Speaker 1: You're listening to Fox Sports. Welcome in the latest episode
Speaker 1: of Wins and Losses. I'm excited to be under way
Speaker 1: here because I think we have got a fantastic guest
Speaker 1: that is going to take us through a lot of
Speaker 1: really interesting things about the rise of the Internet, the
Speaker 1: rise of business based on the Internet, and also big
Speaker 1: tech in general. And he is David Sacks. He has
Speaker 1: got an incredible history. I don't actually know where you're
Speaker 1: from or where you grew up. He's a partner at
Speaker 1: Craft Invests in all different sorts of tech companies and
Speaker 1: beyond out there. But where did you grow up? David? Like?
Speaker 1: What was your background? And thanks for coming on with us. Yeah,
Speaker 1: great to be here. Clay Um, I was born in kipt, Africa,
Speaker 1: and my parents immigrated the United States fast five years old.
Speaker 1: We actually moved to Memphis, Tennessee, and that's where I
Speaker 1: basically grew up until I left for college. All Right,
Speaker 1: I had no idea. So Memphis, Tennessee. How much of
Speaker 1: a culture shock can you member? I can't imagine. The
Speaker 1: conveyor belt between South Africa and Memphis, Tennessee is very common.
Speaker 1: How did that end up? Your location in the United States? Yeah.
Speaker 1: You know, it's interesting. My dad's a doctor and they
Speaker 1: wanted to immigrate from South Africa. They didn't agree with
Speaker 1: the political situation there back in the nineteen seventies, and uh,
Speaker 1: he got a job at the University of Tennessee Medical
Speaker 1: Center practicing and teaching, and so that's we end up
Speaker 1: moving too. Yeah, it was a pretty big culture shock.
Speaker 1: Are you a sports fan? Did growing up in Memphis
Speaker 1: in any way sort of an embed itself in you
Speaker 1: as a college football college basketball fan or you sort
Speaker 1: of not that interested in sports as a kid growing up? Well,
Speaker 1: there are only two real sports in Memphis at that time.
Speaker 1: There was Memphis State Tigers basketball. That was huge. Um,
Speaker 1: everyone looked forward to that. I remember one year we
Speaker 1: went to the Final four with I think Keith Lee
Speaker 1: was sort of the start player then. And the other sport,
Speaker 1: if you want to call it out in Memphis was wrestling.
Speaker 1: Every money was wrestling at the miss South Coliseum and
Speaker 1: those are really the only two big sports in Memphis
Speaker 1: at that time. Obviously it changed, but did you go
Speaker 1: to those old school wrestling matches? You know, my parents
Speaker 1: would never let me go, unfortunately, but I remember, you know,
Speaker 1: Jerry the King Lawler was time and I would watch
Speaker 1: that stuff on TV. And you know, as a fan now,
Speaker 1: as a kid growing up in Nashville, the Nashville Memphis
Speaker 1: rivalry was very real. Did you feel it in Memphis
Speaker 1: when you were growing up? Were you aware that as
Speaker 1: a Memphian you were feuding constantly with Nashvillians a little bit?
Speaker 1: You know, our high school football team would eventually, you
Speaker 1: know what, sometimes going to the state finals and play
Speaker 1: against teams from Nashville. So yeah, there was a little bit.
Speaker 1: Where did you go away to college from Memphis? I
Speaker 1: went to Stanford as an undergrad, all right, So how
Speaker 1: much of a culture shock was that? All right? So
Speaker 1: you you come from South Africa, you then end up
Speaker 1: in Memphis and you make the trip out to Palo Alto.
Speaker 1: Stanford was a lot different place then, certainly than it
Speaker 1: is now, but that wasn't a very common route. How
Speaker 1: did you pick Stanford? Is the place you wanted to
Speaker 1: go to? Yeah? It's interesting. I mean Stanford, I mean,
Speaker 1: to be honest, this is the best school and that
Speaker 1: I got into, and I had a great reputea and um,
Speaker 1: it seemed like a great place to go to school.
Speaker 1: The campus is sort of really idyllic, like you said,
Speaker 1: being in Palo Alto, fantastic weather. Uh, it seemed like
Speaker 1: this an amazing place. And yeah, it was a pretty
Speaker 1: big culture shock because the campus was very liberal. In
Speaker 1: Memphis is uh or Tennessee in general sort of a
Speaker 1: little bit more conservative. So there was a difference there.
Speaker 1: But um, but the you know, the important thing about
Speaker 1: going to Stanford in the early nineties for me was
Speaker 1: that it got me into the whole tech scene when
Speaker 1: I graduated, and that that end up being very important
Speaker 1: for my career. By the way, I wanted to go
Speaker 1: to Stanford Law School. They didn't let me in. I
Speaker 1: had never been to California until I was in college,
Speaker 1: like twenty one or twenty two, and the first time
Speaker 1: I went to the Stanford campus, it really is heaven
Speaker 1: on Earth. I mean it is an incredible, uh incredible place.
Speaker 1: So so you graduate from Stanford, and do you remember
Speaker 1: the first time you ever got on the Internet? By
Speaker 1: the way, good question. Um, I don't remember that. I
Speaker 1: guess you know, it must have been in the mid nineties.
Speaker 1: People are starting to use Yahoo. Um, maybe I was
Speaker 1: in law school, you know. After Stanford, I went to
Speaker 1: law school at the University of Chicago, and it must
Speaker 1: have been around that time. And you know, I thought
Speaker 1: I had missed the whole internet thing because I had
Speaker 1: friends at Stanford who graduated, which that was the year
Speaker 1: that Netscape went public, and it kind of ushered in
Speaker 1: the commercial and there were a bunch of you know,
Speaker 1: really interesting companies getting started around then. There was you know,
Speaker 1: eBay and Amazon and Yahoo, and if you went to
Speaker 1: graduate from Stanford you would get easily pulled into all that.
Speaker 1: But because I graduated ninety four, I kind of felt
Speaker 1: like I missed it, and I actually ended up in
Speaker 1: law school. And it wasn't until when an old friend
Speaker 1: of mine from Stanford called me up and told me
Speaker 1: about a startup he was founding, uh called Confinity but
Speaker 1: eventually got renamed PayPal, and that was Peter Teel, and
Speaker 1: so Peter kind of pulled me back to paol Alto
Speaker 1: in um so Stanford. It actually ended up being very important,
Speaker 1: but it took five years from me to come back
Speaker 1: and do internet stuff. How did you like law school?
Speaker 1: Law school was great. I mean your Chicago was a
Speaker 1: very serious place and um you know, it was rigorous
Speaker 1: and a lot of great teachers and I enjoyed it,
Speaker 1: you know, but by after three years of it, I
Speaker 1: felt like I was ready to do something else. It
Speaker 1: wasn't a desire of mine to do law, but inell
Speaker 1: actually I thought it was really interesting, and you know,
Speaker 1: I enjoyed experience. Did you ever practice at all as
Speaker 1: as a part of a big firm? Did you do
Speaker 1: anything legal related? I also obviously went to law school
Speaker 1: at Vanderbilt, as as most listeners will know, and I
Speaker 1: kind of had the sense early on that law was
Speaker 1: not for me. It sounds like you kind of did
Speaker 1: as well. But did you go into any sort of
Speaker 1: big firm lifestyle or any actual practice of law after
Speaker 1: you graduated? You know, I spent a summer at a
Speaker 1: at a big law firm, and that kind of reinforced
Speaker 1: the decision for me that I wanted to do. You know.
Speaker 1: Part of it was always that I was interested in business,
Speaker 1: but I always felt like I wanted to be the
Speaker 1: decision maker, you know, and not not sort of the
Speaker 1: person carrying out the instructions. And you know, lawyers are
Speaker 1: ultimately advisors to the principle, uh and you know many
Speaker 1: of them do, you know, fantastic work. But I always
Speaker 1: felt like I wanted to be on the other side
Speaker 1: of the table and and do something more directly in business.
Speaker 1: Would you advise, because I get asked this question all
Speaker 1: the time, would you advise kids who think, hey, I
Speaker 1: don't necessarily want to be a lawyer to go to
Speaker 1: law school. If we got a one year old who's
Speaker 1: listening right now and they're going to college, is it
Speaker 1: a move that you would make again? Would you advise
Speaker 1: your own kids or kids who ask you for advice
Speaker 1: whether it go to law school or not. No, I
Speaker 1: would tell him not to because I think the only
Speaker 1: reason to law school these days is if you really
Speaker 1: enjoy the law and want to be a lawyer. You know,
Speaker 1: maybe you want to practice law, or you want to
Speaker 1: be a clerk for a judge, or you know, maybe
Speaker 1: become a judge or an elected official or something like that.
Speaker 1: I think the reason to go to law school today
Speaker 1: is because you're really just in the law now. Back
Speaker 1: when I did it and you did it, there are
Speaker 1: a lot of people who did it because I think
Speaker 1: there weren't as many options or it wasn't as clear
Speaker 1: what you should do. There are a lot more people
Speaker 1: back in those days. We're talking you know years ago
Speaker 1: who went to law school knowing they'll go into business.
Speaker 1: And I just think that today there's so many more options.
