

Sean Bill: (33:19)
So I view it as, and I've worked with our board on this. I think we're getting close to actually doing something on this, you know, um, I view it as let's look at late stage private investments as a substitute for our small cap, public equity exposure. So just slotted, slotted into that slot and say, okay, we're not expecting the return profile that we used to expect from small cap equities. It's now in this late stage bucket. So let's just shift over to that allocation report, part of that allocation to late stage private investing and treat it like it's sidecar our small cap exposure. That's really smart. And it's the first time I've heard that, but it makes complete sense given, especially the recent rally and small caps and broader equities in general. And from what we've analyzed, you still have far more growth prospects in many of the FinTech or other tech late stage startups than you would in know the Russell 2000 value or growth indices.

Sean Bill: (34:14)
Correct? Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I think, you know, I think we will see, I mean, look at Stripe, right. I mean, I could've, I could have been buying shares and Stripe three years ago at 15 billion. Right. Um, and the secondary market, um, you know, I mean, uh, I had friends that were buying those shares and I thought, boy, that's really expensive, but I'm like, gosh, you know, but that would be like, you know, that's a good example of a late stage fund. That's got a broad exposure to a lot of different companies is going to capture that run from 15 billion to a hundred billion, right before Stripe actually hits the public markets. Um, you know, we saw this with Facebook. I mean, that was probably the original, right. I mean, you know, Facebook kind of, you know, put that path, uh, showed the way of how to go down that path.

Sean Bill: (34:57)
And then now we're seeing other big companies doing the same thing. I think Stripe is a perfect example of that. So I'm a big fan of, of allocating to late stage private, private, right. And clearly the companies had been de-risked by the end, compared to when the earlier stages at lower evaluations as well. Sometimes we forget about that. Right? Absolutely. Yeah. I mean, I think a lot of these late stage companies, you know, 10 years ago would have been doing the IPO's. Um, it's just, now it's very, it's very onerous to do an IPO. And so they, they defer it. They don't need their capital. They can defer it for awhile. Last question, before I turned it over to my esteemed colleague, John Darcie to wrap it up. But yeah, the pandemic, I think taught a lot of us, some lessons, not that we're delusional and didn't understand bad things can happen, but I know from our perspective, what was surprising was not only the magnitude, but the speed of the market collapse, right?

Sean Bill: (35:53)
Unlike oh eight where you had 18 to 24 months, three position, this was everything's fine. Everything's not fine. And then, Hey, everything's fine. Again, courtesy of the fed and fiscal stimulus. So are there any take-home lessons, uh, for your investing craft or for asset allocation or is it just the tried and true? Hey, don't panic, bad things happen, manage your way through it. How do you think this, uh, pandemics effected, you know, you intellectually and how you look at, uh, various investments? Yeah, I mean, so, you know, I had a, you know, a shopping list of stocks. I actually published it on my blog. I'm like, Hey, you know, we're getting into some pretty hairy territory. Here's my shopping list. You know, let's buy square at 35. Let's, you know, let's get into some of these names, uh, Boeing, Disney, you know, great companies I'd love to own, but, uh, you had to wait for an, a real pullback.

Sean Bill: (36:44)
And I think that's one thing I learned in, um, at the Chicago board of trade is that you have to have your game plan in place before you get into the, in that case, the pits and by selling, um, you have to know what, what the, what the framework is that you're operating in. So I think I might've been Warren buffet that said, you've got to have your shopping list ready to go when Mr. Mark is having a breakdown and it's hard if you don't already have it prepared to do it on the fly. Um, if you have it already outlined and you're ready to go, then you can take advantage of these psychological or behavioral economics driven issues that create these dislocations, which don't last very long anymore. Um, you know, and the other thing I would say is, you know, I mean this most recent snapback really does illustrate the power of central banks and how, you know, they have learned from 2008 and nine and they are pretty unconstrained and what they can do and the numbers that they can throw at the market.

Sean Bill: (37:48)
So, you know, it definitely, you know, um, would not try to go against the central banks, um, and would definitely try to ride the wave while it's there to be re written. Um, now at some point, you know, they're gonna have to unwind all this stuff and that's another conversation, right? It can be quite a hang over the next six to nine months, but that's right. So to sum it up, it's more of a continuation or reinforcement of your investment discipline. You be ready to buy when opportunities present themselves. And this experience just reinforced that in not only that that's a thoughtful discipline, but that you have to move and move fast, uh, which is sometimes easier said than done. Right? Absolutely. And I think, you know, one of the things I would add to it is, um, you know, as I'm thinking about it, you know, for pension investors or endowments or foundations, um, one of the things we do is rebalance our portfolios, right?

Sean Bill: (38:40)
And individual investors can really benefit from that as well. So, you know, if you are, uh, following a rebalancing plan, uh, you are inherently going to be a value investor, right? So if you have some stocks and you have some bonds and stocks are down 30% and your bond portfolio is up 20%, you're going to be selling some of your bonds and then buying stocks at a discount. And that's a, that's a great position. It's, it's a, you know, a disciplined rebalancing approach should add between 40 to 70 basis points of annualized performance to your portfolio over a decade. So this is a lot better than the risk-free these days. Right? Sean. Yeah. Yeah. It's a good add on, you know, and we got to take those, those basis points wherever we can get them these days. That's right. That's right. Well, Sean, I just want to thank you for our investment team and the folks at sky Ridge from coming on. I'm going to turn up over to, yes, I'll say it again. John, my esteemed colleague say saying it was this isn't enough to, uh,

John Darcie: (39:39)
I want to have to get my shots in at the end of these interviews and, and pick up the, uh, the areas that I think were most interesting and, and ask a few follow up questions, but let's go back to Bitcoin for a second. So you're everybody's dream partner in terms of, uh, being an allocator who understands where things are going, looking around corners and the ability to take risks and do things that are new and exciting, but not every institution thinks in the same way as you go out amongst your colleagues in the institutional investment world, what are you hearing about views on Bitcoin? Is it still people leveling accusations about the fact that it's not backed by anything? It doesn't have any intrinsic value there's issues related to energy usage. What is the broader messaging that you're hearing today within the institutional investor world?

Sean Bill: (40:23)
Well, all right. So John, the first thing I do whenever I come sit down with another CIO of another pension fund, as I tell them that, you know, from my perspective, the most critical thing you can do is think like an entrepreneur with institutional resources. And part of that is driven by being here in the bay area and seeing the impact of innovation. Um, so, so you have to get them out of a traditional mindset, right? Because you know, it is a let's buy, you know, IBM. So we don't get fired type of mentality in general. Um, so to get them to think outside the box, you have to frame it for them. Um, now, you know, the big concerns with Bitcoin that I've found in probably the, probably the biggest concern is the custodian element in terms of custodian, those assets safely. Um, you know, that is something that a lot of people just aren't really comfortable with this idea that there's a private key and a public key.

Sean Bill: (41:18)
And jeez, you know, everybody's read the stories about losing the, the private key and then he can't get it back. And I've tried to explain that I'm like, look, there are, there are good custodians out there as Gemini and there's Coinbase, there's a, there's a lot of different options that you can go through, uh, or you can have someone like SkyBridge do it for you, right. And then that takes it off your plate completely, uh, from a risk standpoint. Um, but I think that probably shot by the way I liked that option myself. I think it's a good option. I think it's a very good option. I think, you know, I mean, I've been, I've been trying to really share that message that, you know, we have our Bitcoin exposure through SkyBridge and, you know, there are different ways of doing it. You don't have to be the CIO of saying, okay, let's go open that a coin, uh, account at Gemini or Coinbase, and I'm going to sign my name on here and we gotta figure out how we're going to store that key. I actually write

John Darcie: (42:10)
Down on a piece of paper and put it in your sock drawer and hope, hopefully you don't wash those socks. Yeah, yeah. Or the,

Sean Bill: (42:18)
Yeah, something happens. Right. Cause that one, you know, that would be everybody's worst nightmare. Um, so I am, you know, but again, as we talked about earlier, I'm a big fan of partnering with different firms and using, you know, the fund to funds model and, and just delegating authority to other asset managers and what have you to let them do what they do best. Um, you know, that's something I learned from Tom Dittmer, you know, he said he, he made as much money by allocating money to smart investors that he did on his own trading and investing. And so I think, you know, there's a lot of alpha to be had by finding those managers that understand the markets that we're in and understand how to protect the capital and, and allocate to them. Um, you don't have to do it all, everything on your own.

Sean Bill: (43:01)
Um, but there are, I think, you know, there's, um, there are two funds up in Virginia that, uh, uh, put money into digital assets. Um, you know, I think, you know, there were probably other pensions that are invested in funds like yourself that have assets in digital or have funds digital assets. Um, so I think that the acceptance level is, is getting there. I think the, probably the hardest thing now for everybody to swallow is the idea that, you know, Bitcoin's at 56 to $60,000 and who knows, they're late. I feel like they're living, you know, and, uh, um, that's a hard one to swallow sometimes now in my case, you know, you know, I think there's still a lot more potential and there's a, still a lot more upside from here. So, you know, I don't think it is a three to 5% allocation that I would've thought, uh, you know, in 2018 or 2019. But I do think, you know, uh, it is a half to one and a half pretty safe that have some money, have some exposure there. Yeah.

John Darcie: (44:02)
That's a narrative that we pushed back on a lot too, is we have some very smart hedge fund managers that we work with that have come to us and said, okay, I buy into the story, but I don't want to be the sucker. That's left holding the bag, buying it at 60 and it trades down to the 30 or something and we try to impress upon them how different the environment is today than it was in 2017. And if you look at caps laws, you were talking about and the exponential power of network growth, uh, still, still could be very early, but I want to go further down what you were talking about in terms of central banks. So you talked about, you know, don't fight, the fed has become don't, don't fight the bazooka around the world from the people's bank of China, from, uh, the ECB and a variety of central banks, but also there's this notion, especially within the crypto community that ultimately central banks might lose control, but there might be diminishing returns on the massive liquidity that they're pumping. Do you view, uh, Bitcoin and digital assets and other technology companies as sort of a hedge against inflation or a hedge against the idea that central banks and central planners might lose control. And do you see a future where there are central bank digital currencies that try to mitigate the impact of that?

Sean Bill: (45:10)
Well, I definitely think of Bitcoin more as a, um, as a digital gold than anything else. I think that the design is most efficiently represented in digital gold and as an, as a holding, um, but gold substitute. Um, I think it is very, very, very well positioned to be a hedge against inflation because it is unlimited supply. It's a finite supply, you know, I think, you know, uh, with all the currency printing that's occurring, uh, around the world, um, you know, that this is where Bitcoin really stands out. There's 21 million coins. Um, you know, you're not going to see more than that. So, um, from a big picture standpoint, you know, I don't see Bitcoin competing as a currency. I see it as digital gold. I think that, you know, it, it doesn't have sovereign authority, you know, there is, it's, it gets a little bit tricky on, um, taking it as a currency.

Sean Bill: (46:14)
Um, you know, it's not legal tender, right? I mean, you know, you still are getting taxed when you sell your Bitcoin to buy something, right. Uh, Bitcoin has been appreciating so rapidly that a lot of people feel kind of remorse every time they sell some to buy some right, that guy, the famous pizza I had bought the pizzas, you know, those pizzas were very, very expensive pizzas. Um, so I think that the, yeah, I think that the place for Bitcoin is really as the gold substitute and, you know, you can walk across the border with a thumb drive and, you know, have a hundred million dollars in your pocket and nobody knows, you know? Right. And there's a lot to be said for that when you're dealing with, uh, third world countries and things like that. And what we've seen in widespread Bitcoin adoption, I do think that, you know, the U S central banks, the European central banks, the Chinese central banks, are going to eventually figure out that they have to digitize their cartoon.

Sean Bill: (47:11)
And they really already are kind of digital right. In the sense how the fed works and how they give you credits and debits and all this good stuff. Um, but I do think that, um, you know, a digital dollar is kind of critical for national security. Uh, we're already seeing that, you know, China's working on a digital Renmimbi, um, you know, uh, hopefully, uh, the U S gets there first and, you know, it gets so widely adopted currency, um, a digital currency. Um, it could be one of these other currencies, like Monero or Zcash or something like that. But I kind of tend to think that, you know, it's going to probably be, um, probably either the U S probably the U S or China, that will, will be the, the digital currency of choice. And that's going to be based on whether you want an open or closed system, you know? Yep.

John Darcie: (47:59)
And then this is sort of down the same vein, but you talked about AI, how you're a big investor in AI companies and about the potentially disruptive potential of AI, not just in asset management, but across society. We had a very interesting guest on salt talks. Recently, his name was Jeff Booth. Uh, he wrote a book called the price of tomorrow, which if you haven't haven't read it, I would definitely recommend it. But he basically talked about how, um, AI is going to disrupt the way we think about employment, the way we think about jobs it's already happening. And COVID, I think accelerated that in terms of people not necessarily feeling so more to large corporations with being able to build out their own individual verticalized businesses through content creation, through, uh, syndicate investing through something like angel list, what do you think the broader implications of AI are for, for the investment community and for society, and as, as a steward of a public plan, how do you think about those implications when you're building your portfolios?

Sean Bill: (48:55)
Well, I definitely think that, you know, we're going to see AI creep into a lot of different areas. So I think, you know, you already see it on the backend, you know, in the back office and customer service, right. You probably have been on the phone with an AI, you know, you probably have talked to the chat bot and the AI and those make, you know, the back office more efficient, right. So that the AI can sort through a lot of the easy problems and then the more difficult problems come to the people, the humans, right. So the, the role, the role of people I think will change into trying to kind of figure out what are the right parameters to separate AI, and then, you know, letting the AI kind of take care of a lot of the, uh, I'll say groundwork, right. You know, um, in the investment area, I think we're going to see, you know, we're already seeing it where it's, you know, AI is being used to scan annual reports, earnings reports, uh, research reports, um, you know, um, I know a company that uses AI to scan satellite photos, um, you know, uh, to see what, uh, what's going on in shipping, what's going on in the, you know, we all know we've all heard the stories about satellite photos being used, uh, to determine how many cars are in the parking lot at the various retailers.

Sean Bill: (50:04)
Um, you know, uh, I think that we're just going to see more and more of this, and we're going to see, um, you know, see, uh, creeping to lending, uh, you know, we'll, we'll see where AI is making decisions on credit. Uh, it could eventually be where John, uh, you know, wants to lend some money and Sean must've borrowed some money and we do it through a smart contract on Ethereum. That's using smart AI to help determine if all the conditions are being met, to release the funds and to repay the funds and all that good stuff. Um, so I, I think that we'll see, um, continued steady progress in AI. Now, I think that there's another element of AI. That's also quite, quite interesting. Um, you know, I'm part of the Silicon valley defense group, and there we're working with the department of defense and while the technology companies here in the Silicon valley and, you know, AI is going to be pretty critical for, for future, um, combat.

Sean Bill: (51:05)
Okay. So, you know, there's a lot of money. The stuff that is going on in the defense sector is way beyond anything that we're seeing, uh, in our space and retail. So, uh, I do think that that technology will eventually trickle out into the consumer, into the investment space, into our daily lives. But, um, you know, I mean, right now, I mean, you can kind of think of it. Like if you think of the Gulf war in 1990 and the advantage of the United States had with night vision. Yep. That's going to be AI and the next battle. Right. Um, you know, the, the decision-making will be so quick, so fast that, uh, you know, AI will be the decider rather than human decision-making. Um, so, so I think, you know, we're going to see AI creep into all kinds of places and all, all sorts of areas.

John Darcie: (51:56)
Yep. It'll be fascinating to watch it. And then as we've all observed, COVID sort of accelerated a lot of that technology adoption and, uh, yeah, it's been fascinating to see, but Sean, thanks so much for joining us. We hope you can come to our, our salt conference, which we just announced the resumption of our in-person salt conferences in September, in New York city this year, as opposed to our customary a destination in Las Vegas. Obviously we love Vegas, but doing it in our home city for once will be fun. And we hope to have you there as we often do. So thanks so much.

Sean Bill: (52:26)
Yeah. September, I think. Right. So that'd be good

John Darcie: (52:28)
For yeah. Crazy weather in New York, everybody getting back to hopefully some in-person interaction for once. So we think it'll be fine. Well, Patricia, do you have anything for Sean before we let him

Sean Bill: (52:37)
Go? No, just thanks a lot, Sean. We really appreciate you sharing your insights particularly on AI and you know, the digital space and the challenges around fixed income stage say it's the biggest elephant in the room for every investor and it's not getting any better anytime soon. Unfortunately. Yeah, no, I think we're going to be in a low return environment for a long time. Uh, I always say, you know, I think in my last blog posts, blog posts and put, you know, we're all becoming Japanese, you know, so this could go on for decades, but all of us like sushi. I know I do. I'm pretty sure you do too. Sean. So alluded to John.

John Darcie: (53:12)
I love it. All right. Thank you, Sean. And thank you everybody who tuned into today's salt. Talk with Sean bill of the valley transit authority, uh, out there in Santa Clara county. Just a reminder, if you missed any part of this talk or any of our previous salt talks, you can access them all on our website@salt.org backslash talks and on our YouTube channel, which is called salt tube. We're also on social media. Twitter is where we're most active at salt conference, but we're also on LinkedIn, Instagram and Facebook. And please spread the word about these salt talks. If you have a, an institutional investor in your family, who's not as enlightened as, as Sean is here, uh, make sure to send them the salt talks so they can free their mind to things that are happening within technology and within the digital asset space. But on behalf of Troy guy esky and the entire salt team, this is John Darcie signing off from salt talks for today. We hope to see you back here soon.

John Preston: "Fall: The Mystery of Robert Maxwell" | SALT Talks #192

“Robert Maxwell and Rupert Murdoch were locked in this Titanic struggle for almost 30 years to essentially become the world’s biggest media baron… Murdoch won every round… that led to Maxwell’s own mental and physical destruction.”

John Preston is a scholar, journalist and author of many books including A Very English Scandal, and most recently, Fall: The Mystery of Robert Maxwell. Preston was also former Arts and Television Editor at The Sunday Times.

Robert Maxwell left Czechoslovakia in pursuit of fortune at a young age, leaving behind a family, many of whom perished in the Auschwitz concentration camp. Maxwell and Rupert Murdoch were famous rivals in their respective quests to become the world’s biggest media baron. Murdoch triumphed at every stage and ultimately led to Maxwell’s mental and physical decline. Maxwell suffered a mysterious death that has led to wide-ranging conspiracy theories. “Maxwell disappeared off the back of his yacht named after his youngest daughter and favorite child, Lady Ghislaine… there are a lot of people that would tell you that he was bumped off, usually by Mossad, but there’s no evidence at all he was murdered.”

Maxwell’s youngest and favorite child is Ghislaine. Infamously, she is the alleged co-conspirator with Jeffrey Epstein who was accused of sex trafficking before his death while in jail. Naturally, this has led to even further conspiratorial speculation.

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

John Preston.jpeg

John Preston

Author

Fall: The Mystery of Robert Maxwell

MODERATOR

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darcie: (00:07)
Hello everyone. And welcome back to salt talks. My name is John Darcie. I'm the managing director of salt, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance technology and public policy. Salt talks are a digital interview series with leading investors, creators, and thinkers. And our goal on these salt talks the same as our goal at our salt conferences, which is to provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big and interesting ideas that are shaping the future. And we're very excited today to welcome, uh, an author and scholar to salt talks, uh, by the name of John Preston, he's the author of many books. He's also the former arts editor and television critic of the Sunday Telegraph. As I mentioned, he's the author of six highly acclaimed books, including a very English scandal, which is now a BBC and Amazon prime TV series, starring Hugh grant and Ben Whishaw and the dig, which has recently been filmed, starring Ralph Fiennes, Carey Mulligan, and the Lily James and his most recent book is called fall. Uh, and it's about the life and death of Robert Maxwell, who was, it was been in the news because of his daughter's travails as well recently, but hosting today's talk is a big fan of Mr. Preston and reader of his books, Anthony Scaramucci, who is the founder and managing partner of SkyBridge capital, which is a global alternative investment firm. Anthony is also the chairman of salt and I'll turn it over to Anthony

Anthony Scaramucci: (01:32)
To begin the end. I am loving this right now because I'm almost a hundred percent confident that you mispronounced Ralph finds. His name is correct. Mr. Preston,

John Preston: (01:43)
I'll tell you, take this badly. You both brisk pronounced it. It's all Ray fines.

Anthony Scaramucci: (01:49)
See that. I love that. That why obviously, cause I'm an Italian American from long island. I'm like an S pronounced every word that I utter in the English language, but the fact that you Darcie mispronounced it is giving me joy beyond comprehension. So I'm entering this salt talk, Mr. Preston in a very good mood right now. Excellent. But, but sorry, you wrote a phenomenal book about, uh, Mr. Maxwell, the fall is the it's called fall, the mysterious life and death of Robert Maxwell. Um, I want to start out though with how you became an author, your Odyssey, I think is an interesting one to, uh, beginning of the process of writing these books. Uh, take us through that arc of your career, sir.

John Preston: (02:36)
Well, I was a journalist for a long time and I wrote a few novels. Uh, I'd get up very early in the morning and run right for a couple of hours before I went into the office and the novels did okay. I mean, you know, hardly set the world on fire in terms of, uh, sales and then like a lot of print journalists, you know, particularly in the UK, but also in the U S things started to get bad and then they got worse and I began to think, Hmm, hold on. I got to find something else to do. So I thought, wow, you know, I can't really do anything else apart from right. So I sat down and I wrote a very English scandal, which was about the Jeremy Thor puffer, which is a big scandal in the 1970s where this man who was the leader of the liberal party, uh, was accused of, um, diverting liberal party funds to pay Hitman, to bump off his gay lover.

John Preston: (03:33)
And it really kind of went on from there. And I, I kind of toyed with the idea of Maxwell for a bit, and I couldn't kind of find a way in, and then it just seemed to me that, you know, in the UK, 30 years after his death, he's still seen as the, as the kind of embodiment of corporate villainy. And I really just wanted to look at him again and see if he was quite as black as he's been painted as, and if so, why, and whether he was perhaps a more kind of nuanced, complex figure than people have on the whole given him credit for.

