WEBVTT - Understanding Hyperscalers: Masters in Business with Ankur Crawford

0:00:02.520 --> 0:00:07.040
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, Radio News.

0:00:08.119 --> 0:00:11.600
<v Speaker 2>This week on the podcast another extra special guest, Doctor

0:00:11.800 --> 0:00:16.560
<v Speaker 2>Encore Crawford is cohed, a portfolio manager of large cap

0:00:16.640 --> 0:00:20.880
<v Speaker 2>strategies at Alger. She's got a fascinating background. She was

0:00:20.920 --> 0:00:26.040
<v Speaker 2>an engineer at Intel, one a number of patents, and

0:00:26.239 --> 0:00:29.840
<v Speaker 2>was the awardy of the Intel PhD Fellowship. She's been

0:00:29.880 --> 0:00:33.320
<v Speaker 2>recognized as one of the top women in asset management.

0:00:34.040 --> 0:00:38.320
<v Speaker 2>If you're interested all into the details of how artificial intelligence,

0:00:38.680 --> 0:00:43.320
<v Speaker 2>semiconductors and software works, as i am, you're gonna find

0:00:43.320 --> 0:00:47.200
<v Speaker 2>this to be a fascinating conversation with no further ado.

0:00:47.520 --> 0:01:02.880
<v Speaker 2>My conversation with Algers Encore Crawford. I'm Core Crawford. Welcome

0:01:02.960 --> 0:01:03.600
<v Speaker 2>to Bloomberg.

0:01:03.880 --> 0:01:06.640
<v Speaker 1>Thank you for having me. Very so, let's.

0:01:06.400 --> 0:01:09.160
<v Speaker 2>Start with your background, which is really kind of fascinating.

0:01:09.720 --> 0:01:14.760
<v Speaker 2>Bachelor's degree in mechanical engineering and material science and engineering.

0:01:15.160 --> 0:01:19.040
<v Speaker 2>That's a double BS from UC Berkeley, and then a

0:01:19.160 --> 0:01:24.800
<v Speaker 2>master's and a PhD in material science and engineering at Stanford.

0:01:25.000 --> 0:01:26.720
<v Speaker 2>What was the original career plan.

0:01:27.640 --> 0:01:30.200
<v Speaker 1>I didn't have one, to be honest.

0:01:31.240 --> 0:01:33.800
<v Speaker 3>I think when I made the decision to become a

0:01:33.840 --> 0:01:37.280
<v Speaker 3>mechanical engineer, I was kind of following my brother's footsteps,

0:01:37.280 --> 0:01:40.200
<v Speaker 3>who was a mechanical engineer and became an orthopedic surgeon.

0:01:40.800 --> 0:01:43.000
<v Speaker 3>And I realized, if I didn't know what I wanted

0:01:43.000 --> 0:01:45.759
<v Speaker 3>to do, I wanted to keep my options open.

0:01:46.880 --> 0:01:51.920
<v Speaker 2>So he becomes an orthopedic surgeon with a mechanical engineering degree.

0:01:51.960 --> 0:01:55.440
<v Speaker 2>Is he designing replacement joints and things like that.

0:01:55.560 --> 0:01:56.040
<v Speaker 1>He does.

0:01:56.080 --> 0:01:59.680
<v Speaker 3>He does actually bring that aspect of his engineering background

0:01:59.840 --> 0:02:04.320
<v Speaker 3>in to device different device configurations, and he works a

0:02:04.360 --> 0:02:09.400
<v Speaker 3>lot with the device companies as well. But there's also

0:02:09.800 --> 0:02:12.960
<v Speaker 3>you know, as a kid, I loved, you know, figuring

0:02:13.040 --> 0:02:16.160
<v Speaker 3>how figuring out how things work, whether it was like

0:02:16.240 --> 0:02:18.840
<v Speaker 3>a car or a calculator, and I would always be

0:02:19.000 --> 0:02:23.119
<v Speaker 3>kind of fidgeting to understand how things work. I loved building,

0:02:23.760 --> 0:02:28.679
<v Speaker 3>so mechanical engineering kind of felt like, you know, I'm

0:02:28.760 --> 0:02:32.520
<v Speaker 3>just a curious person. So I like to satiate that

0:02:32.639 --> 0:02:34.080
<v Speaker 3>need to know how things work.

0:02:34.440 --> 0:02:37.400
<v Speaker 2>And I read somewhere that you originally wanted to be

0:02:37.440 --> 0:02:38.400
<v Speaker 2>an astronauts.

0:02:38.440 --> 0:02:41.919
<v Speaker 1>This correct did. So I grew up till I was five.

0:02:42.040 --> 0:02:47.320
<v Speaker 3>We lived in Florida close to Cape Canaveral, and we

0:02:47.360 --> 0:02:51.520
<v Speaker 3>would go watch the Space Shuttle take off and I

0:02:51.639 --> 0:02:57.559
<v Speaker 3>was so fascinated by space because it was almost ethereal,

0:02:58.080 --> 0:03:00.640
<v Speaker 3>you know, this thing goes up into the sky. And

0:03:01.880 --> 0:03:06.280
<v Speaker 3>for me, the astronauts were celebrities. So you know, for

0:03:06.320 --> 0:03:08.120
<v Speaker 3>a long time I did want to be an astronaut.

0:03:08.240 --> 0:03:12.399
<v Speaker 2>So I have Florida somewhere in between. You're born in Kansas,

0:03:12.480 --> 0:03:13.160
<v Speaker 2>is this correct?

0:03:13.280 --> 0:03:13.520
<v Speaker 1>Yes?

0:03:13.720 --> 0:03:17.160
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, canvas, but you end up in the Middle East, yes,

0:03:17.720 --> 0:03:21.720
<v Speaker 2>and then you're sent to a convent boarding school in

0:03:21.760 --> 0:03:27.440
<v Speaker 2>the Himalayas. This is possibly right, right, No, that is

0:03:27.480 --> 0:03:30.160
<v Speaker 2>all correct, and then you end up in Buffalo, New York.

0:03:31.120 --> 0:03:34.760
<v Speaker 2>You got it all right. So so that's real human research,

0:03:34.920 --> 0:03:40.080
<v Speaker 2>not not chat. I'm curious that is a broad global

0:03:41.120 --> 0:03:45.320
<v Speaker 2>life experience. How does that shape your views on either

0:03:46.000 --> 0:03:49.280
<v Speaker 2>international investing or just the concept of risk and reward?

0:03:49.880 --> 0:03:53.280
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I think it more so shapes the way I

0:03:53.320 --> 0:03:58.320
<v Speaker 3>think about, you know, the cultural differences. When I look

0:03:58.360 --> 0:04:03.360
<v Speaker 3>at companies, when I look at manage teams, I understand

0:04:03.520 --> 0:04:07.560
<v Speaker 3>very well that there are certain cultural differences that are

0:04:07.640 --> 0:04:14.800
<v Speaker 3>simply endemic to businesses and to management teams. And you know,

0:04:14.920 --> 0:04:19.560
<v Speaker 3>just because a management team isn't necessarily always bullish or

0:04:19.600 --> 0:04:23.680
<v Speaker 3>they're always telling you the negative aspect of their company

0:04:24.080 --> 0:04:27.599
<v Speaker 3>doesn't necessarily mean that there's something wrong, and.

0:04:29.480 --> 0:04:32.040
<v Speaker 1>So, you know, I think that that has.

0:04:31.920 --> 0:04:34.960
<v Speaker 3>Been like an example of this is this company called Nebeus,

0:04:35.600 --> 0:04:40.039
<v Speaker 3>where the CEO is a Russian CEO who is incredibly

0:04:40.120 --> 0:04:43.520
<v Speaker 3>humble and he will never tell you what's right. He

0:04:43.600 --> 0:04:45.479
<v Speaker 3>will always point out to you all the things that

0:04:45.520 --> 0:04:47.920
<v Speaker 3>are wrong. And a lot of investors are like, you know,

0:04:48.040 --> 0:04:51.440
<v Speaker 3>I don't that doesn't sound good, And I'm kind of

0:04:51.440 --> 0:04:54.240
<v Speaker 3>looking at the opportunity because that's just his culture, right,

0:04:54.279 --> 0:04:55.320
<v Speaker 3>It's his culture.

0:04:55.040 --> 0:04:55.919
<v Speaker 1>Not to be boastful.

0:04:57.160 --> 0:05:00.360
<v Speaker 3>So just living in all these different countries and having

0:05:00.440 --> 0:05:04.320
<v Speaker 3>exposure as a kid to many different religions, it just

0:05:04.360 --> 0:05:08.920
<v Speaker 3>gives a really unique perspective on any problem that you

0:05:08.960 --> 0:05:12.840
<v Speaker 3>look at because it helps take kind of the blinders off.

0:05:13.720 --> 0:05:18.000
<v Speaker 2>It's fascinating. I never really thought about how does a

0:05:18.040 --> 0:05:21.839
<v Speaker 2>societal cultural set of norms make its way to management.

0:05:22.480 --> 0:05:25.800
<v Speaker 2>You think about the Japanese culture is the sort of

0:05:27.120 --> 0:05:32.080
<v Speaker 2>bravado and very aggressive forecast we tend to see in

0:05:32.120 --> 0:05:34.960
<v Speaker 2>the United States, You would never see anything like that

0:05:35.080 --> 0:05:43.880
<v Speaker 2>in Japan. How do you calibrate what is cultural diffidence

0:05:44.040 --> 0:05:46.839
<v Speaker 2>and what is just hey, there's a problem here and

0:05:46.880 --> 0:05:48.719
<v Speaker 2>they're telling us this is an issue.

0:05:49.000 --> 0:05:51.520
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, you know, I think you have to know the

0:05:51.560 --> 0:05:55.600
<v Speaker 3>business right that the first thing is is know the business,

0:05:55.760 --> 0:05:58.280
<v Speaker 3>and then you can calibrate the tone of the management.

0:05:58.800 --> 0:06:03.200
<v Speaker 3>And you know, example, as Taiwan Semiconductor, I remember speaking

0:06:03.200 --> 0:06:05.719
<v Speaker 3>to them over many of these years that we've owned

0:06:05.720 --> 0:06:08.480
<v Speaker 3>the stock, and I would always say, you guys are

0:06:08.520 --> 0:06:12.520
<v Speaker 3>going to become the single supplier of leading edge. Why

0:06:12.640 --> 0:06:15.080
<v Speaker 3>is it that you can't take up pricing? And you

0:06:15.120 --> 0:06:18.080
<v Speaker 3>would always talk me down and like, oh, no, you know,

0:06:18.320 --> 0:06:21.640
<v Speaker 3>we are here to serve our customer. We are here

0:06:21.680 --> 0:06:24.919
<v Speaker 3>to and I was like, there's absolutely no reason for

0:06:24.960 --> 0:06:28.039
<v Speaker 3>you not to be raising pricing, and they would just

0:06:28.160 --> 0:06:32.359
<v Speaker 3>push back and not really because that wasn't part of

0:06:32.360 --> 0:06:35.320
<v Speaker 3>their philosophy, and it wasn't part of their philosophy that

0:06:35.400 --> 0:06:38.159
<v Speaker 3>Morris had Morris Chang had kind of put into place

0:06:38.200 --> 0:06:43.680
<v Speaker 3>in the early years. However, that is what they ended

0:06:43.760 --> 0:06:45.960
<v Speaker 3>up doing, and so I had to take that with

0:06:46.040 --> 0:06:48.680
<v Speaker 3>a grain of salt, understanding that's their philosophy. It was

0:06:48.720 --> 0:06:52.760
<v Speaker 3>a little frustrating at the time, but you know that

0:06:52.960 --> 0:06:57.080
<v Speaker 3>a business is a business, and at some point the

0:06:57.160 --> 0:07:01.159
<v Speaker 3>realization of how good that business was came into the numbers.

0:07:01.720 --> 0:07:05.360
<v Speaker 2>So you mentioned the advantage of really understanding the business.

0:07:06.000 --> 0:07:08.920
<v Speaker 2>You're in an Intel doctorate fellow, you worked as an

0:07:08.920 --> 0:07:13.920
<v Speaker 2>engineer at Intel, you hold multiple patents. How much of

0:07:13.920 --> 0:07:18.200
<v Speaker 2>an advantage is that when you're looking at semiconductors or

0:07:18.280 --> 0:07:22.720
<v Speaker 2>AI or any of the hyperscalers. What advantage does that

0:07:22.800 --> 0:07:23.120
<v Speaker 2>give you?

0:07:24.960 --> 0:07:29.400
<v Speaker 3>Look, I think understanding the technology is it's kind of

0:07:29.440 --> 0:07:34.160
<v Speaker 3>crucial right now because in this world of AI, I

0:07:34.200 --> 0:07:37.080
<v Speaker 3>think there's a lot of people who don't really understand

0:07:37.120 --> 0:07:42.200
<v Speaker 3>what is happening under the covers, and that's dangerous. And

0:07:42.240 --> 0:07:45.280
<v Speaker 3>that's why you also see the volatility that you see today,

0:07:46.200 --> 0:07:50.520
<v Speaker 3>because you know they're kind of loose holders and not

0:07:50.560 --> 0:07:54.560
<v Speaker 3>truly understanding the different dynamics of the technology.

0:07:55.240 --> 0:07:58.280
<v Speaker 1>And it's just a hard it's a hard.

0:07:58.040 --> 0:08:00.560
<v Speaker 3>Way to invest when you can get shaken out because

0:08:00.560 --> 0:08:04.720
<v Speaker 3>you don't have conviction in the technologies. So it's I

0:08:04.720 --> 0:08:08.440
<v Speaker 3>feel like it's always helped, and in part because you

0:08:08.480 --> 0:08:11.040
<v Speaker 3>know chips. I was a semiconductor analyst when I first

0:08:11.040 --> 0:08:16.120
<v Speaker 3>started at alger and I kind of immediately understood, well,

0:08:16.520 --> 0:08:18.440
<v Speaker 3>I understand what a deposition tool is.

0:08:18.840 --> 0:08:19.680
<v Speaker 1>You know, I used one.