Speaker 1: If you want to do that, you can just do
Speaker 1: it directly, you know, spending three years of law school
Speaker 1: and all the expense of that. Uh, there's just much
Speaker 1: more direct ways of getting into business now. You know,
Speaker 1: in the mid nineties, even though I had some entree
Speaker 1: entrepreneurial instincts and desire to do something in business, I
Speaker 1: really had no idea how to do it. It wasn't clear,
Speaker 1: like how do you start a company? And so as
Speaker 1: a result, you kind of end up going to law
Speaker 1: school as the next step. Uh. But but but today
Speaker 1: I wouldn't encourage it. Okay, So you mentioned you leave
Speaker 1: law school and go back to work for a company
Speaker 1: that would become PayPal. I imagine a lot of people
Speaker 1: are somewhat familiar with PayPal. I've read a lot of
Speaker 1: the corporate history of PayPal because I find it to
Speaker 1: be pretty fascinating. What how would you describe it for
Speaker 1: people out there? You go in at nine, what is
Speaker 1: the experience? Like? Who were you working with? I think
Speaker 1: you mentioned Peter Teal uh and what did you guys
Speaker 1: end up achieving. Yeah. I mean, it was a really
Speaker 1: incredible group of people who today are kind of known
Speaker 1: as the Papal Mafia. That you know, people like Peter
Speaker 1: Til and Elon Musk and Max Levchin and Reed Hoffman,
Speaker 1: and the list goes on and on. Chad Hurley and
Speaker 1: Steve chen who founded YouTube Rule off Photos our CFO
Speaker 1: who went on to become the head of Sequoia, was
Speaker 1: a famous venture capital firm. So a lot of really
Speaker 1: incredible people were part of that founding team. And um
Speaker 1: and you know today Papals a hundred billion dollar, you know,
Speaker 1: publicly listed company, so it's, you know, twenty years later,
Speaker 1: it's a very important company still today. But it was
Speaker 1: really a pretty incredible group of people. When I joined in,
Speaker 1: it was about six months before the dot com crash,
Speaker 1: and Papal was primarily built. Although it was founded the
Speaker 1: year before the dot com crash, it was primarily built
Speaker 1: after and in the wake of the dot com crash,
Speaker 1: And it was a very tough environ ronament lots, you know,
Speaker 1: all these other startups are going out of business all
Speaker 1: around us, and somehow we managed to persevere and create
Speaker 1: you know, a successful outcome, and by early two thousand two.
Speaker 1: We were the first company, first tech company tai Po
Speaker 1: since the dot com crash. Uh And like I said, today, it's,
Speaker 1: you know, a hundred billion dollar publicly traded company. Okay,
Speaker 1: So what do you attribute um there being such an
Speaker 1: unbelievable amount of talent? The so called PayPal mafia. You
Speaker 1: ran through a lot of those guys who not only
Speaker 1: were successful in building PayPal into a company that could
Speaker 1: go public in two thousand two and survived the dot
Speaker 1: com implosion when everything else crashes, what attracted that amount
Speaker 1: of talent to that particular company at that point in time.
Speaker 1: It's interesting. I think the most important thing to realize
Speaker 1: is that although these people and these names are sort
Speaker 1: of celebrated today, they were kind of nobody's back then.
Speaker 1: And you know, we were all pretty young at the
Speaker 1: start of our careers. You know, when PayPal I p
Speaker 1: owed in two thousand two, the I was the average
Speaker 1: age on the S one, which is the sort of
Speaker 1: corporate finaling documents, and I was twenty nine years old,
Speaker 1: So you know, we weren't even thirty years old yet.
Speaker 1: This this executive team, this founding team, and one of
Speaker 1: the ways that we all came together is through friendship networks.
Speaker 1: You know, Peter Teal recruited his friends who had worked
Speaker 1: at sorry who had gone to school with him at Stanford.
Speaker 1: That was the case with me. Max Levchin, who was
Speaker 1: the CTO, he recruited fellow engineers that he had gone
Speaker 1: to school with that you have I And that was
Speaker 1: pretty much how the team was collected and came together.
Speaker 1: Is we recruited our friends, and the main reason for
Speaker 1: that is nobody else would would work for us. Joining
Speaker 1: a startup in the early two thousand's was considered a
Speaker 1: very risky thing to do, and it was really hard
Speaker 1: to convince people to join this fledgling company. So how
Speaker 1: did you meet Peter Tell at Stanford? Do you remember
Speaker 1: the first time you guys met? What drew you together? Yeah?
Speaker 1: So I met Peter at at Stanford. I was undergrad.
Speaker 1: He was actually in law school at that time because
Speaker 1: he's a few there had founded the Stanford Review, which
Speaker 1: was the conservative, you know slash libertarian student newspaper on campus.
Speaker 1: And I ended up becoming a writer and then the
Speaker 1: editor in chief of the Stanford Review. And um, so
Speaker 1: we you know, sort of bonded initially over politics and
Speaker 1: our take on what was happening on campus. And then,
Speaker 1: as you know, after that back in we ended up
Speaker 1: writing a book together about what was happening at Stanford,
Speaker 1: and that was sort of the beginning of a friendship
Speaker 1: that you know, Persevers took to this day. What's your
Speaker 1: favorite thing that you guys published as a part of
Speaker 1: the Stanford Review? Was there an article you wrote? Was
Speaker 1: there an article somebody else wrote while you were an editor.
Speaker 1: Do you recall something where you thought, man, we really
Speaker 1: nailed it here and maybe had an impact that we
Speaker 1: weren't anticipating being able to us. Well, you know, back
Speaker 1: in the this is going back to the late eighties
Speaker 1: early nineties, there was this huge debate at Stanford over
Speaker 1: the cannon the reading list, and there was a big
Speaker 1: protest on campus that became very famous where the protesters
Speaker 1: started chanting, hey, hey, ho ho, Western culture has got
Speaker 1: to go, and there was this sense that there was
Speaker 1: this protest movement to overturn and throw out what they
Speaker 1: called the dead white males of the curriculum. And they succeeded.
Speaker 1: I mean, they really ended up kind of purging the
Speaker 1: cannon of these classic works and replacing it with something
Speaker 1: very different, and that was really the beginning of this
Speaker 1: sort of cultural revolution on campus that kind of persists
Speaker 1: until today. And I think a lot of the political
Speaker 1: changes that you've seen in our society over the last
Speaker 1: you know, thirty years, or really downstream of the changes
Speaker 1: that happened on campus, because what happens the last thirty
Speaker 1: years is that they've been successfully graduating waves of um
Speaker 1: of students who've been in doctrine into the cityology, and
Speaker 1: those students have gone on to populate many of the
Speaker 1: institutions in our in our culture. And so if you
Speaker 1: think about you know, whether it's will capitalism or you know,
Speaker 1: any of these other institutions that are kind of pushing
Speaker 1: this idea of wokens today that all started on campus
Speaker 1: in the late eighties early nineties. We called it political
Speaker 1: correctness back then, but it was the same idea. Two
Speaker 1: thousand two, PayPal goes public, Uh, stock took off. I
Speaker 1: remember I went back and look before we talked, because
Speaker 1: I was like, man, I think that stock was still
Speaker 1: because people, what, you're right, the dot com implosion had happened,
Speaker 1: but you guys had built back up to a really
Speaker 1: impressive spot. Was there something that you bought or something
Speaker 1: you were excited to buy. Do you remember a purchase
Speaker 1: after I'm assuming you had some decent wealth, probably for
Speaker 1: the first time in your life, certainly on that level. Yeah.
Speaker 1: You know, Um, Peter and I both did the very
Speaker 1: cliche thing which I now cringe a little bit at doing,
Speaker 1: which is buying a Ferrari. Um. Yeah, you know what
Speaker 1: kind of Ferrari did you get? Like and and and
Speaker 1: and this is before like it was kind of probably
Speaker 1: commonplace for a lot of these Silicon Valley companies to
Speaker 1: be going public, Like did you just go into a
Speaker 1: dealership in Silicon Valley? Yeah, pretty much, I think I
Speaker 1: got I got a three five five Spider. It was
Speaker 1: like one of those you know, it was like a
Speaker 1: black convertible. It was a really cool car. Um. But
Speaker 1: you know, it's like I felt like it was like
Speaker 1: driving an egg, you know it was. It was so delicate.
Speaker 1: I felt like, you know, I was going to mess
Speaker 1: it up every time I drove it, and uh, you know,
Speaker 1: eventually eventually got rid of it. But what was the
Speaker 1: girl reaction to you having a Ferrari? Like was that
Speaker 1: something that was impressive? Did you always hear about rich
Speaker 1: guys driving fancy cars, and sometimes you got poor guys
Speaker 1: who drive fancy cars to try to look like rich guys.
Speaker 1: Net positive or net negative return on value in terms
Speaker 1: of impressions on women when you have a Ferrari. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, I don't think it really helped me that much. UM.
Speaker 1: So I don't Yeah, I don't think it helped me
Speaker 1: that much. Um. But you know, you know, I was
Speaker 1: only thirty years old at that time, so it was
Speaker 1: a kind that that you do when you're young, and um, yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, I guess I enjoyed it for a couple
Speaker 1: of years and then, uh, you know, I ended up
Speaker 1: ended up selling it. I actually got instead, uh one
Speaker 1: of the first test loos that Elon made, um, and
Speaker 1: that that was an interesting car. Hey, what's up everybody?