Speaker 4: (04:17)
So

Anthony Scaramucci: (04:18)
Let's go into that because I think that this is one of the more fascinating things who is for our, we have lots of young viewers, uh, lots of young listeners, uh, who is Robert Maxwell, John Preston, who is Robert Maxwell. Well,

John Preston: (04:35)
Robert Maxwell set out to become the greatest media Baron in the world and he very nerdy succeeded. But in fact it was, it all went horribly wrong. But one of the extraordinary things about Maxwell is that it's hard to think of anyone in the 20th century who journeyed as far from his roots as Maxwell did, he was born in a small town in what was then Czechoslovakia. His, uh, his family was Jewish. There was a large Jewish population in this, um, in this town and the age of 15 or 16 Maxwell goes off essentially to seek his fortune. And whilst he's away, it's during the war, um, his parents, three of his siblings and his grandfather all die in Auschwitz. And that's really the prison that you have to look at Maxwell's life through. Um, would it have been very different? Had that not have happened to him almost certainly. Would he have been a better person who knows, but essentially there was a very, very dark cloud hanging over him from a young age.

Anthony Scaramucci: (05:58)
So I have the book here, uh, it's uh, it's called fall, the mysterious life and death of Robert Maxwell. Britain's most notorious media barren. There's another media Baron that is celebrating his 90th birthday and Dave, where they were, they rivals John. And if so, of course, they were described that rivalry to us.

John Preston: (06:20)
They were Maxwell and Rupert Murdoch

Anthony Scaramucci: (06:23)
And indeed,

John Preston: (06:25)
Um, Robert Maxwell and Rupert Murdoch were locked in this Titanic struggle for almost 30 years essentially to become the world's biggest media Baron. And as Maxwell son, Ian said to me, when I was researching the book, he said, you know, one of the things you have to remember is that there was a time when, uh, my father and I, my father-in-law and Rupert Mudder were the only two people on the planet breathing the same air. And it was as if the two of them were kind of slugging it out, uh, on the top of Mount Everest, uh, to become, you know, the greatest, um, media figure in the world and, and Murdoch won every round essentially. But in seeking to prove that he belonged in the same arena as Murdoch Maxwell set in chain set in train a chain of events that led to his own kind of physical and mental destruction, his downfall, and ultimately his death.

Anthony Scaramucci: (07:35)
So let's go back for a second because, uh, Mr. Murdoch, uh, his father was a print media Maven in Australia. He was already starting to reach out away from Australia, into other English speaking countries. Uh, and so I'll say something somewhat English, hopefully won't be too offensive, but you guys sort of have this aristocracy. It seems like Murdoch started from a starting block. That was well ahead of Mr. Maxwell. Is that fair to say? Yeah,

John Preston: (08:06)
I think that's true, but they were both outsiders and they both were not members of the British establishment, uh, Murdoch wasn't Jewish, which probably helped him. And although Maxwell had changed his name to something that sounded not remotely Jewish. I think there was quite a lot of antisemitism there, particularly in the city of London at the time, but Maxwell and Murdoch had first met in 1963 in Australia. And when I went to see Murdoch for the book use, it was very obliging, uh, great to see me. And, uh, he said that he'd first met, um, Maxwell and Maxwell comes to Australia and he's got this plan that he wants to sell encyclopedias in Australia all over in Southeast Asia. And he's looking for a business partner and, uh, and Murdoch, uh, as he admitted was kind of spell bound by Maxwell. He's got the gift of the gab.

John Preston: (09:10)
He's very charismatic murder cause just starting out and he agrees to become Maxwell's business partner. He's going to pay a million Australian dollars and together they're going to sell these encyclopedias all over Southeast Asia. And the plan is that Murdoch is going to come to London, they'll sign the contract and then it'll start. But before he has a chance to come to London, Murdoch has lunch with a friend of his, who's a publisher in Australia and he's telling him all about this great plan he's got with this extraordinary man Maxwell he's met and the publisher starts laughing and murder cause kind of bemused and go well, what's so funny. And it turns out that Maxwell had actually got the encyclopedias were bankrupt stock that the publisher given to Maxwell for free. And he was trying to flog them on to murder for a million dollars.

John Preston: (10:01)
And as Murdoch said, yeah, he was obviously trying to con me and he was a crook. And as far as mass murder was concerned that, you know, he decided he didn't want any more, anything more to do with Maxwell and that was going to be it. And you never expected to see him again. But in fact, their faiths were entwined from that moment on and it used to drive Murdoch nuts that they were always being mentioned in the same breath. And the fact that their initials were the same as well added to kind of, you know, another squeeze of poison as far as he was concerned

Anthony Scaramucci: (10:36)
Is, you know, it's fascinating. There's a picture in the book. I'm going to hold it up here because this is, um, an interesting picture. It is a picture of Mr. Murdoch and Mr. Maxwell together. And as you point out in the book, that is a rare occurrence for the two of them to be in the same room together, uh, after that, uh, sequence of events that you're describing, um, was he a crook, was Mr. Maxwell a crook, uh, according to your research, I think it's a very

John Preston: (11:08)
Difficult question to answer in a way I, if you look at what happened to Maxwell in his, the early part of his business career, he winds up in Berlin in 1946, he's helping to run an allied newspaper in, in Berlin designed to kind of, uh, re-introduce Germans to the joys of democracy. And this man walks in one day and says, can you help me? And he turns out to be the biggest publisher of scientific journals in Germany, and nobody has published any scientific research in Germany during the war. And this man has a vast backlog of stuff that you can't get anyone to publish. And Maxwell's first instinct is to kick him out because that's basically was always max Maxwell's first instinct and anybody, and any, thanks, hold on a moment. And for years, as a young man, he's dreamt of getting hold of this commodity, that's going to be an enormous demand after the war. He can get for next to no money. And he suddenly realized my God, you know, the answers just landed in my lap. And the commodity was knowledge and Maxwell becomes during the 1950s, the world's biggest publisher of scientific journals. And

Speaker 4: (12:27)
He always

John Preston: (12:29)
Flew pretty close to the wind in terms of, uh, his business career. But I think he was, you know, he was, uh, he w he, well, one, I was always sort of, as it were fixed on his profit margins, the other could occasionally give off an unexpectedly idealistic glimpse. And I think he did strongly believe in the importance of scientific research. It's when he becomes obsessed with owning a newspaper and with going toe to toe with Rupert Murdoch, that things really start to go haywire. And the rot sets in

Anthony Scaramucci: (13:10)
Is this, uh, the classic Greek story of someone that is overreaching, is this uberous, is this a lack of self awareness? Is this just a twist of fate that leads to accidental tragedy? How do you, how do you, uh, how would you frame this narrative of Mr. Maxwell's wife?

John Preston: (13:31)
I think it's a classic story of hubris. I mean, it's, it's a, it's a terrible morality tale in a way of someone for whom nothing was ever enough. Um, and as Maxwell becomes older it's as if he's constantly trying to grasp this indefinable something, that's going to give him a sense of completion and fulfillment. And of course it always eludes him and money doesn't do it. And, um, and, and there always is this kind of constantly receding horizon. And the more desperate he becomes, the more he overreaches himself and the more he gets into terrible financial trouble. And, uh, and the more the cracks start to appear.

Anthony Scaramucci: (14:27)
Do you think that, uh, uh, that was a suicide, his death,

John Preston: (14:35)
Well, Maxwell disappeared off the back of his yachts named after his youngest daughter and favorite child. The lady Gillan in the early hours of the 5th of November, 19

Anthony Scaramucci: (14:50)
Minutes. How he pronounced that? I just want to make sure you get that right, John, when you come in with questions. Okay. I know that the lane, I know that one you were saying just lane for like, it's fine. Go ahead. Let's go to Galane he's off the back of the boat that he's jumped the boat. Yep.

John Preston: (15:10)
No, I think basically that morning, he's due to fly back to London where he's essentially going to be facing the equivalent of three firing squads. He knows by this point that the police are after him, the bankers are after him and the mirror pensioners know that he's been looting the pension funds. So there are three possible scenarios. Was he pushed? Did he jump, did he fall? Now, there are a lot of people who will tell you, um, without any kind of tremor of doubt that he was bumped off, usually by Mossad, always the kind of front runners in the queue here. Well, it's, although it's quite a long queue. I mean, there are, there are certainly a lot of people who would be very happy to bump Maxwell off, but there's no evidence at all that he was murdered. And if it doesn't really make sense, I mean, why go to the trouble of sending a team of amphibious Hitman after the middle of the middle of the Atlantic to tip him into the sea when Maxwell was so addicted to self publicity, that he practically walked around with a target pin to his forehead anyway.

John Preston: (16:23)
So I think we can safely dismiss murder if it was an accident in many respects, it was an astonishingly fortuitous accident given that he knew what was going to happen to him. Um, did he commit suicide? We'll certainly, I mean, interestingly, about kind of the people I interviewed for the book pretty much split down the middle Rupert Murdoch, for instance, absolutely convinced no doubt whatsoever that Maxwell committed suicide. My own suspicion is that the line between an accident and suicide might be more blurred than we tend to assume. And I suspect that the answer lies somewhere along that line.

Anthony Scaramucci: (17:19)
Okay. So, so you're not in Rupert Murdoch's camp, but you're not fully convinced, but there's a lot of speculation around him being a Moussad agent, a potential double agent or an agent of the KGB. Uh, why did people believe that to be the case? And is there any truth to those rumors? Well,

John Preston: (17:39)
There was, I mean, Maxwell was certainly a spy, um, and, uh, he was aspired for British intelligence during the war and he had this astonishing capacity to pick up languages. He spoke, I think, seven languages. So when he is in Berlin at the end of the war, Berlin is that time divided into four zones, the French zone, the American zone, the Russian zone and the British zone, I think. Yeah. So Maxwell can move from zone to zone and pass himself off as a native. So it's very, very useful. The British intelligence like that. And indeed the British intelligence set him up in business when he comes to England at the end of the war. Um, I think he probably stopped being a spy sometime in the fifties, but he carried on. He loved, um,

Speaker 4: (18:31)
Being

John Preston: (18:33)
A networker. He loved feeling important and conveying bits and pieces of information from one government to another. He was incredibly well connected. He had fantastically good contacts behind what was then the iron curtain, because he was doing a lot of business in Russia at a time when virtually no other Western business people were doing any business at all. Uh, he had very good contacts with the Israeli government. Um, so he was, there was no doubt that he was a very kind of useful pipe through which to pass information, but I don't believe that he was a double agent for anybody. And I don't believe that he was a fully paid up agent for anybody either. I mean, indeed, you know, I mean, if given them, you know, what are the kind of prime qualifications I'm aspiring is normally something that takes place behind the curtain as it were Maxwell was the complete opposite of that. He had to dominate any room that he set foot in. So he would have in many respects, been a terrible liability to any government that employed him as a spy. So I think he was used by people to pass information back and forth, but that was pretty much as far as it went.

Anthony Scaramucci: (19:59)
So no, no reason for them then too often then. Yeah,

John Preston: (20:03)
No, no, really not. And you know, and there's, you know, there's stories that he was trying to blackmail the Israeli government, um, and into kind of bailing him out at a time when everything was going down the pan. But again, absolutely no evidence to suggest that at all. And indeed the fact that the Israeli, the Israelis pretty much gave him a state funeral when he died and buried him on the Mount of olives, seems a kind of odd thing to do if they've just bumped him off.

Anthony Scaramucci: (20:39)
So fat, fascinating stuff, but he looms large even today. Uh, his daughter is now in jail. She was a close friend of alleged conspirator, Jeffrey Epstein was their upbringing. What was her upbringing like? And how did that association come about? Well, I think, I think it was

John Preston: (21:05)
The strange thing is that actually family life with the Maxwells, uh, for quite a long time was perfectly happy. They lived in this enormous house, um, on just outside Oxford looking out over the dreaming spires of Oxford university. The Maxwell's had nine children, two of whom died and Galane is born in pretty much the same week as Maxwell's oldest child oldest son. Who's the ad designate. Michael is very badly injured in a car crash. Uh he's in his teens and he lies in a coma for the next seven years and then dies. And that cast this terrible black cloud over the Maxwell's family life and just as Maxwell himself had to be, it had been brought up under this terrible cloud of what had happened to his own family. I think Elaine was brought up under a similarly black cloud, um, and like all the Maxwell children at one time or another, she worked for his father. She was, she was, she was his father's favorite. I think she was the one who could charm him more easily than the others and possibly was less intimidated by him. The Maxwells would have these kind of

Speaker 4: (22:41)
Pretty

John Preston: (22:42)
Grim Sunday lunches where they would have to each child would have to give a little talk about what they'd accomplished that week and what they hope to accomplish in the week to come. And sometimes there'd be asked about kind of current affairs and another of Maxwell's daughter. Describe to me the kind of fare of watching her, the sort of Searchlight beam of her father's gaze move around the table towards her. Uh, and I don't think Elaine suffered as badly from that perhaps as the others. Um, and then when her father died, she was absolutely grief-stricken possibly even more so than any of her siblings. Uh, I think she absolutely adored her father. Um, and she found herself in New York. How, I mean, people have tried to draw analogies between Jeffrey Epstein and her father, but they don't really stack up apart from the fact they were both extremely wealthy men at one stage.

John Preston: (23:55)
Uh, I mean, Epstein was a much more shadowy figure than Maxwell. I mean, Maxwell really was this tremendous egomaniac. Whereas you feel with Epstein Epstein kind of was happier operating underneath the radar. Um, and you know, how she came into Epstein's orbit. Well, obviously there's been a lot written about that, but you know, I'm, uh, one of the people who think that it's entirely possible that Galane yeah, she seems to have been tried and found guilty by the media on both sides of the Atlantic before she's stood trial. And I believe possibly in a rather old fashioned way that she, uh, deserves a fair trial and who knows she may well get off.

Anthony Scaramucci: (24:56)
Yeah, well, we'll have to, we'll have to see, I don't know a lot about her. Um, as I like to tell my friends in New York, I didn't start making any money until well after Jeff Epsteins career was exposed and over. So I don't have any, any relationship there, but it does. It did seem to be that anybody of any profile or wealth was somehow ensnared in his web. Uh, do you think she wasn't snared in his web or do you think that she was a quote unquote co-conspirator of his,

John Preston: (25:28)
I th the short answer is, I don't know. And my book, I very carefully stopped, um, before any of that happened, because I feel it is a different story.

Anthony Scaramucci: (25:43)
Yeah, no. And that's why I'm asking the question, because I, I noticed the stoppage here. I turned it over to the millennial. You and I are, uh, are baby boomers, the millennials dying to ask questions, tell the truth before the book came out, did you have any idea who Robert Maxwell was? W I was probably your, I was probably your age on the Goldman Sachs trading desk, where we had done several secondary offerings for him. And Goldman actually had to pay a settlement to those pensioners, John. I know John Preston. I know. Absolutely. Yeah, indeed. And so I remember that day vividly because there was a dark Pauler over the trading desk, the day that Mr. Maxwell died, did you know who he was Dorsey?

John Darcie: (26:28)
I did because as, as any millennial would do, I've gone down the entire, you know, he's a foreign intelligence agent rabbit hole, and Jeff Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell were part of some, uh, honeypot scheme to powerful people around the world, uh, and blackmail them, which we're not going to get deep into those conspiratorial rabbit holes. But I knew about him because of the whole Galane Maxwell thing and, and, uh, read up on him. But obviously you got more background through this wonderful book, but, um, yeah. Thank you, Anthony, for passing the Baton. So one of the things that I found fascinating about Robert Maxwell, uh, was the similarities he has to, to other schemers that have existed throughout history. Whether it be Frank Abignail catch me if you can, um, or, or others, Bernie Madoff, or the one MDB scandal, uh, where people are able to trick financial institutions, wealthy investors through just, uh, sheer force of will. What about his personality and his skill set allowed them to do that?

John Preston: (27:36)
I think, well, Maxwell was a tremendously charismatic man. Uh, he was also very intimidating. Um, so very few people in the UK genuinely stood up to him. A lot of people claim to have stood up to him, uh, and said that, you know, I would have no track whatsoever with Maxwell and his disgraceful ways. A lot of them, when you were just rolled over, like, you know, complete dummies when Maxwell was actually in their company, the extraordinary thing about one of the, maybe many things about Maxwell's financial affairs is that throughout the 1980s, he's a kind of, you know, he's because he's a very successful businessman. He has, he genuinely has money, um, in the 1980s and the beginning of the 1980s. But as things go on and as he overreaches himself, very few people ever say, well, hold on a minute. You know, where is this money?

John Preston: (28:48)
And if they ever did say it, Maxwell would go, well, it's all sorted away in Lichtenstein. And Lichtenstein is this tiny kind of quasi country, which is essentially a tax Haven. So you put money in lectern Stein, and nobody can get at it. So all he ever did was to say, well, I've got billion stashed away in Lichtenstein. And they all believed him. I mean, it was astonishing, but I think that, you know, there is a big difference between someone like Maxwell and someone like Bernie Madoff in the Bernie Madoff was solely interested in lining his own pockets Maxwell weirdly.

John Preston: (29:33)
I mean, I think he would have actually did lose money from the para the pension funds of the, of the mirror of mirror newspapers. But I think he would have paid it back if been able to, he wasn't particularly interested in money for the sake of money. He liked to wield power and influence, but he had virtually no interest in possessions, apart from his yacht, the lady gala in which she, he was very fond of. Um, but he, he's a kind of, you know, he's a man without a center in a funny sort of way, what did he want? You know, and you feel that Maxwell himself didn't really know, and he's just constantly trying to find out is

John Darcie: (30:18)
It, is it like a Robert Moses situation, the power broker, great Robert Carroll book where a man maybe starts his life with a certain ideological bent, but then he tastes power and, and it becomes a pursuit of power and influence for the sake of it. I think with Maxwell

John Preston: (30:37)
Idealism and expediency were always running along parallel tracks. So I don't think it was necessarily that one took over from the other, although one certainly did become, um, you know, Supreme as it were. Um, I mean, I remember when I was, when I started researching the book and when I started writing it, someone asked me how I was going to do it. And I said, it's like a build your own citizen Kane kit. And it really is a bit like that. And, uh, and if you Chuck in bits of the great Gatsby, you pretty much got it. You know, you have this extraordinary vivid Technicolor, mythological life. Um, and as I said, you know, as I said to Anthony, yeah, it is very hard to think of anyone in the trench, essentially who journeyed is far from his roots as Maxwell. And you have this strange feeling, the older he becomes it's as if the past is kind of constantly snapping at his heels, almost mocking him for what he's achieved. And basically saying you can never escape who you were.

John Darcie: (31:45)
Yep. So is this going to be turned into a Netflix series or a movie or both? What's the future of this story? Because it's too interesting to not be adapted to the screen?

John Preston: (31:56)
Well, it's been bought by a UK company working title and they plan to turn it into, uh, a TV series. So there's some discussion at the moment, whether you could have one actor playing the young Rowan Maxwell who is incredibly good looking, I mean, it looked kind of like Clark Gable and max row, the older, he got the bigger he got. And I mean really to the point where you would need someone in the mother of all fat suits to be able to play him. Um, so, but I'm delighted to say, that's not going to be my

Anthony Scaramucci: (32:38)
Problem. [inaudible] Anthony has this, John, you start, I'm cutting you Mike, John. Okay. He was trying to suggest that I could play him without the fat suit. If you start John, I'm cutting you mic. I saw where you were going with that. Okay. Friday's Maximilian, paranoia, this depressing. Did you hear what he said? He said I had a screen actors Guild card. He was already started. I had to get in there. Jack, keep going, Darcie, go ahead. He

John Darcie: (33:11)
Had already started to respond before I even said anything. Uh, John, so your, your comment about the paranoia is correct, but, um, yeah, no, that's fascinating stuff. And we look forward to watching that

Anthony Scaramucci: (33:22)
And hopefully the paranoia, if people are after you just remember that. Okay.

John Darcie: (33:28)
Well, we look forward to watching it on screen and hope they remain true to your wonderful book. Uh, before we let you go, is there anything else interesting that we didn't cover related to his life that you think, uh, was interesting as you did your research?

John Preston: (33:43)
I think he's a kind of figure

Speaker 4: (33:47)
Who foreshadows

John Preston: (33:50)
Donald Trump in a way because they, both of them have similar kind of crazed self aggrandizement and Maxwell. Um, as soon as he buys the daily mirror in the mid 1980s, um, he rechristened it, uh, ma his headquarters Maxwell house. So you can see Mac there. There's a pretty short line between Maxwell house and Trump tower and Trump, uh, Maxwell buys the New York daily news at the beginning of 1991. And Trump has indeed tried to buy the New York daily news on several occasions during the 1980s, um, as a springboard for his political career. And Trump was kind of fascinated by Maxwell. And there's a kind of, I remember I talked to Maxwell's valet who said that Maxima once had a party on board, the lady Galane and all these kinds of the great and good of New York without including Donald Trump. And because Maxwell was very proud of his, um, this was a cream shag pile carpets. All the guests had to take their shoes off and putting these little kind of blue plastic booties on, and it would protect the carpet. And Maxwell's valet told me that, you know, Maxwell very reluctant that Trump very reluctantly removed his shoes, but he looked round the yards with this expression of kind of, or an envy on his face as if Maxwell had something that Trump lusted after. But at the time hadn't quite got his hands on.

John Darcie: (35:27)
Yes, he eventually got his hands on it for at least four years. And daddy did all right. Well, John, it's fascinating to have you on, it's a great book fall about the life and mysterious death of Robert Maxwell. Anthony want to hold it up one more time, the American

Anthony Scaramucci: (35:43)
Version of the UK and the American version, but this was a, a great read and reads like a thriller John, uh, congratulations on your, uh, golden global winning, uh, television series as well. And, uh, we look forward to your future works. Thank you again for all thoughts.

John Preston: (36:04)
Thank you very much, indeed.

John Darcie: (36:07)
And thank you everybody for tuning in to today's salt. Talk with author, John Preston, just a reminder. If you missed any part of this talk or any of our previous salt talks, you can access them on our website@salt.org backslash talks or on our YouTube channel, which is called salt tube. You can also interact with us on social media. We're most active on Twitter at salt conference, but we're also on LinkedIn, Instagram, and Facebook. And please spread the word to your friends about these salt talks. We love educating our community and growing our audience as well. And on behalf of Anthony and the entire salt team, this is John Darcie signing off from salt talks for today. We hope to see you back here soon.

Professor Peter Hotez: Preventing the Next Pandemic | SALT Talks #191

“We’re in this bizarre period of anti-science. It’s globalized; it’s become its own empire.”