0:08:19.760 --> 0:08:22.400
<v Speaker 3>I understand what etching is I used this tool, I

0:08:22.480 --> 0:08:27.560
<v Speaker 3>understand what the issues are in fabricating a chip, and

0:08:27.760 --> 0:08:31.040
<v Speaker 3>you know how hard it is to fabricate a chip,

0:08:31.560 --> 0:08:34.520
<v Speaker 3>so you know, it just gives you a little bit

0:08:34.600 --> 0:08:39.600
<v Speaker 3>of a edge on the conceptual understanding and where the

0:08:39.679 --> 0:08:42.800
<v Speaker 3>industry is going, so you know early I remember in

0:08:42.800 --> 0:08:45.840
<v Speaker 3>twenty thirty, eleven, twelve or thirteen, one of those years,

0:08:46.160 --> 0:08:49.120
<v Speaker 3>I put together a presentation about how we're at the

0:08:49.240 --> 0:08:52.960
<v Speaker 3>end of Moore's Law and what will happen if we're

0:08:53.000 --> 0:08:54.400
<v Speaker 3>at the end of Moore's law. And I sent the

0:08:54.400 --> 0:08:57.320
<v Speaker 3>presentation out to all of the companies that I covered,

0:08:57.360 --> 0:09:00.480
<v Speaker 3>and I said, I would like your feedback and tell

0:09:00.520 --> 0:09:01.440
<v Speaker 3>me why I'm wrong.

0:09:02.240 --> 0:09:04.920
<v Speaker 1>But that was thinking kind of eight nine.

0:09:04.800 --> 0:09:08.960
<v Speaker 3>Years ahead because it had implications for the entire sector.

0:09:09.600 --> 0:09:12.760
<v Speaker 3>And so those kinds of insights I think are easier,

0:09:13.080 --> 0:09:16.040
<v Speaker 3>not that any everyone can have them, they just come

0:09:16.120 --> 0:09:18.800
<v Speaker 3>probably a little easier because I understand the technology.

0:09:19.160 --> 0:09:24.520
<v Speaker 2>So I see the advantage of having the technical background

0:09:24.720 --> 0:09:29.320
<v Speaker 2>as an analyst. I'm curious what made you leave the

0:09:29.400 --> 0:09:34.760
<v Speaker 2>technical field being an engineer and working with Semis to

0:09:34.800 --> 0:09:37.560
<v Speaker 2>becoming an analyst in the space and working on the

0:09:37.600 --> 0:09:39.000
<v Speaker 2>financing of semis.

0:09:39.480 --> 0:09:46.280
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, you know, I had gone through my graduate career

0:09:46.559 --> 0:09:49.200
<v Speaker 3>and really I had set some goals for myself. I

0:09:49.200 --> 0:09:52.920
<v Speaker 3>want to write this many papers, I want to you know, present,

0:09:53.120 --> 0:09:54.360
<v Speaker 3>I want you know, I want.

0:09:54.200 --> 0:09:55.520
<v Speaker 1>To be useful to society.

0:09:56.400 --> 0:09:58.480
<v Speaker 3>And at the end of it, I felt like I

0:09:58.480 --> 0:10:03.160
<v Speaker 3>had kind of achieved all those but I wasn't happy.

0:10:04.360 --> 0:10:07.880
<v Speaker 3>I just wasn't content and happy. And I thought to myself,

0:10:07.960 --> 0:10:10.160
<v Speaker 3>my gosh, if I have achieved everything that I set

0:10:10.160 --> 0:10:13.320
<v Speaker 3>out to do and yet I'm still not happy. What

0:10:13.480 --> 0:10:17.440
<v Speaker 3>happens if I become a professor and i'm you know,

0:10:17.640 --> 0:10:20.520
<v Speaker 3>and we just go through a tough spot on you know,

0:10:21.000 --> 0:10:24.560
<v Speaker 3>raising money or whatever it might be like in the research,

0:10:27.320 --> 0:10:30.720
<v Speaker 3>Will I be able to Will I be even unhappier?

0:10:31.400 --> 0:10:34.040
<v Speaker 3>And I think that self awareness made me realize I

0:10:34.120 --> 0:10:36.640
<v Speaker 3>needed to go look somewhere else. And when I came

0:10:36.679 --> 0:10:39.520
<v Speaker 3>to alger it was really like I was thinking I'd

0:10:39.559 --> 0:10:41.880
<v Speaker 3>be here for two years and then go back and

0:10:41.920 --> 0:10:45.880
<v Speaker 3>do a postdoc somewhere and be a professor, and I

0:10:45.920 --> 0:10:46.440
<v Speaker 3>never left.

0:10:46.679 --> 0:10:49.960
<v Speaker 2>Huh, really really interesting. One of the complaints I've heard

0:10:50.000 --> 0:10:54.080
<v Speaker 2>from people who are technologists or engineers or what have you,

0:10:54.240 --> 0:10:59.319
<v Speaker 2>is everything has become so increasingly specialized and narrow that

0:10:59.400 --> 0:11:01.840
<v Speaker 2>you get put in to a silo, you have no

0:11:01.960 --> 0:11:06.160
<v Speaker 2>idea what's going on in any of the adjacent science

0:11:06.280 --> 0:11:09.280
<v Speaker 2>is more or less even within your field, everybody gets

0:11:09.320 --> 0:11:10.080
<v Speaker 2>too specific.

0:11:10.600 --> 0:11:13.040
<v Speaker 3>Was that a concern, Oh, for sure, And that's a

0:11:13.040 --> 0:11:15.960
<v Speaker 3>great insight it is. Actually, you know, I was in

0:11:16.000 --> 0:11:18.319
<v Speaker 3>a room this is probably at you know, fifteen by

0:11:18.320 --> 0:11:21.560
<v Speaker 3>fifteen room. I spent you know, three and a half

0:11:21.640 --> 0:11:25.480
<v Speaker 3>years in the basement of a building at Stanford taking care.

0:11:25.320 --> 0:11:27.120
<v Speaker 1>Of a tool that was about this big.

0:11:27.640 --> 0:11:31.559
<v Speaker 3>I was the plumber and the electrician and carrying out

0:11:31.600 --> 0:11:33.040
<v Speaker 3>cryopumps and fixing them.

0:11:33.520 --> 0:11:37.280
<v Speaker 1>And it was a very narrow, lonely.

0:11:37.040 --> 0:11:40.000
<v Speaker 2>Experience I can imagine.

0:11:39.880 --> 0:11:43.640
<v Speaker 3>And my advisor was fantastic, but you know, just that

0:11:43.800 --> 0:11:48.200
<v Speaker 3>process required. It was very narrow and I'm very proud

0:11:48.240 --> 0:11:51.920
<v Speaker 3>of the work that we did, but it was very,

0:11:52.040 --> 0:11:53.480
<v Speaker 3>very niche.

0:11:53.720 --> 0:11:57.079
<v Speaker 2>So you moved from a field governed by the laws

0:11:57.120 --> 0:12:02.000
<v Speaker 2>of physics and nature to another field kind of governed

0:12:02.040 --> 0:12:06.640
<v Speaker 2>by the eccentricities of human behavior. What are the challenges

0:12:06.640 --> 0:12:07.719
<v Speaker 2>in that transition?

0:12:10.880 --> 0:12:16.600
<v Speaker 3>You know, I don't really I didn't know anything when

0:12:16.600 --> 0:12:18.959
<v Speaker 3>I started in this business. I knew a lot about

0:12:18.960 --> 0:12:23.560
<v Speaker 3>atoms and materials and magnets and how to how to

0:12:23.640 --> 0:12:27.920
<v Speaker 3>make a chip. But I really didn't know very much

0:12:27.960 --> 0:12:35.400
<v Speaker 3>about investing, so honestly it was all new to me.

0:12:36.280 --> 0:12:40.320
<v Speaker 3>So the challenge was really understanding like it. I was

0:12:40.360 --> 0:12:44.080
<v Speaker 3>always asking why, well, why does this happen? Or why

0:12:44.120 --> 0:12:45.720
<v Speaker 3>does the stock go up on this? Or why does

0:12:45.760 --> 0:12:50.240
<v Speaker 3>stock not go up on this? And understanding that human

0:12:50.320 --> 0:12:56.839
<v Speaker 3>behavior aspect was more a fascination versus a challenge because

0:12:57.120 --> 0:13:02.240
<v Speaker 3>this idea of expectations versus the truth. You know, I

0:13:02.520 --> 0:13:04.600
<v Speaker 3>grew up in a world where there is a single

0:13:04.679 --> 0:13:09.440
<v Speaker 3>answer right where you write an equation and there is

0:13:09.480 --> 0:13:14.559
<v Speaker 3>a way to do it, versus you know, people can

0:13:14.640 --> 0:13:17.440
<v Speaker 3>skin the cat in so many different ways. In what

0:13:17.480 --> 0:13:20.320
<v Speaker 3>we do, you can get to the same result in

0:13:21.000 --> 0:13:26.360
<v Speaker 3>you know, an infinite number of ways. But so that

0:13:26.520 --> 0:13:30.080
<v Speaker 3>was I suppose that was the challenge of understanding that

0:13:30.120 --> 0:13:34.440
<v Speaker 3>there isn't just one way of doing it, but perhaps

0:13:34.480 --> 0:13:38.040
<v Speaker 3>you have to understand the different ways than adopt your

0:13:38.040 --> 0:13:40.959
<v Speaker 3>own way of approaching the problem.

0:13:41.559 --> 0:13:44.480
<v Speaker 2>I love the Richard Feynman quote, imagine how much harder

0:13:44.520 --> 0:13:49.680
<v Speaker 2>physics would be if electrons had feelings. It always always

0:13:49.720 --> 0:13:54.960
<v Speaker 2>cracks me up at the intersection of science and investing.

0:13:56.800 --> 0:14:04.000
<v Speaker 2>So you answer a recruiting ad from Alger despite knowing

0:14:04.120 --> 0:14:09.440
<v Speaker 2>nothing about investing. What made you think your skills might

0:14:09.480 --> 0:14:12.840
<v Speaker 2>get you through the door at a shop like Alger.

0:14:13.000 --> 0:14:16.920
<v Speaker 1>I didn't, really, I really didn't. I was reading a book.

0:14:17.000 --> 0:14:19.640
<v Speaker 3>It was written by a bunch of Mackenzie consultants at

0:14:19.640 --> 0:14:22.560
<v Speaker 3>the time, and I forgot the name of the book,

0:14:22.600 --> 0:14:26.000
<v Speaker 3>but it was all about you know, profit and loss

0:14:26.040 --> 0:14:32.840
<v Speaker 3>and just businesses, how businesses are run. And I really

0:14:32.920 --> 0:14:36.440
<v Speaker 3>didn't know, honestly, Berry, what I was applying for. I

0:14:36.520 --> 0:14:40.840
<v Speaker 3>knew that I needed to do something else. I had

0:14:40.880 --> 0:14:43.400
<v Speaker 3>worked at Merrill Lynch for a summer before I had

0:14:43.400 --> 0:14:46.480
<v Speaker 3>started graduate school, and I loved it. It was on

0:14:46.880 --> 0:14:50.800
<v Speaker 3>like kind of the emerging markets debt desk, and.

0:14:52.080 --> 0:14:53.680
<v Speaker 1>I was like, let me give this a go again.

0:14:54.600 --> 0:14:57.360
<v Speaker 3>And when I applied to Alger, I knew that I

0:14:57.440 --> 0:15:01.920
<v Speaker 3>was curious enough that I would be able to cross

0:15:01.960 --> 0:15:05.280
<v Speaker 3>the chasm and I would be able to you know,

0:15:05.400 --> 0:15:07.080
<v Speaker 3>learn and give back to our company.

0:15:07.920 --> 0:15:08.200
<v Speaker 2>Huh.

0:15:08.200 --> 0:15:09.720
<v Speaker 1>Really, really, I really did know.

0:15:10.920 --> 0:15:14.280
<v Speaker 2>Well, that's really fascinating. We'll explore that more coming up.

0:15:14.320 --> 0:15:19.320
<v Speaker 2>We continue our conversation with Encore Crawford CopM of the

0:15:19.440 --> 0:15:24.280
<v Speaker 2>Large Cap Strategy at Alger and PM of the Concentrated

0:15:24.320 --> 0:15:30.840
<v Speaker 2>Portfolio ETF. Talking about her career at Alger. I'm Barry Results.

0:15:30.880 --> 0:15:35.480
<v Speaker 2>You're listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. I'm

0:15:35.520 --> 0:15:39.520
<v Speaker 2>Barry Ridults. You're listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

0:15:39.960 --> 0:15:43.240
<v Speaker 2>My extra special guest this week is doctor OnCore Crawford.

0:15:43.720 --> 0:15:48.720
<v Speaker 2>She is portfolio manager at Alger, where she copms the

0:15:48.840 --> 0:15:55.400
<v Speaker 2>large Capital Appreciation strategy as well as running the Concentrated ETF.

0:15:56.200 --> 0:16:00.160
<v Speaker 2>So we were talking earlier about you answered an and

0:16:01.840 --> 0:16:06.000
<v Speaker 2>that Alger had had put up to hire people. I

0:16:06.080 --> 0:16:10.840
<v Speaker 2>read a story that Alger's CEO, Dan Chung hired you

0:16:11.000 --> 0:16:13.880
<v Speaker 2>right on the spot. That's kind of unusual in this space.

0:16:14.280 --> 0:16:16.080
<v Speaker 2>Tell us about what happened there.

0:16:17.360 --> 0:16:20.680
<v Speaker 3>It was funny. I actually walked into this meeting. I

0:16:20.720 --> 0:16:23.280
<v Speaker 3>had just come back from Tahoe. I'm a big skier,

0:16:23.720 --> 0:16:26.720
<v Speaker 3>and I was really frustrated because it was pouring outside

0:16:27.280 --> 0:16:32.440
<v Speaker 3>and I walked in like drenched and really like upset,

0:16:32.480 --> 0:16:34.160
<v Speaker 3>and I was like, the only good thing about this

0:16:34.320 --> 0:16:36.760
<v Speaker 3>is that it's snowing in Tahoe.