Speaker 1: It's me three time Pro Bowlertle Warrington, and I couldn't
Speaker 1: be more excited to announce a new podcast, call Up
Speaker 1: on Game. What is Up on Game? You asked, along
Speaker 1: with my fellow Pro bowler T J. Huschman, Zada and
Speaker 1: Super Bowl champion. Yep, that's right, Plexico Burris. You can
Speaker 1: only name a show with that type of talent on
Speaker 1: it Up on Game. We're going to be daring our
Speaker 1: real life experiences loaded with teachable moments. Listen to up
Speaker 1: On Game with Me, LaVar Arrington, T J. Hutchman's Outa
Speaker 1: and Plexico Birds on the I Heart Radio app, Apple
Speaker 1: podcast or wherever you get your podcast from. So I
Speaker 1: don't even know anything about that. When did that? Was
Speaker 1: that like an early model Tesla? I mean he's like
Speaker 1: kind of almost making out of the back of the
Speaker 1: studio somewhere. Yeah, I mean the first version of the
Speaker 1: Tesla was called the Roadster and it was the first
Speaker 1: car that Ellen made, and it was more of a
Speaker 1: sports car and it it was in the body of
Speaker 1: they used like the body of I think it was
Speaker 1: like an old I want to say, Fiat or something
Speaker 1: like that. It was a really small car. It was
Speaker 1: a two seater and didn't have a lot of features.
Speaker 1: It didn't even have power steering. It was pretty hard
Speaker 1: to draw, I've to be honest, but elon. But it
Speaker 1: was very quick. It had that speed from the electric batteries. Basically,
Speaker 1: you know, the torque was there was no gear shifting,
Speaker 1: and the torque felt, you know, almost unlimited, and so
Speaker 1: it was a very fast car. But it was small
Speaker 1: and kind of hard to drive, but it got test
Speaker 1: off the ground. What Ellen did is I think he
Speaker 1: sold maybe thousand of those cars, um and you know,
Speaker 1: the idea was, we're, you know, we're going to sell
Speaker 1: a sports car because he could charge a lot of
Speaker 1: money for them, and then on the heels of that
Speaker 1: he would make a mass market car. And that's what
Speaker 1: he did is you know, I think he stopped production
Speaker 1: of the Roaster after maybe a thousand they sold about
Speaker 1: thousand of them, and then use that money build the
Speaker 1: Tesla Model Less, which was their first real mainstream car,
Speaker 1: and that was a really fantastic car that was easily
Speaker 1: the best car I'd driven till that time. And you know,
Speaker 1: since then they've gone on to the Model three and
Speaker 1: not a lie and Tesla has become the most valuable
Speaker 1: car company in the world. Tesla is an interesting story,
Speaker 1: and I think, and I'm curious if you were the
Speaker 1: same way. One of the things that fascinates me about
Speaker 1: a lot of the guys who made money at PayPal
Speaker 1: is many people make tens of millions of dollars and
Speaker 1: they throw up the peace sign and they say, Okay,
Speaker 1: I've got money to be able to basically do whatever
Speaker 1: I want for the rest of my life, But I'm
Speaker 1: not interested in pushing all that money back into the
Speaker 1: center of the table and make bigger bets going forward.
Speaker 1: It seems like a lot of the PayPal guys and
Speaker 1: maybe it's the psychology of the company in general, the
Speaker 1: risk taking culture. I'm curious how you would analyze it.
Speaker 1: Almost looked at the money that you guys made at
Speaker 1: PayPal as table stakes that allowed you to up your
Speaker 1: wagers on things that were even more important to you.
Speaker 1: Did you have a conscious decision about making that kind
Speaker 1: of choice, because certainly you've gone on to other companies,
Speaker 1: and it's easy for somebody who has a success on
Speaker 1: the level of payper how to say, Hey, you know,
Speaker 1: I've made my money. I can have a really comfortable life.
Speaker 1: You guys, it seems like a lot of you said, Okay,
Speaker 1: I've got the table stakes to do what I really
Speaker 1: wanted to do. Conscious decision, unconscious? Am I analyzing the
Speaker 1: larger culture in your mind correctly? Yeah? I think that's right.
Speaker 1: I mean, nobody felt out of that original PayPal crew.
Speaker 1: Nobody felt like, oh, let's just retired now. They all
Speaker 1: went on to do, you know, greater things, And I
Speaker 1: think that's why the paper Mafia's kind of remembered today
Speaker 1: is not just for PayPal, but what they all did afterwards. Um,
Speaker 1: you know Ellen famously that really his entire fortune on
Speaker 1: Tesla and SpaceX. He was, you know, a few weeks
Speaker 1: away from going bankrupt and you know, ended up just
Speaker 1: back in two thousand eight in the financial crisis and
Speaker 1: put his last dime into Tesla and SpaceX to save
Speaker 1: those companies and then ultimately succeeded. And that's why he's
Speaker 1: the world's riches man today, or one of them, is
Speaker 1: because he really double triple down and kind of risked
Speaker 1: every penny he had on those ventures. But everybody else
Speaker 1: in the group really went on to do really impressive
Speaker 1: things as well. I mean, Peter went on to become
Speaker 1: of VC. He wrote the first check as an angel
Speaker 1: investor into Facebook. I think it's a five mins houseand
Speaker 1: dollar check, and then that turned into billions. And then
Speaker 1: he was the founding investor at Volunteer, which is now
Speaker 1: a successful public company, and you know, also founded Founders Funds,
Speaker 1: a VC firm has done very well. Mass Love Tune
Speaker 1: is the CTO of PayPal, founded a firm which is
Speaker 1: now publicly traded company, went publishing the last year that's
Speaker 1: worth you know, billions, um, and so on down the line.
Speaker 1: I mean everyone went on to do different things. I
Speaker 1: after PayPal, created another internet company called Yammer, which was
Speaker 1: an enterprise software company. It was one of the first
Speaker 1: enterprise software companies to use viral tactics that I had
Speaker 1: learned at PayPal. So yeah, we all went on to
Speaker 1: do different things. And I think it's partly a function
Speaker 1: the fact that we were all very young and still
Speaker 1: had a lot of ambition, and nobody felt like they
Speaker 1: had hit some number or something where they were just
Speaker 1: going to retire. Is it difficult to when you have
Speaker 1: a big, big hit like you guys did with PayPal?
Speaker 1: Is it difficult to decide what the next step you're
Speaker 1: going to take is in any way because you're almost
Speaker 1: over analyzing it and trying to equal or have that
Speaker 1: same kind of success you mentioned Yammer. How many things
Speaker 1: did you look at in a significant way from a
Speaker 1: business opportunity perspective before you made the leap there? And
Speaker 1: what was it that made you make that choice? Yes?
Speaker 1: So for me, I mean I think you raised a
Speaker 1: good point, which is, you know, once you've had a success,
Speaker 1: you know, is there a danger of kind of over
Speaker 1: analyzing the next thing and being reticent to have a failure,
Speaker 1: you know, because now you've had a success and it
Speaker 1: could be the opposite to right where you expect everything.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's just you're going to be uh analyzed
Speaker 1: in some way based on your prior success. And I'm
Speaker 1: just kind of fascinated by how you make the decision
Speaker 1: to take the next opportunity. Yes, So for me, it's
Speaker 1: it's always about the product. And what happens is I
Speaker 1: get a product idea and I start, you know, turning
Speaker 1: it over my head and start developing the idea, and
Speaker 1: I get kind of obsessed with it. And so it's
Speaker 1: my passion for the product that drives everything else, and
Speaker 1: I don't worry so much about what the business outcome
Speaker 1: is going to be. I just try to design the
Speaker 1: best product and try to figure out how to get
Speaker 1: it into as many fuel as hands as possible, solve
Speaker 1: the distribution problem, and and kind of let that drive
Speaker 1: it and then let the shift fall where they may
Speaker 1: in terms of the actual financial outcome. I think it's
Speaker 1: not healthy to be thinking so much about, you know,
Speaker 1: how much money you're going to make, because that's not
Speaker 1: something that's going to fuel you on a daily basis when,
Speaker 1: especially when times get tough, you really want to have
Speaker 1: passion for the idea and the mission of the company
Speaker 1: and the product, and that's the thing that's going to
Speaker 1: motivate you on a daily basis. So you sell uh
Speaker 1: yammer for over a billion dollars basically four years after
Speaker 1: its founding. Microsoft buys it. And then I'm kind of
Speaker 1: fascinated by your move into venture capital. But before we
Speaker 1: talk about that, are you noticing along the line you
Speaker 1: get to Silicon Valley in ninety nine, you're right there
Speaker 1: at the heartbeat of this culture. Zuckerberg is gonna move
Speaker 1: Facebook out there, uh, and it continues to grow and
Speaker 1: become an incredible incubator of so many different ideas. Is
Speaker 1: the culture substantially evolving as you see it? Do you
Speaker 1: like the evolution that you're seeing in Silicon Valley? Do
Speaker 1: you dislike it? Well, the culture Silicon Valley is always
Speaker 1: a really important contributor to the sasum of all the
Speaker 1: companies that were there historically. And so you know, I
Speaker 1: really sell when when I moved back to Silicon Valley
Speaker 1: back to PayPal, it really felt like the center of
Speaker 1: the universe. You would drive along the one on one
Speaker 1: freeway and you would see all these office buildings, these shiny,
Speaker 1: gleaming new office buildings that had just been constructed in
Speaker 1: the last couple of years, and they all had the
Speaker 1: logos of companies that didn't exist a few years before.
Speaker 1: And it really felt like something magical was happening where
Speaker 1: you could build these incredible companies so quickly, and there
Speaker 1: was nowhere else in the world you could really do that.