Dr. Peter J. Hotez is dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine, and professor of pediatrics and molecular virology and microbiology at Baylor College of Medicine. Dr. Hotez is an internationally recognized physician scientist in neglected tropical diseases and vaccine development.

Anti-science sentiment has taken hold in America and spread globally. This has been a main obstacle in slowing the COVID pandemic, nearly half the country flouted CDC guidelines as a sign of political and cultural allegiance. Disinformation has been difficult to counteract as its dissemination is so pervasive across the Internet. This was made especially difficult when the Trump-led White House executed a textbook anti-science disinformation campaign, undercutting the health and science community’s efforts. “I’ve had multiple epiphanies but the latest and most horrifying was seeing the anti-science COVID disinformation campaign come out of the White House about a year ago. I’ve seen this before. This is a deliberate anti-science disinformation campaign.”

The COVID vaccines have proven highly effective at not only preventing symptomatic illness, but also asymptomatic spread. The next major challenge is getting the rest of the world vaccinated, particularly Africa and Latin America where large-scale vaccination plans have yet to be developed.

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Professor Peter J. Hotez, MD, PhD.jpeg

Peter Hotez

Dean

National School of Tropical Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine

MODERATOR

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darcie: (00:06)
Hello, everyone. Welcome back to salt talks. My name is John Darcie. I'm the managing director of salt, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance technology and public policy. Soul talks are a digital interview series with leading investors, creators, and thinkers. And our goal on these salt talks is the same as our goal at our salt conference series, which is to provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future. And in my opinion, and I know Anthony shares this opinion as well. There's no topic more important today than talking about vaccines and public health. And we're very excited today to welcome professor Peter J Hotez onto salt talks, uh, to talk about these issues. Uh, Dr. Hotez is the Dean of the national school of tropical medicine and professor of pediatrics and molecular virology and microbiology at Baylor college of medicine and Waco, Texas, Dr.

John Darcie: (01:01)
Hotez is an internationally recognized physician scientist in neglected tropical diseases and vaccine development as head of the Texas children's CVD. He leads a team and product development partnership for developing new vaccines for diseases affecting hundreds of millions of children and adults worldwide. In 2006 at the Clinton global initiative, he co-founded the global network for neglected tropical diseases to provide access to essential medicines for hundreds of millions of people. He obtained his undergraduate degree in molecular biophysics from Yale university in 1980, followed by a PhD degree in biochemistry from Rockefeller university in 1986 and a medical degree from wild Cornell college medical college, uh, in 1987, in 2014 to 2016, Dr. Hotez served in the Obama administration as us Envoy, focusing on vaccine diplomacy initiatives between the us government and countries in the middle east and north Africa in 2018, he was appointed by the us state department to serve on the board of governors for the U S Israel by national science foundation.

John Darcie: (02:05)
And he's frequently called upon to testify before us Congress, and also in major media outlets. He's also going sort of off script here. He's been called the OJI villain by people in the anti-vaccine movement, including Robert Kennedy Jr. Who's sort of the face of a lot of that movement. So that's a huge badge of honor, uh, for Dr. Hotez to get that distinction within that community, because it means he's spreading truth and sort of, uh, one of the people that's evangelizing truth around the need to get vaccines, especially for something like COVID-19 that has ravaged, uh, so much of the United States as well as the world, but it's a pleasure to have you on Dr. Hotez hosting. Today's talk is Anthony Scaramucci, the founder and managing partner of SkyBridge capital, a global alternative investment firm. And he's also the chairman of salts. And with that, I'll turn it over to Anthony for the interview. Anthony is not a doctor, but I know he has a lot of very important things to say about

Anthony Scaramucci: (02:54)
That, correct. Hotez he starts in every day, every day, he's got a little wise Alec remark, trust me as we get towards September and it's bonus season, I look taller and thinner to Mr. Darcie. Okay. Just so you know. So I, he gave

Peter Hotez: (03:08)
Me a very generous introduction, unfortunately, we're almost out of time, but it was a great introduction.

John Darcie: (03:12)
Yeah. Well, now I'm doing much,

Anthony Scaramucci: (03:17)
I'm doing your book at this service or which I apologize for, cause I ha I've read it on my Kindle. Uh, but what we'll do is obviously we'll post it up for people and we'll put it up on our social media, but the book is about vaccine diplomacy in a time of anti-science. And I think the book is absolutely fascinating on a number of different levels because we're in the age of disinformation SIRS, you clearly point out of the book and we're in an age where I would have thought as you and I were roughly contemporaries. I would've thought at this point in our lives, science would have mattered more. Uh, but it feels like we went instead of into the 21st century, we're sort of back in the 17th or 18th century, even skipping the 19th century. So, so my question to you, sir, why did you write the book? What can our viewers and listeners learn from purchasing the book, which I strongly recommend that they do?

Peter Hotez: (04:11)
Yeah, I think you're absolutely right, Anthony, you know, we're, we're in this bizarre period of what I call anti-science, it's almost, it's big and it's globalized. It's become its own empire, which we'll talk about more. But the reason I wrote the book was, uh, from my time as us science Envoy, um, in the Obama administration, I was there in the middle east and north Africa at a very difficult time. Uh, 2015 into 20 14, 20 15, 20 16. It was during the Syrian conflict, the civil war, the ISIS occupation, the proxy war between the Saudis and the Iranians were starting in Yemen. And the Arabian peninsula had de stabilize the [inaudible] war and political collapse was bringing back a vaccine preventable diseases, neglected tropical diseases like leishmaniasis, this huge rise and in Aleppo, and while everyone was focused on the geopolitical consequences, what I saw was a massive eruption of disease and also noted how we were seeing this in Venezuela with the Maduro regime and in central Africa and the, and the Boca Harambe areas in Northern Nigeria.

Peter Hotez: (05:20)
And then even what was happening on Texas and the Gulf coast and realized that the kinds of forces that were bringing back diseases were things that is a MD and a PhD physician scientist. I was never trained to think about poverty, war, political collapse, climate change anti-vaccine anti-science movements. And yet these were the disease drivers and all that, that book was finished about a year before COVID-19 erupted. So that COVID-19 was in some ways I see it as a culminating event rather than something extraordinary. This was all predicted and predictable based on the, uh, the huge unraveling we're seeing.

Anthony Scaramucci: (06:00)
So I wanna, I wanna, I wanna ask you about the moment. Was there an epiphany? Uh, you're obviously a medical doctor university professor, uh, you've had this, uh, work as a political public servant for our country. Thank you for that. But was there a moment, was there an epiphany where you were like, oh my God, there's a tremendous amount of disinformation out there. And that just information is in a Prairie fire situation growing at a time when we don't need that. Frankly, we need scientific fact on the ground and data. When did that happen,

Peter Hotez: (06:38)
Sir? Well, I've had multiple Epiphanes, but the latest one and for me the most horrifying was when I saw the anti-science, uh, COVID disinformation campaign come out of the white house about a year ago at this time. Uh, and you know, going up against anti-vaccine groups for years because I have a daughter with autism and I have four adult kids, and I have a daughter with autism and intellectual disabilities and wrote a book about it called vaccines did not cause Rachel's autism to debunk all of the fake claims that vaccines cause autism from the anti-vaccine lobby and what autism is. And, and so I became by default, an expert in anti-science disinformation campaigns. And then I saw it happening in front of my eyes, going on CNN and MSNBC, listening to the stuff coming out of the white house. And, and of course it came out of president Trump, but it was Peter Navarro and Larry Kudlow and this guy Meadows, and even the white, even Kaylee, Macanese the white house press secretary.

Peter Hotez: (07:39)
I said, you know what, I know what this is. I've seen this before. This is, this is not just a one-off thing. This is a deliberate anti-science disinformation campaign and called it out as such. And, and I was one of the first to call it out. Not because I was so brilliant, it's just that I had decades of experience going up against these groups and it was coordinated and it was really scary. And that was a tough time for me because, you know, as a scientist, you're always told, just stick with the science. You're not an expert on politics. Don't try to become a political expert, but in order to tear apart, the anti-science from what was being said, you know, you have to call it out. And that was, uh, that was a very dark period for me.

Anthony Scaramucci: (08:22)
Let let's say that we're speaking today to anti-vaxxers, uh, they they're, we've got a hundreds of them, millions of them plugged into this and they were trying to move them. What would you say to anti-vaxxers? And by the way, I'm going to point out something to you, which is astonishing to me. I have a high school teachers that are friends of mine, uh, elementary school teachers, very smart, educated people. They won't get vaccines. They, they absolutely think that the coronavirus vaccine is going to do something to genetically mutate them. Uh, and so what would you say to these people? How, how do you reach these people, sir? Is there a way to change their hearts and minds?

Peter Hotez: (09:02)
Well, one of the things that I point out is, and thanks for the question is that this is no longer a fringe group. Anti-science anti-vaccine sentiments activities are now mainstream in American public life. And, and although it started around vaccines causing autism about six, seven years ago, it in order to re-energize cause in part, because I had been debunking all the fake autism links in order to re-energize, it found a way to glom itself onto the Republican tea party here in Texas and Oklahoma. And that re-energized it. They started forming political action committees. They started getting a lot of money from T D T party donor support. And, um, and then it glommed on in 2020 protest against mass and social distancing. It became this full-on anti-science movement of that. And you saw it happen, uh, in the last summer you saw how the virus accelerated through the Southern states, um, mostly red states and then into the central, uh, upper Midwest, all because people showed their political allegiance by defying masks and social distancing.

Peter Hotez: (10:10)
And, and now we've got multiple surveys, including one of ours that we did with Texas a and M and then one that, uh, the most recent on PBS news hour finds that quote, white Republicans are now the leading anti-vaccine evac, most vaccine hesitant group. And it all began about six, seven years ago, uh, with under this banner of health, freedom, medical freedom, and it's, it's not become mainstream. And this is, this is a huge issue in, so trying to combat the disinformation is, is not easy because it dominates the internet there more than 480 fake anti-vaccine websites, all revved up on Facebook and Instagram and Twitter. If you go to amazon.com and look on, look up books on vaccination, they're almost all fake anti-vaccine books and COVID conspiracy books. So Amazon is the single largest promoter of vaccine, uh, disinformation. And then of course, as if that weren't complicated enough, you've gotten out of the export of this to Western Europe, you had anti mask, anti, uh, vaccine rallies and London and Berlin Paris and Berlin, the tried to storm the Reichstag or it was reported.

Peter Hotez: (11:23)
It was linked to Q1 on. And, and then if that were not complicated enough, then you've got what U S and British intelligence report is a systematic program of weaponized health communication. That's the term they use coming out of Putin and Russian government. So this is a mainstream movement now, and it's as big a threat, I think to our country is anything that we build infrastructure to combat like nuclear proliferation or terrorism. I think it's reached that level, you know, in the end that killed 530 540,000 Americans was not only the SARS coronavirus. It was the SARS coronavirus, aided and abetted by this anti science movement. And there's some new numbers saying that a majority of the deaths and COVID-19 in the U S were, were because of this. So this is, this is a crisis

Anthony Scaramucci: (12:11)
30, 35,000 people are dead in Florida. Uh, yet governor DeSantis is out there, uh, championing his economic policies and his policies towards handling the virus. And as you know, many people find his decisions to be quite popular. What's your, uh, as a scientist, what's your view of that?

Peter Hotez: (12:33)
Well, you know, he's, he's done everything he can to encourage this kind of fake health, freedom, uh, sentiment and attitudes. And he most recently held a press conference where he brought in Scott Atlas. I'm sure he's someone you've you've met before. And yes, no. I know Scott and, and all of these, all of this great Barrington nonsense that came, comes out of the American Institute for economic research. And, and now it's got a quote, its own intellectual underpinnings, even though it's highly flawed. And, and, uh, but, but it has the veneer of a serious, uh, uh, well intellectually thought out program. And again, it's, uh, but the [inaudible] in here, this is not a time to mess around. This is we know that variant is much more contagious than anything we've seen higher mortality. New paper came out in nature magazine last week. So this is a, this is, you know, we're not, we're not far away. We, we still can. I think we can vaccinate our way out of this. We just have to minimize loss of life between now and then,

Anthony Scaramucci: (13:36)
But the current vaccines on the market right now are somewhat protective of that variant, is that fair to say or

Peter Hotez: (13:44)
That's right. So it looks as though all of the operational warp speed vaccines, which by the way, is another terrible name is, um, are not only protective against your original lineages, but against the [inaudible] variant, which is going to be the dominant one in the foreseeable future. That's the one that came out of England and what's more Anthony, which is really exciting. Now studies out of Israel in Scotland are showed the vaccines are not only stopping symptomatic and illness, which is what we knew from the phase two clinical trials last year. But now we know it's actually stopping documented infection, meaning PCR positivity. And what that means is the vaccines are stopping virus shedding from the nose and mouth. It means that I'm working at stopping asymptomatic transmission so that, uh, I'm pretty confident. Now, if we can vaccinate most of the American people, we can actually vaccinate our way out of this epidemic. We can actually haul virus, transmission and get back to something that resembles something very normal. And as you know, I've, I mean, no one has been more straightforward about giving bad news to the American people than I've been. So this is a very optimistic thing I'm saying, and I firmly believe it that we can, we can conquer this virus in the United States. We have a big problem globally, but in the United States,

Anthony Scaramucci: (15:02)
Well, I, you know, listen, I, I found you throughout this whole process to be a voice of reason, sobering facts-based, but also a voice of reason. And I think, uh, you know, I owe it to you and people like you and, uh, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, et cetera, for telling the truth to people and also helping us conform our behavior to create more safety for our families and even, you know, elderly people in my family. But, but, uh, I'm going to take this, I'm going to cut it and I'm going to send it to about a hundred people. I know that will not get the Corona virus vaccine. And, you know, listen, I'm not trying to profile here, but they are white and they are Republican. And they've been watching a lot of Fox news and they listened to president Trump and they not going to take the vaccine.

Anthony Scaramucci: (15:52)
And you, and I both know, uh, that taking that vaccine and I'll fully disclose everybody. I'm about to get my second dose of the modern, a virus vaccine. Um, you and I both know that that's going to stall our ability to create this herd immunity. So you've got the stage, give me your best sale. I, you know, you got, you got a great gown on I'm, I'm, I'm loving the doctor's gown and the Baylor logo and everything. You've got the stage, but you got to channel your best salesmanship now. And you've got to convince this, this group of a hundred people that I know personally, that will not take this vaccine. What are we saying to them

Peter Hotez: (16:30)
Today? So we've been working, I've been working our groups and working on Corona virus vaccines for the last decade. We make vaccines for lots of tropical and neglected infections. And we adopted a coronavirus vaccine program a decade ago. We showed that the best way to prevent Corona virus infection is to deliver the spike protein to the immune system, to create virus, neutralizing antibodies in your system. We now know that those virus neutralizing antibodies from a vaccine will save your life. Well, that

Anthony Scaramucci: (17:02)
Will make me sterile doctor.

Peter Hotez: (17:05)
Yeah. They won't make you sterile. It won't modify your DNA. In fact, we've put out a series of articles now, deep debunking, all of the fake assertions ranging from that, it's going to modify your DNA, creating genetically modified humans to five G nonsense. And, um, and the list goes on. What we know is that by getting vaccinated, getting virus, neutralizing antibodies, that's the closest thing to a guarantee that you will not go to a hospital or an intensive care unit because of COVID-19. And we know that the only way to get back to a normal quality of life in the United States is to get just about every adult vaccinated. And if we do that, um, I think the masks didn't come off. I think the, um, we can get back to school, get back to college, get back to ball games, get back to everything else that we like to do.

Anthony Scaramucci: (18:00)
And in 2000, I think that's brilliant and I'm going to cut that. And I'm going to try to reach as many people with that as possible. In 2012, David Quammen wrote a book called spillover, uh, and he talked about the animal population and the human population running into each other. Now, as the population of humans is spilling over into the animal population, seven plus billion of us, uh, and it causing these transfers, the zoological or zoo Tropic transfers of viruses from mammals to humans. Um, what is your opinion of that more of that going to happen in our future and are these M RNA vaccines, can they be reprogrammed to help prevent the next big pandemic?

Peter Hotez: (18:48)
Yeah, a lot to unpack there. Well, first of all, what's happened now for the first time more people live in urban areas than rural areas. That's been a trend that's been accelerating over the last decade. So if you've projected decades out, you know, the human race is going to live in a series of mega cities, massive, uh, urban structures that outstrip, um, water and sanitation. And, you know, we're looking at a mega city is a city over 10 million people. So consortium and Legos and DACA and Bangladesh for, to laser. These are going to be massive cities, and they're going to encroach upon forested areas where bats live. And we know bats, uh, not only, uh, are, are natural reservoirs of Corona viruses, but also Ebola virus and lip a virus. So we should expect more of this kind of contact going on. And, and particularly in areas where there's enormous amount of crowding that outstrips infrastructure that's just can ignite a virus, uh, along one of these big mega cities. So unfortunately this is going to be a new reality, and we now need to take steps globally, uh, in order to get ready for this as a. So what I've been saying is we've had SARS in 2003 mayors in 2012. That's when we started getting involved in this, making those vaccines, we've got COVID in 2019, we'll have COVID 26, we'll have COVID 32, and we need to get ready for that as well.

Anthony Scaramucci: (20:22)
Um, 500,000 plus deaths in the United States, obviously very tragic. And some of those we both know could have been avoided at, we had better unified theory around public health and safety, and obviously a bigger output on the vaccines. We also both know that president Trump and his family took the vaccine, but didn't want to tell people about it because they prey on these peoples conspiracy theories in their anti-vaccine situation. Um, what would you say to president Biden who is now at the helm? How do we cleanse ourselves of this, this, this information? What do we do from a public perspective, a private perspective to try to get this right going forward?

Peter Hotez: (21:09)
Well, first of all, I would like to say, you know, he is responsive to the scientific community or has been, and I, and I've worked with president Biden when he was a Senator around neglected tropical disease legislation, very committed to things like this. And he, um, you know, he came out right after the inauguration saying he was going to vaccinate a hundred million people in a hundred days and said, we're going to fully vaccinate the American people by the fall. But those of us in the scientific community saw that [inaudible] he said, oh, this isn't going to work. He's got to do this by late in the spring. And they responded, you know, they, they were, they were responsive and they figured out how, how to do that. So I have to tell you, that's one of the more impressive things I've seen in terms of responding to a pandemic threat by, by an entity in the U S government, what he has to do now, which so far, I haven't really seen.

Peter Hotez: (22:01)
Maybe there are things going on behind the scenes is reaching out to the other side, reaching across the aisle. And I know he's capable of it. He's had his Greg great track record of doing it. But, um, this, this vaccine resistance, this anti-science component of the Republican party is real. And as I say in the past, it was just, you know, from the, you know, pretty extreme people down here in Texas, in Oklahoma, under health, freedom, medical freedom, it's mainstream, and the Republican party right now, you have multiple members of Congress now publicly stating they're not going to get vaccinated and we've got to fix this and we have to fix it soon because it's eroding the strength of our country. I mean, uh, I, I'm a believer that the greatness of our nation is built on a lot of things. And one of them is the greatness of our research institutions and universities and the water.

Peter Hotez: (22:54)
Why do people love America? And that's a major reason. And this is, you know, our greatest victories were achieved through science, whether it's defeating Nazi-ism and fascism in world war II or the cold war, or putting humans on the moon. Um, we have always been a science driven country for the last hundred years. And, and to get away from that is so self-defeating, and, and this means reaching out to the Republicans and I haven't been doing my part I've well, first of all, we had a lot of vaccine hesitancy among African-American groups. So I started going on talk radio shows and podcasts that reach black and brown communities, and now I've made it no. And then I've been doing it going on conservative news outlets, and then trying to get back on Fox. I was on for a while. And then, then I was off trying to get back on Fox. And even I did was on Newsmax. So it was on a daily caller and we have to do this in order to fully, you know, solve this problem. And I think we can, but it's going to take a lot of work. There's a lot of in people right now.

Anthony Scaramucci: (23:57)
Yeah. And, but, you know, and it's also has spilled over frankly, to continue to use that word into election fraud. We had the secretaries of state of Michigan and the secretary of state of Georgia on our, our series here to talk about the accuracy of that election. Yet there's 40 or 50 million people think that it's a fraudulent election. So we, we have a fever going on in the country right now of disinformation. And that's why people like you, sir, our national heroes, because you're willing to brave that fight despite the attacks on your personhood and who you are. Um, I know I

Peter Hotez: (24:32)
W I always say, no, the Republican party was never anti-science right. I mean, national academy of sciences was formed under Abraham Lincoln, Eisenhower launched NASA, George W. Bush launch PEPFAR. You know, it was never this way before. And so at am. I try to educate people about that, to say, you know, this, these are not the droids you're looking for. I don't know why you're going in this direction when it's, so obviously self-defeating and scary and, and, uh, and, uh, an, a security threat for the country. This is as great. A Homeland security threat is anything we'll face.

Anthony Scaramucci: (25:06)
So I, I have a theory about this, sir. Not that you want to hear my theories, but I do believe that there's economic desperation in the land. Uh, there's a very large group of people that don't feel the aspirational arc of America that perhaps our generation and our parents felt and a result of which they're pointing fingers. And they're looking to conspiracy, and they're looking to breed this disinformation. It helps almost a swash where they're going directionally. I think we've got to provide more jobs, more opportunity, more real income.

Peter Hotez: (25:37)
I totally agree. I mean, it's, you know, it's become tribal and, and all I'm trying to do now is say to the tribe, this is not the one you want get, right. Don't get, get rid of, get rid of the anti-science good, right?

Anthony Scaramucci: (25:52)
Because obviously science is our future will lead to more prosperity. I've got the erstwhile millennial that needs to ask questions. If we don't bring them in dock the ratings, don't apparently he's very, very popular this guy. I mean, he gets, he gets fan mail and all kinds of different stuff, but I have one last question before we bring in Mr. Darcie, and that's related to the accusations going on, uh, in the Wu Han laboratory and the origination of COVID-19. I was wondering if you could, uh, opine on those theories, which your opinion there, if you have one

John Darcie: (26:25)
And former CDC director Redfield just came out with an op-ed basically expressing his opinion than it did originate from the lab and move on.