0:16:37.480 --> 0:16:39.040
<v Speaker 1>And Dan happens to be a skier.

0:16:39.240 --> 0:16:42.600
<v Speaker 3>I didn't know that, and so we started this conversation

0:16:42.760 --> 0:16:47.880
<v Speaker 3>talking about, you know, our mutual love of skiing. After that,

0:16:48.040 --> 0:16:50.200
<v Speaker 3>I think he realized I didn't know very much at

0:16:50.240 --> 0:16:54.800
<v Speaker 3>all about investing, and he asked me my opinion of

0:16:54.840 --> 0:16:55.800
<v Speaker 3>Intel versus AMD.

0:16:57.280 --> 0:16:59.880
<v Speaker 1>And this was two thousand and three, two thousand.

0:16:59.600 --> 0:17:02.040
<v Speaker 2>And four and peak Intel.

0:17:02.360 --> 0:17:03.320
<v Speaker 1>It was peak Intel.

0:17:03.520 --> 0:17:06.160
<v Speaker 3>And I remember saying, you know, I worked at Intel,

0:17:07.000 --> 0:17:10.639
<v Speaker 3>and you know, I think I prefer AMD versus Intel

0:17:10.720 --> 0:17:13.040
<v Speaker 3>because this is you know, kind of what I'm seeing

0:17:13.040 --> 0:17:16.720
<v Speaker 3>inside of Intel, not inside information, but more the culture

0:17:17.240 --> 0:17:22.240
<v Speaker 3>that had developed. And we had this long discussion about it.

0:17:22.680 --> 0:17:26.680
<v Speaker 3>That evening, they hosted a a kind of a get

0:17:26.720 --> 0:17:31.359
<v Speaker 3>together for all of the applicants, and Dan and I

0:17:31.400 --> 0:17:38.000
<v Speaker 3>got into an argument about nanded versus hard dist drives and.

0:17:37.800 --> 0:17:39.360
<v Speaker 2>You were on the nan side, right.

0:17:39.920 --> 0:17:42.080
<v Speaker 3>Well, he was telling me that all hard to strives

0:17:42.160 --> 0:17:44.119
<v Speaker 3>were going to go to zero.

0:17:44.600 --> 0:17:45.960
<v Speaker 2>And he was eventually right.

0:17:45.880 --> 0:17:47.880
<v Speaker 3>And he will be eventually right. And you know what's

0:17:47.920 --> 0:17:50.760
<v Speaker 3>so funny. I just had this discussion with him yesterday.

0:17:52.000 --> 0:17:54.520
<v Speaker 3>I was like, Dan, we had this discussion twenty two

0:17:54.560 --> 0:17:55.000
<v Speaker 3>years ago.

0:17:55.480 --> 0:17:57.840
<v Speaker 2>It only took you two decades to be right. You know,

0:17:58.040 --> 0:18:01.000
<v Speaker 2>in trading is the same as wrong.

0:18:01.560 --> 0:18:04.479
<v Speaker 3>Well, it was great because we had this Really it

0:18:04.520 --> 0:18:08.200
<v Speaker 3>wasn't it wasn't a heated conversation, but it was definitely

0:18:08.640 --> 0:18:12.040
<v Speaker 3>kind of looking at this problem in two different ways.

0:18:13.080 --> 0:18:16.080
<v Speaker 1>And as we were walking out, he was like, you're hired.

0:18:16.160 --> 0:18:18.520
<v Speaker 2>Just like that, Just like that. I need someone who's

0:18:18.720 --> 0:18:20.639
<v Speaker 2>not afraid of me, will stand up and make me

0:18:20.760 --> 0:18:23.920
<v Speaker 2>think of this problem from multiple angles.

0:18:24.119 --> 0:18:27.640
<v Speaker 3>Well, I think it's a little bit of the culture

0:18:27.680 --> 0:18:31.159
<v Speaker 3>that we have at ALGA of it's always better to

0:18:31.240 --> 0:18:35.600
<v Speaker 3>have different perspectives versus go along with the norm and

0:18:35.680 --> 0:18:42.159
<v Speaker 3>be consensus, and to always encourage that debate. So, you know,

0:18:42.440 --> 0:18:46.240
<v Speaker 3>and one thing I am for sure is especially because

0:18:46.440 --> 0:18:49.360
<v Speaker 3>again I come from a place of we're always trying

0:18:49.400 --> 0:18:50.080
<v Speaker 3>to find the truth.

0:18:50.119 --> 0:18:51.120
<v Speaker 1>There is an answer.

0:18:51.920 --> 0:18:54.080
<v Speaker 3>I do bring that to the table here too, and

0:18:54.160 --> 0:18:57.439
<v Speaker 3>that there is an answer, right whether or not you

0:18:57.480 --> 0:19:00.880
<v Speaker 3>look at it from one angle versus the other. There

0:19:01.040 --> 0:19:03.840
<v Speaker 3>is an answer, like the earnings are the answer, the

0:19:03.880 --> 0:19:07.960
<v Speaker 3>trajectory of earnings are the answer, and getting that right

0:19:08.800 --> 0:19:10.760
<v Speaker 3>is you know, it can be a topic of debate

0:19:10.760 --> 0:19:13.240
<v Speaker 3>and how you get there. We can debate it to

0:19:13.359 --> 0:19:14.840
<v Speaker 3>make sure that we're getting to the truth.

0:19:15.480 --> 0:19:19.800
<v Speaker 2>So you start in the analyst training program at alger

0:19:20.400 --> 0:19:24.960
<v Speaker 2>you advance to a research associate, then an analyst, and

0:19:25.080 --> 0:19:29.720
<v Speaker 2>a tech sector head and ultimately a portfolio manager. What

0:19:29.960 --> 0:19:32.840
<v Speaker 2>transition was the most challenging? What changed the way you

0:19:33.000 --> 0:19:34.520
<v Speaker 2>thought about the job.

0:19:37.000 --> 0:19:41.359
<v Speaker 3>I would say that the transition from kind of being

0:19:41.400 --> 0:19:45.359
<v Speaker 3>an analyst to a portfolio manager, and even as a

0:19:45.720 --> 0:19:48.879
<v Speaker 3>tech sector head, it was I kind of had my

0:19:49.040 --> 0:19:56.560
<v Speaker 3>fingers in everything, and I was my little OCD tendencies

0:19:56.960 --> 0:20:02.680
<v Speaker 3>were still able to play out a little bit. That

0:20:02.720 --> 0:20:07.080
<v Speaker 3>transition to portfolio manager, however, required a different skill set,

0:20:07.760 --> 0:20:12.480
<v Speaker 3>which was allowing for other people to do the thinking

0:20:12.800 --> 0:20:16.880
<v Speaker 3>and or the detailed work which I loved to do,

0:20:18.000 --> 0:20:21.640
<v Speaker 3>and kind of taking a much more macro perspective and

0:20:21.760 --> 0:20:25.199
<v Speaker 3>a bigger picture perspective, where you know, it was a

0:20:25.240 --> 0:20:31.280
<v Speaker 3>much more socratic methodology of questioning and asking the right

0:20:31.359 --> 0:20:36.400
<v Speaker 3>questions to guide the analysts in the right direction, so.

0:20:38.000 --> 0:20:39.119
<v Speaker 1>You know, and that was like I.

0:20:39.160 --> 0:20:41.280
<v Speaker 3>Used to do that with the companies, right, I would

0:20:41.320 --> 0:20:44.000
<v Speaker 3>ask all these questions of the companies, But doing it

0:20:44.040 --> 0:20:46.919
<v Speaker 3>with your peer set and people that work with you

0:20:47.080 --> 0:20:50.280
<v Speaker 3>is a little bit different, and so that was a

0:20:50.440 --> 0:20:51.840
<v Speaker 3>kind of a tough transition for me.

0:20:52.400 --> 0:20:57.600
<v Speaker 2>So you have a PhD, but not an MBA. I'm

0:20:57.680 --> 0:21:01.080
<v Speaker 2>curious the apprenticeship you went through going through all those

0:21:02.040 --> 0:21:05.320
<v Speaker 2>steps at alger What do you think you learned through

0:21:05.359 --> 0:21:09.119
<v Speaker 2>that process that, hey, a green NBA right at a

0:21:09.160 --> 0:21:11.240
<v Speaker 2>school is going to take them a couple of years

0:21:11.240 --> 0:21:11.960
<v Speaker 2>to figure out.

0:21:12.640 --> 0:21:16.520
<v Speaker 3>You know, when you are on the hook for real

0:21:16.560 --> 0:21:22.240
<v Speaker 3>performance for real clients and you make a wrong decision,

0:21:22.920 --> 0:21:27.080
<v Speaker 3>it isn't like doing poorly on a test, right, It's

0:21:27.080 --> 0:21:34.920
<v Speaker 3>simply not equivalent because you actually feel the pain of

0:21:35.000 --> 0:21:41.199
<v Speaker 3>having made that decision that impacted someone else. So, you know,

0:21:41.800 --> 0:21:49.800
<v Speaker 3>I think learned abilities that are experiential just have a

0:21:49.840 --> 0:21:54.200
<v Speaker 3>different impact than when you're sitting in a classroom because

0:21:54.200 --> 0:21:56.480
<v Speaker 3>I think in a classroom that the consequences are just

0:21:56.600 --> 0:22:01.760
<v Speaker 3>lower than they are when it's when you're really investing

0:22:01.800 --> 0:22:02.560
<v Speaker 3>other people's money.

0:22:02.960 --> 0:22:07.320
<v Speaker 2>That is the classic academia versus real life. All Right,

0:22:07.359 --> 0:22:09.280
<v Speaker 2>I didn't get one hundred, I got a ninety six.

0:22:09.480 --> 0:22:13.240
<v Speaker 2>Isn't the same as this one position is ruining all

0:22:13.320 --> 0:22:15.600
<v Speaker 2>of my performance for the quarter.

0:22:15.560 --> 0:22:16.040
<v Speaker 1>That's right.

0:22:16.760 --> 0:22:19.280
<v Speaker 3>It's very different, and I think what you learn from

0:22:19.359 --> 0:22:22.080
<v Speaker 3>it is I mean, there are certain I have this

0:22:22.119 --> 0:22:25.080
<v Speaker 3>book where I used to write down and not so

0:22:25.200 --> 0:22:28.040
<v Speaker 3>much anymore. But I have all my learnings from when

0:22:28.080 --> 0:22:32.080
<v Speaker 3>I was a kid in the business where to remind

0:22:32.160 --> 0:22:34.160
<v Speaker 3>myself not to make those same mistakes again.

0:22:35.280 --> 0:22:37.960
<v Speaker 1>And I haven't looked at it in a while.

0:22:38.040 --> 0:22:41.840
<v Speaker 3>I probably should go back and see how I developed,

0:22:41.920 --> 0:22:46.560
<v Speaker 3>because there were so many learnings that I would carry

0:22:46.600 --> 0:22:48.760
<v Speaker 3>with me and have shaped who I am today.

0:22:49.320 --> 0:22:52.320
<v Speaker 2>I think that's how Ray Dalio wrote Principles, just get

0:22:52.359 --> 0:22:54.440
<v Speaker 2>writing all his mistakes and what he learned from them.

0:22:54.520 --> 0:22:57.680
<v Speaker 3>Oh really, I love Principles. I actually have his book

0:22:57.760 --> 0:22:58.320
<v Speaker 3>for kids.

0:22:58.600 --> 0:23:04.400
<v Speaker 2>Oh really, I don't real but he's described Principles as

0:23:05.080 --> 0:23:08.800
<v Speaker 2>just every mistake he's made, every adjustment he's made, and

0:23:08.880 --> 0:23:13.879
<v Speaker 2>ultimately how to turn errors into better performance. It's really

0:23:14.880 --> 0:23:18.639
<v Speaker 2>very insightful, especially from a time when Wall Street didn't

0:23:18.720 --> 0:23:21.480
<v Speaker 2>love to admit they ever got anything wrong. It's kind

0:23:21.480 --> 0:23:25.120
<v Speaker 2>of fascinating. So you ran Alger's tech sector and then

0:23:25.760 --> 0:23:32.280
<v Speaker 2>took over with your colleague the capital appreciation strategies, being

0:23:32.400 --> 0:23:37.240
<v Speaker 2>hyper focused in one sector versus broad capital appreciation. What's

0:23:37.280 --> 0:23:40.639
<v Speaker 2>that transition like? That sounds like a really big leap

0:23:41.119 --> 0:23:44.639
<v Speaker 2>from something you're very comfortable with to gee, there's a

0:23:44.640 --> 0:23:47.919
<v Speaker 2>lot of risk and a lot of uncertainty around that

0:23:48.080 --> 0:23:50.080
<v Speaker 2>sort of new job description.

0:23:50.320 --> 0:23:50.520
<v Speaker 1>Yeah.

0:23:50.560 --> 0:23:53.840
<v Speaker 3>Absolutely, But look, there's things that rhyme. And I think

0:23:53.880 --> 0:23:58.399
<v Speaker 3>that the sector I struggled with most was healthcare because

0:23:58.400 --> 0:23:59.960
<v Speaker 3>it is so incredibly esotary.

0:24:01.000 --> 0:24:05.440
<v Speaker 2>And why why is healthcare so esoteric? You come out

0:24:05.440 --> 0:24:07.480
<v Speaker 2>with a drug, you sell a few billion dollars worth,

0:24:07.520 --> 0:24:08.359
<v Speaker 2>everybody's happy.

0:24:08.760 --> 0:24:10.760
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, but it doesn't quite work that way all the

0:24:10.800 --> 0:24:11.560
<v Speaker 3>time now it does it.

0:24:12.640 --> 0:24:16.639
<v Speaker 4>So and there's all this like legislative you know, overhang,

0:24:16.880 --> 0:24:21.440
<v Speaker 4>there's regulatory stuff that's happening, there's subsidies that come and go,

0:24:21.520 --> 0:24:26.119
<v Speaker 4>There's there's a political backdrop that you have to always

0:24:26.119 --> 0:24:27.320
<v Speaker 4>be aware of for healthcare.