Speaker 1: There was, you know, there was nowhere else where you
Speaker 1: could find the money to do it, where you get
Speaker 1: vcs to write you these checks so quickly, you know,
Speaker 1: without spending months thinking about it. They could do it
Speaker 1: in days or weeks, and you could find the talent
Speaker 1: that you needed to build these companies. So it was
Speaker 1: really a magical place. And what happened between say two
Speaker 1: thousand and over that twenty year period is that looking
Speaker 1: just kind of getting it got bigger and bigger. If
Speaker 1: you go back to the ninety nineties, it was sort
Speaker 1: of clustered around Palo Alto, but you know, it got
Speaker 1: it kept growing to the point where it included San
Speaker 1: Francisco and the East Bay, and then it went south
Speaker 1: to San Jose, and so Silicon Valley really became Silicon Bay,
Speaker 1: and it kept getting bigger and bigger, and it created
Speaker 1: this sort of bounty of riches for the city of
Speaker 1: San Francisco, even though the city itself had really done
Speaker 1: nothing to encourage Silicon Valley, and in fact, I had
Speaker 1: a lot of policies and politicians who were hostile to
Speaker 1: the tech industry. It you know, made San Francisco this
Speaker 1: beneficiary of these incredible riches. And we can talk more
Speaker 1: about that. But then what happened, I think during COVID,
Speaker 1: and this is really new, this is the last couple
Speaker 1: of years, is that because of COVID, and you know,
Speaker 1: that started this whole era of remote work and distributed work.
Speaker 1: People started doing their jobs from home and then they
Speaker 1: realized that they could do these jobs from anywhere. And
Speaker 1: so this whole tech industry of the last couple of
Speaker 1: years has decentralized a lot, and you started to see
Speaker 1: the rise of tech hubs in places like Austin and Miami. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, New York City has gotten strong. L A
Speaker 1: and Seattle were already somewhat strong. But you're seeing now
Speaker 1: tech emerge everywhere and it's not just Silicon Valley anymore.
Speaker 1: And I'd say maybe fifty of the companies we invest
Speaker 1: in today are still in Silicon Valley or the Bay Area,
Speaker 1: but the other fift are increasingly in a distributed number
Speaker 1: of locations. And I think it's really good for the
Speaker 1: country actually, that this wealth and prosperity that's being created
Speaker 1: by the new economy is not just going to be
Speaker 1: in the Bay Area, but that's going to be all
Speaker 1: over the United States. Yeah, I'll give you By the way,
Speaker 1: we're talking to David sachs Uh, this is wins and Losses.
Speaker 1: I'm Clay Travis. I'll give you an example of that, David.
Speaker 1: I spent a lot of time going out to l
Speaker 1: a UM obviously because Fox was based there for Fox Sports,
Speaker 1: and spent months and months out there, and I would
Speaker 1: go around and look at everybody's houses in l a
Speaker 1: and then I, you know, you see how much they cost.
Speaker 1: And then I'd come back to the Nashville area and
Speaker 1: I would be like, you know, my house that that
Speaker 1: we initially bought here, uh, would cost millions and millions
Speaker 1: of dollars in l a and it was a fraction
Speaker 1: of that in Nashville, right. Um, And what I've seen
Speaker 1: with COVID is it accelerated things to such an extent
Speaker 1: that now there's not as big of a difference. You know,
Speaker 1: a lot of people are cashing out in California, in
Speaker 1: New York, in the Chicago area and moving to where
Speaker 1: I live in the Nashville area. And the prices have
Speaker 1: skyrocketed in Nashville. And I think that's because the top
Speaker 1: ten percent of income earners, to your point, have realized
Speaker 1: that they can basically live anywhere in the United States
Speaker 1: and do their same job, and absent COVID, many of
Speaker 1: them would not have risk that, right. You would never
Speaker 1: have said, oh, okay, I'm gonna go ahead and relocate
Speaker 1: and do my job that I had been doing in California,
Speaker 1: in Nashville or in Austin or a place like that.
Speaker 1: And uh. And certainly people who are running hedge funds
Speaker 1: in New York are finally saying, screw it, I'm not
Speaker 1: gonna pay you know, fifteen percent state income tax and
Speaker 1: I can go to Florida pay nothing, being better weather,
Speaker 1: get a bigger place. But it seems like in many
Speaker 1: of these areas that lack of similarity in housing prices
Speaker 1: has vanished, right, Um, And I think it's reflective of
Speaker 1: what you're saying, which is people with high level talent
Speaker 1: and frankly high level incomes being more evenly distributed across
Speaker 1: the country than they might have been in the earth
Speaker 1: in the late nineties and the early two thousand's for sure. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think I think that's right, and I think it's
Speaker 1: all been enabled by this cultural shift that we don't
Speaker 1: all have to meet in person almost all of my
Speaker 1: meetings these days or by zoom. Yeah, you know, the
Speaker 1: factors that I invest in, they are fine with meeting
Speaker 1: by zoom and in fact, they like it better. It
Speaker 1: saves everyone, you know, a bunch of drive time and
Speaker 1: I can be wherever I am and um, and they
Speaker 1: can be in a different city. So everything kind of
Speaker 1: moved to zoom in in the VC industry. I'm not
Speaker 1: sure that's totally true. If you're if you're trying to
Speaker 1: build a company, I think there is some value in
Speaker 1: having people under the same roof working together, but certainly
Speaker 1: for a VC everything's moved to zoom And so if
Speaker 1: that's the case, if if you're somebody who who's kind
Speaker 1: of a knowledge work and do your job remotely from anywhere.
Speaker 1: Now you're kind of freed up to live anywhere you want.
Speaker 1: You don't have to just live in the in the
Speaker 1: in your sort of industry town and um and so yeah,
Speaker 1: there's been a lot more decentralization. I mean, it used
Speaker 1: to be that if you wanted to do tech in
Speaker 1: a serious way, you have to go to the Bay Area.
Speaker 1: If you wanted to do entertainment in a serious way,
Speaker 1: you have to go to l A or finance was
Speaker 1: in New York, um, and so on down the line.
Speaker 1: But now people are liberated. And so I think cities
Speaker 1: are starting to realize that they're competing for knowledge workers. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, not just companies anymore. You know, cities used
Speaker 1: to compete to get the company headquarters is to move
Speaker 1: to their city. Now they're kind of competing for individual
Speaker 1: knowledge workers to make that decision. And the low tax
Speaker 1: states or no tax states like Florida and Texas um
Speaker 1: are just seeing you know, there are incredible beneficiaries of that.
Speaker 1: And if you look at the migration stats across the
Speaker 1: United States, all the states that are growing right now
Speaker 1: are basically the zero tax or low tax states and
Speaker 1: the states that are seeing the biggest outflows, or California,
Speaker 1: New York and the other states that have very high taxes.
Speaker 1: So it's it's a it's a really big change. We're
Speaker 1: talking to David Sachs. All right, so you now do
Speaker 1: venture capital. I'm not an expert at venture campit capital
Speaker 1: at all. I know just enough to be good enough
Speaker 1: at content that I can build a business and be
Speaker 1: able to sell it, but I wouldn't be great at
Speaker 1: spreadsheets or anything like that. Um, what percentage of companies
Speaker 1: that you look at do you end up investing in? Uh,
Speaker 1: by the time they go through their fundraising rounds, Like
Speaker 1: what kind of hit rate would have fund like yours have?
Speaker 1: In terms of the personage of companies that you're investing in,
Speaker 1: I mean, if you probably one in a thousands. But yeah,
Speaker 1: but I mean obviously that's not me. I can't take
Speaker 1: a thousand meetings without doing crazy. So we have a
Speaker 1: we have a team, you know, close to forty people
Speaker 1: now and between all of them, they look at thousands
Speaker 1: of companies every year for us to make you know, um,
Speaker 1: one to two dozen investments at various stages. So it
Speaker 1: might be a little better hit rate than that. It
Speaker 1: might be more like one something like that. But that
Speaker 1: doesn't mean that every company we go deep on, right.
Speaker 1: It might mean that we take a meeting, or it
Speaker 1: might just be that they send us their information. But
Speaker 1: our top of funnel, when we measure it is is
Speaker 1: thousands of companies. Um, what is your biggest hit? What
Speaker 1: is the company that you invested in as a venture
Speaker 1: capital investor? And it has been an absolute home run
Speaker 1: well before. So I started Craft in two thousand seventeen,
Speaker 1: about five years ago to institute size and professionalize what
Speaker 1: I was doing. But I've been investing, you know, pretty
Speaker 1: much since you know, after we sold PayPal in two
Speaker 1: thousand two. Probably the biggest hit to day would be
Speaker 1: investing in Facebook back in She's Camember exactly what year
Speaker 1: it was, and it was like two five or two
Speaker 1: thousand and six that you know, what kind of valuation
Speaker 1: would Facebook have had at the time that you invested. Well,
Speaker 1: I invested in a in the growth round, So I
Speaker 1: wasn't as early as Peter Peter invested like at a
Speaker 1: five million dollar valuation. I think by the time I invested,
Speaker 1: it was sort of at a at a five million
Speaker 1: million dollar valuation or something like that UM and then
Speaker 1: it went public at fifty fifty billion dollar valuation. Today
Speaker 1: it's about five billion. You know, there were some other
Speaker 1: ones too. I mean I invested in UM, Valanteer, invest
Speaker 1: in Airbnb, slack Um, SpaceX you know Elon's company, which
Speaker 1: has done phenomenally. Would you invest in Tesla? You know,
Speaker 1: I don't know how I missed that, but I bought
Speaker 1: one of the original tests by the non investment company,
Speaker 1: and that was did you look at the Tesla? I'm
Speaker 1: just kind of curious. Did you look at any of
Speaker 1: the VC money when they raised and say, hey, I'm
Speaker 1: consciously not going to make that choice, Like, yeah, I'm
Speaker 1: just kind of curious. You liked the car uh and
Speaker 1: obviously your friends with Elen. I'm just sure curious how
Speaker 1: you didn't end up in there. Well I didn't. I
Speaker 1: didn't look at it. I wasn't a professional VC or anything,
Speaker 1: so I didn't look at it. You know, he never
Speaker 1: presented it to me. He certainly could have called him
Speaker 1: up and said hey, could I invest? I actually did
Speaker 1: that with SpaceX UM. I emailed him and said, you know, hey,
Speaker 1: can I invest? Me? Said sure, so I invested personally,
Speaker 1: and then we invested as a VC later. Um. You know,
Speaker 1: I don't know why I didn't occurred to me. I
Speaker 1: just I guess I just thought that the idea of
Speaker 1: a new car company was so far outside the realm
Speaker 1: of what I thought I knew about investing, you know,
Speaker 1: because all the other investment selves making were software investments
Speaker 1: or tech investment. And I guess what i'd realize is
Speaker 1: that was basically creating an iPad on wheels, and I
Speaker 1: should have just seen it as a car company. I
Speaker 1: should have really seen it as like a fundamental tech innovation.