Anthony Scaramucci: (26:34)
What's your opinion there, sir, if you have one,

Peter Hotez: (26:36)
Well, you know, it's, it's not impossible. The, well, one of the things I've said is, you know, China's always been the perfect mixing bowl for zoonotic viruses, because we used to do a lot of work in China. We kept the lab in China, in Shanghai for many years, and you see it in the outdoor markets, you know, it's this perfect mixing bowl of ducks and pigs and chickens. And, and it all comes together in contact with, with humans. And that's why we see all of the avian flus, poor sine flus come out of China. That's why you see, you saw stars arise out of China. So the point was, there was never a reason to invoke human orange or man-made oranges, uh, for this, for this virus. So it's not impossible. I just never saw the, the urgency to, to focus on it because we know that China is a place that we do active virus surveillance for, because of it's a vulnerable, vulnerable area.

Peter Hotez: (27:34)
So let's, it is possible. Um, I think proving it is going to be really tough, you know, trying to get ahold of, uh, an email chain or, uh, or a smoking gun in terms of record. But it's, you know, I've been talking to a number of people, uh, in, in law enforcement and in, and other branches of the government, uh, last year about the possibility. And that's what I said, yes, it's possible, but I don't know the need to, to, to, to, uh, to focus on it. And then, because, uh, there's a lot of, there are a hundred other reasons why that quarter of ours could have arisen out of China. John Dorsey, go ahead.

John Darcie: (28:16)
All right. So you talked about how in the U S we're on a path, and we were talking about this before we went live on a path. There was an op-ed written recently, or an article written recently in the New York times about how the current dilemma facing the Biden administration is what to do with the oversupply of vaccines, which is obviously a, a high class problem to have when six months ago, or nine months ago, we didn't know what the timeline was going to be for even developing a vaccine. So it's promising the arc of vaccinations in the U S is relatively promising, not withstanding the anti-vax movement, but around the world, it's a much different picture. So a lot of countries, whether it be an Africa or, or, uh, middle east areas that you covered under the Obama administration or Asia, there's certain countries that a lot of countries that have zero vaccinations. So how do we look at our role in the world as, as the United States, as a leader around the world? Uh, not just for altruistic reasons, but also for selfish reasons in terms of really extend, extinguishing this virus, uh, in a way that will be lasting for hopefully the foreseeable future. How do we think about vaccine distribution in a way that can help the world and also help us?

Peter Hotez: (29:21)
Well, you know, my op my optimism about the U S and to some extent, the UK and Western Europe is tempered by my profound pessimism for what's going to happen in Africa and Latin America. I mean, look at, look at the size of, of the undertaking. There are 1.1 billion people living in Sub-Saharan Africa, 650 million people in Latin America. You're talking. So roughly almost 2 billion people, two doses of vaccine, that's 4 billion doses of vaccines, where where's that going to come from? The big picture problem is this. Everyone was so focused on the innovation and making and, and using that high technology to make high-tech very good vaccines for the U S and Europe is, and nobody really gave thought to simple, durable, non fussy, easy breezy vaccines for Africa and Latin America. And that is the reality. So, you know, Pfizer by and tech said, they're going to donate 230,000 doses of their vaccine to Rwanda.

Peter Hotez: (30:24)
It's great. It's a drop in the bucket. And, and even if the us were to give all of the rest of its supply today, um, it would help a little bit, but it's still mostly a drop in the bucket. We still have not figured out what we're going to do, and it's not because there wasn't a commitment to equity. Uh, the international policy makers who Gavi sucky created the Kovac sharing facility, it's well-designed, and it's, uh, in its structure, but the vaccines just aren't there because we were so focused on the shiny new toys in terms of the types of vaccines that were going to make the nobody gave attention to that. So we, you know, early on started making in low cost recombinant protein vaccine for COVID-19 that now we've licensed to biologically and Hyderabad there, like serum Institute of India, one of the big manufacturers, and they have the capacity to make 1.2 billion doses, which is what they're doing.

Peter Hotez: (31:20)
But it was interesting when I, you know, in 2020, as I was calling out the disinformation campaign in the white house, I was also on the phone trying to raise money because nobody cared about our vaccine because it wasn't a high-tech cool vaccine. It was something that it's the same technology you use as the hepatitis B vaccine that's been given for four decades. And we did, we raised around four or $5 million privately, um, including from Tito's vodka. So if you, um, and the, the clay brick foundation and JPB foundation, so if you order a cocktail tonight and it has vodka in it, it's gotta be teed up. So my,

John Darcie: (31:57)
My mother-in-law is going to my mother-in-law is going to take care of that herself, uh, tonight. So, so Tito's is well supportive in my household. Trust me

Peter Hotez: (32:06)
Ahead. And, um, but you

Anthony Scaramucci: (32:08)
Know, I was starting and his grandmother-in-law to lay my head, but let's keep going. Cardi.

John Darcie: (32:12)
If Bacardi was involved in, uh, in the vaccine distribution, then that would be covered by my grandmother-in-law, but

Anthony Scaramucci: (32:20)
We're certainly open to hear from Bacara while her diet. And just so you know, and I want everybody to know this is diet Coke, and Bacardi seems to be going very well for her at age 83. And counting, go ahead. And this is,

John Darcie: (32:32)
I don't want to waste too much time with this, but speaking of her, she's 82 years old, her husband got COVID thankfully survived it a tough couple of weeks, but she slept in bed with him every night that he had. COVID-19 never got it, never got infected. It was the most bizarre thing that we couldn't figure out what was going on. It's just goes to show you the weirdness of this disease.

Peter Hotez: (32:52)
It really, for, for so many reasons, it's so odd. So the point is, um, and so in terms of what the Biden administration should do with the excess is they should provide it to the Kovacs facility and let them distribute the vaccine. What I prefer not happen is to, for the, for the Biden administration, do what the Russians and the Chinese have been doing, which is using their vaccine as a bargaining chip in a very transactional way, making one-on-one deals with countries, um, uh, in what's now being called vaccine nationalism. You know, we've got a good Kovac sharing facility. If they're going to provide vaccine, don't use it as a, as an instrument of foreign policy, use it, use it as, uh, to provide for the equity mechanism that's been set up, but I think that's probably something like that will happen, but again, it's still not enough.

Peter Hotez: (33:45)
Um, I'm really worried. And now at that [inaudible] variant the south African variant going out from South Africa to Mozambique, Malawi, Tanzania, I'm worried it's going to destabilize the African continent. We've got the P one variant coming out of Brazil that could do the same. This, this could be a real, uh, as terrible as things have been, this could be, uh, even even more concerning humanitarian catastrophe. And so I hope our vaccine can make a difference. Um, and, and I worry about the bad press around the AstraZeneca vaccine, because that was one of the other workhorse vaccines that we were counting on for low and middle income countries. So the, this could be the next phase, the next crisis of the pandemic, the us UK Europe looks after itself and the rest of the world suffers dramatically.

John Darcie: (34:38)
Are you worried actually about the efficacy of the AstraZeneca AstraZeneca vaccine at all? Or do you think it's purely something that, you know, the PR has gotten out of control and it's going to damage a pandemic response as a result?

Peter Hotez: (34:51)
Well, you know, it's, it's a race to the bottom. The say it was a worst who was the worst public health communicator? Was it the white house coronavirus task force in 2020, or it was, or was it AstraZeneca? Um, they certainly have not done themselves any favor, but the individual European countries made a lot of mistakes, too. I'm in Germany, the Paul Ehrlich Institute set out such a damning press release, uh, uh, the, uh, uh, day before the European medicine agency said it's safe to use. And so this creates a lot of confusion and we have to remember this anti-vaccine anti-science empire as deeply infiltrated the low and middle income countries. It's an India, it's an Africa it's in Latin America. So we're going to get a lot of people who will die refusing, um, COVID vaccines in Africa and in the Americas. And so this is going to be a huge issue.

John Darcie: (35:43)
Um, in terms of the vaccines, are you worried about their ability to, uh, inoculate against these variants? How concerned should we be generally about the variants and, you know, not just the fact that they're more contagious, but they're potential resistance to Primis that we've developed so far.

Peter Hotez: (36:00)
So all of the vaccines work equally? Well, it looks like against the B 1, 1 7 variant, which is the dominant one now in the U S and it'd be dominant for the foreseeable future down the line. We may see a rise in that P one from Brazil or B 1, 3, 5, 1 for South Africa, it's here, but it seems to be out competed by the [inaudible] variant from UK, as we get this under control, it might become a problem later on. So I'm already giving a heads up to people. Don't be surprised if you have to get a third dose of your Moderna or Pfizer vaccine, or a second dose of the J and J vaccine, either later on this year or next year. And that boost may be slightly reconfigured to target those particular variants. I don't think we're going to need to get vaccinated every year, like, like flu, but anticipate at least in at least one additional boost.

John Darcie: (36:54)
Yeah, that, that was sort of my next question. You know, I actually had COVID myself in early December. I got the first dose of the modern vaccine a couple of days ago, and it knocked me out for 24 hours. It was sort of the classic COVID symptoms. And so it was just, I was curious about, you know, re vaccination, whether it's going to be like the flu, but you sort of answered that. Do you anticipate, remember

Peter Hotez: (37:16)
If you've gotten COVID in recovery, that's almost like your first dose of vaccination exactly. For your first immunization and some people, unfortunately, uh, don't handle the second immunization as well. So Anthony, if you get vaccinated today, this afternoon, don't make big plans for the next 1, 5, 5

Anthony Scaramucci: (37:37)
PM today. And, uh, you know, my wife had what was COVID arm, which I'm sure you've heard of, right. It was a 1% of the people, her arm grew up, you know, like a bee sting. Um, but like she always says is better than the alternative. And I think that's the thing we have to tell people. Uh, what you're doing is priming the immune system. You're, you're allowing the immune system to recognize the virus and respond to it and kill it before it starts to wreak havoc on your system and causes an overreaction, potential blood clotting.

Peter Hotez: (38:10)
Remember, it'll save your life. And, uh, that's the only, it's not socially, not social media is I use the word guarantee and people jumped on me for that. But it's about as close to a guarantee as you can have that you won't die from COVID. Uh, if you get, if you get fully vaccinated,

John Darcie: (38:29)
Where do you think we are? I have young kids. Anthony has young kids. Where do you think we are in terms of the research process around vaccinations for adolescents and children? And when do you think we'll have some finality on knowing what the best course of action is?

Peter Hotez: (38:43)
Well, today, or last night, Rutgers university announced they're going to require vaccinations for their college kids. And I think all the other colleges will follow suit about half a million college kids got infected, uh, last year. And then there were a hundred deaths on college campuses, a lot of that from staff. So I think it's very reasonable because we'll have the vaccines here for all universities, college campuses, especially for those living in the dorms to require vaccination. I also think we may have the data by the fall to immunize adolescents and 12 say 10 or 12 to 16 to 18. And, and that will make junior high schools, high schools, very safe places of teachers, staff, and the kids are vaccinated. I think for the little kids were probably a little further out, maybe by next year, we'll have that data maybe sooner, but I, I don't think it would be 10 next year.

Peter Hotez: (39:41)
And then some decision will be made. How, uh, how far down in age group you go, you know, maybe this would be given something like a measles vaccine and about one year of age. And the reason I say that if you're vaccinating pregnant women, now it looks like pregnant women will have antibodies on board in double transfer to the placenta and fetus and protect newborn babies for a period of time, but it may limit vaccine effectiveness in the first six months of life. So I'm guessing it may, could over time projecting way out in the future could be given almost like a preschool or measles vaccine,

John Darcie: (40:15)
Right? And my wife is pregnant having another child be breaking this news to some of my friends who maybe watch salt talks, but she got vaccinated, uh, at the urging of our doctor. And fortunately didn't have the same type of reaction I did to the first shot. Not that I am saying in any shape or form that I, it,

Peter Hotez: (40:36)
Well, first of all, mazal Tov, which has got vaccinated, the, um, you know, the pregnant women have not done well with this virus, very high rates of hospitalization, ICU admissions, much higher than non-pregnant women of the same age and a lot of deaths. Unfortunately. So even though we don't have all the I's dotted and T's crossed in terms of safety and efficacy data, um, there's now new data coming out about the, that works really well in pregnant women. We're still finishing all the safety studies, but the risk of what happens if you're pregnant and getting COVID, especially now with the [inaudible] variant is so concerning that most of us are recommended. Go ahead and get vaccinated. And, um, and now the American college of obstetrics and gynecology is saying, getting get vaccinated and the maternal fetal medicine society to saying get vaccinated. So you did the right thing.

John Darcie: (41:29)
Well, that's good to hear from you for sure. Last question I have your is about preparing for the next pandemic. So obviously we're, we're learning a lot from the, you know, in some ways failed response. And in some ways the response as it relates to vaccine development has been very encouraging. Do you think we're more prepared now for the big one? You know, it's, it's hard to even say that we got lucky in any way with COVID because you have in the U S more than half a million people dead and, and others, you know, sort of wounded from the vaccine as well as many others around the world, but this wasn't sort of the ultra deadly type of virus that could wipe out large parts of the human population. Do you think we've learned enough from this, you know, this pandemic, that the time, uh, that may be one that's more deadly around and we're going to be ready for

Peter Hotez: (42:14)
It? Well, this has been a tough virus because it's had this Janice face is to face on the one hand, you had people going into ICU and losing their lives. On the other hand, you had at least half the individuals with no symptoms and shedding, a lot of virus in their nose and mouth and walk, going into bars and, and public venues. And that's what made it so complicated. The way I respond to that is with each pandemic, we've learned something and we have improved infrastructure. So after SARS, in 2003, we had international health regulations, 2005 with after H one N one pandemic flu in 2009, we'd built the global health security agenda and, and, and, uh, and put in new infrastructure for monitoring flu, and then thereafter, Ebola and 2014 at Davos Sepi was created the coalition for epidemic preparedness innovation. So we do learn from epidemics.

Peter Hotez: (43:09)
I think the things that a few things have to happen for this one after this one, one, we need greater involvement at the G 20 countries, where it's, we still focus too much on the you that U S U K some of the Western European countries and the country known as the bill and Melinda gates foundation. It's it's, it's not enough. We've got to get full and vote always somehow after figure out a way to get China on board Russia on board, um, Japan, more on board, uh, Indonesia, all the Brazil, all the G 20 nations, that's gotta be a priority to G 20 summit to work together. We have to build capacity for making vaccines right now. No vaccines are made on the African continent, barely anything's made in Latin America, nothing was in the middle east. So building that infrastructure is going to be really important about the number of discussions about that.

Peter Hotez: (44:01)
And lastly, we've got a defeat anti-science and for that, I've been pushing hard on the Biden administration. If they'll do it to create an inter-agency task force, to really decide what they're going, how they're going to conquer this, recognize how deadly a threat this is. And it means not only bringing in the usual suspects, the health and human services agencies, but they're going to have to bring in a commerce and justice department. You're going to have to bring in state departments to do something about the Russian of weaponized health communication. Uh, and I'd like to see that the United nations level as well, uh, uh, bringing all the UN agencies to tackle this, because I see it as, uh, as I've said at the beginning of the program, I said, I see this as a bigger threat as nuclear proliferation, or terrorism. It's an arguably it's killed more people than those two things combined right now. And, uh, and yet there seems to be very little political will to want to do anything about it. That's so far, I'm sort of the lone person rattling the cage on this one. That, that just be, and maybe it's maybe I'm overreacting, just because I've had the bins so targeted by them for decades. I've lost my perspective, but, uh, I see this as something very serious. We need to confirm.

John Darcie: (45:22)
Yeah. I mean, people in their mind, they, they get worried about things like, uh, foreign terrorism and other things, but this is much more pernicious. And if you look at loss of life and damage to public health, this is much greater, but it doesn't crystallize in people's mind the same way.

Peter Hotez: (45:38)
I still haven't found a good way to talk about it, because what if I scare you see if I start to go on long enough, I start talking about human on and Neo Nazi grips and potent. And I start myself sounding the next was Luther since that the TV at night. So I need to find a, I mean, you know, if you listen to me long enough, you kind of understand it and, and, and start to agree, but, uh, I've got to figure out a way to say it in a more elegant way.

John Darcie: (46:04)
We don't blame you given the fact that you've been labeled the, you know, the O G vaccine king Republican. I mean, number one by the

Peter Hotez: (46:11)
G O G O G villain. Oh, gee villain.

John Darcie: (46:14)
Okay. Oh, gee villain. We'll leave it with, it's great to have the OJI villain on salt talks. Anthony, you have a final word for Dr. Hotez before we left.

Anthony Scaramucci: (46:21)
You know, I, I, you know, I don't want to sound like a fanboy doctor, but I have an enormous amount of respect for you because when you're in the public guy and you know, I've been rolled on a few times, you know, when I got fired from the white house, I got rolled in bro broken glass by the nation's comedian. It was a, it was a, it's a brutal time, uh, for your family. And you're out there every day and you're taking buckshot every day. So for those reasons, I see you as a national hero, uh, and a global hero in this fight against the disinformation. And so it's a, once again, a public service announcement from the salt talks and all of us here, please get yourself vaccinated. The vaccines are safe, they'll protect you and your family they'll protect your loved ones, particularly your children. You're providing them a shield until we can get a vaccine up and running for them. And so if I got any of that wrong back, let me know, but, uh, that's our message. Brilliant.

Peter Hotez: (47:16)
That's brilliant. After the year in great public health communicator, we need more, we need more and we're,

Anthony Scaramucci: (47:21)
We're, we're thrilled to have you with us, and I hope we can invite you back. Uh, and the title of the book is preventing the next pandemic vaccine in a time of anti-science. And so I encourage people to read that book and share it with people that are reluctant to get the COVID-19 vaccine from one of the providers and started, thank you again for being on with us.

Peter Hotez: (47:43)
Thank you as a real honor, and enjoy speaking with both of you. It's been great.

John Darcie: (47:48)
Thank you, Dr. Hotez for joining us and thank you everybody for tuning into today's salt talk, you know, again, a big part of this battle is educating people. Uh, so please spread the word about this salt talk in particular, it's an important public service announcement. You know, both Anthony and I have gotten the vaccine. Dr. Hotez has gotten the vaccine. My pregnant wife has gotten the vaccine. Uh, everyone in my family has gotten the vaccine and, and everybody doing well and feeling a huge burden lifted off the mentally, which is another issue that's arisen, uh, from this pandemic is the mental health crisis that's been created by the fact that we can't go out and live relatively normalized, which getting vaccinated will allow you to do that. But, uh, just a reminder, if you miss any part of this episode or any of our previous episodes, you can access them all on our website@sault.org backslash talks, and also on our YouTube channel, which is called salt tube. Please follow us on social media. Twitter is where we're most active at salt conference, but we're also on Instagram, LinkedIn, and Facebook. And again, please spread the word about these salt talks. I say that about every episode, because I think every topic we cover is important for its own reason, but none more important than this one, but on behalf of Anthony and the entire salt team, this is John Darcie signing off for today. We hope to see you back here soon again on salt talks.

Ted Seides: Teaching Financial Literacy with Capital Allocators | SALT Talks #190

“Everyone talks about being a long-term investor. Almost no one is able to invest for more than a 3-5 year horizon… you can’t be wrong for too long in this business.”

Ted Seides is the creator of the podcast Capital Allocators and recently published a book under the same name. He discusses lessons and best practices for money managers.

Money managers should always start by understanding the purpose of the capital and its return objectives. This can vary whether it’s a pension fund or a multi-century oriented college endowment. Despite understanding the need for long-term patience, in reality most investors’ returns are judged on 3-5 year timelines. A passion for constantly learning from people across the investment landscape has been the driving force in growing the Capital Allocators podcast. “When I focus on the compounding of the relationships, the returns have been amazing.”

Bitcoin and blockchain-powered technology represents potentially the next major investment opportunity. Interest in Bitcoin has accelerated as a hedge against inflation due to expansion in the money supply. The continued development of blockchain infrastructure will only make related technologies more attractive to major institutions. “Around 20% of all the super talented programmers and engineers are doing things on blockchain protocols. That’s a classic venture investment: follow the talent.”

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Ted Seides, CFA.jpeg

Ted Seides

Host

Capital Allocators Podcast

MODERATOR

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darcie: (00:06)
Hello, everyone. Welcome back to salt talks. My name is John Darcie. I'm the managing director of salt, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance technology and public policy. Salt talks are a digital interview series with leading investors, creators, and thinkers. And our goal on these salt talks is the same as our goal at our salt conferences, which is to provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future. And we're thrilled today to welcome Ted [inaudible] CFA to salt talks, Ted site, he's created capital allocators, LLC to explore best practices in the asset management industry, after a long story career in the industry, uh, which is still in the midst of, I would add he launched the capital allocators podcast in 2017 and the show reached 5 million downloads in January of 2021 alongside the podcast.

John Darcie: (01:03)
Ted works with both managers and allocators to enhance their investment and business processes. In March of 2021, he published his second book, also named capital allocators, how the world's elite money managers lead and invest in order to distill the lessons from the first 150 episodes of the podcast from 2012 to 2015, Ted was the founder of protege partners, LLC, and served as president and co-chief investment officer in 2016, Ted author, his first book called. So you want to start a hedge fund lessons for managers and allocators to share lessons from his experiences. He's a trustee and member of the investment committee at the winter grand foundation, a member of the advisory council for the Alliance for decision education and an active participant in the hero's journey foundation. He previously served as a trustee and the head of the program and committee of the Greenwich round table and a board member of citizens schools, New York hosting today's talk is Anthony Scaramucci, the founder and managing partner of SkyBridge capital. It's a global alternative investment firm. Anthony is also the chairman of salts. And with that, I'll turn it over to Anthony to start the interview.

Anthony Scaramucci: (02:13)
I just want you to know how things go down at SkyBridge. He's there in the beautiful background with assault picture and the sole logo on trapped in the conference room with the echo chamber microphone. So I just want to make sure that you know who the important people are at SkyBridge. Okay. So it's, it's nice to see you, you know, I'm a huge fan. We go back a very long time, but having said that I'm lying about my age now society. So, you know, what can I tell you? I, I'm only going to tell people we know each other for 10 minutes, as opposed to 20 years, let's go right to the book. Congratulations on it. Uh, tell us about the book, how the world's elite money managers manage money, what they think about, uh, and his F Scott Fitzgerald, correct. Are the bridge different for the rest of us?