0:24:28.040 --> 0:24:30.720
<v Speaker 1>So, you know, healthcare.

0:24:30.320 --> 0:24:34.840
<v Speaker 3>Actually was a part of the market where it didn't

0:24:34.920 --> 0:24:38.840
<v Speaker 3>really rhyme with anything that I had done before. But

0:24:38.880 --> 0:24:42.000
<v Speaker 3>if you think about industrials and financials, those were cyclicals,

0:24:42.520 --> 0:24:45.280
<v Speaker 3>cyclicals of a different nature. You know, some were long

0:24:45.680 --> 0:24:51.040
<v Speaker 3>kind of longtime cyclicals versus semis. You know, financials were

0:24:51.040 --> 0:24:54.840
<v Speaker 3>also cyclicals tied to the economy. The emphasis more on

0:24:54.880 --> 0:25:00.720
<v Speaker 3>the macro was something I started to incorporate more in

0:25:01.080 --> 0:25:07.080
<v Speaker 3>my thinking. But you know, for someone who has a

0:25:07.280 --> 0:25:10.520
<v Speaker 3>very curious like I'm always curious and I'm always asking

0:25:10.640 --> 0:25:14.240
<v Speaker 3>questions to me. It was it was kind of a

0:25:14.280 --> 0:25:17.640
<v Speaker 3>breath of fresh air to kind of expand my purview

0:25:17.760 --> 0:25:25.200
<v Speaker 3>to understand and synthesize how the world works. But it

0:25:25.359 --> 0:25:31.359
<v Speaker 3>was I quite enjoy having that broader perspective. And you

0:25:31.359 --> 0:25:34.480
<v Speaker 3>know what, Elsa is super interesting and I've only had

0:25:34.480 --> 0:25:38.359
<v Speaker 3>this appreciation probably in the last decade, is how history rhymes.

0:25:39.840 --> 0:25:43.600
<v Speaker 3>So I have become a bit of a you know,

0:25:43.720 --> 0:25:47.280
<v Speaker 3>a history fan. And in part because I got I

0:25:47.359 --> 0:25:50.760
<v Speaker 3>started when I was I was working with my now

0:25:50.840 --> 0:25:54.320
<v Speaker 3>eighteen year old and doing history homework with her, and

0:25:54.359 --> 0:25:56.520
<v Speaker 3>all of a sudden, I started to realize, like, there

0:25:56.600 --> 0:26:00.959
<v Speaker 3>is so much that is similar that is going on

0:26:01.000 --> 0:26:07.600
<v Speaker 3>today as has been, as it happened before. So you know,

0:26:07.760 --> 0:26:10.320
<v Speaker 3>I think that is also really fascinating as you start

0:26:10.359 --> 0:26:13.960
<v Speaker 3>to pull the big picture together, because it just gives

0:26:14.000 --> 0:26:18.000
<v Speaker 3>you a different perspective on sectors and how to invest.

0:26:18.600 --> 0:26:22.640
<v Speaker 2>Really really interesting. So you also are the sole manager

0:26:22.760 --> 0:26:26.600
<v Speaker 2>of the alger concentrated equity strategy, which is now inn

0:26:26.640 --> 0:26:32.879
<v Speaker 2>etf form. When I think of concentrated portfolios, we're talking

0:26:33.200 --> 0:26:37.359
<v Speaker 2>fifteen twenty twenty five names. How many names are concentrated

0:26:37.680 --> 0:26:39.720
<v Speaker 2>and then how do you size them? Are they all

0:26:39.760 --> 0:26:42.960
<v Speaker 2>equal weight or you know what does that look like?

0:26:43.240 --> 0:26:46.160
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, so this this portfolio is twenty to thirty stocks.

0:26:46.200 --> 0:26:54.040
<v Speaker 3>It is an actively managed, fully transparent ETF. And you know,

0:26:54.400 --> 0:26:56.680
<v Speaker 3>when we think about sizing for the portfolio, and look,

0:26:56.840 --> 0:26:59.240
<v Speaker 3>the concept of this portfolio is to just invest in

0:27:00.200 --> 0:27:04.560
<v Speaker 3>the best businesses that are going to have the greatest

0:27:04.640 --> 0:27:07.880
<v Speaker 3>change and have the most kind of have the best

0:27:07.960 --> 0:27:09.880
<v Speaker 3>risk reward at any given point in time.

0:27:10.680 --> 0:27:14.600
<v Speaker 2>So tell us the full name of the ETF and.

0:27:14.800 --> 0:27:20.560
<v Speaker 3>It's the Concentrated Equity Portfolio and the tickers cn EQ.

0:27:22.119 --> 0:27:25.960
<v Speaker 3>So the idea here is we want to invest in

0:27:26.000 --> 0:27:30.240
<v Speaker 3>the best companies that are going to be benefited by

0:27:30.800 --> 0:27:34.000
<v Speaker 3>you know, the major the best growing trends in the

0:27:34.040 --> 0:27:40.159
<v Speaker 3>market and the compounding nature of earnings should drive the

0:27:40.200 --> 0:27:43.919
<v Speaker 3>portfolio and drive the companies that are within that portfolio. So,

0:27:44.800 --> 0:27:48.160
<v Speaker 3>you know, position sizing is just like any other portfolio.

0:27:48.680 --> 0:27:51.600
<v Speaker 3>The risk reward dictates how big the companies are in

0:27:51.640 --> 0:27:56.680
<v Speaker 3>the portfolio. And there are some that you know, in

0:27:56.720 --> 0:27:59.240
<v Speaker 3>Nvidia is currently at thirteen and a half percent position

0:27:59.280 --> 0:28:02.880
<v Speaker 3>in the portfolio, whereas there's other companies that were waiting

0:28:03.600 --> 0:28:05.600
<v Speaker 3>at the bottom of the portfolio, kind of like figure

0:28:05.640 --> 0:28:12.480
<v Speaker 3>technologies that is smaller and waiting to see when the

0:28:12.560 --> 0:28:15.480
<v Speaker 3>true traction in their market starts in the overhang of

0:28:15.480 --> 0:28:17.920
<v Speaker 3>some of the selling and to take it up.

0:28:18.600 --> 0:28:21.240
<v Speaker 1>But each of the businesses.

0:28:20.480 --> 0:28:25.639
<v Speaker 3>That are owned in this portfolio have large opportunity and

0:28:25.760 --> 0:28:28.720
<v Speaker 3>big TAM.

0:28:27.760 --> 0:28:30.560
<v Speaker 2>Total addressable market yes, c N eq R right, I'm

0:28:30.560 --> 0:28:32.960
<v Speaker 2>going to make a note of that. So I know

0:28:33.160 --> 0:28:36.680
<v Speaker 2>alger back when it was Algera Capital Growth or alge

0:28:36.760 --> 0:28:41.880
<v Speaker 2>Capital Management launched in nineteen sixty four, what does growth

0:28:41.920 --> 0:28:45.440
<v Speaker 2>investing mean an Algea, because there are definitions that seem

0:28:45.520 --> 0:28:48.640
<v Speaker 2>to be different from place to place. What are you

0:28:48.800 --> 0:28:54.560
<v Speaker 2>looking for that Perhaps the market hasn't priced correctly, so.

0:28:56.480 --> 0:28:57.520
<v Speaker 1>You know, I don't.

0:28:58.240 --> 0:29:02.040
<v Speaker 3>I think what makes us interesting as growth investors is

0:29:02.040 --> 0:29:06.880
<v Speaker 3>that the fundamental thing we look for is not necessarily growth.

0:29:07.800 --> 0:29:08.560
<v Speaker 1>It is change.

0:29:10.080 --> 0:29:13.720
<v Speaker 3>And the change begets the growth right, So the growth

0:29:13.760 --> 0:29:16.880
<v Speaker 3>is an output of the change, and I think that's

0:29:17.800 --> 0:29:21.560
<v Speaker 3>an important differentiator because it's not just expressed as let's

0:29:21.560 --> 0:29:23.880
<v Speaker 3>do a screen and find the companies that are growing

0:29:24.280 --> 0:29:28.040
<v Speaker 3>the fastest. It is let us look for the change,

0:29:28.200 --> 0:29:32.959
<v Speaker 3>because where there is change, there is often unidentified opportunity

0:29:33.040 --> 0:29:37.760
<v Speaker 3>and because of that, we will get the growth. So

0:29:38.160 --> 0:29:44.000
<v Speaker 3>we have a significant research team that is always looking

0:29:44.080 --> 0:29:49.040
<v Speaker 3>for change. Now, the way that Fred had initially incepted

0:29:49.080 --> 0:29:53.480
<v Speaker 3>this concept of change was to look at two different pillars.

0:29:53.800 --> 0:29:56.320
<v Speaker 3>The first is what we call high unit volume growth,

0:29:57.120 --> 0:30:00.280
<v Speaker 3>and that is typical kind of company that that is

0:30:00.320 --> 0:30:04.480
<v Speaker 3>growing their top line, they become market dominant or have

0:30:04.640 --> 0:30:08.120
<v Speaker 3>a positioning that is they're taking a lot of share,

0:30:09.440 --> 0:30:15.360
<v Speaker 3>very forward thinking and you know, expresses itself as high

0:30:15.360 --> 0:30:19.680
<v Speaker 3>top line and growing bottom line. It could be small

0:30:19.720 --> 0:30:22.120
<v Speaker 3>in mid cab companies, it could be larger companies. It

0:30:22.200 --> 0:30:28.720
<v Speaker 3>really spans the gamut of of change and growth. So

0:30:28.760 --> 0:30:33.680
<v Speaker 3>that would be more of a typical growth company, traditional

0:30:33.880 --> 0:30:36.880
<v Speaker 3>kind of a traditional growth company. The other side, which

0:30:36.920 --> 0:30:39.800
<v Speaker 3>I think makes us really unique, is what we call

0:30:39.880 --> 0:30:44.240
<v Speaker 3>life cycle change. And oftentimes we like to show this

0:30:44.480 --> 0:30:48.600
<v Speaker 3>this it's almost like an S curve of you know,

0:30:48.640 --> 0:30:51.040
<v Speaker 3>we like to invest in the companies that are early

0:30:51.280 --> 0:30:56.280
<v Speaker 3>on in the S curve and companies that have already

0:30:56.360 --> 0:30:59.680
<v Speaker 3>gone through the S curve. They're kind of saturated out

0:30:59.840 --> 0:31:04.720
<v Speaker 3>of their markets and they're starting to question who.

0:31:04.560 --> 0:31:09.680
<v Speaker 2>They are saturated as in fully priced or saturated as in, hey,

0:31:09.680 --> 0:31:10.920
<v Speaker 2>that's as big as their market share.

0:31:11.040 --> 0:31:13.160
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, that's that's as big as their market is going

0:31:13.200 --> 0:31:16.040
<v Speaker 3>to get. So what you see is oftentimes companies that

0:31:16.200 --> 0:31:19.920
<v Speaker 3>are you know, their growth, their growth, they were great

0:31:19.920 --> 0:31:22.000
<v Speaker 3>growth companies and all of a sudden their growth has

0:31:22.040 --> 0:31:25.680
<v Speaker 3>stabilized or growth is starting to kind of approach GDP.

0:31:25.880 --> 0:31:29.040
<v Speaker 3>I remember kind of more mature, right, so kind of

0:31:29.040 --> 0:31:31.800
<v Speaker 3>a more mature company. And then the management has a

0:31:31.840 --> 0:31:35.280
<v Speaker 3>decision to make am I still a growth company? Or

0:31:35.320 --> 0:31:38.120
<v Speaker 3>am I going to just milk what we have? And

0:31:38.840 --> 0:31:43.520
<v Speaker 3>oftentimes that that gets change. So a new management comes

0:31:43.520 --> 0:31:47.400
<v Speaker 3>in and the sides, we're going to kind of jettison

0:31:47.520 --> 0:31:52.200
<v Speaker 3>all our low growth businesses and start buying higher growth businesses,

0:31:52.800 --> 0:31:55.720
<v Speaker 3>and it changes the profile of the business. It could

0:31:55.760 --> 0:32:00.800
<v Speaker 3>be a regulatory change that makes the company a little

0:32:00.840 --> 0:32:04.840
<v Speaker 3>bit more growthy than it was historically. It could be

0:32:05.760 --> 0:32:10.160
<v Speaker 3>m and A that again reaccelerates top line growth. It

0:32:10.200 --> 0:32:14.040
<v Speaker 3>could be a technology technological change that they really embrace.

0:32:14.400 --> 0:32:16.960
<v Speaker 3>And this was Microsoft in its early days back into

0:32:17.000 --> 0:32:19.040
<v Speaker 3>you know, when there was a when Satya Nadella first

0:32:19.120 --> 0:32:24.560
<v Speaker 3>came to the helm. So it's almost as if the

0:32:24.640 --> 0:32:27.760
<v Speaker 3>company had a decision to make and we're looking for

0:32:27.880 --> 0:32:31.480
<v Speaker 3>changes that the decision from here is to get onto

0:32:31.520 --> 0:32:34.760
<v Speaker 3>a growth trajectory and then study how they execute such

0:32:34.800 --> 0:32:37.080
<v Speaker 3>that it drives both top line and bottom line growth,

0:32:37.960 --> 0:32:42.320
<v Speaker 3>so that you know, oftentimes when we buy companies that

0:32:42.360 --> 0:32:45.120
<v Speaker 3>are on that side of the ledger, people will think

0:32:45.160 --> 0:32:50.480
<v Speaker 3>they're value names, and they're not really value names. They're

0:32:50.480 --> 0:32:54.440
<v Speaker 3>actually unidentified and misunderstood growth and that's how we think

0:32:54.480 --> 0:32:56.560
<v Speaker 3>of them. And a great example of this is you

0:32:56.600 --> 0:32:59.480
<v Speaker 3>know what's happening to the hard to drive companies right now,

0:33:00.120 --> 0:33:03.640
<v Speaker 3>where you know, they were trading at single digit multiples,

0:33:04.360 --> 0:33:06.959
<v Speaker 3>but in an era of AI, all of a sudden,

0:33:07.720 --> 0:33:09.240
<v Speaker 3>you need a lot more data and you need to

0:33:09.280 --> 0:33:13.280
<v Speaker 3>store all that data. So you know, hard tos drives

0:33:13.360 --> 0:33:16.880
<v Speaker 3>all of a sudden became you know, in shortage, and

0:33:16.920 --> 0:33:19.960
<v Speaker 3>now they're taking pricing and their their their earnings power

0:33:20.000 --> 0:33:23.600
<v Speaker 3>has you know, gone up three four fivefold over over

0:33:23.600 --> 0:33:24.320
<v Speaker 3>the last few years.