Speaker 1: And so I guess we has to have the innovation,
Speaker 1: the imagination to see what a radical innovation it would be.
Speaker 1: And I'm curious. So those are a lot of hits, obviously, Tesla,
Speaker 1: maybe not a not a hit. What's the worst decision
Speaker 1: you've made in terms of not investing or investing in
Speaker 1: your like? So I'll give you an example, small level.
Speaker 1: I don't even know if you know this. I decided
Speaker 1: that I would get into the pants business early on
Speaker 1: when I launched out Kick, and the idea I think
Speaker 1: was the right one, which was I don't want to
Speaker 1: be uh reliant upon advertising dollars to monetize my business.
Speaker 1: I would rather my content business. I would rather own
Speaker 1: businesses that I could advertise against instead of having to
Speaker 1: go out hat in hand always selling ad dollars, right,
Speaker 1: and so find things that over lap with, uh, the
Speaker 1: audience that I'm already reaching from a content perspective, things
Speaker 1: that they would want to buy. And you know, at
Speaker 1: some point when you're staring trying to tell the difference
Speaker 1: between you know, one pantone color and another one, like
Speaker 1: the difference between auburn orange and Tennessee orange for somebody
Speaker 1: frankly who maybe a little bit color blind and also
Speaker 1: certainly is not is not fashion savvy, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: and and shipping them in and tie dying and the
Speaker 1: sizing and pants are really actually a complicated business. So
Speaker 1: I lost like fifty thou dollars pretty fast in pants,
Speaker 1: and I was like, this is such a stupid idea.
Speaker 1: You know, you see athletes who go broke, and you know,
Speaker 1: if they did a documentary on me, wo'd be like
Speaker 1: Clay Travis decided going to the pants business. He lost money.
Speaker 1: Was there anything you got into on a bad perspective
Speaker 1: or you were like, this is just such a stupid
Speaker 1: business that I ended up getting involved in and or
Speaker 1: something that you looked at, looked at heavily, then passed
Speaker 1: on and it ended up being wildly successful. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: mean there's definitely things that I've invested in that haven't worked.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is this is absolutely a bad average game.
Speaker 1: And nobody that's you know, a thousand what's a good
Speaker 1: what's a good batting average? In the VC business? Like,
Speaker 1: what are you shooting for? I know, your returns overall,
Speaker 1: but what kind of hit rate should you have if
Speaker 1: you're doing a good job in VC investing, Well, it's
Speaker 1: probably like baseball and if you're batting three something, you're
Speaker 1: like Hall of Fame r um. Yeah, I mean really,
Speaker 1: although it's not just um, I mean, you'll appreciate this.
Speaker 1: It's not just batting average. It's also slugging. Slugging because
Speaker 1: you can hit you can hit like a thousand home
Speaker 1: runs on one swing, right, as opposed to just being
Speaker 1: able to maximize, you know, one run. You can get
Speaker 1: a thousand runs on a swing exactly. And and that's
Speaker 1: and that's really what that's one of the biggest um
Speaker 1: things about the VC business that's kind of nonintuitive to
Speaker 1: people is that it's not about how many losers that
Speaker 1: you have. It's about the magnitude of your winners. And sometimes,
Speaker 1: you know, you can be wrong about everything, but that
Speaker 1: one decision you were right about ends up with turning
Speaker 1: you know, ten times your funds. So, um, that tends
Speaker 1: to be that if you look at kind of the
Speaker 1: great VC funds, it's not about how often they were right,
Speaker 1: it's about the magnitude of their winners. And UM, so yeah,
Speaker 1: but I mean I think we've had a pretty good
Speaker 1: batting average. You know, I've been in about twenty five
Speaker 1: unicorn companies. Um. You know, we defined unicorns companies that
Speaker 1: end up being worth a billion dollars or more. And um,
Speaker 1: you know that the most recent one for us was
Speaker 1: was crypto. Um we you know, we made some crypto
Speaker 1: investments back in two thousand, seventeen, two eight, and they
Speaker 1: returned our first fund. So you know that was sort
Speaker 1: of like a forty or fifty x investment in five
Speaker 1: years based on making you know, based on investing in crypto.
Speaker 1: I think you also invested in a movie, right, Um,
Speaker 1: thank you for smoking am I right about this? How
Speaker 1: did that happen? Uh? And and have you gotten involved
Speaker 1: in other creative endeavors, which are certainly different than trying
Speaker 1: to analyze software companies or tech related funds. Yeah. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I guess that you're If you're looking for me to
Speaker 1: identify a bad investment, I'd say anything in the movie industry. Now. Actually,
Speaker 1: we didn't lose money on Thinking for Smoking. We actually
Speaker 1: did fine. It ended up being one of the big
Speaker 1: hits of I think two thousand five, two thousand six. Um,
Speaker 1: this is an independent movie. I financed it along with
Speaker 1: a few friends. Peter and e la On all contributed
Speaker 1: and they were executive producers. This was a script I
Speaker 1: found that was written by Jason Weightman, who ended up
Speaker 1: directing the movie, based on a book by Christopher Buckley.
Speaker 1: And um, I just thought it was a fantastic So, yeah,
Speaker 1: this is this is amazing to me, Like, so, how
Speaker 1: do you find a script? Right? Like? So, uh, you
Speaker 1: are thinking, after you've made some money in PayPal, hey,
Speaker 1: I like movie. Certainly at Stanford you've talked about the
Speaker 1: culture of political correctness and whatnot. Were you thinking, hey,
Speaker 1: maybe I'll get involved in the entertainment industry in some way. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean it was just sort of an unfuneral venture
Speaker 1: for me where I decided to create a movie production
Speaker 1: company and it was like a startup, you know, We're like,
Speaker 1: let's let's see, let's understand what it takes to make
Speaker 1: a movie. Let's try and make a better one. And
Speaker 1: we went out looking at projects and we probably looked
Speaker 1: at a thousand scripts, and I thought that Jason had
Speaker 1: written the best one I had seen, and someone had
Speaker 1: given it to me as a writing sample for him actually,
Speaker 1: and the question I asked was, wait, why is the
Speaker 1: writing sample? Why why don't we just make this? And
Speaker 1: the reason why is because the lights have been fragmented.
Speaker 1: Warner Brothers owned the book and Jason script was actually
Speaker 1: owned by Milk Gibson's company Icon, And anyway, we spent
Speaker 1: something like two years trying to unravel the right situation
Speaker 1: and acquire all the rights, and we finally did that.
Speaker 1: Then we could make it as an intendent movie, and
Speaker 1: we did that, and we took it to the Frounto
Speaker 1: Film Festival and Sun Dance and ended up being a
Speaker 1: pretty big hit um in terms, you know, as a
Speaker 1: hit creatively want a lot of awards, and it did
Speaker 1: something like the box office on an eight million dollar budget,
Speaker 1: and you know, it's one of these kind of cult
Speaker 1: movies that's and it launched Jason Reitman's career. He's ended
Speaker 1: up becoming a very very big director in Hollywood. The
Speaker 1: you know, my takeaway from it though, is in terms
Speaker 1: of business is that you know, we did a little better,
Speaker 1: but not much than just get our money back. And
Speaker 1: so it made a lot of money, but it mainly
Speaker 1: made money for Fox, uh, you know, the Fox Searchlight
Speaker 1: movie studio. And that kind of taught me a lot
Speaker 1: about the movie business, which is is controlled by gatekeepers.
Speaker 1: There's a handful of studios and they really make all
Speaker 1: the money. And you know, we as this sort of entrepreneur,
Speaker 1: as the producer who took all the risk, this is
Speaker 1: not really a reward for that risk, and um, you know,
Speaker 1: very it's very different than the internet business, where you're
Speaker 1: taking you're taking a similar kind of risk, very hard
Speaker 1: execute you know, a huge chance of failure, but at
Speaker 1: least when you hit it, there's a giant reward there.
Speaker 1: And so that was a big lesson for me. And
Speaker 1: on the heels of things for smoking, that's what I
Speaker 1: actually created yammer is. I was like, well, look I'm
Speaker 1: gonna do something super risky. At least I want to
Speaker 1: be in a position to get rewarded for it if
Speaker 1: it works. Fox Sports Radio has the best sports talk
Speaker 1: lineup in the nation. Catch all of our shows at
Speaker 1: Fox sports Radio dot com and within the I Heart
Speaker 1: Radio app. Search f s R to listen live. So
Speaker 1: let's talk big picture. Now, you've been in Silicon Valley
Speaker 1: for a long time. And by the way, that's fascinating.