Ted Seides: (03:03)
Um, well the book came out of the podcast, I suppose there was always a book in the podcast, but as you know, from having written a bunch of them, you really scratch your head and why anyone would bother writing a book because it takes up so much time and a bunch of your resources. So, um, pandemic hit, I had some time on my hands and, and there were a few things that I had learned from doing the podcast that I really wanted to go back and try to figure out like, what were those lessons? And it really started with decision-making. Um, I had interviewed Annie duke a number of times, Michael [inaudible] and it just started there. And it, it, you know, it grew from there and we can talk more about it, but are the rich are the, are the elite different? Um, in many ways they are there the institutional investors, if you want to call that entire class, that sort of elite, they do have access to resources and people that, you know, a lot of retail investors, don't,

Anthony Scaramucci: (03:58)
There's, there's no instruction manual, uh, something that you, uh, have made clear from your podcasts and the other books that you've written. And so people are finding their way. There's a little bit of a matte sailing race. And what I mean by that is people are looking at each other's sailboats, and they're trying to figure out how they're going to need to, uh, make the terms pursuant to what other people are doing. But what are some general axiomatic observations that you've made in your story career? Yeah,

Ted Seides: (04:28)
Well, I, you know, there, there wasn't an instruction manual once it was Steve Swenson's book, uh, pioneering portfolio management. Um, and I started my career working for David and he was just an incredibly disciplined investor. And one of the things I learned from him is this whole framework for investing. That's, that's common. That started.

Anthony Scaramucci: (04:48)
I'm going to stop you for a second, just for our young viewers. Uh, David Swenson was, is the Yale endowment. He's the chief investment officer there. About 20 years ago. You wrote a legendary book called pioneering portfolio management, which all of us, Fred, uh, I just wanna to throw that in there to ensure good news is for you. You've got all these young people, hopefully these young people are ground by your book. I just want to explain to them who we

Ted Seides: (05:15)
Is. I know it's, you're reminding you reminding me of our age now, Anthony, that I think you're right, that some people wouldn't have David Swinson is really the Warren buffet of institutional investing. And in this book you referred to, he described how he had invested at Yale at that point in time for 15 years. And now he's been there for 35 or 36 years, and it became known as the Yale model. Um, and that book describes kind of a multi-asset class framework. He started with the first principles of if you're managing an endowment, which has a really, really long time horizon. You want to be equity oriented, you want to own things. You want to be diversified. And he was a big believer in active management. And he described in that book, a lot of the academic research and the framework for how he went about investing successfully at Yale, what he didn't do in that book was described, then how do you go do it?

Ted Seides: (06:13)
So it's good to have a framework. And one of the benefits I've had from being able to interview all these terrific people on the podcast is you start to figure out how did they do it? How did these people go about figuring out what their strategy will be? How do they go find the money managers they want to invest with? What kind of research do they do once they make decisions? How do they make those portfolio decisions? And then how do they monitor those decisions over time? And so there's a whole section of the book called investment frameworks that tries to walk through that process for how did the people sitting really at the top of the food chain of capital go about their day to day,

Anthony Scaramucci: (06:52)
I'm going to lay out the organic ingredients. You tell me what I've gotten right and wrong. You've got actuarial goals, you have risk and volatility that you need to deal with because God forbid you need to build a building. And then the market drops like in 2008, you have ESG goals where you're worried about the social impacts of investing. Uh, tell us, uh, how you bake that cake with all of those ingredients on the table today. Uh, what, what do some of the best capital allocators do? 10? Yeah.

Ted Seides: (07:28)
So it starts with, what is the purpose of the capital? So in a pension fund, you mentioned it could be this actuarial assumption. We need to earn a certain return because we have to fund the retirement of our constituents. If it's an endowment, it could be, we need to support the budget of the university for decades to come centuries, to come at it in some instances. And then we also have spending along the way. So a lot of it turns to just starting with the very basic of what are your return objectives, what are your spending needs to achieve the goals you're trying to for that pool of capital. And it's very different. If it's an endowment, a pension fund, it could be an individual. Um, and, but that's where it starts. And then from that, you start to draw things like what's the duration of the assets.

Ted Seides: (08:17)
Like how long can you be investing? Um, what strategies do you want to pursue? How much risk do you want to take? So when you, when you get down to it for these particular pools of capital and it's quite different from individuals, um, it started with that Yale model, which was equity oriented, diversified multi-asset class. And the evolution you've seen since that has to do with what's happened in the capital markets. So, you know, if we look at, uh, today, um, just owning us equities at whatever valuations they're at, just owning us bonds at zero or one and a half percent on the 10 year, it's not going to get the goals that most of these pools of capital need to earn, call it six to 8% a year. And so what you've seen is this evolution away from kind of pure asset class buckets, and more towards the importance of active management and manager selection across these asset classes. Because if you just invest in us stocks, a lot of these CEOs don't think that's going to be good enough to meet their objectives.

Anthony Scaramucci: (09:22)
So there's the stark reality. We were in super low interest rate environment. You're talking about, I'm going to throw out a number. So the pension funds common assumption to meet their needs 7%. Is that the right time? It's about 7%. So with rates, let's call the 10 year for the purposes of this conversation and it between 1.3 and 2%, let's just call it that. Um, so you've got 500 basis points over the 10 year that you effectively need to make to hit your actuarial goals. Stock market seems to produce that with the varying levels of volatility. So let's say I'm coming to you with a 30 billion, a billion dollar endowment tag. What are you telling me to do?

Ted Seides: (10:13)
Yeah. Well, you said a key word in there, which is the stock market has produced that. I think a lot of the people in the seat don't think it will going forward. And so you do want to own equities because over a long period of time, you probably will get to those rates of return, but you might have some volatility along the way. A lot of these asset class strategies, what you see is they're very diversified. So there'll be U S equities and international equities. There's been an increasingly increasing move over the last 10 years into private equity. There's a lot of good reasons why, um, and certainly venture capital with the top managers. And then you have a fair amount of hedge fund exposure to managers trying to earn those equity like returns, but with less correlation to the equity markets. And then you'll see things like real estate and timber investing and real assets. It's really global and completely sort of across the landscape in terms of the different opportunities that these people will pursue

Anthony Scaramucci: (11:10)
For the individual. Ted, do you think the 60, 40 classic portfolio allocation model is dead? Is that in the museum now? Or is that still life to be breathed into it? Yeah.

Ted Seides: (11:24)
I mean, there's an argument. You could make that any of these portfolio structures have a framework that might start with 60, 40, or 70 30 or 80 20, depending on what it is, but just owning the 60 and just owning the 40. It doesn't look very good for the next 10 years now, the problem is we, you know, we wouldn't have, we could have had, we probably did have this conversation 10 years ago and 20 years ago, it didn't look good then either because you really don't know what's going to happen in markets. And that's been a very, very tough bogey for anything else over the last 10 years. But most of the people that look at market history would say the probability of achieving anyone's goals for 60, 40, that's, that's pretty dead, um, underneath what you might do to change it. There's still some risk construct that might look like 60, 40, but you're just not going to achieve it, owning the 60% stocks and the 40% bonds.

Speaker 4: (12:16)
So, so you've done 200

Anthony Scaramucci: (12:18)
Interviews, which is a sensational amount of interviews for some very eccentric people that you've met.

Speaker 5: (12:26)
You're just talking about yourself or the other 199. You see, I got to see them

Anthony Scaramucci: (12:30)
At the top of the list in terms of the exec tricities, but, but tell me some of the memorable quotes, tell me some of the memorable observations, tell me when you clicked off the microphone and said, okay, wow, I've got that in the can. That's going to be relevant or timeless. Give us some of the, uh, stories from your podcast. Amazing

Ted Seides: (12:52)
Thing about the podcast is without, you know, without, um, stretching. I think I felt that way. I'm probably 175 of the conversations. And part of that is having been in the business for 20 years and knowing great people to talk to, you know, who have really interesting stories to tell. So there's a lot in it. One of the things I did in the book there's the book is structured in three sections are sort of a toolkit, which are disciplines and skills that CEO's need that you're not taught in the investment world. There's this investment framework section I talked about. And then there's this last section, which is called nuggets of wisdom, and there's 184 quotes that come out of 3,500 pages of transcripts of some of the most interesting quotes across investing and life lessons. And, and then at the end of that, there's a top 10 list.

Ted Seides: (13:41)
So there's a little bit of everything. Um, but just to give you an example of one of those kind of frameworks, that's distilled in a quote, and I'll give you two examples of quotes. One of the most surprising things that I found from doing this conversations is that everyone talks about being a long-term investor. Almost no one is able to invest for more than let's call it a three to five-year horizon because the whole governance structure that goes into a decision-making process for investing has a lot of people involved. And if you're, if you underperform for too long, and it doesn't even matter if you're an endowment with a multi hundred year horizon, you're not going to be in the seat for too long. And so people have condensed that time horizon. So one of the great quotes, Andy golden, who manages Princeton and Princeton's endowment said to finish first, you first have to finish. So let me give you a slightly more colorful version of that. That's in the book from a young aspiring good-looking gentleman named Anthony Scaramucci, who you, you may not remember this quote, but it came from

Speaker 5: (14:42)
The show. Here we go. You ready for this very good hair?

Ted Seides: (14:47)
You said we're in the investing business, but it's sort of like in the fashion business, skirts come up and down in our industry.

Speaker 4: (14:56)
And

Ted Seides: (14:57)
That's the same framework to say, look, you can't be wrong for too long in this business, because if you just are, if you're just a, the like long skirts do, you might be out of favor, you know,

Anthony Scaramucci: (15:11)
You and I were at the trial three at Della art day talking about this very topic because in 2007, everybody was investing like an endowment at 75 year horizon, 2008 comes. Now we have a 75 minute Arisun and everyone wants their hedge fund manager to have an ATM machine in the lobby of the hedge fund. Then we're going into private equity. Now we're going into crypto, which we're going to get to in a second. But yes, I do think we're in the fashion industry. There are trends, uh, on top of, uh, the fundamentals of investing. And then the other issue for me, which I would add is that everybody is a long-term investor 10 until they have short-term losses. The minute they have short term loss, if they start freaking out it yet, uh, which SkyBridge experienced in March of last year. Now I will point this out.

Anthony Scaramucci: (16:03)
And you know this about the way the world works. There were five obituaries written about SkyBridge after our disastrous, March of 2020, we're up like 40% since then, no one's writing about the Renaissance. Trust me. Okay. It's just the way it works in our lives, but Dorsey's is chomping at the bit here. He's got that beautiful background behind him. I'm stuck in the large conference room with the microphone. And I want to make sure that my producer puts the word in there because this is for John Dorsey right now, but I got two last questions for you. Your career, I think has been absolutely fascinating. You worked at the Yale endowment, you were in the hedge fund, seeding business. You made a bet with Warren buffet. You're now doing something that I think is even in my mind, more fascinating because it was an academic lilt. What you're doing, describe your career to us and tell us what's the future for Ted sites.

Ted Seides: (17:01)
Wait, uh, well, you walked through it. I don't need to do that, but what, but what I'll tell you is in my early years, working for Dave Swenson, I got really lucky to learn the business the right way, learn great lessons about investing before I had bad habits on my own. And, and it's so fortunate to have a mentor like that earlier in your career. I tried direct investing after business school. I worked at a private equity fund that worked at a hedge fund and I was surprised, but it just wasn't for me. I didn't enjoy it as much as I enjoyed investing in people. And then as you know, when we first met, I guess it probably was about 20 years ago. Um, I was in the hedge fund business and what I found from doing it, I love the investment process. I love investing in people.

Ted Seides: (17:46)
Um, the end goal of let's just make more money. Let's just make more money for our clients. There was just something slightly off now don't get me wrong. It's fun to make money. It's great to have it, but I never felt a hundred percent fulfilled in that. And I didn't know what to do when I left. We talked about, yeah, should I come join? Or it's when I left. And I was like, I'm not sure I want to do the same thing. The podcast came out of that. And it took, it was, I was doing it alongside of a bunch of other investment

Anthony Scaramucci: (18:16)
We're snap people. We were trying to recruit you because I think you're, I think you were growing with guy. I mean, you know, books ahead, keep going. Yeah. So I was doing a bunch of other questions you said no. So I don't know what that actually means about me and Darcie, but that's a keep going sideways. I wasn't

John Darcie: (18:32)
Here at the time. He might've come. If I was making the [inaudible]

Anthony Scaramucci: (18:37)
Let the guy finish. Okay.

Ted Seides: (18:40)
So the podcast came out of it. I was doing a bunch of other investment projects all along the way until about a year and a half ago. And then really from some of the people I had on the show, some of the really talented leaders guys like Shondra and Thomas at Northern trust asset management and Greg Fleming at Rockefeller capital, who I've just become close to. I realized these great leaders do the same thing. That's part of what I put in the book. You know, they create a vision, they repeated all the time and they motivate people using it. And so I started to think very carefully about what is it that I'm doing and what do I enjoy about it? And I came up with this, this idea of the vision of capital allocators to learn, share, and implement the process of elite investors.

Ted Seides: (19:25)
Um, learning is a lifelong thing for many of us implementing is the process of okay, taking those lessons and investing what's different today. From what I used to do is sharing. And I come from a family of teachers in many ways, and I have found that incredibly gratifying. So you then take that and put it together with a bunch of, you know, values, to statements that how you want to behave. And I, and I looked through that and I said, boy, what this is really about is what I refer to as compounding knowledge and relationships. So what I found is that if I'm entering into relationships, whether it's people on the podcast or the investments that I'm making, you know, for my own account, I'm not so interested in transactional things. I'm not interested in investing in something that I don't really know who the people are, but they might generate great returns.

Ted Seides: (20:16)
I'm interested in finding things where I can contribute to the success of what they're doing. And that can compound over time. That the relationships that I have are, you know, multi, like antsy, we've known each other for 20 years, you call me and say, you know, email me and say, Hey, you want to come on salt talks? And I say, of course I do. Right. I get those requests all the time. And 90% of the answer is, you know, I don't have time for that. So that's what matters to me. And then what I found is that when I focus on the compounding of the boy, oh boy, the returns have been amazing and it's not so much like, am I investing in something because I think that's going to be the highest return. I do invest in things where my instinct tells me they're going to be, you know, very good outcomes, but it's that, that development of the relationships and the development of the knowledge and sharing it and what comes from that, that's just excited me. Like nothing else I've ever done before.

Anthony Scaramucci: (21:11)
Well, I was uncomplicated by you coming on, but I, I, and I also feel that you're, you have this intrinsic value about yourself, um, um, is there's a common sense wisdom to the things you do. So this is my last question that I am going to turn it over to John, lots of young people, uh, on Ted, uh, when you're getting young people advice about the investment oral in terms of what to read and how to grow their careers and those good habits that you're talking about, uh, share with us some of that, uh, advice and mentoring wisdom. Yeah.

Ted Seides: (21:47)
Well, I mean the, the things that I learned and I would say, I wish I learned them a lot earlier in my life. Um, for a whole bunch of reasons. Mentors are really, yeah, mentors are really important and, and the other one for me, and I think like a lot of my audience is male. I'm hoping to diversify that over time, but I think it's true of men. Um, it's okay to ask for help. You know, in fact, it's great when you can't make good decisions on your own, in a vacuum. And I, for whatever reason was terrible at asking for help throughout my life. And, and that's a big one that I have. I'm constantly pushing myself now. And lo and behold, when I do that, wow, you get to answers faster, you get better answers and you really get to involve people in what you're doing. So, you know,

Anthony Scaramucci: (22:36)
It's a male thing by the way.

Ted Seides: (22:38)
I do a little bit. Yeah, yeah. Definitely more than female. I mean, it may not be all men, but it's certainly true for me. I'm only going to point the finger at me rather than generalize it. Um, but I think that's a big one. And then when it comes to people's careers and, and you know, this passion matters a lot more than money, you know, when people ask me, what would you do? You know, if I were starting off, I wanted to follow what you did. Howard marks has this great line about, like, what would he tell someone who wants to start an investment fund today? He says start 40 years ago because you always want to be in a place, um, where there are tailwinds. So, you know, we, whether we're going to do it with John, we should talk a little bit about crypto because that's, you know, interesting.

Ted Seides: (23:18)
But the industry that we're in, that we started in doesn't have the same tailwinds that it did, you know, 30 years ago. And so, you know, I, I think that's fine. If people are passionate about it, they love what they do or what part of the investing world they occupy. There's nothing wrong with that. But if they're just doing it thinking they're going to get riches, because there are very wealthy people who have succeeded in that over time, you know, they may find that 10, 15 years down the line and they put their blood, sweat and tears into it and they didn't get that outcome. That's if they were outcome focused, instead of process focused, like we talk about in investing, you got to think about that with your life as well. Great. Go ahead, John. All right.

John Darcie: (23:57)
Well, yeah, Ted, it's a pleasure to have you on, uh, Anthony asked you about the podcast and some of the more memorable quotes and learnings that you have from those podcasts and having listened to many of the episodes, I can agree with you. There's something profound that comes out of each one, but what's something that surprised you as a common thread, either across many of your interviews or a few of your interviews about the way people think about investing. Yeah.

Ted Seides: (24:21)
The biggest surprise to me was that when we look at these chief investment officers, we think that they are the top of the food chain, that they are the decision maker. And what I kept hearing over and over is this notion of the governance challenge. And I wasn't sure exactly what that meant. And so I started asking certain questions about, you know, where are you getting to? And ultimately what you find is that you could have an investment team that an investment office managing billions of dollars, that they want to invest in the SkyBridge crypto fund. And they've done all the work and you've met with them 10 times and they tell you, they're about to, you know, they're about to invest. They're going to make a recommendation to their committee. They go to the committee meetings, it's totally opaque to the entire money management committee, unless you have money managers that happened to sit on these investment committees and the recommendation gets turned down.

Ted Seides: (25:18)
And so they've put all this time and effort in, and in fact, they weren't able to make the decisions they wanted to make. And so that governance challenge of how do you work with a board? How do you communicate with them? How do you define roles and responsibilities? How do you make sure your incentives are aligned? That is something that was far more challenging than I had understood. And part of that was because a piece of Yale success is a very effective governance structure. And so I was never privy to these situations where the governance, it doesn't work seamlessly in my entire career until I started talking to all these other CEOs and you find out, wow, yeah, they're sitting at the top of the food chain, but they also have someone to answer to. And most of the time in the money management world, the managers have no idea what that piece of the process is like, right.

John Darcie: (26:09)
Talking about, you mentioned the SkyBridge Bitcoin fund, and I want to talk about crypto for a minute. So you you've launched a series of, uh, episodes on your podcast focused on crypto and Bitcoin. Uh, and it's, we've done the same thing on salt talks, just the demand from the community to learn more about the asset class is astronomical. And I think our friends over at Morgan Stanley have experienced the same thing in terms of their clients and their advisors clamoring to have an offering on their platform. And they were the first recently to announce that they're onboarding to Bitcoin funds to make it available to their clients. Why did decide to launch into the crypto world? What's the feedback that you're getting from people in the institutional investment community about whether this is a investible asset class. There's obviously a wide range of opinions on Bitcoin and crypto, but what are you hearing? And what's your view on the asset class?

Ted Seides: (26:59)
Yeah, let me give background, cause I love showing my own hearing melody. Uh, we had a wonderful chief technology officer at protege guy named Alexi Biederman brilliant Russian guy. And in something like 2012, he said, I want to do a luncheon. We did these talking luncheons and I want to talk about the Bitcoin. We were like, okay. And he gave this talk and I was like, can we, can I just go back to work now, completely missed it in 2012. So I started paying attention, um, really in 2017 when Bitcoin was running and I, you know, through the podcast is how I originally met. Patrick O'Shaughnessy is a dear friend of mine. And he had done this fantastic miniseries called hash power before he did it. He and I did a bunch of hikes together and he was explaining to me what all this stuff was.

Ted Seides: (27:46)
So I was, I was really interested in it. I bought Bitcoin for the first time. Then I bought and sold it since. And throughout that time, um, I should, as an aside, I'm on the advisory board of block tower capital, which is one of the leading hedge funds in the space. And I S I joined their advisory board in early 2018. And throughout that time, Ari Paul, who I had in, on the show in the miniseries and Matthew gets his partner would say to me, Hey, we want to get a group of these institutions together to talk about crypto. And I would kept telling them, no, one's interested. No one's interested. No one's. And I could explain why, but no one's interested. No one's interested. And then around the turn of the year with this most recent surge in Bitcoin, what, what I found talking to a lot of these CEOs was they started getting, they started asking the question, okay, I remember 2017, this thing ran and collapsed, and now it's back again.

Ted Seides: (28:40)
This is technology what's happened. What's happened with the technology infrastructure. And so even from the fourth quarter of last year to the first quarter of this year, Matt gets said to me, Hey, can we bring together a bunch of people to talk to Michael Saylor from micro strategy? And last year I said, no. And this year I said, yeah, it's time. And we reached out to about 30 CEOs and every single one of them either participated in this or sent their number to, to participate in it. It's still early innings. And so what I found was that the investment case, let's just say, Bitcoin, they're starting with Bitcoin is the, exactly the same thing as it was in 2017. So you could think about it as a hedge against Fiat money debasement you could think about it as a, another venture capital type opportunity. And then because of the money printing and COVID, and the rise in Bitcoin last year, people said, okay, I now have to take this seriously.

Ted Seides: (29:36)
And lo and behold, there's been a lot of infrastructure development, you know, across custody trading, everything you would need. Um, so that it's closer to being ready for institutions. And so what I wanted to do was dive in and just keep it simple. Like what, for an institutional perspective, what do they need to like, what's the macro case. I had Eric Peters from one river on now, how do you get entry at Michelson and China for sound to shine from, um, gray scale and then two hedge fund managers, Ari, Paul and Seth. Jim's like, okay, if you're an active manager in this space, what are the opportunities where are the inefficiencies? And I'll, I'll do more of these episodes over time with great people in the space. And so what, what I learned was, um, that it's almost ready. Now. There's a question of, it's almost ready for what, and I would say that in the, the level of understanding of people start with Bitcoin, they, they look at Bitcoin as this interesting asymmetric hedge in this portfolio of risk assets.