0:33:24.320 --> 0:33:28.520
<v Speaker 2>Even though people thought it was a at the tail

0:33:28.600 --> 0:33:32.280
<v Speaker 2>end of their useful life cycle, they found a second.

0:33:32.000 --> 0:33:35.480
<v Speaker 3>Life, that's right, and so so that is a that

0:33:35.640 --> 0:33:37.760
<v Speaker 3>is also a change, and it happens to be a

0:33:37.840 --> 0:33:42.000
<v Speaker 3>change in the market broadly, right, So So.

0:33:42.080 --> 0:33:46.200
<v Speaker 2>That raises a really fascinating question. I have to ask you.

0:33:47.320 --> 0:33:50.880
<v Speaker 2>There are companies that appear to be on the back

0:33:51.040 --> 0:33:57.320
<v Speaker 2>end of their of their life cycle. Their growth has plateaued.

0:33:58.040 --> 0:34:02.320
<v Speaker 2>Maybe they're not gaining market share, maybe the market itself

0:34:02.360 --> 0:34:08.800
<v Speaker 2>isn't growing. How can you identify when something is legitimately

0:34:09.440 --> 0:34:13.960
<v Speaker 2>fading or potentially at the start? Like I know IBM

0:34:14.160 --> 0:34:17.279
<v Speaker 2>just had a rough quarter, But how many times has

0:34:17.440 --> 0:34:21.040
<v Speaker 2>that company reinvented itself and been left for dead only

0:34:21.120 --> 0:34:25.120
<v Speaker 2>to surprise everybody. And there's a bunch of Microsoft you

0:34:25.120 --> 0:34:29.719
<v Speaker 2>brought up as another example. What were they thirty forty

0:34:29.800 --> 0:34:32.399
<v Speaker 2>years old when Nadella came in? That that's a huge

0:34:32.400 --> 0:34:36.560
<v Speaker 2>turnaround story. So how do you identify when, hey, these

0:34:36.600 --> 0:34:39.680
<v Speaker 2>guys are never going to be what they once were

0:34:39.880 --> 0:34:42.600
<v Speaker 2>or no, there's something real happening.

0:34:42.680 --> 0:34:47.359
<v Speaker 3>Okay, So there is this publicly traded fintech company that

0:34:49.000 --> 0:34:51.120
<v Speaker 3>you know was just struggling in part because they had

0:34:51.120 --> 0:34:54.200
<v Speaker 3>saturated their markets and there was nowhere for them to

0:34:54.239 --> 0:34:57.759
<v Speaker 3>grow and it was becoming a lot more competitive.

0:34:59.040 --> 0:35:01.880
<v Speaker 1>CEO and CF so leave new.

0:35:01.760 --> 0:35:05.799
<v Speaker 3>Management comes in, you know, put together a brand new

0:35:05.800 --> 0:35:11.920
<v Speaker 3>strategy that is fantastic. Our team looks at it like promising. However,

0:35:12.480 --> 0:35:15.800
<v Speaker 3>the core issues of their business have not been resolved.

0:35:16.600 --> 0:35:19.080
<v Speaker 3>Right do you go from a four and five percent

0:35:19.120 --> 0:35:21.920
<v Speaker 3>grower to a ten twelve to fifteen percent grower With

0:35:22.000 --> 0:35:27.719
<v Speaker 3>the strategy, We couldn't really you know, resolve that they

0:35:27.760 --> 0:35:30.440
<v Speaker 3>would be able to get there because the pressures in

0:35:30.480 --> 0:35:36.759
<v Speaker 3>their markets were so significant. Competitive mature, competitive maturity, the

0:35:37.120 --> 0:35:39.439
<v Speaker 3>you know, they were just fighting to kind of stay

0:35:39.480 --> 0:35:42.200
<v Speaker 3>alive or stay stay at that like three four five

0:35:42.239 --> 0:35:43.280
<v Speaker 3>percent type growth.

0:35:43.920 --> 0:35:47.239
<v Speaker 1>So that was one that we looked at.

0:35:47.520 --> 0:35:50.360
<v Speaker 3>The catalyst was a new CEO, a new management team,

0:35:50.680 --> 0:35:54.640
<v Speaker 3>like the entire management team was different, but to us

0:35:54.640 --> 0:35:57.399
<v Speaker 3>it wasn't really logical that it would change or they

0:35:57.440 --> 0:36:02.600
<v Speaker 3>could change the trajectory of the business. Microsoft a completely

0:36:02.640 --> 0:36:06.000
<v Speaker 3>different story because Satya comes in, he says, we're going

0:36:06.080 --> 0:36:09.920
<v Speaker 3>to turn the ship, We're going to develop cloud and

0:36:09.960 --> 0:36:13.080
<v Speaker 3>then we started to understand what it meant to go

0:36:13.200 --> 0:36:16.520
<v Speaker 3>to a SaaS based business. Gosh, it can be you know,

0:36:16.840 --> 0:36:20.280
<v Speaker 3>in the near term it would be depressing their earnings,

0:36:20.960 --> 0:36:25.920
<v Speaker 3>but longer term it's really interesting, right, and they can

0:36:25.960 --> 0:36:28.120
<v Speaker 3>get to a mid teens type growth again, which they

0:36:28.160 --> 0:36:31.480
<v Speaker 3>did get to. I mean Microsoft, if you remember everyone

0:36:31.480 --> 0:36:34.279
<v Speaker 3>thought Google was going to take over Google Sheets was

0:36:34.320 --> 0:36:37.160
<v Speaker 3>going to take over Excel, and like, why do we

0:36:37.360 --> 0:36:38.400
<v Speaker 3>all need Microsoft?

0:36:38.640 --> 0:36:41.680
<v Speaker 2>I asked myself that question every time I launch and

0:36:41.680 --> 0:36:44.360
<v Speaker 2>look at the annoying new ribbon that they changed this

0:36:44.480 --> 0:36:48.359
<v Speaker 2>decade ago. But I use both, but you use both?

0:36:48.440 --> 0:36:51.719
<v Speaker 3>Ye, and after all these years, and I assume in

0:36:51.800 --> 0:36:55.360
<v Speaker 3>ten years we'll still be using Microsoft. So you know,

0:36:55.480 --> 0:36:59.719
<v Speaker 3>Satya then pivoted this ship and got into the cloud

0:36:59.719 --> 0:37:05.320
<v Speaker 3>business with Azure, and so we watched the actions as well,

0:37:05.640 --> 0:37:08.080
<v Speaker 3>so we can dream the dream and then test the

0:37:08.160 --> 0:37:12.800
<v Speaker 3>hypothesis and see whether or not they're executing against it.

0:37:14.040 --> 0:37:18.279
<v Speaker 2>Really really interesting. Let me reverse the question to you

0:37:18.360 --> 0:37:22.719
<v Speaker 2>and say what leads you when you're running a concentrated

0:37:22.880 --> 0:37:27.040
<v Speaker 2>portfolio to say I'm going to sell this? Is it

0:37:27.080 --> 0:37:31.239
<v Speaker 2>the fundamentals deteriorating the thesis not working out sometimes is

0:37:31.280 --> 0:37:34.520
<v Speaker 2>based on valuation or is it simply we only have

0:37:34.640 --> 0:37:38.520
<v Speaker 2>room for X number of companies and this opportunity is here,

0:37:38.560 --> 0:37:40.040
<v Speaker 2>and that opportunity is all the way up here.

0:37:40.120 --> 0:37:41.799
<v Speaker 1>It's all of the above, right.

0:37:41.840 --> 0:37:45.640
<v Speaker 3>There is examples of selling a company because there's a

0:37:45.680 --> 0:37:48.080
<v Speaker 3>better opportunity and you don't want to take you don't

0:37:48.120 --> 0:37:50.919
<v Speaker 3>want to take double the risks so to the same

0:37:51.000 --> 0:37:54.080
<v Speaker 3>end market, yet the upside of one is greater than

0:37:54.080 --> 0:37:58.920
<v Speaker 3>the upside in the other. There are examples of you know,

0:37:59.239 --> 0:38:03.040
<v Speaker 3>you sell or at least trim because the price target

0:38:03.080 --> 0:38:05.480
<v Speaker 3>has been achieved, and maybe beyond the price target has

0:38:05.520 --> 0:38:09.040
<v Speaker 3>been achieved, so their risk reward is simply different. There

0:38:09.080 --> 0:38:14.400
<v Speaker 3>are examples of disappointments, you know, companies that disappoint relative

0:38:14.440 --> 0:38:19.000
<v Speaker 3>to our expectations and they didn't deliver on what we

0:38:19.120 --> 0:38:23.360
<v Speaker 3>expected them to do and the hypothesis didn't play out.

0:38:23.680 --> 0:38:25.640
<v Speaker 1>So I think there's.

0:38:25.200 --> 0:38:30.280
<v Speaker 3>All of the above, and every sale has a different reason.

0:38:30.880 --> 0:38:34.359
<v Speaker 2>Really really interesting. Coming up, we continue our conversation with

0:38:34.440 --> 0:38:40.040
<v Speaker 2>doctor Encore Crawford, executive vice president and portfolio manager at Alger,

0:38:40.719 --> 0:38:45.359
<v Speaker 2>diving in to her AI thesis. I'm Barry Richards. You're

0:38:45.400 --> 0:38:50.880
<v Speaker 2>listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. I'm Barry Ridults.

0:38:50.920 --> 0:38:54.400
<v Speaker 2>You're listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. My

0:38:54.560 --> 0:38:58.920
<v Speaker 2>extra special guest today is doctor Encore Crawford. She's portfolio

0:38:58.960 --> 0:39:04.200
<v Speaker 2>manager at al where she copms the large capital appreciation

0:39:04.360 --> 0:39:10.279
<v Speaker 2>strategy and runs the concentrated ETF for the firm. So

0:39:11.080 --> 0:39:15.640
<v Speaker 2>we are legally obligated to discuss artificial intelligence, but you're

0:39:15.680 --> 0:39:19.920
<v Speaker 2>the perfect person to have this conversation with. There's a

0:39:20.000 --> 0:39:23.719
<v Speaker 2>quote of yours that I found fascinating. You said, when

0:39:23.920 --> 0:39:31.440
<v Speaker 2>software begins to write software, innovation becomes exponential. That's already happening.

0:39:32.280 --> 0:39:36.560
<v Speaker 2>Walk us through what this means for earning powers for

0:39:36.680 --> 0:39:41.080
<v Speaker 2>the semiconductors, for the hyperscalers, and then for the rest

0:39:41.120 --> 0:39:42.400
<v Speaker 2>of the S and P five hundred.

0:39:42.719 --> 0:39:44.960
<v Speaker 1>Okay, so that is a very big question.

0:39:47.719 --> 0:39:51.239
<v Speaker 3>Look, I think we're at this I mean, elon, don't

0:39:51.239 --> 0:39:55.160
<v Speaker 3>call it a singularity, or we're at this point in

0:39:55.280 --> 0:39:59.480
<v Speaker 3>time where we have never seen this kind of innovation.

0:40:00.680 --> 0:40:03.880
<v Speaker 1>And imagine everything that.

0:40:04.400 --> 0:40:08.560
<v Speaker 3>You know, let's take to it's easiest to describe with software.

0:40:09.520 --> 0:40:12.400
<v Speaker 3>We used to sit in code software, right and we

0:40:12.480 --> 0:40:17.040
<v Speaker 3>had to understand the coding, We had to debug it.

0:40:17.040 --> 0:40:20.080
<v Speaker 3>It would take a long time. Well, when software begins

0:40:20.120 --> 0:40:26.080
<v Speaker 3>to write software, that whole process is truncated. And imagine

0:40:26.080 --> 0:40:30.640
<v Speaker 3>what can be done in our largely digital world when

0:40:32.120 --> 0:40:35.480
<v Speaker 3>software begins to code, decode, and create.

0:40:36.600 --> 0:40:41.960
<v Speaker 2>So let me push you a little bit there. The

0:40:42.040 --> 0:40:46.600
<v Speaker 2>large language models that are out there give AI the

0:40:46.640 --> 0:40:50.600
<v Speaker 2>ability to effectively cut and paste everything that's been done before.

0:40:51.320 --> 0:40:57.520
<v Speaker 2>How good is AI at creatively innovating code that's never

0:40:57.560 --> 0:40:58.480
<v Speaker 2>been written before.

0:40:59.560 --> 0:41:03.600
<v Speaker 3>So look, I am not a coder, so I can't

0:41:03.640 --> 0:41:08.440
<v Speaker 3>tell you whether the code is elegant or you know,

0:41:08.560 --> 0:41:11.799
<v Speaker 3>can be taken to production. I will tell you that

0:41:12.400 --> 0:41:17.920
<v Speaker 3>I was able to build a pretty interesting app inside

0:41:17.960 --> 0:41:21.400
<v Speaker 3>of a few months. And this is just doing it

0:41:21.440 --> 0:41:24.440
<v Speaker 3>on the weekends, occasionally on the weekends, not even you know,

0:41:24.560 --> 0:41:26.279
<v Speaker 3>every weekend, so.

0:41:29.400 --> 0:41:32.000
<v Speaker 1>You know, and that was all VIBE coded.

0:41:33.480 --> 0:41:38.520
<v Speaker 3>So it is adding this technology that is highly viable.