Speaker 1: Do you think you'll ever fund any other movies? Maybe
Speaker 1: because you're just so committed to the idea that it's
Speaker 1: getting out there, um, as opposed to the you know,
Speaker 1: remunerative return that you might be able to recoup. Yes,
Speaker 1: And I think that's the way you have to look
Speaker 1: at it. I actually have another movie that's um in
Speaker 1: the can, so to speak. Um. It's called dolly Land.
Speaker 1: It's a movie about the painter salvad Or Dolly Ben Kingsley,
Speaker 1: you know, the multi Academy Award winner plays Dolly. It's
Speaker 1: directed by a great director named Mary Here and it's
Speaker 1: actually done. We made it as an independent movie over
Speaker 1: the past year and we're taking it too film festivals
Speaker 1: later this year. And I think we've been accepted to
Speaker 1: Toronto Film Festival, and there's a couple others we're looking at.
Speaker 1: So it's exciting. I mean, we're gonna take to the
Speaker 1: Film Festival and try to sell it and see what happens. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, I hope it makes money. But you know,
Speaker 1: I've I've gotten used to the idea that, you know,
Speaker 1: it's very, very hard to make money in the movie business.
Speaker 1: It's not why I do it. I do it because
Speaker 1: I love movies and I like the subject matter, and um,
Speaker 1: it's a passion project for everyone who's involved. So so yeah,
Speaker 1: I you know, I'm still sort of interest in the
Speaker 1: movie business and do it. But it's you obvious see
Speaker 1: it as a hobby or you're going to be disappointed.
Speaker 1: I think our actors harder to manage than other employees.
Speaker 1: It's case by case. Um, most of them are very
Speaker 1: professional and are a delight to work with, and then
Speaker 1: you have a handful who are known as difficult. But
Speaker 1: to be honest, UM, the ones who are difficult, they
Speaker 1: don't last that long. I mean there's a kind of
Speaker 1: old uh saying in Hollywood is a life's too short list.
Speaker 1: And if you're an actor, you really don't want to
Speaker 1: get on the lots too short lists? Are you? We're
Speaker 1: talking to David David Sacks about wins and losses in
Speaker 1: his career across a variety of fields. All right, let's
Speaker 1: talk um, big picture here on tech. One reason I'm
Speaker 1: so excited to talk to you and I appreciate all
Speaker 1: the time you've given us, is for what I do, UM,
Speaker 1: and I testified in Congress about this, uh, in front
Speaker 1: of the House Judiciary Subcommittee. I can see the power
Speaker 1: of Facebook for what they can do. I can see
Speaker 1: the power of Twitter just for the content that we
Speaker 1: created OutKick. You know, I can go in and look
Speaker 1: at the charts and tell you basically, hey, the algorithm
Speaker 1: is favoring us today or this month. Hey, they decided
Speaker 1: they don't like what we're writing, and they are writing
Speaker 1: us off of the algorithm page UM. And it seems,
Speaker 1: based on my experience, that the bias always runs against
Speaker 1: us whenever we write something favorable. I'll give you an example.
Speaker 1: When we had Donald Trump on for the first time
Speaker 1: on my sports talk radio show. We wrote a bunch
Speaker 1: of articles about it at OutKick. Our traffic basically vanished
Speaker 1: on social media literally within a day. Or two of
Speaker 1: all of those articles, and it was Trump primarily talking
Speaker 1: about sports going up on OutKick. It was clear that
Speaker 1: we have been flagged in some way. Certainly the same
Speaker 1: thing has happened when we wrote about masks or we
Speaker 1: wrote about covid um. From a business perspective, not from
Speaker 1: a political perspective. Does that make sense that they would
Speaker 1: be behaving, these big tech companies, and I'm talking about
Speaker 1: OutKick specifically in a way that clearly is discriminatory in
Speaker 1: terms of the distribution of articles from sites like mine.
Speaker 1: Does that make sense to you from a not from
Speaker 1: a you know what's better for the country perspective? Does
Speaker 1: it make sense from a business perspective? No, I don't
Speaker 1: think so. I mean, I think they're doing it because
Speaker 1: for ideological reasons. And um, now what I think what
Speaker 1: happens is they start with a business rationale that seems
Speaker 1: to make sense. So for example, they will let's say
Speaker 1: you're a social media site, and uh, you start with
Speaker 1: the content moderation department, because there's a certain kinds of
Speaker 1: content that just shouldn't beyond there. I mean, people threatening
Speaker 1: violence or you know, harassing other users, or using profanity
Speaker 1: or obscenity, and they don't want that to be part
Speaker 1: of their social networks. So they create a content moderation
Speaker 1: team to basically take down that stuff, and you know,
Speaker 1: no one really has a problem with that. But then
Speaker 1: the problem is that the people actually doing the content
Speaker 1: moderation have an ideological bias and they start indulging that bias.
Speaker 1: And the fact the matter is that if you're in
Speaker 1: Silicon Valley, you know, the for failing orthodoxy is everyone
Speaker 1: kind of drinks from the same monocultural sound. They all
Speaker 1: have the same political views. This stuff has been pulled
Speaker 1: many times and you can sit and so half the
Speaker 1: time ton't even realize what they're doing when they indulge
Speaker 1: in in this bias. But yeah, the bias absolutely creeps
Speaker 1: in and then it starts to become official policy. Um.
Speaker 1: I think something similar has happened that at Google, where
Speaker 1: you know, you've got the search algorithm, and the search
Speaker 1: algorithm might produce some results that seem offensive to people,
Speaker 1: so they introduce, you know, what they call human interventions.
Speaker 1: But then as soon as you allow humans the process,
Speaker 1: they carry with them their preconceived biases and they start
Speaker 1: indulging those biases, and the problem is that none of
Speaker 1: us have any transparency into those decisions. And I think
Speaker 1: we have a right to know when we're being down
Speaker 1: ranked or the algorithms sort of supporting our content we
Speaker 1: should ever right, or or we've been kicked off one
Speaker 1: of these networks. There's no explanation that comes with us,
Speaker 1: and I think we should have due process rights to
Speaker 1: at least know why, to know when and why we've
Speaker 1: been down ranked or downvoad or something like that. And
Speaker 1: is that the idea behind the idea of an open
Speaker 1: algorithm marketplace effectively so that we could go in and
Speaker 1: I'm just using out kick as an example, which is
Speaker 1: owned by Fox now. But when you're down ranked, if
Speaker 1: you are a business that is reliant on advertising, that
Speaker 1: can take money directly out of your pocket, and the
Speaker 1: lesson that they are instructing to business owners is you
Speaker 1: play games and share content that we want to be
Speaker 1: shared or else. Right, there's an implicit threat from a
Speaker 1: business perspective that is hanging over the algorithmic problems that
Speaker 1: can arise. What's a solution? Not necessarily again from a
Speaker 1: political perspective, but you just kind of kind of walked
Speaker 1: through us if you were just trying to be as
Speaker 1: open and trans parent as possible. Is it a public
Speaker 1: algorithm so that everybody could see what results are occurring? Well,
Speaker 1: this is what Elon has suggested with respect to Twitter,
Speaker 1: as he says that he wants to open source the algorithm.
Speaker 1: And so the idea is, yeah, you would be able
Speaker 1: to see how the algorithm works, and if there's a
Speaker 1: human intervention, you would know that. And so that does
Speaker 1: give you, well, first of all, it gives you an
Speaker 1: assurance that they're not putting their thumb on the scale
Speaker 1: and discriminating against certain people because of their their viewpoints.
Speaker 1: But also it would give you some due process to
Speaker 1: know that when there's an intervention against you, at least
Speaker 1: know what's happened. Um. So that that's that's why Elan
Speaker 1: has been pushing that idea of of open sourcing the algorithm. Um.
Speaker 1: I think it's a great idea. I mean, we need
Speaker 1: more transparency around the decision these big tech companies are
Speaker 1: making because frankly, they have enormous power. I mean, by
Speaker 1: and large, they are monopolies and they controlled the public square.
Speaker 1: The public square has been privatized. Um. You know when
Speaker 1: the founders at the trainers in the Constitution started the country,
Speaker 1: the town square was a place you would go to
Speaker 1: it like the courthouse steps, and you pull out of
Speaker 1: soapbox and could talk and people gather around to listen.
Speaker 1: That's what the town square meant today. The town square.
Speaker 1: All these giants social networks. I mean, that is where
Speaker 1: people assemble, that is where political speech occurs. And yet
Speaker 1: there are no limitations on their ability to you know,
Speaker 1: to d platform you or discriminate against you. And they
Speaker 1: don't even they're not even obligated to provide any transparency
Speaker 1: around that. And so I think we need more to
Speaker 1: process on these big monopolistic companies when they restrict our speech.
Speaker 1: I'll give you an example. By the way, Google News
Speaker 1: obviously drives a lot of traffic. Um No, people out
Speaker 1: there may not realize it, but Google News is wildly influential.
Speaker 1: When Fox bought out Kick, they went back through all
Speaker 1: these social media relationships and I've been saying for a
Speaker 1: long time, yeah, we're registered with Google News, but never
Speaker 1: our store. He's come up even stories where we might
Speaker 1: break news other people right will show up on the
Speaker 1: Google News alerts. We won't. Fox did a deep dive
Speaker 1: and they said, oh, you've been mischaracterized, and you hadn't
Speaker 1: been showing up in Google news for years. It's amazing
Speaker 1: how often the mischaracterization seems to only run one way, right,
Speaker 1: like uh, and and so I'm incredibly skeptical that at
Speaker 1: some point someone at Google wasn't it was you know, unhappy,
Speaker 1: and they just decided, Hey, I'm gonna move the OutKick
Speaker 1: algorithm you know, feeder or whatever over into this little
Speaker 1: box where it will kind of disappear. Um. And if
Speaker 1: you're a independent business, you don't have the resources or
Speaker 1: the relationships to even get things like that rectified. And uh.