Ted Seides: (30:44)
That one way or another is dollar based and say, wow, you know, if this really continues, maybe this is digital gold, and I'm going to need to own some of that. Um, very hard to price. And we know all the, all those issues, more of it, you say on top of it, after 2017, so much money came into the space from all these ICO's that if you talk to the people in Silicon valley, what you find is something like 20% of all the super talented programmers and engineers are doing things in blockchain protocols. So that's a classic venture investment of just follow the talent. This is where the talent is going. I can't tell you, I know anything about what that means for the development of applications of the blockchain, but you're starting to see improvements in the base layer protocols. You're starting to see everyone talks about defy, decentralized finance.

Ted Seides: (31:36)
What does that mean? Lending on the blockchain, um, um, trading payment platforms. And then I get to bring it back to my real world, hedge funds and investing. So the best example I could give to people is everyone has heard about what happened with GameStop and all the stocks around game stop. And you could ask the question of why could a stock be 140% short? Why could there be 140% short interest? Now it's entirely possible. It comes because stock can get lent more than once, but stock shouldn't be able to be led more than once. So shouldn't stock lending, uh, tracking stocks, tracking, stock ownership.

Ted Seides: (32:23)
I went, of course it should. And I'm sure that 10 years from now that the record heard of who owns what stock will be in some type of technology where it's not just that I own a share of Berkshire Hathaway. It's I own that chair. And if I lend that share, there's a record that shows, you know, the person I lent it to can't go read, lend it again. So there are all these little things that I started to understand that said, wait a minute, this makes sense. You've got all this talent working on it, you know, developing technology that I'm never going to understand. And I know I'm never going to understand. So the institutions start with Bitcoin. They then say, oh, all of those protocols are getting built today on Ethereum. And you know, maybe, maybe there'll be another technology that's better. And there's all this.

Ted Seides: (33:10)
I don't even understand that. So I, today I own about 80% Bitcoin and 20% of Ethereum. And then as you start to learn more, you say, whoa, what's the stuff with NFTs. And I had a long conversation with Ari about how is it possible that I could go, I was kind of like, what's this NBA top shots. Like, what is it? And I went on their website and I watched this amazing clip of Zion Williamson blocking the shot way into the stands. And that was somebody bought that on the blockchain for $250,000. I said, wait a minute. I just watched the clip. It's the same clip. It's not in the glass case, like a Honus Wagner baseball card. Just, I understand that. How is that possible? And you start to have conversations about what's the difference between a Picasso and a forged Picasso. What's the difference between a Birkin bag and a mockup Birkin bag that came from the same factory and you start to realize, wow, there is something to scarcity and branding, and it's not any different with NBA top shots than it is with a whole litany of things that have had value in the eyes of the holders for many years.

Ted Seides: (34:16)
So you start pulling all these threads and as you get a little bit deeper, people get more interested and they realized this could be, you know, web 3.0, this could be the next big ecosystem. So you start to pay attention as you're an institution, you start with your venture capital managers that you trust Chris Dixon at a 16 Z that's when, when Yale was in the press three years ago for ingesting and Bitcoin, they didn't, they just invested in another venture fund. And now you see Bitcoin purchases and we're going to see more and more. I think there's a tidal wave of coming into this whole ecosystem over the next five or 10 years.

John Darcie: (34:50)
So Mike Novogratz came on salt talks, and he obviously deals with a lot of institutions relating to Bitcoin. He launched a galaxy, as you know, the pitch for him was you have all these other players in the space. I was at fortress. I know the institutional community. I know the type of touch and experience that you need. He made a comment that he thinks that only 10 to 15% of whales in the Institute of institutional community, so that it could be insurance companies that could be endowments. That could be pensions. He only thinks that 10 to 15% of those who are invested in Bitcoin have publicly revealed their position. So you have 85% of those are long Bitcoin, but haven't announced it yet because of concerns around the stigma of Bitcoin or ESG concerns, whatever it may be. Do you think that's accurate that people in the community are invested into Bitcoin more than we realize, and they just are still reticent to disclose it? Or what do you think the adoption rate within the institutional investor community is? Well, the only

Ted Seides: (35:49)
Way I can answer that by saying, if it's not disclosed, neither Mike, nor I know the answer to that, right. Um, I, you know, Coinbase basis sponsored my show, they sponsored the mini series and Brett fall, who Oak, who runs their institutional sales is a good friend of mine. So recently there was some announcement that there were a few institutions that owned Bitcoin directly. Um, and that I know is true because I was able to confirm it, um, with Brett. Um, I have heard anecdotally that there are a lot more institutions that do own Bitcoin directly in particular. Um, but I have no way of knowing the order of magnitude at this point in time.

John Darcie: (36:31)
Right? So you talked about how COVID sort of poured gasoline on the adoption of cryptocurrencies and decentralized finance. You know, it was something that maybe was inevitable, but all the money printing and the move to a completely digital world sort of accelerated adoption, which we're seeing in the price of cryptocurrencies over the last year or so. How did the COVID-19 pandemic also influence if at all institutional investors approach to investing as it relates to different factors? So obviously the value factor hasn't performed nearly as well as technology and growth factors have, uh, since the onset of the pandemic, is that caused a longterm monumental shift in the way these endowments and pensions and insurance companies are looking at portfolio construction, or do they take a long-term enough view that they're like, okay, we can't have a knee jerk reaction to every micro trend in the market. Yeah.

Ted Seides: (37:24)
So in theory, they, they, it shouldn't affect it, um, that they do take a very long-term view. And that having a long-term view means that you ride through these periods of time. Now let's circle back to what Anthony said earlier, which is when you guys got hit at March, 2011, March, 2020, all these long-term investors start saying, oh, you know, let's, let's right. Let's go, let's write to a wary for SkyBridge. And it's just not the case. So what was really interesting, and I did this both in a miniseries last year, and it's a small chapter in the book on kind of crisis investing, which is in theory, they're all long-term in theory. They all stay the course. In theory, they're not performance chasers. That's what everyone wants to be, what actually happened, um, in COVID. And that's only one example because in the markets and particularly public markets sold off dramatically, but then they came back.

Ted Seides: (38:18)
So maybe you could say, that's not that hard of a period of time. And so what I found was talking to baby, maybe a half a dozen CEOs in that moment of time. So April of last year, what I found was they all had the same playbook of how they were managing that period of, so we'll start there and broaden it out. And that was, you start by gathering as much information as you can. People have to calibrate, where are you in your portfolio? Um, what's happened with your assets and some of that's just technology. Do you have the infrastructure to understand your performance, which managers are doing badly, this particular, when people had to pay careful attention to liquidity, because when you can't go back to school and school becomes a virtual, what does that mean for the revenues of the academic institution, which is never something that an endowment manager, you know, in the last 30 years had to think about, right?

Ted Seides: (39:10)
If you're managing a hospital pool of capital and the entire efforts of the hospitals start going towards treating COVID patients and all of the, the high profit margin elective surgeries go away. How do you think about investing the assets when the structure of the, the P and L of the institution has changed? So that's, that's a big step. And before you can even say, I want to make a change in my portfolio, you have to understand where you stand. Then they go into talking to their existing managers, what's happening. Are there opportunities? There were things sold off more than they thought. So they're mining their own portfolio. They, they then have like a wishlist of, oh, these are the top venture capital funds. I always wanted to invest in. Maybe other people are getting shaken out. Now let me reach out to those special managers and see if there are any opportunities to invest.

Ted Seides: (40:02)
And after all of that, they then engage. And when I say engage, they might make a decision. So all of that comes before changing anything in the portfolio. And what I would tell you is this time around, they didn't even get to the bottom of the list before the markets came back. So the biggest difference between these types of investors and say, hedge fund managers, hedge fund managers are in the market every day, they pay attention to what's happening. They're trying to capture an efficiencies. These investors have such long time horizons that they don't need to pay any attention to what's happening in the market in a short-term period of time, even in something like that, that was like a 20 or 30% sell off in the markets over just a few weeks. So the sh the long answer to that short question is absolutely nothing has changed.

Ted Seides: (40:48)
Um, what we saw, right? Everyone has talked about how the trends in place from technology accelerated during COVID. And that's true. So people now think about, well, growth stock investing value stock investing in, right at the point, there's always happens right? At the point when everyone was ready to leave value investing for debt, there's been such a bounce in value stocks that I think value just outperformed growth for the period, going back to January of 2020, because there's been such a strong move. So markets are cyclical. The skirts go up and down. There's only Anthony can say, and most of the people in this seat just, you know, over time they stay the course, they, they stay diversified. So they don't have to make those calls. They're going to have a value manager and growth manager, and one's going to perform well. When the other one isn't

John Darcie: (41:36)
Last question I want to ask you also related to the pandemic and the future has to do with investment due diligence. You know, the most exciting topic that anybody can talk about, but it's, it's fascinating, Anthony. I happened to be in the office today. We're, we're standing 200 yards apart from each other, but we're on different computers doing a, and

Anthony Scaramucci: (41:55)
The fact that he took it, better location, better room rate. That that's how he is. He's just, he's a selfish, selfish millennial. Okay. Here I am. As a struggling baby boomer, struggling, go ahead, Darcie, keep going.

John Darcie: (42:10)
But, you know, during March of 2020, as Anthony talked about, our portfolio got hit, we were heavily allocated towards stuff like structured credit. There was basically a lockup in those markets, despite the fact that we felt that those assets weren't fundamentally impaired, but, uh, in a lot of cases, when you're talking to sovereign wealth funds or pensions or endowments, they, uh, you know, they were reallocating capital to strategies and managers. They knew they were doubling down on things that they were intimately intimately familiar with. But the, at the beginning of the pandemic, at least doing due diligence on new funds was challenging for a lot of firms that are used to in-person meetings and, and an old way of doing things. How much have they adjusted to this idea that investment due diligence now is going to be done on zoom and virtually? Are they comfortable with that? And is that going to be part of the future? Are we going to continue to do these zooms, uh, you know, zoom, uh, due diligence meetings even after the pandemic hopefully ends or, or, uh, are we going to go back to the old way? Yeah.

Ted Seides: (43:10)
Um, I think for a long time throughout most of last year, uh, the, your average CIO was deeply uncomfortable with making a decision to invest in someone they hadn't met before. Um, and they would just hold out, hope that by the time that their, their cue was done and they needed to make changes, like if this lasts for a couple of years, they certainly were going to have to figure out a new way of doing things. Um, I don't think it will change that much. And you can, there are really interesting theoretical questions of whether that's right. Like, do, do you really get a lot of value face-to-face meeting that person? Is there more in the dynamics? And I, I think what people would say is that the part of the assessment that goes with trying to figure out how a team works together is very, very difficult to do virtually it's very rare situation. When you can have an Anthony Scaramucci on a Scot on assault talk and, you know, pretty clearly what this guy is like day to day. Most people aren't that authentic and transparent with themselves and how they're going to work with their team, especially when they're trying, you know, they have a goal to raise money from you and they're going to put their best foot forward. So if there are frictions, it's so much easier to hide them by not having those people on the camera

Anthony Scaramucci: (44:31)
Life. If I was less authentic and less crazy, is that what you're trying to say? Sirens,

Ted Seides: (44:36)
Those are two authentic and crazy are two different things. That's your choice.

Anthony Scaramucci: (44:41)
Most people are crazy. Let's just stipulate that. And what they try to do is hide the crazy correct. We let the crazy go out. Maybe, maybe we'll have a pepper conference before this is over. You never know.

Ted Seides: (44:53)
FinTech is a very healthy thing. I

Anthony Scaramucci: (44:57)
Agree. And it, and that you had that in spades. My

Ted Seides: (45:00)
Friend appreciate it. So, John, I think to come back to that, we're now at this funny point where people have gotten more comfortable with the notion that they can take the risk of knowing that they don't know everything by investing in something new on zoom at the same time, where now you could look six months out and say, Hey, we may be able to travel again. I do think there's going to be incredible, uh, reduction in all of the travel, um, because there is a fair amount of like, if I'm going to meet a manager a times before I'm even going to think of investing, there is no reason at all, why can't do two or three or four of those over zoom, because you're going to basically get same dominant information. What's going to be interesting to see is on the other side, on the manager side and their business development efforts, managers love the fact that they haven't had to travel, uh, public equity.

Ted Seides: (45:52)
But, you know, really when you're talking to private equity guys, but you know, how many they get, they go on a road show because there's a finite date to close a fund and they have the same conversation, 150 times. Um, and so the question is really going to be if the personal connection ultimately matters in winning that sale, who's going to be first. And as soon as you know that one manager's having success, you better believe everyone else is going to be jumping on a plane right behind them. It'd be fast followers. So I think it's really hard to know at this point in time, um, how that will all play out once, you know, hopefully this is mostly passed and we can move around safely. Uh, but I think it will be a hybrid. You know, I don't think we'll go back to every decision is done over zoom, right. Uh, but, but it's been a challenge in, it's created an acceleration of kind of the winners and losers in this field, as well as, you know, a lot of life because all of the new investments are extensively. All the new investments that got made were in pre-existing relationships. If you didn't have the relationships going into the pandemic, it was really hard if not impossible to raise money, you know, over the last year, year and a half, I guess, a year.

John Darcie: (47:05)
Yep, absolutely. Uh, in fascinating stuff, maybe the rise of the introverted investment manager and people that don't have to necessarily wow. People in public and can live more on the strength of their performance, uh, in their process. But Ted, it's a pleasure having you on again, the book and the podcast, both of which are very much worth your time. It's called capital allocators. The book also with the tagline, how the world's elite money managers lead and invest. There's no one that knows that world better than Ted. So we highly recommend you go out and read the book and become a regular listener to this podcast. Anthony, you have a final word for Ted before we let him go is it's

Anthony Scaramucci: (47:40)
Great. It's great to have you on. And, uh, I'll take another run at you when you get more real, you can do your podcast here at SkyBridge, by the way. So I'm just letting you know that recruiting offer still stands Mr. Site,

Ted Seides: (47:52)
Hey, say it through John. Great, great to be with you, Anthony. It is always a pleasure and always a good laugh. We'll put

John Darcie: (47:59)
Them on the spot. He has to come to our salt conference, which is coming up in September. You know, we sorta took a leap of faith late last year and booked the Javits center expansion, which is a new, great venue. They built out over there at Javits with a beautiful roof terrace. That'll help everybody's social distance and all that stuff sort of right. Coming after labor day. Hopefully everybody is chomping at the bit to get back to in-person events. So we'd love to have you there today. Of course,

Ted Seides: (48:23)
It's my pleasure. I says, I said, I know, I don't say no to Anthony often if was trying to capture my whole life. That could be a little tougher, but, but absolutely

Speaker 5: (48:30)
It'd be fun to do it. We'll never know

John Darcie: (48:36)
Anthony out of the recruiting pitch this time and maybe it'll be a little bit more successful, but anyways, Ted, thanks so much for coming on. Thanks again, Ted for joining us today here on salt talks and thank you everybody who tuned into this talk, I'm sure plenty of allocators and managers watching this show as listened to his podcast every week. So we highly recommend again that you read his book capital allocators and listened to his podcast, capital allocators, both tremendous resources, uh, both for people in the industry and people looking to understand, uh, how institutional investors allocate capital over the long term. Just a reminder, if you missed any part of this talk or any of our previous salt talks, you can access them on our website@salt.org backslash talks and also on our YouTube channel, which is called salt too. We've posted all of our episodes there for free. We're getting great engagement and growth on our YouTube channel. So please spread the word as well. Uh, if you find any of these episodes interesting, including this great episode with Ted, please spread the word about salt talks. We're on social media as well. Besides, uh, YouTube, we're most active on Twitter at salt conference. We're also on LinkedIn, Instagram and Facebook, and on behalf of Anthony and the entire salt team. This is John Darcie signing off for today. We hope to see you back here soon on salt talks.

Greg Gibb: China's FinTech Boom | SALT Talks #189

“We focus on two core segments: small business owners and the middle class for wealth management… We have over 100 million small businesses in China that make up 60% of the GDP. Personal wealth in China is $25 trillion USD; almost 40% comes from the middle class.”

Gregg Gibb is chairman and CEO of Lufax, a leading technology-empowered personal financial services platform in China.

Fintech in China is a story of first world technology meeting emerging market need. The goal is to make retail borrowing and wealth management easier, safer and more efficient. This focuses on two key groups: small business owners and the middle class for wealth management. Being part of the Ping An group enables greater financial synergies in matching the investment needs for customers, using tech and AI-powered tools. “For what’s driving demand, for small businesses it’s the availability of credit.”

Saving rates in China are very high, but the financial asset formation is still very low. A lot of Chinese wealth is still sitting in deposits and this has been driving asset managers into China. The regulations have been pushing for capital market development and the AUM in the market is greater than 25%.

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Greg Gibb.jpeg

Greg Gibb

Chief Executive Officer

Lufax

MODERATOR

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

John Darcie: (00:07)
Hello everyone. And welcome back to salt talks. My name is John Darcie. I'm the managing director of salt, which is a global thought leadership forum and networking platform at the intersection of finance technology and public policy. Salt talks are a digital interview series with leading investors, creators, and thinkers. And our goal on these salt talks is the same as our goal at our salt conferences, which is to provide a window into the mind of subject matter experts, as well as provide a platform for what we think are big ideas that are shaping the future. And we're very excited to talk about some of those ideas today with Mr. Greg Gib. Uh, Greg is the chairman and chief executive officer of Lou facts. And he's been in that role since December of 2011, uh, before joining paying on, uh, Mr. Gibbs served as the global senior director of McKinsey and company, and subsequently the operating director of Taiwan, Thai shin, financial holding company.

John Darcie: (01:01)
He has more than 20 years of work experience in both multinational and domestic companies of the financial and investment industries. He had obtained a bachelor's degree in east Asian studies at Middlebury college in Middlebury university. Excuse me. Uh, Mr. Gib was introduced to the national 1000 for an expert plan of the organization department of the CPC central committee in 2012, awarded the Shanghai top 10 financial innovation figures of 2012 award and honored as the China top 10 leaders of internet finance in 2013 for his unique and widely recognized insight about innovative financial services. Mr. Gibbs is the author of two great books, uh, banking and Asia, the end of entitlement and banking and Asia acquiring a profit mindset, which introduced bankers development opportunities in Asia. Uh, the way this talk is going to go today, Greg is going to give a presentation about the future of, uh, innovative finance, uh, in China through the work that Lou FACS is doing. And then we're going to host a Q and a session after the presentation with Anthony Scaramucci, who is the founder and managing partner of SkyBridge capital, which is a global alternative investment firm. Anthony is also the chairman of salts. And with that, I'm going to turn it over to Greg first to give a presentation about Lew facts and the FinTech ecosystem that's building in China. Go ahead, Greg.

Greg Gibb: (02:23)
Right. Thank you, John. Uh, so I would, uh, uh, move through pretty quickly here, but I, I know we have some time for questions, uh, at the end. Um, if we could just go to the next page, um, the, the really the story of, um, a FinTech in China is, is first-world technology meeting, emerging market need. Uh, it really, uh, tried to address a lot of, uh, unmet, uh, requirements of the market here. And we really try and make our retail borrowing and wealth management easier, safer, and more efficient. So that's kind of our positioning in China. Um, if we go, uh, and of look at our unique positioning, our highlights, it starts with the fact that we really focus on two core segments in China, uh, small business owners and the middle-class for wealth management. And these are two very large markets that are evolving quite quickly.

Greg Gibb: (03:15)
The way we do it is through a unique capital light hub and spoke model, which I'll go through. And the entire process end to end in all that we do is really very tech and AI driven. And this is really tech that allows us to select the right clients and match them to the right product in a totally digital environment. We do benefit a lot from the fact that we're part of the pig and group and ping on has more than 200 million financial service customers here in China. And that creates a lot of synergies for us and our team. You know, we're talking about FinTech. Our team is quite unique in the fact that we're very deep on the fin side, probably deeper than any other platforms that are operating here in China. Everyone knows China obviously has been the second largest economy since 2010.

Greg Gibb: (04:01)
The areas that we focus at number one is small businesses. So we have more than a hundred million small businesses here in China that make up 60% of the GDP. So it's a big part of the economy. And then on the wealth side, you can see that the personal wealth in China, sorry on the last page is about 25 trillion us. And almost 40% of that is derived from the middle class who has very quick needs emerging as the economy evolves. Um, if we look at the underlying what's driving growth in China in these spaces, is it for the small business owner? The key issue is availability of credit. And you can see here that the leverage ratio in China is still lower than the U S small businesses in terms of their load balance to income ratio is 27% versus 41% in the U S and the availability of financing to these small businesses, particularly those that don't have collateral from the banking system is quite poor.

Greg Gibb: (04:59)
So there's actually huge unmet need, and that is really need that. We're tapping it just to be very clear. What we're doing here is we're serving the individual. Who's a small business owner, but the money that we land is used for their business. And this is really kind of a unique space here in China that allows us to grow north of 20, 25%, uh, in this, uh, in this area on the wealth side, everyone knows savings rates in China are very high. What's very interesting though, is the financial asset formation is still very low. So about 15% in financial assets of total personal savings versus 74% in the U S. And so we have a situation here where a lot of the Chinese wealth is still sitting in deposits, but that is really mobilizing, you know, you've, you've seen a lot of headlines over the last year about asset managers trying to get into China.

Greg Gibb: (05:49)
And that's really because the regulations are pushing for capital market development and pushing retail to go into those markets with a lot of new products. So you have a big shift in wealth in addition to growth. So this is a space that the AUM in the market particularly online is north of 25% growth, probably for the foreseeable future. So quite a large foundation. Um, if we go here, I just want to talk a little bit about, uh, how we play. So in our two core spaces, starting on the left here with retail credit facilitation, what we're doing is sourcing small business owners, we're evaluating them. And then through our tech platform, connecting them to more than 50 funding partners real time. So the whole process, once we contacted a customer, everything is done digitally, the evaluation and the funding of that loan takes less than 30 minutes.

Greg Gibb: (06:43)
And that is all connected through a network of more than 50 partners that we work with to get that done. And again, through the sourcing, the, the, the underwriting, and eventually the collection, all of that is done digitally. And we're what we're doing here is really providing larger tickets, longer term loans to this, this group of customers. And we benefit a lot from the fact that we've been doing this for 15 years. So we've accumulated a lot of proprietary data that really allows us to make those risks decisions. On the right hand side here, we have our wealth management hub here. What we're doing is connecting the rising middle-class investor to more than 400 product providers adhere. The tech is really about doing the matching is getting the customer into the right product. And increasingly those products are all capital market driven. So as they have daily volatility, then following up with content to give customers the right direction.