0:41:38.760 --> 0:41:42.400
<v Speaker 3>You talk to coders, they are using it ninety percent

0:41:42.400 --> 0:41:45.759
<v Speaker 3>of the time and are now just instructing and have

0:41:45.840 --> 0:41:49.080
<v Speaker 3>to have this the logical framework of how to use

0:41:49.239 --> 0:41:52.399
<v Speaker 3>the code. And I think that the big picture here

0:41:52.680 --> 0:41:56.800
<v Speaker 3>is that once the code begins to write the code,

0:41:57.040 --> 0:42:01.440
<v Speaker 3>then it's not going to necessarily be creating. The creation

0:42:01.560 --> 0:42:03.640
<v Speaker 3>still has to come from you, the insight still has

0:42:03.680 --> 0:42:10.080
<v Speaker 3>to come from you, but it can actually innovate, right,

0:42:10.360 --> 0:42:14.120
<v Speaker 3>the innovation curve for you is significantly higher.

0:42:14.920 --> 0:42:18.240
<v Speaker 1>So that's what we're seeing today where.

0:42:19.680 --> 0:42:24.000
<v Speaker 3>These digital assets are becoming more innovative, or they're allowing

0:42:24.080 --> 0:42:28.120
<v Speaker 3>us to be more innovative and we've hit that point

0:42:28.120 --> 0:42:31.960
<v Speaker 3>in time where we're getting exponential innovation and we've never

0:42:32.000 --> 0:42:36.240
<v Speaker 3>really seen anything like this before. You know, humanity hasn't

0:42:36.280 --> 0:42:38.839
<v Speaker 3>seen this before in such a short period of time.

0:42:39.120 --> 0:42:42.799
<v Speaker 3>You know, if you look at previous industrial revolutions, they

0:42:42.840 --> 0:42:44.839
<v Speaker 3>would be you know, over generations.

0:42:46.200 --> 0:42:48.440
<v Speaker 1>It wouldn't be coming in the span of five years.

0:42:49.520 --> 0:42:52.880
<v Speaker 3>And so this is what makes it really interesting because

0:42:53.360 --> 0:42:56.200
<v Speaker 3>you ask like, how good is it for semiconductors, and

0:42:56.239 --> 0:42:58.080
<v Speaker 3>how good is it for you know, the rest of

0:42:58.080 --> 0:43:01.120
<v Speaker 3>the S and P and the hyperscalers. The impact on

0:43:01.160 --> 0:43:06.160
<v Speaker 3>all of these differs. So, you know, software is that

0:43:06.320 --> 0:43:08.560
<v Speaker 3>the you know, we wrote a paper three years ago

0:43:09.080 --> 0:43:12.400
<v Speaker 3>called aim the Declining Cost to Create, and it was

0:43:12.480 --> 0:43:15.920
<v Speaker 3>all about how when software begins to write software, the

0:43:16.000 --> 0:43:20.800
<v Speaker 3>cost to create software goes to zero. And what happens

0:43:20.800 --> 0:43:26.399
<v Speaker 3>to the incumbents when the cost to create software is zero? Right,

0:43:27.280 --> 0:43:30.680
<v Speaker 3>one of the modes goes away, and that necessarily means

0:43:30.719 --> 0:43:35.520
<v Speaker 3>that the operating profit of businesses must change. Not that

0:43:35.640 --> 0:43:39.640
<v Speaker 3>software is dead, it's just that the operating profile of

0:43:39.960 --> 0:43:43.920
<v Speaker 3>all of the companies must change because it becomes more competitive.

0:43:45.200 --> 0:43:47.160
<v Speaker 1>Right, and where does that value go?

0:43:47.480 --> 0:43:49.720
<v Speaker 3>We had five and a half trillion dollars of spending,

0:43:50.200 --> 0:43:53.960
<v Speaker 3>now six trillion dollars of IT spending. Fifty percent of

0:43:53.960 --> 0:43:58.520
<v Speaker 3>that was IT services and software, and our contention was

0:43:58.560 --> 0:44:01.920
<v Speaker 3>that the value would go from IT services and software

0:44:01.920 --> 0:44:06.480
<v Speaker 3>into hardware networking, because that is really what is driving

0:44:06.840 --> 0:44:10.920
<v Speaker 3>this innovation curve. So, you know, there's entire sectors that

0:44:10.960 --> 0:44:14.640
<v Speaker 3>have been kind of grown a lot, and others that

0:44:14.719 --> 0:44:18.239
<v Speaker 3>are facing their own pressures. I would say the same

0:44:18.280 --> 0:44:21.759
<v Speaker 3>thing for any sector in the market. You know, we

0:44:21.800 --> 0:44:26.760
<v Speaker 3>spoke about healthcare earlier. How can a United Healthcare actually

0:44:28.000 --> 0:44:32.000
<v Speaker 3>use AI to bend the cost of care? And can

0:44:32.040 --> 0:44:36.960
<v Speaker 3>there be incumbents that cross the chasm or there might

0:44:37.000 --> 0:44:40.040
<v Speaker 3>be some that can't cross the chasm, and there are

0:44:40.120 --> 0:44:42.840
<v Speaker 3>new companies that begin to use AI to bend the

0:44:42.880 --> 0:44:43.560
<v Speaker 3>cost of care.

0:44:43.800 --> 0:44:48.400
<v Speaker 2>So I'm glad you brought up healthcare. I've been fascinated

0:44:48.480 --> 0:44:52.520
<v Speaker 2>not so much by bending the curve of cost from

0:44:52.680 --> 0:44:57.279
<v Speaker 2>somebody like United, but all of the small biotechs and

0:44:57.360 --> 0:45:06.160
<v Speaker 2>new molecules and huge well of existing chemistry and pharmaceuticals

0:45:06.280 --> 0:45:10.719
<v Speaker 2>and studies we've done that nobody's really had the ability

0:45:10.760 --> 0:45:13.600
<v Speaker 2>to go back to and say, hey, maybe something's in

0:45:13.680 --> 0:45:15.480
<v Speaker 2>here that we've missed.

0:45:16.600 --> 0:45:16.799
<v Speaker 4>You know.

0:45:16.880 --> 0:45:20.920
<v Speaker 2>The most cliched example is I'd never pronounce it right.

0:45:21.680 --> 0:45:25.440
<v Speaker 2>Sildnfl Viagra was supposed to be a heart treatment and

0:45:25.560 --> 0:45:28.520
<v Speaker 2>had this unusual side effect and now it's a multi

0:45:28.520 --> 0:45:32.400
<v Speaker 2>billion dollar met the same thing with GLPS and originally

0:45:32.400 --> 0:45:35.200
<v Speaker 2>for diabetes. But hey, everyone's losing a lot of weight

0:45:35.239 --> 0:45:40.120
<v Speaker 2>on these. I'm curious, not so much on the cost side,

0:45:40.160 --> 0:45:46.879
<v Speaker 2>but there's this giant body of un excavated research that

0:45:47.280 --> 0:45:49.759
<v Speaker 2>just seems like it's waiting for AI to attack it.

0:45:50.239 --> 0:45:52.680
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, and so you know, recently I met with the

0:45:53.280 --> 0:45:55.560
<v Speaker 3>I was actually on a panel where I was the

0:45:55.600 --> 0:45:59.759
<v Speaker 3>moderator for a company and I've forgotten I've forgotten the

0:45:59.840 --> 0:46:02.920
<v Speaker 3>name of the CEO and the company, but they're basically

0:46:02.960 --> 0:46:06.719
<v Speaker 3>a new AI company that is taking this compendium of

0:46:06.800 --> 0:46:11.040
<v Speaker 3>knowledge and taking it to companies and saying, marry it

0:46:11.160 --> 0:46:15.520
<v Speaker 3>with the data that you have, and can we start

0:46:15.560 --> 0:46:21.520
<v Speaker 3>finding not only the solutions, but you know, for your targets,

0:46:21.800 --> 0:46:27.040
<v Speaker 3>but use this history to get there faster. So there's

0:46:27.120 --> 0:46:29.120
<v Speaker 3>lots of efforts being made on this right now. I

0:46:29.160 --> 0:46:34.040
<v Speaker 3>do think that we will accelerate drug discovery and the

0:46:34.160 --> 0:46:36.920
<v Speaker 3>impact it will have to healthcare. I mean Look, the

0:46:36.920 --> 0:46:39.600
<v Speaker 3>holy grail is staff personalized healthcare at some point.

0:46:40.640 --> 0:46:43.759
<v Speaker 2>Well wasn't wasn't DNA testing supposed to give us that

0:46:44.360 --> 0:46:45.560
<v Speaker 2>couple of years ago?

0:46:45.880 --> 0:46:49.440
<v Speaker 3>Well, DNA, yes, But DNA testing used to cost a

0:46:49.480 --> 0:46:52.880
<v Speaker 3>million dollars a year, a million dollars per sample, and

0:46:52.960 --> 0:46:56.640
<v Speaker 3>today it's one hundred. So we're getting to the point

0:46:56.680 --> 0:47:00.360
<v Speaker 3>where we can actually look at our individual DNA and

0:47:00.400 --> 0:47:03.320
<v Speaker 3>it just takes time, and at some point can.

0:47:03.200 --> 0:47:05.000
<v Speaker 1>We marry it with some AI insights.

0:47:05.520 --> 0:47:09.360
<v Speaker 3>So look, I think healthcare is going to be greatly impacted.

0:47:09.480 --> 0:47:14.200
<v Speaker 3>I think that I'm most excited actually to see how

0:47:14.239 --> 0:47:17.920
<v Speaker 3>we can democratize healthcare because really our healthcare system here

0:47:18.120 --> 0:47:22.320
<v Speaker 3>is kind of broken, not kind of to be polite,

0:47:22.840 --> 0:47:26.200
<v Speaker 3>and how can we take down that cost of care?

0:47:26.760 --> 0:47:30.080
<v Speaker 3>And really, like I would love to have universal health care,

0:47:30.320 --> 0:47:33.560
<v Speaker 3>it just can't be done in the construct of healthcare

0:47:33.680 --> 0:47:38.839
<v Speaker 3>as it is today. So, you know, can we use

0:47:38.880 --> 0:47:42.279
<v Speaker 3>AI to provide universal health care?

0:47:42.520 --> 0:47:43.280
<v Speaker 1>I think we can.

0:47:44.120 --> 0:47:48.080
<v Speaker 3>It will take a few years, maybe a decade, but

0:47:48.120 --> 0:47:50.200
<v Speaker 3>I think we can. And this is a global statement,

0:47:50.280 --> 0:47:54.040
<v Speaker 3>it's not necessarily just the US. It's bringing the cost

0:47:54.120 --> 0:47:58.759
<v Speaker 3>of care down enough such that you know, anyone on

0:47:58.760 --> 0:48:01.080
<v Speaker 3>this planet will have at access to healthcare.

0:48:01.800 --> 0:48:05.080
<v Speaker 2>So I'm going to assume that you think all of

0:48:05.080 --> 0:48:08.120
<v Speaker 2>the AI bubble talk is wildly overblown.

0:48:09.080 --> 0:48:12.799
<v Speaker 3>Yes, I do think it's wildly overblown. I think they're look.

0:48:12.800 --> 0:48:15.960
<v Speaker 3>I think the trade has gotten a bit harder, you know,

0:48:16.160 --> 0:48:20.200
<v Speaker 3>and in part because the first two to three years

0:48:20.200 --> 0:48:22.279
<v Speaker 3>of the trade was oh, you just have to buy

0:48:22.280 --> 0:48:26.120
<v Speaker 3>the GPUs and anything that the GPU touched was gold.

0:48:27.560 --> 0:48:31.319
<v Speaker 3>And then it became more nuanced. Well, agents use CPUs

0:48:32.000 --> 0:48:34.440
<v Speaker 3>and we have a memory shortage, and memory has now

0:48:34.480 --> 0:48:38.799
<v Speaker 3>gone up four x in price, So Capex budgets are

0:48:38.840 --> 0:48:42.319
<v Speaker 3>going up. So that question of ROI is coming to

0:48:42.400 --> 0:48:45.960
<v Speaker 3>the fore and how much does Capex have to go

0:48:46.080 --> 0:48:48.640
<v Speaker 3>up to accommodate the supply chains being as tight as

0:48:48.680 --> 0:48:54.000
<v Speaker 3>they are, And there's technological differences between a CPU versus

0:48:54.000 --> 0:48:57.839
<v Speaker 3>a GPU and how they're used, and the Chinese might

0:48:57.880 --> 0:49:00.799
<v Speaker 3>be coming and right. So there's there is like a

0:49:00.920 --> 0:49:04.200
<v Speaker 3>lot of different aspects that have made it a little

0:49:04.200 --> 0:49:08.040
<v Speaker 3>bit harder. Where you know, open versus closed source debate,

0:49:08.440 --> 0:49:10.560
<v Speaker 3>like the open model versus the closed model.

0:49:10.880 --> 0:49:11.840
<v Speaker 1>That's another debate.

0:49:13.040 --> 0:49:16.680
<v Speaker 3>The debt and the CDs spreads widening, that's another day.

0:49:16.840 --> 0:49:19.719
<v Speaker 3>So all of a sudden, we've gone from a relatively

0:49:19.880 --> 0:49:23.759
<v Speaker 3>simple we're going to need AI, We're going to need

0:49:23.840 --> 0:49:25.200
<v Speaker 3>compute two.

0:49:26.560 --> 0:49:27.800
<v Speaker 1>There's a slew of.

0:49:27.680 --> 0:49:33.200
<v Speaker 3>Different narratives that one can press on for the barecase. Now,

0:49:33.719 --> 0:49:38.680
<v Speaker 3>I structurally believe that we just talked about healthcare and

0:49:39.000 --> 0:49:42.640
<v Speaker 3>the innovation curve in healthcare and what that can give

0:49:42.680 --> 0:49:43.640
<v Speaker 3>back to society.

0:49:43.880 --> 0:49:46.120
<v Speaker 1>That is true value.

0:49:46.320 --> 0:49:48.759
<v Speaker 3>Right, If we can bend the cost of care from

0:49:49.040 --> 0:49:52.640
<v Speaker 3>x to X minus, that is value that's created for humanity,

0:49:53.800 --> 0:49:55.480
<v Speaker 3>and we will pay for that value.

0:49:56.800 --> 0:49:57.040
<v Speaker 1>You know.