Speaker 1: And that's why I think the idea that Ellen is
Speaker 1: trying to put in place could be so potentially influential,
Speaker 1: which is just, hey, we're gonna have content neutral policies
Speaker 1: and people will have optics on things. And and David,
Speaker 1: I don't know if you paid attention to it. I'm
Speaker 1: sure you did. But you know, the day that Ellen
Speaker 1: announces that he's reached acquisition terms, suddenly my Twitter feed
Speaker 1: comes alive and I'm adding tens of thousands of followers
Speaker 1: at a rapid rate. It's hard for me to believe
Speaker 1: that in some way Twitter is not trying to bury
Speaker 1: the evidence of what they've been doing. So when neutral
Speaker 1: engineers come back and start to look at the algorithms
Speaker 1: they have in place, there's not necessarily the same evidence
Speaker 1: that there would have been if somebody like Elon weren't
Speaker 1: acquiring the company. It's gonna be really interesting to see
Speaker 1: what happens if Elon is able to close this deal.
Speaker 1: I guess they're still still up in the air with
Speaker 1: us going to happen, but it'll be really interesting to
Speaker 1: see what comes out after he acquires the company because
Speaker 1: we just don't have any visibility into how they moderate
Speaker 1: content or upfold or down rank content, how the algorithm
Speaker 1: works with them. Again, the manual trending topics is wildly influential,
Speaker 1: and I think that's a total cesspool. By the way,
Speaker 1: for somebody who does what I do. Uh, they decide
Speaker 1: what trends, they decide how they are going to characterize
Speaker 1: what trends in a positive or negative fashion. Um, it's
Speaker 1: just such a rigged game. And do you think that one?
Speaker 1: See my theory is one unrigged game, right. So if
Speaker 1: Elon is able to acquire h Test, sorry, acquire Twitter,
Speaker 1: what I think would happen is if there are wildly
Speaker 1: divergent results that suddenly start to happen at Twitter, and
Speaker 1: we can see a discrepancy between what's going on on
Speaker 1: Twitter and what's going on on Facebook and what's going
Speaker 1: on on Instagram and all these different social media outlets,
Speaker 1: then it puts a lot of pressure on these other
Speaker 1: companies to also be honest and transparent about what they're doing.
Speaker 1: Is there a logic to that, based on your knowledge
Speaker 1: of how tech companies work, that that could occur, that
Speaker 1: that influence could become substantial. I think so, because Ellen,
Speaker 1: I mean, this is what's so important about what Elon
Speaker 1: is doing is that he's drawing a line in the
Speaker 1: sand here and he's opposing censorship, and he's also setting
Speaker 1: an example for all these other companies. One of the
Speaker 1: things about the censorship that's taken place that's so discouraging
Speaker 1: is the way that it all seems to be done
Speaker 1: in unison. So when Trump was sent off Twitter back
Speaker 1: in January, they all did it. Every site did it
Speaker 1: within days of that decision. So they all seem to
Speaker 1: be acting in concert, in lockstep. I've called it a
Speaker 1: speech cartel. If they were getting together for the purpose
Speaker 1: of fixing prices, let's say advertising prices, everybody would be
Speaker 1: up in arms saying that's illegal. But if they get
Speaker 1: together for the purpose of fixing speech and what you
Speaker 1: can't say or what you can't which, by the way,
Speaker 1: is so much more dangerous than from a from a
Speaker 1: democracy perspective than fixing advertising costs. Absolutely. I mean, look
Speaker 1: at the employees of these companies have enormous power over
Speaker 1: our public discourse and public debate. They were never elected
Speaker 1: to have that power. And back twenty years ago when
Speaker 1: I was doing Internet stuff, we never believe when we
Speaker 1: were creating these platforms, we never believed it was our
Speaker 1: job to put our thumb on the scale and prefer
Speaker 1: certain views over others. We just thought it was our
Speaker 1: job to let the users communicate with each other. And
Speaker 1: somehow that mission changed, And now the employees these companies
Speaker 1: have gone from being umpires to basically being participants, to
Speaker 1: being partisans in the marketplace of ideas. And I think
Speaker 1: what you hear from Elan is listen, I'm a moderate.
Speaker 1: I'm going to restore the balance. I'm gonna let the
Speaker 1: users communicate the way that they want to. I'm gonna
Speaker 1: be nonpartisan. I'm going to be a fair referee, and
Speaker 1: that's what's so powerful about what he's doing, and hope
Speaker 1: it will set an example for these other companies you
Speaker 1: mentioned dolly Land, which I'll be interested to see as
Speaker 1: well as a passion project. It's not necessarily being done
Speaker 1: to make money. One of the arguments that I've made
Speaker 1: for a while. And maybe Ellen is doing this, I'm
Speaker 1: curious if you think he's doing it is in the
Speaker 1: passion project being brought to bear. In the world of
Speaker 1: larger media, I think, to a large extent me media
Speaker 1: in the United States is broken. And what I mean
Speaker 1: by that is you've got the CNNs, the msnbc S,
Speaker 1: the New York Times, the Washington Post, and their narrative
Speaker 1: bias to me is so clear, and you have one alternative,
Speaker 1: which is basically Rupert Murdoch and Fox. In fact, if
Speaker 1: Rupert Murdoch didn't exist, there would be almost no It's
Speaker 1: crazy to think about, but there would be almost no
Speaker 1: full fruition of media outlets in the country. Right. It's
Speaker 1: basically one man and his family who said, Hey, we're
Speaker 1: gonna create Fox News, and we're gonna buy the Wall
Speaker 1: Street Journal and we'll run the New York Post and
Speaker 1: now they bought out kick and they have these different
Speaker 1: assets that are trying to fight back a battle, not necessarily,
Speaker 1: in my opinion, on a right wing basis, but just
Speaker 1: for the seventy of the country that isn't gone insane.
Speaker 1: It feels like to some extent there is an opportunity
Speaker 1: for passion projects and media which may not return a
Speaker 1: lot of money, but do have massive influence. Do you
Speaker 1: think that's what Ellen is doing with Twitter? Is it
Speaker 1: his passion project? Is it a version of dolly Land
Speaker 1: for him? Or do you think he's looking at it
Speaker 1: as a big money maker. I think, first and foremost,
Speaker 1: like you said, it's a passion project. I think that
Speaker 1: this is about the principle of free speech for him.
Speaker 1: When he says that he's going to restore Twitter to
Speaker 1: being an open town square, that really is his main motivation.
Speaker 1: And it always starts with the mission for him. I
Speaker 1: think he's got enough money, you wouldn't just be doing
Speaker 1: this as a business deal. Now. The history of Elon's
Speaker 1: ventures is that he starts with the mission and you know,
Speaker 1: the passion project, as you say, but over time he
Speaker 1: figures out how to make them a great business certainly
Speaker 1: that's the case with Tesla. The passion project there was
Speaker 1: to move the world to sustainable energy. So but in
Speaker 1: the process of doing that, he's created the world's best
Speaker 1: car with SpaceX. He wants to get people of the Mars.
Speaker 1: I mean, that really is the mission. But in the
Speaker 1: process of doing that, he's figured out, you know, Starlink
Speaker 1: and how to make that a great business. Um so
Speaker 1: I think he will figure out how to make Twitter
Speaker 1: into a great business. But I have no doubt that
Speaker 1: it's all about the passion rim politics. Obviously, you're involved
Speaker 1: in donating money. What's the best thing that national politics
Speaker 1: could do in your mind to advance American business interests?
Speaker 1: How much like the Biden administration to me is just
Speaker 1: a disaster in all respects. But a lot of politicians,
Speaker 1: it seems to me the best outcome would just be
Speaker 1: don't do anything. Unfortunately, because of where we are, what
Speaker 1: can and should America be doing to advance entrepreneurial and
Speaker 1: capitalistic interests so that we maintain uh leadership in risk
Speaker 1: taking around the world. Well, the the entrepreneurial energy in
Speaker 1: America is strong. I mean, this is historically our great advantage.
Speaker 1: It's our d n a right our cultural DNA exactly.
Speaker 1: I mean Americans are willing to take risks, are not
Speaker 1: afraid of failure. If they do fail, they kind of
Speaker 1: dust themselves off and try again. There's the huge stigma
Speaker 1: in our culture the way there is in Europe. If
Speaker 1: you fail and you got vcs people like us who
Speaker 1: are willing to write a check and if it's a zero,
Speaker 1: so be it. We're not going to come break your
Speaker 1: kneecaps or even be too upset about it. You just
Speaker 1: don't have that mentality in other parts of the world.
Speaker 1: So that's what's strong there. And I think what you
Speaker 1: need from government is to create a stable environment with
Speaker 1: sound money and low taxes and reasonable spending levels just
Speaker 1: to not break the golden goose. And you know the
Speaker 1: prominent washing right now is they're really threatened to break
Speaker 1: the golden goose. I mean inflations out of control as
Speaker 1: a result of this hyper spending um and the money printing.
Speaker 1: I mean, you had the FED and if you were
Speaker 1: running so sorry to cut off that, you're exactly right
Speaker 1: on this. If you're a business guy, you have to
Speaker 1: make a profit in order to that's how capitalism works.
Speaker 1: If you were running the government, and you saw the
Speaker 1: books that the government is putting out on a yearly basis.