Greg Gibb: (07:39)
So they're building the right portfolios for themselves. And so this whole process is done and recorded on blockchain to really make sure that customers in terms of suitable selling and everything is well tracked. And you could handle any, anything that happens as the markets evolve. If we go to our market position. So at retail credit, this space, we're number two in the market. And this goes back to June last year, where we had about 500 billion renminbi in loans that we had helped facilitate. And that was the first half of last year generating about 24 billion renminbi. I'm sorry, 20 about 24 billion. Maybe what's interesting. Here is everyone always asked us, how big are you next to ant because we're number two and it answers number one. So ads is roughly four times our size at the same time period here. What's interesting though, is we were generating about 80% of their revenue.

Greg Gibb: (08:34)
And so this starts to speak to the dynamics of the segment that we're serving and the way we do it. It generates a very high profit margin on the wealth side. We're number three in the market, that period last year of June 375 billion in AUM, and that's about 500 billion and trading volume on the platform. So we're in a very strong market position to the space that continues to grow quite quickly. If we go to page 10 here, again, the comparison with ads, because then whenever I have a chance to talk to investors that, you know, half the questions are, how do we compare with ant? And so I'll just take a second here. If you look at the borrowers that we serve, our average ticket size is roughly 20 to 30 times the average ticket size that ad served. So we're really helping small business owners provide them funding to manage their business and has really built themselves around a small ticket, shorter duration consumption loads.

Greg Gibb: (09:33)
And so there's a very different in terms of segment and size. And there's a similar story on wealth management where our average investor is about four or five times the size of an investor. And so that's one big difference is really segment. The second is we really are deep in our focus for the retail credit and for the wealth management in Anta obviously is a super app. So they're covering a broader space. We're very focused where, whereas they're broader. And if you look along the bottom here at pre-tax margins over the last couple of years, we've, we've always been north of 30%. So we grow at nice double digit levels, but we've always sustained that 30% plus pre-tax profit margin. If you look at the right here, Andrew is obviously grown very quickly, but as they have many different businesses ranging from payments to insurance, to other super app functions, they have to double down and invest often as they build their businesses.

Greg Gibb: (10:27)
So they've had a much greater degree of volatility in their net margins over time. So there is a difference of profile in terms of how we, how we've grown over the last couple of years versus apps. If we go here, I just want to go a little bit deeper into how our platform works. So we're talking about small business owners. These are, these are customers that we're serving as individuals. So all the lending is to the individual. They typically will have five to 20 employees. Their typical annual revenue would be one to 2 million us dollars or less. So these are really kind of micro businesses, but these are very interesting individuals in the sense that a lot of them have life insurance policies, you know, 60% of them own one or two properties, individual properties, but 60% of them also have not been able to get an unsecured loan from any bank in the last five years.

Greg Gibb: (11:23)
Banks in China really only want to serve customers who have collateral. And obviously Jack had his famous comment about how he saw the banking sector, which I won't repeat here, but it is an issue that these small business owners really don't have access to, to capital without collateral. And so we're really serving them mostly in an unsecured with an unsecured product to meet their needs. And the typical loan size is about 25,000 us. And the typical duration is about two to three years. So we source these customers. We have this, we do actually have a very large offline Salesforce of about 60,000 people around China. We also work with ping on who obviously has a very large set of insurance businesses that helps Reaper customers offline to our online platform. And then the hub in the middle here basically does all the analysis, does all the connection to the funding and then follows up on collections and I'm to the right here or our funding partners.

Greg Gibb: (12:18)
So we work with more than 50 bags, more than five trust companies, and a number of insurance companies will provide part of the credit enhancement in the model we take about today on new loans, about 20% of the risk. And the other 80% of the risk is born by either our credit enhancement partners or our funding partners. Just to talk a little bit about the data side of this. So we spent a lot of time really evaluating that individual, and we also spend time evaluating their business, and we built up 15 years proprietary data to do that. And that's all going in obviously to our database. And we're constantly using machine learning to refine how we judge risk for these individuals. We priced the loans today, anywhere between 15% and 24% APR. And again, those credit decisions with our models today are all made. Now, in a matter of minutes, we actually don't take any information, physical information from the customer.

Greg Gibb: (13:16)
Everything they do is authorized through the app. We then scan all of the data that we have and then make a decision. And increasingly if there's an interface with the customer to ask them a few more questions, if we need a little bit more understanding, that's all done with AI robots today to drive that interaction, our Salesforce obviously very large offline, but we direct them to where we think the best customers are, uh, to help get the right quality. And then when it comes to collections, a lot of that is done today by chatbots and differentiated with the data. So maybe just giving you a feel of how this kind of looks today from the perspective of a customer, a small business owner, applying for a loan. So we'll play a short video here, so you can see how the process works

Speaker 3: (14:05)
As the retail credit facilitation platform of Lew fax holdings. Hang on. Kuwait always strives to provide innovative solutions to our massive client base ping on Pook. We introduced the first AI plus video loan application experience in the world by leveraging several technologies to create a redefined borrowing experience for every customer

Speaker 4: (14:23)
[inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible], [inaudible]

Speaker 3: (14:39)
Seamless credit approval supported by our personal and SME big database credit inquiry platform, making loan applications more efficient.

Speaker 4: (14:47)
[inaudible]

Speaker 3: (15:03)
Our intelligent voice recognition technology frees our customers from any text input, our multiple cutting edge anti-fraud technologies and AI instant approval help achieve a frictionless customer credit application process and zero waiting time for every customer

Speaker 4: (15:16)
Employee do Tony [inaudible]

Speaker 3: (15:23)
Our AI customer services able to provide real-time assistance and give customers a secure application process video 3.0 ping on poo quick redefining the loan application process with AI plus video technology, loopback holdings, better technology, better financial life.

Greg Gibb: (15:42)
So what you saw on the app, there was actually our chat bot. So that's not a, that's not a real person. Um, who's really driving interaction. Cause what we wanna do increasingly is just be able to ask customers a series of questions that we then validate with more than 50 million data points in the background, in terms of this proprietary capability we built up over the last 15 years to help make a credit decision. What are the, what are the technologies we do apply while they're interacting with the app is when we ask them questions, is, is facial recognition and lie detection. So, you know, if the, if the question is being asked that the answer looks a little bit strange in terms of their facial recognition, that goes into the credit decision. So it's really a very tech driven application and that really flows through also to how we source the customers, how we drive our Salesforce to go into various cities in the various parts of the cities to try and find customers that have those needs, who we think will also be good credit.

Greg Gibb: (16:39)
So we kind of start that from the, from the upfront and then collections, we do have 9,500 collectors in nine centers, but most of the collection is driven up front by chatbots. And then for the harder cases, a human will come in as needed. So really the end to end processing here is all driven off of our, off of our platform. You know, a point here on data, there's a lot of debate about what types of data could you use today to really make good credit decisions. And we break data into two types. We break it into sort of what we call a hard credit and financial data, which gives you some sense of the person's background and how they've bought insurance over time, how they paid their bills over time, but what we call financial data. And then there's behavioral data, which is e-commerce data, social data.

Greg Gibb: (17:29)
And when you're, when you're making a credit decision, you're really looking at two angles. The first is the person's willingness to repay. And the second is their ability to repay and what we find. And you see these two bars here on the lap when we're baking the first part of the decision on willingness to repay both financial data and behavioral data are very useful in the model. Financial data here is weighted at 58% and social and other data at 42%. But given that we're making longer-term loans for larger amounts, when it comes to the predictiveness of what is going to, you know, this person's ability to repay, then the financial data in our model gets weighted at 92%. And so this is really unique because very few or really most of our competitors do not have the degree of financial data that we have over these 15 years refined around this customer segment.

Greg Gibb: (18:21)
Our other tech platform competitors do have a lot of behavioral data, but we found that that behavioral data is really only effective for small short-term lows because when you're making a large loan, what really matters the ability to repay. And so that's really our unique underlying capability here to serve this segment. And it's very hard for others to replicate what we built in terms of that offline to online sales capability, then having the data to really make the right credit decisions and then having funding partners who, who trust your data, capabilities and analysis to then fund those loans or in the case of our credit insurance partners to provide the credit enhancement. So this is really what we've been able to tie together over a number of years. If we go to the wealth side, what we're doing here is the middle-class in China is a population of about 150 to 200 million people.

Greg Gibb: (19:17)
And the customer where they were serving typically has investible wealth of anywhere from $5,000 up to about 500,000 us dollars. So they don't quite fit into the bucket yet of being high net worth. When they go to a bank they're not getting served by a private banker, they're still really only having access to counter services. But these customers, when they start to have a couple hundred thousand us dollars, they actually need to figure out how they're going to invest for their retirement. There's been a lot of change on the regulatory side in China, where the whole wealth management market has shifted and is shifting from purely fixed income to customers, really having to start to explore equities and build portfolios and get the right diversification. And it is a challenge because today, when people buy mutual funds in China, if they buy a fund directly, the average holding period is about a hundred days.

Greg Gibb: (20:10)
You know, when you start to get them into portfolios, we can get that up to 200 days, 300 days, which is obviously critical to generate a healthy return. So what we're doing on our platform is connecting these customers entirely online. And then we have 400 product providers in the background, and it's really using the data on the customer and the product and the markets to drive matching to really get them to the right product and the right portfolio over time. So they can start to generate those sustainable returns because in China, fixed income and interest products, a lot of the money's still 50% of it being a deposit today in China, obviously the rates are going down. And so if a Chinese retail investor wants to beat inflation, they have to nail gain exposure to capital markets. And so that's what we're really doing here is driving the reallocation of that wealth and giving the customer a service level that they would normally get by the time they were a private banking customer, but we're giving them that expertise in an online environment at a lower entry point.

Greg Gibb: (21:11)
And there's really relatively few platforms that focus on this segment to our large competitors, typically who have a larger, broader customer base are typically serving the more mass market. And it's really through expertise that we're differentiating for our target group. The entire process that we have on the wealth side has a lot of data on the customer to really figure out what their wealth level is, what their risk tolerance is. And then we're matching that with a lot of data from the product side. And then we're doing AI driven, matching. We have 8,000 products on the platform. Customers don't want to see 8,000 products. They want to see the two or three products that are relevant to them in the current market condition. And increasingly we're using that data and our knowledge of the customer to get them into portfolios so they can get more diversified.

Greg Gibb: (22:00)
They can drive up those holding periods. And once a customer goes into a product, we have chatbots that will nudge them, which will remind them of things they should do or not. Do we also do social comparison to say, you know, what you're doing is similar to people that are similar to you, you're better or worse in certain ways, right? You're you're, you have too much concentration risks. You're actually doing a better job in certain areas to really educate the customers on how to better invest in the whole process, what the customer does with us on the app, everything that they see, every box that they click, every contract that they agree to is all recorded on blockchain. And this really helps us ensure suitable selling throughout the process. You can place a situation where a customer buys a product, six months later, they lose money.

Greg Gibb: (22:46)
And they said, I didn't know. And so really having that capability as an independent verification is critical in the regulatory environment as well. So all of this is done in, in, in lieu facts, but we do benefit from being part of the pig ecosystem and ping on obviously is a, is a huge financial platform in China with insurance banking, securities, et cetera, and invest very, very heavily in technology, facial recognition, voice recognition, AI chat, bot development. And so we, we have early access to that technology. We have our own everything we do with the customers, our risk, our interfaces developed by ourselves. But behind that, we'd better put a lot for the big investment that God has in technology. Obviously being associated with ping on from a brand perspective is very, very helpful and helps drive down our acquisition costs for both borrowers and investors.

Greg Gibb: (23:43)
And then given the amount of data and the pig has, we can test our models against, against a broader base of customers by the time that we rolled about on our platform. So the synergies we gain here out of analytical insights that we gain here are substantial and a big benefit for us politely on page 18 here, obviously regulation in China, FinTech is a big issue. And I think what distinguishes our team was we do have very strong technology, but we probably have the deepest bench in terms of financial DNA of having that expertise internationally, domestically to continue to revise our strategies, the way we operate to meet the market needs, but also to really anticipate the regulatory environment. So maybe I will stop here and we can, we can move into questions.

John Darcie: (24:36)
All right, fantastic. I'll let Anthony, uh, start off with the questions, but I have a lot of questions for you as well. It's fascinating stuff that you guys have

Anthony Scaramucci: (24:42)
Built. Listen, it's a terrific presentation, but also congratulations obviously on the company, but my first questions or somewhat us centric, if you forgive me, because we, we really want to make this introduction, Greg, to the U S investors as among, among other investors, of course, but how has the Chinese economy evolving? How is it evolving in terms of small business formation and household affluence, even prior to COVID-19 and what impact has the pandemic add on those trends? Oh,

Greg Gibb: (25:20)
The, the issue for small business owners in China, pre-crisis pre COVID and today remains very large the same, which is they're a very big part of the economy, but a lot of them just cannot get funding from banks. And the what's happened as a result of COVID is the policy push around small businesses has increased. So what we're seeing from our funding partners is a lot more demand for more asset, particularly in that small business space, because policy is driving them to do more. But our funding partners here, Anthony are small, medium sized banks. They don't necessarily have the national footprint. They don't necessarily have the scale. They don't necessarily have the data in order to be able to serve these customers without our cooperation. So the COVID impact has been that the banks given the policy changes, want to do more business with us.

Greg Gibb: (26:15)
What we've also seen, particularly on the wealth side, you know, that, that wealth formation with all this, all the things that people typically talk about with tied up, right, the growing urbanization, the growth of the middle-class, all that stuff. What we saw happen in COVID of course, was a much accelerated move to online. You know, there was, there was in China as well, a couple of buds where people couldn't go to banks didn't want to go to banks and they have come to us much more dramatically. Obviously the stock market in China, despite recent days, being down over the last 12 months, you know, the average mutual fund returned last year in China was north of 40%. So you've seen a real drive again with the stimulus packages, but going on around the world, accelerated online trading and investment behavior. So I think things that were true before COVID are still true, but there was an acceleration of some trends there,

Anthony Scaramucci: (27:10)
You, you, uh, you talk a lot about the differences between the consumer and fit and household financial behavior related to debt and investing. So how would you compare that between China and the United States? And are there, are there cultural forces that are unique to each country?

Greg Gibb: (27:32)
I think it's harder to say that it's there's cultural differences. I think as, um, you know, as people get wealthier and as people have more businesses or they have more retirement concerns, uh, you know, China's regulation and people's behavior does look more and more like rest of world over time. I think that the biggest differences are with the small business side is that in the U S retail banking, small business related banking has developed over the last what, 50, 70 years, right? It's, it's quite, it's quite well developed in China. You know, retail banking is kind of 20 years old or less. Um, and most banks really don't specialize around small businesses. So it's really a supply side difference. I would say in China for the small business side on the wealth side, the biggest differences is really this. Most of the, of the, of the wealth product in China over the last decade was essentially debt to real estate companies repackaged as wealth product.

Greg Gibb: (28:37)
So it was a fixed income market in the last two years under the central bank, all these policies have come out to really make all products standardized and to basically be tradable on the exchanges. And so wealth is being pushed from the debt side really to the equity side. And so this is driving a huge shift in, you know, if you look at the United States, you know, what percentage of savings are in equity or mutual fund products? I guess it would be north of 30, 40% in China. That number is less than 10% today. So there really is this huge shift that's being driven by policy. And frankly, what China's trying to do, what the overall regulators are trying to do in China is improve their debt to equity ratio. And given the retail money is such a big part of the equation here. You know, they're trying to get less debt on the books and really build up more of the equity side. So there's this huge shift in the way that wealth is being driven.

Anthony Scaramucci: (29:33)
Talk about, talk about AI for a second and the role that it plays in the underwriting process and what conditions in China make it a leader in the development of AI.

Greg Gibb: (29:45)
So really over the last decade, particularly with the huge penetration of mobile and mobile phones, there's obviously been a huge amount of data that's been acquired throughout the society, obviously huge, fast growing e-commerce behaviors and the rest. And that data has been increasingly used and tested against very important decisions on about customers and product at risk. And so the huge availability of data on a very huge population now acquired over a decade, has really allowed platforms like ourselves to use a lot more variables that allow you to judge risk in an online environment or a mobile environment that wouldn't have been possible, you know, seven, eight years ago. And so, but also this data is changing, right? China is obviously a huge place. The provinces are very different, right? The economics across the provinces are very different. So you have to be able to tune for different geographies. You have to be able to tune for different customer segments and be able to do that dynamically so that the availability of data, the deep penetration of mobile, and then really the experience now to be able to do that in a totally digital way with very high efficiency, just keeps, keeps turning on itself. And so with the machine learning and everything, you're getting a lot of optimization.

Anthony Scaramucci: (31:14)
You, you talk about, you know, how does the relationship with ping and make you well positioned to tackle the financial needs of the Chinese consumer? Does that tell us a little bit more about that relationship? Sure.

Greg Gibb: (31:27)
So pig out, as you may know, his started at about 30, 33, 34 years ago in China, one of the largest insurance companies in the world now, but it has 27 different financial licenses as a recent count. So it's very deep and broad across the market. You know, people that have ping on insurance and the like are typically these middle-class consumers, a lot of them are small business owners. So that foundation gives us a lot of access to very good customer. Given they've been operating in these spaces for 2030 years. It also gives us a lot of good data to tune our models. And it also has a very strong brand, but increasingly in FinTech, the issue is also regulation, right? So the relationships that ping on his builds over the last 30 years with regulators as a trusted party, the way that it handles all kinds of compliance risks and credit risks is also very important to earning trust of those that you're working with. So ping on is a, is a, is a huge brand advantage. It's a huge technology advantage. It's a big source for efficient acquisition of customers, but also increasingly it's a very important base of trust as you deal with regulators, as they're kind of redesigning how they want the future to look,

Anthony Scaramucci: (32:48)
Chinese regulators have recently adjusted rules around micro loans and bank, internet lending, which most notably shell, the IPO of ant financial, which we both know. But can you explain the reasons for that regulatory decision and what impact if any, it has on businesses like Lou Fox. So

Greg Gibb: (33:11)
Basically over the last five years platforms like ourselves have started to provide a lot of the facilitation for credit and China for retail, for small business owners. And the regulators were looking at this and saying, okay, so you guys are sourcing the customers. You claim to have great data models. You claim to have the risk under controls, but the funding is coming from our banks and do our banks really know enough about what's in the black box at the end of the day, the banks and the ones that have to hold the capital. It's the financial institutions that are bearing most of the risk. So, you know, this has been an issue that the regulators would watching for a couple of years, but really September last year, the regulators started to signal to people like us, that we want you guys to have skin in the game, right.

Greg Gibb: (34:04)
You know, yes, the funding can come. You know, majority of the funding, 70, 80% could come from financial partners, but you as a platform need to bear 20 to 30% of the risk. And you know, you've got to bear the right capital behind that risk as well, because if you get it wrong, we want you guys to, you know, to share the pain and make sure that there's therefore no moral hazard, that as a platform developing very quickly, that, you know, you basically grow very quickly and then someone takes someone else has to take care of the problem.

Anthony Scaramucci: (34:32)
What did I miss? John Dorsey? Anything pretty exceptional story.

John Darcie: (34:36)
Yeah, I got, I got a few questions myself. Uh, Greg, if you don't mind, you talked about blockchain, how you guys are at the front of so many different movements across technology and FinTech specifically, whether it be, um, you know, using AI, using facial recognition for credit worthiness as a, as a variable under credit worthiness, but blockchain, the blockchain piece of it is very interesting to me. And in China, you know, there are certain restrictions on things like Bitcoin, but China is very forward-thinking as it relates to central bank, digital currencies, they're digitizing that you on as, as most viewers probably know, how did you guys think about a development of blockchain? Why is blockchain technology for, for you guys, the best solution, and what do you think the future of digital assets and blockchain and Oregon and technologies are within China? So

Greg Gibb: (35:24)
As you move to a world where everything is, is being done through a mobile phone, and you're, you're dealing with transactions in the, in the, in the tens of billions and hundreds of billions of dollars, and you've got contracts and you've got verification items that are very important, both in terms of verifying that the customer is who they say they are, that the money is from where they say it is. And that those contracts are agreed as they say, you know, if it was just left to us as a private company to say, listen to us, we've, we've started all in our database. If there's any issues, just check our database. You know, people are going to challenge that heavily. And so really having the ability to not only as your data comes in that you're using to make decisions, but everything that happens on the platform to put that back into an independent place that anybody can go look at, right.

Greg Gibb: (36:16)
If the regulators want to know what's going on, it's always there. And so that independence and the certainty that brings therefore the trust that it brings to a purely digital world is very important. And obviously China is a big and fast changing place. And there's a lot of physical paper that you just would never trust. Uh, you know, we, uh, if you went back five or six years ago, part of our credit processes, people had to bring it income proof and house ownership prove all that sort of thing. And there was just a huge amount of fraud, right? And it really wasn't efficient. And so once you're moving to that blockchain to build the trust, to have that independence, and then to really enable the processing and all kinds of ways down the path just basically helps create that essential trust across Chinese commerce. That just is not as easily occurring in the physical world.

John Darcie: (37:05)
Yeah. It's fascinating stuff. In terms of the products that are on your platform, you talked about how you have a wide suite of products, but you don't, you don't want to inundate people with, you know, questions about what type of products they should be allocating capital to and use AI to match them. What types of products are on your platform? You talked about, uh, you know, less yield oriented products, fixed income products and more equity type of products. What are the, what's the product suite that you have on your platform? What are you looking for in a product in terms of onboarding and onto the platform, and how does that matching engine work in terms of identifying what's right for an individual?

Greg Gibb: (37:42)
So there really are two parts to it, but starting with the product side, we have a broad range of product. So, you know, at the high end, you've got a private equity, uh, product on the platform. Uh, you've got, you know, 4,000 mutual funds or more on the platform. You have a growing number of insurance products on the platform. You've got structured products at various levels. So we were really looking at how to drive a rating of those products. And here we're looking at who's the provider at the fund manager level. We're looking down to the level of who is the fund manager, right? Maybe a great fund fund manager change yesterday, someone else was running. It, that's something you want to know. And so having the data and being able to update that is what we really call you to know your product at multiple levels.