0:49:57.160 --> 0:50:01.359
<v Speaker 3>The other day there's been this big debate about token maxing.

0:50:01.920 --> 0:50:06.000
<v Speaker 2>And there was to find that for the lay listener.

0:50:06.440 --> 0:50:11.960
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, token maxing was this behavior that companies were encouraging

0:50:12.000 --> 0:50:15.799
<v Speaker 3>their engineers to basically have leader boards of who can

0:50:15.880 --> 0:50:19.879
<v Speaker 3>use the most tokens, which sounds insane, right. It would

0:50:19.880 --> 0:50:24.040
<v Speaker 3>almost be like, you know, telling your employees to see

0:50:24.080 --> 0:50:27.600
<v Speaker 3>how much they can spend on lunch, and whoever spends

0:50:27.640 --> 0:50:30.400
<v Speaker 3>the most on lunch gets an award, right.

0:50:31.320 --> 0:50:35.080
<v Speaker 2>Well, I imagine if you're a FedEx driver and the

0:50:35.120 --> 0:50:38.160
<v Speaker 2>company holds a competition to who's going to go through

0:50:38.200 --> 0:50:42.000
<v Speaker 2>the most amount of gas and tires, meaning making the

0:50:42.040 --> 0:50:45.280
<v Speaker 2>most deliveries not a bad thing for the company.

0:50:44.920 --> 0:50:50.120
<v Speaker 3>Not necessarily a bad thing. But you know, in this case,

0:50:50.600 --> 0:50:53.759
<v Speaker 3>the tokens that were being used or what was being

0:50:53.840 --> 0:51:00.799
<v Speaker 3>used is actually not necessarily tied to deliveries. It was

0:51:01.640 --> 0:51:05.520
<v Speaker 3>just use the most tokens as you can. It didn't

0:51:05.600 --> 0:51:08.560
<v Speaker 3>kind of matter what you built with it, right, So

0:51:09.719 --> 0:51:12.600
<v Speaker 3>or there wasn't as much scrutiny as to how many

0:51:12.680 --> 0:51:16.760
<v Speaker 3>quote unquote deliveries you made. You just burned through your tires.

0:51:17.400 --> 0:51:20.759
<v Speaker 1>So so it was kind of inefficient.

0:51:21.600 --> 0:51:23.319
<v Speaker 3>But you know, they came out and they said, you know,

0:51:23.360 --> 0:51:27.480
<v Speaker 3>we blew through our entire budget in a quarter for

0:51:27.520 --> 0:51:29.719
<v Speaker 3>the year, for the year, the entire budget for the

0:51:29.760 --> 0:51:33.399
<v Speaker 3>year in a quarter, and you know, and we haven't

0:51:33.400 --> 0:51:34.320
<v Speaker 3>gotten an ROI.

0:51:34.360 --> 0:51:35.160
<v Speaker 1>Well, no kidding.

0:51:36.120 --> 0:51:38.319
<v Speaker 3>Well, they turned around last week and they laid off

0:51:38.360 --> 0:51:40.600
<v Speaker 3>ten percent of the people that worked for the company

0:51:40.840 --> 0:51:45.240
<v Speaker 3>because of AI. Well, you know, somewhere along the way,

0:51:45.760 --> 0:51:49.600
<v Speaker 3>the use of artificial intelligence allowed them to kind of

0:51:50.000 --> 0:51:51.799
<v Speaker 3>refine their workforce.

0:51:52.239 --> 0:51:55.360
<v Speaker 2>That sounds like they didn't lay off people because of AI.

0:51:55.520 --> 0:51:59.239
<v Speaker 2>They sound like they laid off people because management was

0:51:59.400 --> 0:52:02.680
<v Speaker 2>kind of misincentivizing the employees.

0:52:03.200 --> 0:52:05.680
<v Speaker 3>Well, I mean they said that they lay the laid

0:52:05.680 --> 0:52:06.719
<v Speaker 3>off people because of AI.

0:52:06.800 --> 0:52:09.360
<v Speaker 1>There's been many companies like Jack Dorsey at x y Z.

0:52:11.800 --> 0:52:14.000
<v Speaker 3>You know also, you know he cut forty percent of

0:52:14.000 --> 0:52:18.799
<v Speaker 3>the staff blaming AI. Who knows really what the real

0:52:19.200 --> 0:52:21.799
<v Speaker 3>reason is. It could be AI, or it could be

0:52:21.840 --> 0:52:23.040
<v Speaker 3>they just over hired.

0:52:23.160 --> 0:52:24.440
<v Speaker 2>Which he has a history of.

0:52:24.600 --> 0:52:25.600
<v Speaker 1>Which he has a history of.

0:52:25.600 --> 0:52:28.040
<v Speaker 2>If you've tracked him over various contents.

0:52:27.920 --> 0:52:30.760
<v Speaker 3>And many of these companies did right, So I can't

0:52:30.800 --> 0:52:36.000
<v Speaker 3>deconvolve that. However, you know, Uber in particular said it

0:52:36.080 --> 0:52:39.560
<v Speaker 3>was because of AID they had kind of they have

0:52:39.680 --> 0:52:42.640
<v Speaker 3>been very front foot forward on the use of AI

0:52:43.400 --> 0:52:47.879
<v Speaker 3>and now they're able to increase productivity enough that they

0:52:47.920 --> 0:52:49.480
<v Speaker 3>can titrate down their workforce.

0:52:50.239 --> 0:52:54.399
<v Speaker 1>So, you know, I do think that there is.

0:52:54.480 --> 0:52:59.439
<v Speaker 3>Value that is being created because of AI. I think

0:52:59.480 --> 0:53:02.080
<v Speaker 3>that it is not necessarily a technology that's plug and

0:53:02.120 --> 0:53:05.360
<v Speaker 3>play into an enterprise, and there has to be some

0:53:05.480 --> 0:53:10.160
<v Speaker 3>learnings and before you can get to that ROI, and.

0:53:10.040 --> 0:53:12.600
<v Speaker 2>We're seeing those stumbles in that learning car.

0:53:13.320 --> 0:53:15.680
<v Speaker 3>It doesn't mean that it's never going to work. And

0:53:16.120 --> 0:53:20.839
<v Speaker 3>my viewpoint is that where there is value, we work

0:53:20.880 --> 0:53:25.200
<v Speaker 3>in a system of rewarding value. So if you can

0:53:25.239 --> 0:53:31.040
<v Speaker 3>create value, I believe that whoever uses that system that

0:53:31.120 --> 0:53:33.759
<v Speaker 3>creates the value, they will pay for it.

0:53:35.440 --> 0:53:40.879
<v Speaker 2>So you've described the demand for computers insatiable. What would

0:53:40.960 --> 0:53:43.239
<v Speaker 2>have to happen for you to say, all right, we're

0:53:43.280 --> 0:53:48.680
<v Speaker 2>getting to saturation or satiation. What does the top of

0:53:48.719 --> 0:53:51.359
<v Speaker 2>the cycle look like? Or is it so far off

0:53:51.360 --> 0:53:54.719
<v Speaker 2>in the future that we can't even think about it.

0:53:54.960 --> 0:53:56.759
<v Speaker 3>What I would say is that this is not a

0:53:56.920 --> 0:53:59.480
<v Speaker 3>question that can I can say, oh, we'll never like

0:53:59.520 --> 0:54:03.239
<v Speaker 3>in twenty thirty we won't need compute, or I think

0:54:03.239 --> 0:54:06.520
<v Speaker 3>it's a function of how much we put into the ground, Right,

0:54:06.600 --> 0:54:10.919
<v Speaker 3>it's a delicate balance of you know, if we put

0:54:11.120 --> 0:54:14.000
<v Speaker 3>X into the ground today we put You know that

0:54:14.000 --> 0:54:16.560
<v Speaker 3>the hyperscalers are spending six hundred and fifty billion dollars

0:54:16.640 --> 0:54:17.840
<v Speaker 3>or whatever that that number is.

0:54:17.920 --> 0:54:20.840
<v Speaker 2>It's circular, exists. It's that we've heard these complaints for

0:54:20.920 --> 0:54:21.839
<v Speaker 2>two years.

0:54:21.520 --> 0:54:25.560
<v Speaker 3>But six hundred and fifty billion dollars seemed like a

0:54:25.600 --> 0:54:28.879
<v Speaker 3>really big number. Yet we are still short compute, right,

0:54:28.920 --> 0:54:31.560
<v Speaker 3>you're hearing from the hyperscalers we do not have enough.

0:54:31.800 --> 0:54:33.759
<v Speaker 3>The neo clouds are telling you that there are four

0:54:33.840 --> 0:54:39.000
<v Speaker 3>times as many asks for compute as they have capacity

0:54:39.160 --> 0:54:42.960
<v Speaker 3>so if one says that we are short compute today,

0:54:43.520 --> 0:54:46.960
<v Speaker 3>I don't really understand the logic. Now, let's fast forward

0:54:46.960 --> 0:54:49.640
<v Speaker 3>two and three years. If we put three trillion dollars

0:54:49.680 --> 0:54:53.000
<v Speaker 3>into the ground next year or the year after, which

0:54:53.040 --> 0:54:56.440
<v Speaker 3>we cannot do today because we are short power, we

0:54:56.480 --> 0:54:58.960
<v Speaker 3>are short people, we are short capacity, we are short

0:54:59.160 --> 0:55:01.799
<v Speaker 3>you know, we can't make the those chips. But let's

0:55:01.840 --> 0:55:05.000
<v Speaker 3>hypothetically say we put in three trillion dollars of compute

0:55:05.000 --> 0:55:08.080
<v Speaker 3>into the ground in twenty twenty eight. I would say

0:55:08.160 --> 0:55:11.760
<v Speaker 3>that that is overcapacity. But we can't do it because

0:55:11.800 --> 0:55:16.040
<v Speaker 3>there is almost a natural, a natural limiter to the

0:55:16.040 --> 0:55:19.520
<v Speaker 3>growth of this market in we don't have the chips,

0:55:19.560 --> 0:55:22.520
<v Speaker 3>we don't have the people, we don't have the power, right,

0:55:23.280 --> 0:55:27.320
<v Speaker 3>and so the market is being capped. If all normal

0:55:27.360 --> 0:55:29.960
<v Speaker 3>forces and if we had an infinite supply of everything,

0:55:31.200 --> 0:55:34.280
<v Speaker 3>I think we would be in overcapacity today because it's such.

0:55:34.080 --> 0:55:35.040
<v Speaker 1>A big market.

0:55:35.440 --> 0:55:38.520
<v Speaker 3>Everyone would be building at a pace that you know

0:55:38.560 --> 0:55:40.560
<v Speaker 3>they wanted to be that they would want to be first.

0:55:41.120 --> 0:55:44.319
<v Speaker 3>But the fact is, it's actually a blessing that the

0:55:44.360 --> 0:55:47.799
<v Speaker 3>market is being capped by all of these supply change shortages.

0:55:48.160 --> 0:55:51.120
<v Speaker 3>The fact that we don't have plumbers and electricians to

0:55:51.200 --> 0:55:56.760
<v Speaker 3>actually work in their data centers. Is capping the growth

0:55:57.840 --> 0:56:02.960
<v Speaker 3>of data centers, and so it is allowing for duration

0:56:04.840 --> 0:56:08.879
<v Speaker 3>versus kind of having a one time growth pop and

0:56:08.960 --> 0:56:10.680
<v Speaker 3>which you were not going to pay a high multiple for.

0:56:11.800 --> 0:56:15.600
<v Speaker 3>So I think that oversupply is a function of how

0:56:15.680 --> 0:56:19.359
<v Speaker 3>much we put into the ground and how we use it.

0:56:20.280 --> 0:56:24.000
<v Speaker 2>So let's unpack some of that. In the beginning of

0:56:24.080 --> 0:56:28.040
<v Speaker 2>twenty five, when deep Seek first Kinda was released and

0:56:28.080 --> 0:56:32.080
<v Speaker 2>everyone was startled, and the initial reaction was, oh, we've overbuilt.

0:56:32.160 --> 0:56:35.239
<v Speaker 2>We don't need this many GPUs. We don't need all

0:56:35.320 --> 0:56:39.080
<v Speaker 2>these giant data centers. We just need slightly clever software

0:56:39.080 --> 0:56:43.240
<v Speaker 2>that can do more with less. Didn't take long before

0:56:44.280 --> 0:56:47.680
<v Speaker 2>that just was overrun with No, we need horsepower. We

0:56:47.719 --> 0:56:51.879
<v Speaker 2>really need the ability for big problems to not come

0:56:51.960 --> 0:56:57.320
<v Speaker 2>up with clever little workarounds, but we need the firepower.

0:56:57.680 --> 0:57:00.239
<v Speaker 2>And then again, more recently, we've seen a number of

0:57:00.320 --> 0:57:03.799
<v Speaker 2>open source models out of China that seem to be

0:57:03.880 --> 0:57:08.200
<v Speaker 2>doing a whole lot more with less. At what point

0:57:08.480 --> 0:57:11.879
<v Speaker 2>does it begin to become, Hey, do we really need

0:57:11.920 --> 0:57:14.680
<v Speaker 2>a three trillion dollars worth of capacity? Don't we just

0:57:14.760 --> 0:57:19.040
<v Speaker 2>need to take a little bit of that working out

0:57:19.120 --> 0:57:22.560
<v Speaker 2>of the constraints we have the way the Chinese models have.

0:57:23.320 --> 0:57:27.040
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, so one of the things that I think is

0:57:27.120 --> 0:57:30.480
<v Speaker 3>well understood is that the Chinese models didn't do this

0:57:30.640 --> 0:57:34.320
<v Speaker 3>on their own. So the way I like to think

0:57:34.360 --> 0:57:41.360
<v Speaker 3>of it is, you know, you have like these almost

0:57:41.360 --> 0:57:42.600
<v Speaker 3>like like an animal world.

0:57:43.040 --> 0:57:47.000
<v Speaker 1>Right. I just went on on on safari to Kenya.