Speaker 1: I mean, obviously the business would go bankrupt with the
Speaker 1: books that the government is putting out right now, how
Speaker 1: long can this continue? You know, modern modern monetary theory,
Speaker 1: the idea was, Hey, we can print as much money
Speaker 1: as we want, there's no consequences. We're seeing consequences. We've
Speaker 1: got a thirty trillion dollar national debt now and we
Speaker 1: basically added twenty trillion dollars in the last you know,
Speaker 1: ten twelve years. When you look from a business perspective
Speaker 1: at the nation's books, where are we in and how
Speaker 1: troubled would you be? Purely from a business perspective on that,
Speaker 1: I think it's terrifying. We owe something like a GDP now,
Speaker 1: I mean we basically, oh more than the entire amount
Speaker 1: of the output of our economy in our national debt,
Speaker 1: and what do we get all of that debt um?
Speaker 1: So it's it's really pretty scary. And I agree with
Speaker 1: you about m m T. I mean, that's the latest
Speaker 1: group of so called experts that I think are gonna
Speaker 1: be massively discredited. Uh. They claimed for years that we
Speaker 1: can print as much money as we want and spend
Speaker 1: as much you want, because I guess we were the
Speaker 1: world's reserve currency. That be no price to pay for that.
Speaker 1: And it's true that interest rates stayed low for a
Speaker 1: long time, but now they've rocked it up, and inflation
Speaker 1: has rocketed it up, and you're seeing it. Ordinary Americans
Speaker 1: feel a lot poorer because their wages is not kept
Speaker 1: up with inflation. And we've had a stock market crash
Speaker 1: because now the stock market is starting to price in,
Speaker 1: you know, much higher interest rates that are gonna be
Speaker 1: necessary to tame the inflation. So it was just very irresponsible. Um.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's the fun at a law that you
Speaker 1: cannot spend more than you make, not for very long
Speaker 1: and um yeah, we just need fiscal sanity to return
Speaker 1: to Washington. You mentioned experts, uh, And I appreciate your time,
Speaker 1: and I know how busy you are. To me, one
Speaker 1: of the great lessons of the past several years has
Speaker 1: been how wrong experts can be. The experts who told
Speaker 1: this modern monetary theory there were going to be no consequences,
Speaker 1: certainly the experts surrounding so much of COVID. Uh. One
Speaker 1: of the reasons why I love capitalism is you really
Speaker 1: do have to put your money where your mouth is,
Speaker 1: and you have to place bets based on things like logic,
Speaker 1: based on numbers. Um, where are we in the field
Speaker 1: of so called experts right now? Were you someone who
Speaker 1: believed I think probably the answer is no. On conventional
Speaker 1: wisdom in the first place, which is a business opportunity
Speaker 1: is really about recognizing that the conventional wisdom is wrong oftentimes,
Speaker 1: or else everybody would be doing what you're doing isn't
Speaker 1: isn't what you do basically the exact opposite of what
Speaker 1: experts do. Yes, because if you listen to the experts
Speaker 1: with respect to any business opportunity, they will always tell
Speaker 1: you us a bad idea that because yes, they are
Speaker 1: fully ingrained in the old way of doing things and
Speaker 1: they they don't have the imagination to see that things
Speaker 1: could be done in a completely different way. I mean, look,
Speaker 1: we would never have found it PayPal if we had
Speaker 1: listened to all those payment experts back in and in fact,
Speaker 1: part of the reason we created PayPal is because we
Speaker 1: didn't know that much about payments. We weren't beholden to
Speaker 1: the old way of doing things. So you're listening to
Speaker 1: experts is something that really runs against the grain of
Speaker 1: an entrepreneur. And this whole idea of listening to authority
Speaker 1: because those people in power have some sort of credentials,
Speaker 1: and that you should automatically listen to them and not
Speaker 1: consult your own faculties, your own common sense. That's an
Speaker 1: idea that I think is gonna be offensive to any entrepreneur.
Speaker 1: And I think we've seen that now with politics over
Speaker 1: the last couple of years. I mean, everything the experts
Speaker 1: told us about COVID, for example, was just completely wrong.
Speaker 1: And I mean we're told so many things and then
Speaker 1: they also not not to be right. So you know,
Speaker 1: having a healthy distrust of experts is a good idea
Speaker 1: in business or politics. I think it's also the case
Speaker 1: that everything that they told us and allowed us to
Speaker 1: discuss on social media very often ended up being wrong.
Speaker 1: And when I kind of diagnose it, I'm curious what
Speaker 1: you think about this As we come to a close here.
Speaker 1: We've been talking with David Sachs. A lot of this
Speaker 1: comes down to risk analysis. Many people are really really
Speaker 1: bad at analyzing risk, both financial and personal. And it
Speaker 1: seems to me that you talked about the American DNA,
Speaker 1: and I agree with you is based on taking risk.
Speaker 1: I mean, you don't get on a ship and decided
Speaker 1: to come to a new land and then get in
Speaker 1: a covered wagon and go all the way to the
Speaker 1: west coast because you have a high if you don't
Speaker 1: have a high risk tolerance. Right, it seems like our
Speaker 1: national risk tolerance in a social media era is being
Speaker 1: totally destroyed to the point where you saw all the
Speaker 1: time in the early days of COVID, well, if it
Speaker 1: saves just one life, well, if it saves just one life,
Speaker 1: we would have never committed airplanes. We certainly wouldn't have
Speaker 1: emitted cars. Um. How much of this is just a
Speaker 1: failure to understand basic risk in both personal business and life. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean I think I think you you saw this
Speaker 1: during COVID as there was a total suspension of cost
Speaker 1: benefit analysis in favor of this sort of zero COVID
Speaker 1: thinking this idea that we can completely stamp out COVID,
Speaker 1: which was just not possible, very clearly not possible, And
Speaker 1: there was a total refusal to to to apply cost
Speaker 1: benefits on any of these lockdowns. I mean, we I
Speaker 1: think it's very clear now that that whole policy of
Speaker 1: lockdowns it cratered the economy was devastating the economy, but
Speaker 1: it didn't do anything to stop COVID. And no one
Speaker 1: about the or the kids in school with the mass,
Speaker 1: you know, and and the remote learning. I mean, we
Speaker 1: lost an entire year of schooling for so many kids
Speaker 1: in this country, and no one really thought to apply
Speaker 1: cost benefit to that, you know, negligibile benefit if any,
Speaker 1: and the costs I think we're gonna be feeling for
Speaker 1: a generation. So yeah, we need to bring back benefit costs.
Speaker 1: I think we have to bring back as assumption of risk.
Speaker 1: You know that there's a tradition this country that you're
Speaker 1: allowed to do risky things. Uh, you know, if you're
Speaker 1: willing to assume the risk. And and we saw this
Speaker 1: workout I think very well in Florida, where they basically
Speaker 1: got on with their lives so much more quickly the country, Um,
Speaker 1: because they allowed people to make their own choices. And
Speaker 1: if you wanted to go out to a restaurant and
Speaker 1: risk get in COVID, that was your choice. Um. So
Speaker 1: we've got to bring back these basic ideas. And I think,
Speaker 1: you know, I don't know if it's just that the
Speaker 1: media culture doesn't really get it but but you're allowed
Speaker 1: to do whiskey things in this country. You know, if
Speaker 1: it doesn't work out for you, that's your choice, such
Speaker 1: as buying our ferrari. Alright, last question for you, uh uh,
Speaker 1: what advice would you give. There's a lot of people
Speaker 1: who are young that listen to these podcasts, this Wins
Speaker 1: and Losses podcast because they're trying to build their own culture,
Speaker 1: their own idea, their own worldview. For someone who wants
Speaker 1: to get into business today, let's say that they are
Speaker 1: out there and they're sixteen years old listening to this
Speaker 1: right now, what do you wish you had known when
Speaker 1: you were sixteen? What would you be telling young people
Speaker 1: they need to be doing today to prepare themselves to
Speaker 1: make the kinds of decisions that you had the opportunity
Speaker 1: to make in your twenties, thirties and forties. I mean,
Speaker 1: the main thing I would have done differently was just
Speaker 1: get into business faster. Like we talked about, I kind
Speaker 1: of I took some time and went to law school,
Speaker 1: and UM, I just didn't know how to get into it.
Speaker 1: And I think that what's great about UM entrepreneurialism today
Speaker 1: is there's so many opportunities. There's incubators. Now there's young
Speaker 1: startups you can join. I just would have gotten into
Speaker 1: it a lot sooner, and so I still think going
Speaker 1: to college is probably a good thing to do. I
Speaker 1: wouldn't necessarily encourage anyone to drop out, although certainly a
Speaker 1: lot of great entrepreneurs have had success dropping out, like Zuckerberg,
Speaker 1: like Bill Gates, so on. But but I would say
Speaker 1: just get into it as quickly as possible. What you
Speaker 1: really want to do is go work at a startup
Speaker 1: where you can really learn, where there's some great founders,
Speaker 1: and it almost doesn't matter what's the job is that
Speaker 1: you get. The important thing is who you're associated with.
Speaker 1: And you know, I learned so much working with people
Speaker 1: like Peter Till and Elon Musk at my first startup
Speaker 1: at PayPal, and that enabled me to go on and
Speaker 1: then found my own companies and become an investor. So
Speaker 1: you really want to just work with the smartest people
Speaker 1: you can possibly find and do that as quickly as possible.
Speaker 1: Outstanding stuff, David Sachs. This has been a phenomenal discussion
Speaker 1: wins and Losses with Clay Travis. I hope everybody enjoyed it.
Speaker 1: Thank you guys, there's now forty seven of these, I believe,
Speaker 1: so if you enjoyed this one, check out the other
Speaker 1: forty six. Thank you, thank you, quite appreciate it.