Greg Gibb: (38:31)
And then on the other spectrum is the customer, uh, and the early the KYC, which has kind of a broader KYC, which is really knowing what their background is. You know, when we used to do this in the beginning, we would like customer pill and surveys. They still do. But what they were saying in the surveys and what we found through third party data was, was generally not true people who said they didn't have money off and had money and vice versa. And so really being able to try and get a firm understanding of a customer's experience, then determines what we show them on the platform. So if a customer really comes across to us as conservative, they're only going to see products that are right for a conservative customer. You know, if we can get comfortable that the person is a qualified investor, does have substantial net worth that they could maybe see private equity products on the platform.

Greg Gibb: (39:21)
So it's really a screening process. It's then really a matching process. And of course, what product is right for the customer depends on what's already in their portfolio. It depends what's happening in the markets in terms of what to put forward or suggesting other matches they need to have to get the right balance. So it's a very, very real time processing to get you to those three or four products that really matter the most to you today. And it's really getting China to probably leap frog a bit from being purely fixed income in the past to moving to kind of, you know, the right portfolio strategies today. But a lot of that is happening in an online environment rather than a counter by counter visit.

John Darcie: (40:02)
Right? Last question from me. So we have a friend of ours name is Winston ma. He used to work for CIC, uh, sort of in the venture capital wing of that organization. He wrote a great book about the phenomenon you were talking about earlier, where the explosion in mobile devices and the penetration of mobile devices within China gave rise to this massive dataset that has enabled the rise of AI and this data-driven economy. Those are two sort of macro trends that have developed over the last decade. As you look out over the next decade, what are the major macro trends that you're looking at in terms of continuing to see around corners, uh, for Lu facts? Is it something like quantum computing? Is it deeper penetration into something like blockchain, but what are the big technology trend that you have your eye on or multiple trends, uh, in China and around the world right now? So,

Greg Gibb: (40:51)
You know, I think at the end of the day, um, with financial services, customers still want a personal touch. They want the tailored advice as products get more complex as capital markets become more part of the solution and there's more volatility. You know, they still want someone to hold their hat and we have to be able to in an online environment, we have to be able to provide that increase touched over time, that increased expertise over time. And in our view, the only way to do it, we think the biggest driver, at least for the next three to five years is advancing your AI so that you can make your interactions, that you can make your chat bots or how chat bots evolve into other service forums to just make it very directive, very personalized, and to make customers as comfortable as possible with the process.

Greg Gibb: (41:40)
You know, and if you think about how that's going to change the traditional financial industries, which are still heavily counter based in individual driven, right? Your ability to drive central control to really make sure customers are getting the best advice that it's standardized, that it's tested. And then it's rolling out consistently in doing that with a very high touchpoint at very low cost is where we see, you know, that's going to be a huge impact. It's gonna be a huge impact because some companies will do it well. And there'll be a huge impact because the other companies who don't do it well are going to find margin changing very quickly. They're going to find customers expectations on service levels, changing very quickly. So, you know, we, we, we do like the technology angle. We do like to invest in technology, but for us, it's really the application at the end of the day, it's about service and it's using that technology to create that personal service at a much lower cost point.

John Darcie: (42:34)
Greg, it's been a pleasure to have you on salt talks and they do have a final word before I, uh, I read us out here.

Anthony Scaramucci: (42:40)
Listen, I think it's an, it's an amazing business. You're intersecting a lot of things that are going on at the same time. You're, uh, innovating through with AI. Uh, you're making things, uh, easily available over the blockchain. And, uh, you're obviously prepared for the future. And I would say that a lot of financial services companies, Greg frankly, are Napa prepare for the future. They're operating off of an older model. So it's an interesting vision and a great business plan. Thank you so much for joining us on salt talks. Thanks very much.

John Darcie: (43:13)
And thank you everybody who tuned into today's salt talk with Greg Gib of lieu facts. Just a reminder, if you missed any part of this episode or any of our previous episode of salt talks, so you can access them on our website@sault.org backslash talks, and also on our YouTube channel, which is called salt tube. We're also on Twitter, we're most active, uh, at salt conference there. We're also on LinkedIn, Instagram and Facebook. And please spread the word about these salt talks. I think it's fascinating to have people like Greg on, uh, on the show who are in different parts of the world, doing really exciting things and disrupting the traditional finance ecosystem, but on behalf of Anthony and the entire salt team, uh, this is John Darcie signing off from salt talks for today. We hope to see you back here soon.

Nisa Amoils: Blockchain Solutions to ESG Problems | SALT Talks #188

“When I got into venture capital, I noticed female founders were only getting 2% the venture funding available… they’re under-shopped and undervalued, yet they overdeliver. As well as a moral imperative argument, it’s a real economic argument.”

Nisa Amoils is a VC investor, focusing on fintech, blockchain and crypto. Nisa Amoils is author of the best-seller Wtf Is Happening: Women Tech Founders on the Rise.

Women founders receive only 2% of available venture funding yet their companies consistently over deliver. There is a large community of women founders that represent huge financial value. The absence of women-led venture funds plays a major role in this disparity. They’re more likely to invest in women-led companies that grow into success stories, creating a positive cycle. “As well as a moral imperative argument, it’s a real economic argument.”

Blockchain technology serves as an agent of change in the democratization of access to capital and also in revamping entire industry systems. Areas like supply chain management of healthcare, climate change and law represent huge opportunities. Blockchain tech and crypto will create transparency, efficiency and automation across global institutions and drive the tokenization of illiquid assets.

LISTEN AND SUBSCRIBE

SPEAKER

Nisa Amoils.jpeg

Nisa Amoils

Managing Partner

A100x

MODERATOR

Anthony Scaramucci

Founder & Managing Partner

SkyBridge

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

Rachel Pether: (00:07)
Hi, and welcome back to salt talks. My name is Rachel Pether and I'm a senior advisor at SkyBridge, as well as being the MC for salt and thought leadership forum and networking platform that encompasses business technology and politics. So it talks as a series of digital interviews with some of the world's foremost investors, creators and thinkers, and just as we do at our physical salt events, we aim to provide our audience a window into the minds of subject matter experts. Now, today we're going to be focusing on women, founders and tech and the democratization of venture capital. And I'm very excited to be speaking to a different of mine. Nisa miles Nisa is many things. She's a venture capital investor, a securities lawyer, a board member, and a former entrepreneur. She authored the best seller. WTF is happening. Women tech founders on the rise, and she's a regular panelist on business channels, as well as a contributor for Forbes and blockchain and magazine. She holds a business degree from the university of Michigan and a law degree from the university of Pennsylvania. So Nissa, welcome to salt tool.

Nisa Amoils: (01:22)
Thank you so much for having me Rachel. So nice to see you.

Rachel Pether: (01:26)
I apologize for profusely summarizing your biography. So maybe we could start by just giving me a bit more background about you and who you

Nisa Amoils: (01:35)
Are. Absolutely. So I've been in venture capital for the past 10 years for the past five years. I've been investing almost exclusively in FinTech and blockchain and crypto companies prior to getting into investing. I, as you noted, um, had a stint as an entrepreneur. I also worked in media, under Barry Diller, um, at, is what was started as NBC universal and then became interactive Corp I C. And back then we were investing in the first wave of internet disruption, um, as to how we communicate as opposed to no we're investing in the internet of trust or value. And, uh, yes, I practiced securities law, um, for a number of years before getting into media. And that background has been extremely helpful in terms of investing in, um, financial services and crypto,

Rachel Pether: (02:40)
Right? Want to come back to that point? You made about the internet of trust or value, but before we do that, you did author this book, a WTF is happening, woman tech founders on the rise. And I know you're very passionate about women and technology. And you spent a number of years researching and writing this book. Maybe you could talk me through, I guess, a, the process for that. And B what were some of your key findings from that book?

Nisa Amoils: (03:10)
Absolutely. When I got into venture capital, I noticed that female founders were only getting 2% of the venture funding that was available and it just didn't make sense to me. And I saw all these great female founders that were building in hard tech or disruptive tech, uh, areas like artificial intelligence, virtual reality robotics, and in particular blockchain, because I focus so heavily there. And so I saw them out performing. I actually see diverse teams always are performing, and I thought it was an investment opportunity to bring to light. And so the book profiles, 13 female founders in those areas, but really what it does is makes the business case for investing in, um, with a lot of data about how they all perform and they're under shopped undervalued yet they over-deliver. And to me, it was an arbitrage opportunity for investors. In addition to the moral imperative argument, this is a real economic argument as well.

Nisa Amoils: (04:22)
And so the findings really were, um, that you don't need to have a stem degree to go into these areas. Um, science, technology, engineering, math, um, you can tangentially learn along the way you can start companies. You know, I wanted to profile the women so that they could be role models for other women that were coming up in, in later generations. And that as long as you're passionate, you have grit. Um, the timing is right. Um, the market size is right. Um, you can really have some great winners here. So that was, uh, that was also meant to disrupt a bit of the systemic barriers that hold women back in terms of fund management and, um, access to capital access to opportunities. And that is, that is what I wanted to try and change. And that, that is ultimately what led me to blockchain technology as an agent of change for democratization of access to capital. And so when you started

Speaker 3: (05:39)
Writing or researching the book, and you mentioned the tiny percentage of fund funding that went to women founders, how long ago was this, that you started the process and how have you seen, or how has that number changed since that period? I started

Nisa Amoils: (05:56)
Writing book in 2018. It came out in March, 2019. And since we've had the pandemic, I have seen the number of women drop the funding that goes to female founders has gone even lower. Um, and I think this has been well publicized is that a lot of women have had to drop out of the workforce because of childcare and other, uh, issues. And so that's, uh, yeah, we're, we're going backwards instead of going forwards.

Speaker 3: (06:32)
Yeah, that's definitely one another, one of the unfortunate side effects of the pandemic. I do want to go back to the points you made around access to capital and democratization and move to what you're focusing on now with, with a a hundred times and the focus there really being on democratizing finance. So can you talk me through exactly what this is and then also go into why is it so difficult for the average investor to access venture capital?

Nisa Amoils: (07:07)
Absolutely. So a 100 X ventures is a venture fund. It's a rolling fund that we've done with angel list, which means that each series in the fund can be viewed as its own fund individually, where investors in the fund can have more optionality in the quarters that they subscribe to. And in the amounts that they subscribed angel list serves as a backend service provider for everything that normally you would have a fund administrator, an auditor, a lawyer, et cetera, and they handle it one stop shop, which makes it easier for everybody it's, it's like they've automated the fun process, and that allows you to lower the barrier to entry while it's still right now, um, limited to accredited investors. Those laws are also changing and expanding. In fact, in the us yesterday, um, they raised the amount of reg CF to 5 million from 1 million for unaccredited investors to invest in these types of things.

Nisa Amoils: (08:17)
So that's very encouraging. They brought in the definition of what an accredited investor is, so that it's not only based on your wealth, it's also based on your sophistication and knowledge. So I think the trend is that, uh, we're broad, we're broadening the access Angeles just facilitated that. And we are able to offer women and minorities access to the fund at a very low minimum that would not normally be possible. What that does is it allows them to learn about blockchain and crypto and all the other digital and the applications there. And it allows them to participate in that wealth creation opportunity, which I personally believe is one of the biggest of our lifetimes. And they've been traditionally left out of it. If you look at all the lists of, of who's invested and who's, um, you know, the Forbes lists of, you know, there's no women on it. So, uh, we want to be able to change that through this vehicle and offer that opportunity. Yeah, that's great

Speaker 3: (09:25)
That it can be used as an educational resource as well. Cause there's really nothing better than actually trial and error, I guess when it comes to investing. So that's great. People can dip their toe in. And you mentioned that it's easier for women and minorities on the investor side. Do you have any particular diversity focus on the investing side as well?

Nisa Amoils: (09:49)
We don't, we're not saying that we're a gender lens fund, meaning that we invest in men. Of course, we, if you look at the companies we have invested in, many of them are started by men, but because it's private equity and venture capital, so much of it is about your sourcing and your networks. So because I'm part of so many groups, women's groups, women in blockchain, et cetera, by definition, I'm getting, um, you know, female founders coming to me, uh, where as a lot of times they don't know where else to go. Um, so yes, we will be investing in women and minorities as well. Great. And

Speaker 3: (10:33)
I wanted to just go back to one of the points you made at the very start when you were talking about this internet of trust and value and died down

Rachel Pether: (10:41)
A bit deeper and to

Speaker 3: (10:43)
Blockchain and the theory of, and I know you're very passionate about these technological technology breakthroughs. What has been in your opinion, the real value that's been created through this digitization of finance?

Nisa Amoils: (10:59)
Yeah, so I think you're seeing waves of innovation right now, and it started with the ICO's and, um, the run-up in crypto prices, Bitcoin Ethereum, especially this year, as you've seen the institutional stampede finally come in, uh, one after the other, uh, uh, traditional wall street. So, uh, most of the headlines go to the disruption of traditional finance and decentralized finance, and those are great innovations. Um, there's no question that they, the technology is making, um, antiquated systems, you know, you have T plus two settlement for instance, to, um, you know, there, it's making it much more, um, transparent, efficient, automated, and liquid. Um, so of course, tokenization and, um, of illiquid assets, uh, will continue to happen. Uh, however, what's not as well publicized is the use of the technology in other industries, in other areas of disruption that have real impact solving real world problems.

Nisa Amoils: (12:19)
And that's a lot of what we want to focus on at a 100 X is for instance, the pandemic has exposed a lot of different problems with our supply chains being just in time with our healthcare system, whether that be data and tracing and privacy issues and identity, or whether that be coordination of clinical trials around the world, um, to save money and time, or whether that be vaccination, rollout and distribution, right? So there are so many different areas of healthcare alone that, um, can use the technology to solve some of those problems. Uh, on the other hand, there are so many different areas of climate change that can benefit from the technology as well, such as carbon credit offsets. Um, there are areas of legal title, uh, insurance, um, that are being disrupted using the technology, for instance, automobile, um, total loss claims that, um, can be expedited from 50 days down to one day using the technology and from paper systems from the 1970s. And then that gets rid of cars that are sitting in landfills, um, and it creates a better land use, uh, situation. And so that's almost a secondary effect of that has impact. Um, so we're very interested in sustainability ESG STGs impact, and we're always looking to align with founders that have that same mentality and that can use the technology for good as well. That's great. And

Speaker 3: (14:10)
On the, um, on the healthcare side that you mentioned, what would be some examples of technology that would improve either that supply chain or that process? Have you looked at one specifically?

Nisa Amoils: (14:25)
Yes. So as I mentioned, the clinical trials, um, reduction of cost and coordination of, uh, efforts that are going on around the world that involve many different stakeholders where blockchain technology can be used to coordinate and track, you know, any kind of, um, it's immutable, right? So, so the records can be, uh, secure and they can be, um, not tampered with et cetera. Um, the supply chain example that's often used is, is about our food, um, and the provenance of where that is coming from. If you eat something and you get sick, you know, where, what, what countries did it stop in? What was the origin who touched it? Um, you know, you, you can feel secure and safe that when you go to your local supermarket and it has a verified organic label, um, that's trackable with a code that, that gets you on chain data. Um, that's a huge breakthrough in terms of, of where things are coming from, and that, that applies to medical devices as well. Um, or any kind of supply chain, distribution efforts, um, vaccines, et cetera. Mm. And you mentioned

Speaker 3: (15:51)
When you were talking about some of the examples about, it's not always sort of a primary impact in terms of ESG, but there's often, I guess, secondary impacts as well. So maybe you could tell me a bit more about what impact looks like for you and how you sort of define it and consider it when you're looking at investments.

Nisa Amoils: (16:15)
Right? So that was the example about the second order effects of the land, um, usage ha happening from title insurance. Um, another example is a company we're going to invest in that's providing climate data to real estate developers and insurance companies based on artificial intelligence and blockchain. And they will be able to predict based on the patterns that are happening, where, um, some weather related effects might occur and that gets priced into the transaction. Um, so that is something we consider impact that, that, um, is, you know, anything that's trying to help the world solve these, some of these real problems and make the world a better place, um, can be defined as impact.

Rachel Pether: (17:15)
I think that's an excellent definition. And then if you take all these, these big themes and the things that you're passionate about, so diversity and, and blockchain technology, how can blockchain and technology be used as a tool for diversity,

Nisa Amoils: (17:34)
Exactly how we're using it and also through security token offerings, um, to give you an example of that there a few years ago, there was, um, a transaction with one of the trophy properties, uh, real estate pro hotels, um, in the world. And they tokenized part of the hotel and that investment was made available to any accredited investor, as opposed to the insiders working on real estate, private equity that it would normally go to, and that allowed them to have investors from around the world. And it allowed accredited investors to get in at a very low access point. And through tokenization, after your one-year lockup, you can trade that token on exchanges. And what I've seen in the three years since is that, um, I did invest and that token has appreciated in value despite the pandemic, um, trading very well. And I consider that a success because it's a wealth creation opportunity that went to somebody like me that would not have had access to it before. And I think that trend is going to continue and allow unaccredited investors, some access as well. That we're S we're seeing that, um, with the vaccine Jeff and reggae plus, but I think, um, it wouldn't have been possible without blockchain technology before. And so there are, uh, also, um, alternative ways to raise capital and capital formation that democratize the process. So for founders that go to access venture capital, that normally cannot access it, they can use these different tools to raise capital. And that's exciting. No, that's

Speaker 3: (19:45)
Very exciting. And it's interesting, you mentioned the example of trashy hotels as someone who, you know, moved to the middle east to work for a sovereign wealth fund in 2008, I think pretty much at that point middle east Southern wealth funds own most of the, the kind of trophy hotels globally. So it was good to see that opening up a little bit as well. I would really like to touch on, you know, I've been reading a lot recently. I think Robin hood, you know, made an announcement about X percent of Robin hood customers are now female, um, with all the work that you're doing in sort of gender diversity and, you know, the writing that you're doing with Forbes, et cetera,

Rachel Pether: (20:26)
What have been some of the

Speaker 3: (20:29)
Findings on women's participation in the cryptocurrency markets themselves.

Nisa Amoils: (20:38)
I just saw that same statistic actually that, um, more women are trading in crypto than ever before, which brilliant. And it ju it's a factor of, um, partly, you know, Robin hood phenomenon is, is the lockdown and, and people are looking for alternative forms of, um, entertainment say, and they're, they have more time, maybe they're, they're reading more and they're self-learning and their experiments thing, which is great. And then, you know, we've seen, um, in the us, these stimulus checks and, and the correlated run-up in crypto prices. So, you know, that, um, people are putting part of their stimulus checks into crypto. And so that, um, I think the combination of the education and the time, um, has allowed more women to get into trading crypto and, and participate in that wealth creation.

Speaker 3: (21:46)
It's interesting. You're actually, I think about the third person this week, who's used Robinhood and entertainment and the same in the same sentence. Um, I'd just like to ask a few questions on the capital raising side. I know that you were,

Rachel Pether: (22:03)
Uh, you know, you used to work in

Speaker 3: (22:05)
A venture capital or used to work. Um, you are an entrepreneur previously, were you involved in the fundraising process and was it sort of the struggles from you personally that led to you really wanting to help democratize this industry? Or has it, will you more looking at it through the lens of an investment perspective?

Nisa Amoils: (22:28)
Yes, it is both. It is, um, for female fund owned funds. Um, there are, I think 90% of them are very small, um, or, you know, other than a handful. Um, and they go through this process of being part of emerging manager programs, whether that be a pensions or, um, sovereign wealth funds or endowments. And there are a lot of barriers to getting through their systems, right? You have to be a certain size fund to, um, participate with them. And it's hard to get from a to B. So I, and, and the number of women fund managers in general, I think is about maybe five or 7%. It's very small and that's the trickle down effect that, um, if there were more and running funds, they would invest more in female founders and those female founders would grow up and, and go public. And, and then the cycle they would have well to create and invest more so that kind of cycle would continue. And so it's very hard to, um, kind of wait for those systems to change because it could take decades or, or hundreds of years by some calculations. And so part of the process is really de-risking emerging managers for these institutions and by the same token, allowing more women and minorities, to be able to incur the expense and take the risk of entering into fund management.

Rachel Pether: (24:22)
Yeah. And I think you made an important point before, you know, it's not just some fluffy Duffy feel-good factor here. There's actually a bonafide underlying economic data to support this as well in terms of, you know, returns and things like that.

Nisa Amoils: (24:40)
Right. Exactly. And if people would pay attention to the data and believe the data, then why wouldn't they want to invest there? Right. Everybody is seeking returns first. So, so why wouldn't you,

Rachel Pether: (24:56)
And do you think that comes from sort of subconscious biases? What do you think it was, but I'll, uh, I will take it as a response, a very succinct one word response. And also just to, you know, I guess close I'd really be interested. You know, you've been, you've had such a variety of experience and, you know, you've worked on both sides of the fence and also been, uh, a lawyer when you're looking like within, within the fund I a hundred X, what are you most excited about seeing over the next 12 or 24 months? And what would success look like

Nisa Amoils: (25:44)
For you? Yeah, so we like to think that we're Prehype investors and my partner, Alex, who spent 15 years as a technologist at Goldman Sachs likes to always say that, um, you know, there are so many different, uh, companies that don't even need a block chain or AI that are, you know, tagging it onto, uh, them. We like to decipher the wheat from the chaff there. Um, we think, I mean, he, he seated a company called dapper labs three years ago, and now it's worth $2 billion, um, in the NFT space, which of course you must be reading about because it's, it's hard not to, um, now that's blown up. So we we'd like to get in before that happens. And we really think that the next wave of innovation is going to come, um, with this ESG lens and impact lens that we're, um, seeing these world use cases, um, happen.

Nisa Amoils: (26:46)
That's not to say we wouldn't, uh, again, invest in, in a blockchain based gaming company we have, and we would, um, be opportunistic as well, um, or in, you know, financial services or, or in, um, other kinds of disruption. But we really do believe that the world is trending towards, um, solving some of these issues that really have been brought to light this year. And that so many different governments are trying to use technology to do that now. And so that's really going to be where we see these, this next wave into your as time we hope to participate now, get in early, have great returns for investors. Um, and then, you know, continue to make positive impact.

Rachel Pether: (27:40)
Fabulous. Well, I really hope we can get you back on in a year and, you know, see where you are in that evolution. And I was just thinking, we actually met just over a year ago and at an alternative investments summit in the Cayman islands. So here's hoping we can actually meet again in person as well.

Nisa Amoils: (28:01)
I can't wait for that. Rachel. I'd love to.

Rachel Pether: (28:04)
Perfect. Thanks so much for your time today, Lisa, it's been a real pleasure. Thank you so much.