0:57:47.280 --> 0:57:50.400
<v Speaker 3>And you know, giraffes almost always have like birds sitting

0:57:50.480 --> 0:57:54.440
<v Speaker 3>on their necks, and those birds are you know, it's

0:57:54.440 --> 0:57:58.000
<v Speaker 3>a mutually symbiotic relationship. I suppose it's not that symbiotic

0:57:58.080 --> 0:58:00.680
<v Speaker 3>to the giraffe, but you know, the bird gets to

0:58:00.720 --> 0:58:03.919
<v Speaker 3>rest on the durrafs deck and benefits from the fact

0:58:03.920 --> 0:58:04.120
<v Speaker 3>that the.

0:58:04.120 --> 0:58:09.640
<v Speaker 1>Giraffe is walking around. So similarly, I suppose the bird

0:58:09.880 --> 0:58:12.840
<v Speaker 1>might like keep the bugs away, keep the bugs away, or.

0:58:12.800 --> 0:58:15.400
<v Speaker 3>Like eat at the ticks on the giraffe. I don't know,

0:58:17.280 --> 0:58:22.400
<v Speaker 3>but similarly, you know, the Kimmi model is a little

0:58:22.400 --> 0:58:25.520
<v Speaker 3>bit like the bird on the giraffe. Whereas look, and

0:58:25.560 --> 0:58:31.280
<v Speaker 3>I think that they are incredibly like the Chinese are

0:58:31.760 --> 0:58:35.160
<v Speaker 3>are very innovative in their own right. I think they're

0:58:35.280 --> 0:58:40.080
<v Speaker 3>very good fast followers. However, they need the giraffe, which

0:58:40.160 --> 0:58:45.040
<v Speaker 3>is our l MS in order to survive. And so,

0:58:46.640 --> 0:58:48.920
<v Speaker 3>you know, I think there are many different ways to

0:58:49.040 --> 0:58:53.400
<v Speaker 3>address what is happening. You know, the scenario that I

0:58:53.440 --> 0:58:56.760
<v Speaker 3>think is actually most logical, which I'm not quite sure

0:58:56.800 --> 0:59:00.120
<v Speaker 3>that you know, the large language models will do is

0:59:00.160 --> 0:59:03.000
<v Speaker 3>basically to hold the N and N minus one model

0:59:03.720 --> 0:59:08.720
<v Speaker 3>internal and allow for you know, certain businesses, certain companies,

0:59:08.760 --> 0:59:13.480
<v Speaker 3>the US government, other governments who are not going to

0:59:13.600 --> 0:59:17.840
<v Speaker 3>distill this model and kind of feed a Kimney type

0:59:17.880 --> 0:59:23.680
<v Speaker 3>model and allow for them use of that model, and

0:59:23.960 --> 0:59:27.200
<v Speaker 3>only make public the N minus two model. And that

0:59:27.360 --> 0:59:30.920
<v Speaker 3>way it keeps any of the distillation at Bay. Now,

0:59:30.960 --> 0:59:33.360
<v Speaker 3>in order for that to happen, all of the frontier

0:59:33.400 --> 0:59:37.520
<v Speaker 3>models will have to agree to do this, because if

0:59:37.560 --> 0:59:42.439
<v Speaker 3>there's any frontier model that you know is equivalently is good,

0:59:43.560 --> 0:59:47.240
<v Speaker 3>then it kind of breaks the breaks the ecosystem that

0:59:47.280 --> 0:59:53.480
<v Speaker 3>I'm describing. But so so, I think the point is

0:59:53.480 --> 0:59:56.400
<v Speaker 3>that you need to spend the capex for the training

0:59:57.120 --> 1:00:01.760
<v Speaker 3>in order to get that output so that Kimmy can

1:00:01.800 --> 1:00:02.840
<v Speaker 3>train on that output.

1:00:03.000 --> 1:00:07.040
<v Speaker 2>So these opening on the output, not on the not

1:00:07.120 --> 1:00:07.720
<v Speaker 2>creating their.

1:00:07.640 --> 1:00:11.680
<v Speaker 3>Own LLM, Well, Kimmy has created their own LLLM by

1:00:11.720 --> 1:00:16.080
<v Speaker 3>feeding off the it's called distilling, feeding off the output

1:00:16.200 --> 1:00:21.120
<v Speaker 3>from the large language models. So you know, but a

1:00:21.120 --> 1:00:23.760
<v Speaker 3>lot of the spending that is happening is actually coming

1:00:24.320 --> 1:00:27.400
<v Speaker 3>from the use of the compute like so from the

1:00:27.440 --> 1:00:31.400
<v Speaker 3>inference aspect. So you train and then you have to infer.

1:00:31.520 --> 1:00:35.240
<v Speaker 3>So the inference is what we experience as consumers, and

1:00:35.320 --> 1:00:40.480
<v Speaker 3>so that inference is driving a majority of the spend.

1:00:41.080 --> 1:00:45.400
<v Speaker 3>And you look at the revenues of open ai Anthropic,

1:00:46.480 --> 1:00:49.520
<v Speaker 3>they're kind of like, I've never seen growth like this.

1:00:49.720 --> 1:00:52.760
<v Speaker 3>I don't think we as ever have seen growth that

1:00:52.920 --> 1:00:55.640
<v Speaker 3>is as significant as what we're seeing today.

1:00:55.840 --> 1:00:59.360
<v Speaker 2>You know, people frequently make a comparison to the dot coms,

1:00:59.360 --> 1:01:03.240
<v Speaker 2>and I always feel feel like that's a terrible comparison

1:01:04.120 --> 1:01:08.480
<v Speaker 2>because these are real companies with real revenue, real potential profits,

1:01:09.000 --> 1:01:13.680
<v Speaker 2>like almost they're not clicks and eyeballs. But the one

1:01:13.840 --> 1:01:17.520
<v Speaker 2>thing some of the skeptics have pointed out that almost

1:01:17.640 --> 1:01:20.920
<v Speaker 2>resonate is, you know, during the Internet era, we have

1:01:21.000 --> 1:01:25.800
<v Speaker 2>this huge boom where most of that value ended up

1:01:26.160 --> 1:01:30.800
<v Speaker 2>landing in the consumer's laps, not the investors lapse, because

1:01:31.200 --> 1:01:35.640
<v Speaker 2>so many of those companies crashed and burned. How similar

1:01:35.840 --> 1:01:38.080
<v Speaker 2>or different? Is this environment to that?

1:01:39.320 --> 1:01:43.160
<v Speaker 3>So I think it's quite different. Look, there were there

1:01:43.160 --> 1:01:46.160
<v Speaker 3>may be parallels at some point, I e. Do we

1:01:46.240 --> 1:01:52.439
<v Speaker 3>overbuild and how long does it take to actually eep

1:01:52.560 --> 1:01:56.600
<v Speaker 3>through that overbuild? So you think about two thousands. One

1:01:56.600 --> 1:01:59.160
<v Speaker 3>of the reasons we overbuilt is because we had dreamed

1:01:59.160 --> 1:02:01.640
<v Speaker 3>the stream of what the Internet would be, and we

1:02:01.680 --> 1:02:04.840
<v Speaker 3>had you know, pets dot com was actually a brilliant idea,

1:02:05.440 --> 1:02:09.360
<v Speaker 3>just a little it was chally now it's chewy, but

1:02:09.360 --> 1:02:14.520
<v Speaker 3>but it's but chewey became a significant business. Amazon has built,

1:02:14.640 --> 1:02:17.880
<v Speaker 3>you know, a many trillion dollar business off the back

1:02:18.080 --> 1:02:22.440
<v Speaker 3>of consumers buying on the Internet. But we didn't have

1:02:22.480 --> 1:02:27.000
<v Speaker 3>the internet, right, we had dial up. Right dial up

1:02:27.040 --> 1:02:29.520
<v Speaker 3>is not good enough to increase productivity back then.

1:02:30.240 --> 1:02:33.640
<v Speaker 1>What I would argue today is that we actually have

1:02:34.920 --> 1:02:37.000
<v Speaker 1>the tools. All we needed.

1:02:37.200 --> 1:02:40.240
<v Speaker 3>We had the Internet, we had the the productivity, or

1:02:40.280 --> 1:02:48.000
<v Speaker 3>we had the kind of the the infrastructure that was

1:02:48.120 --> 1:02:56.440
<v Speaker 3>needed for ubiquitous intelligence. All we needed was the chips, right,

1:02:56.480 --> 1:02:58.640
<v Speaker 3>We need the data centers and the chips, and that's

1:02:58.640 --> 1:03:02.880
<v Speaker 3>what is happening today. And so if we actually need

1:03:03.000 --> 1:03:10.320
<v Speaker 3>ubiquitous intelligence and infinite intelligence to some extent, like if

1:03:10.320 --> 1:03:14.680
<v Speaker 3>we overbuild, we will eat through that overbuild as well.

1:03:14.960 --> 1:03:15.960
<v Speaker 4>So what do you.

1:03:15.960 --> 1:03:21.040
<v Speaker 2>Think the skeptics misunderstand about AI? Is it the scale,

1:03:21.120 --> 1:03:25.720
<v Speaker 2>the economics, how durable the investment cycle is? What are

1:03:25.760 --> 1:03:27.000
<v Speaker 2>the bears getting wrong here?

1:03:27.320 --> 1:03:30.919
<v Speaker 3>I think it's the duration, I definitively think I think

1:03:30.920 --> 1:03:33.760
<v Speaker 3>it's the I think maybe it's all of the above, really,

1:03:33.800 --> 1:03:39.800
<v Speaker 3>but it's duration, it's the scale, it's the economics. All

1:03:39.840 --> 1:03:43.360
<v Speaker 3>three of those is where I think they're pushing on

1:03:43.400 --> 1:03:44.800
<v Speaker 3>the wrong on the wrong thread.

1:03:45.640 --> 1:03:48.400
<v Speaker 2>So so last question before I get to all of

1:03:48.440 --> 1:03:51.680
<v Speaker 2>my favorite questions, I asked, well, my guests, what do

1:03:51.680 --> 1:03:56.479
<v Speaker 2>you think investors aren't talking about or thinking about that?

1:03:56.720 --> 1:03:59.920
<v Speaker 2>Perhaps they should be? What what is getting overlooked here?

1:04:00.360 --> 1:04:04.640
<v Speaker 2>And it could be any asset, geography, policy, whatever, But

1:04:04.800 --> 1:04:06.920
<v Speaker 2>what aren't people talking about?

1:04:06.960 --> 1:04:11.400
<v Speaker 3>But should Yeah, I think that people aren't really talking about,

1:04:12.440 --> 1:04:16.040
<v Speaker 3>you know, the net positive benefits to humanity from AI.

1:04:17.560 --> 1:04:22.600
<v Speaker 3>And you know, we talked about healthcare and how we

1:04:22.640 --> 1:04:27.440
<v Speaker 3>can make healthcare kind of available to any human on

1:04:27.480 --> 1:04:28.480
<v Speaker 3>this planet.

1:04:28.680 --> 1:04:29.920
<v Speaker 1>The same goes for education.

1:04:31.120 --> 1:04:35.560
<v Speaker 3>There's no reason why any child should be quote unquote

1:04:35.600 --> 1:04:38.480
<v Speaker 3>left behind. I mean, I've been shocked at you know,

1:04:38.520 --> 1:04:41.360
<v Speaker 3>what I've been reading recently is kids going to college

1:04:42.000 --> 1:04:46.080
<v Speaker 3>and they can't read. Right, That is a failure of

1:04:46.080 --> 1:04:51.520
<v Speaker 3>our education system that can be solved using artificial intelligence.

1:04:53.360 --> 1:04:55.400
<v Speaker 3>You know, this is and this is again, it's a

1:04:55.480 --> 1:04:59.400
<v Speaker 3>global issue. It is not a local issue. This is

1:04:59.440 --> 1:05:02.720
<v Speaker 3>something that we can There's no one that should not

1:05:02.760 --> 1:05:11.120
<v Speaker 3>be educated. And like the AI kind of the anti

1:05:11.240 --> 1:05:15.400
<v Speaker 3>AIS a climate change right, I mean, I do think

1:05:15.480 --> 1:05:17.840
<v Speaker 3>that using AI will we be able to solve the

1:05:17.880 --> 1:05:19.880
<v Speaker 3>problems that we have with climate change? Will we be

1:05:19.880 --> 1:05:24.400
<v Speaker 3>able to engineer things that will help with the rapid

1:05:24.480 --> 1:05:28.640
<v Speaker 3>rate of climate change. And a lot of the AI

1:05:29.280 --> 1:05:33.800
<v Speaker 3>AI kind of doomers or AI naysayers who don't want

1:05:33.840 --> 1:05:36.840
<v Speaker 3>the data center built in their backyard or data center

1:05:36.920 --> 1:05:41.840
<v Speaker 3>built anywhere, are ignoring the fact that there are many

1:05:41.960 --> 1:05:45.000
<v Speaker 3>different aspects of AI that will be good for humanity.

1:05:46.400 --> 1:05:49.560
<v Speaker 1>And does it require great change? And is change scary?

1:05:50.120 --> 1:05:52.760
<v Speaker 3>It is, and it will require change, It will require

1:05:52.840 --> 1:05:57.040
<v Speaker 3>change from all of us. But the end point is

1:05:57.080 --> 1:05:58.360
<v Speaker 3>actually quite beautiful.

1:05:59.080 --> 1:06:02.000
<v Speaker 2>I like that you're such a techno optimist. All right,

1:06:02.080 --> 1:06:05.600
<v Speaker 2>let's jump to our favorite questions, starting with who your

1:06:05.640 --> 1:06:08.560
<v Speaker 2>mentors who helped shape your career?

1:06:09.400 --> 1:06:11.880
<v Speaker 3>Oh gosh, I think that's that's a pretty easy one.

1:06:13.280 --> 1:06:18.800
<v Speaker 3>Our CEO, Dan Chung has been pivotal in in my career,

1:06:19.000 --> 1:06:21.720
<v Speaker 3>in my career growth, and you know, I told you

1:06:21.760 --> 1:06:27.120
<v Speaker 3>like he hired me from Stanford without knowing anything and

1:06:27.520 --> 1:06:30.360
<v Speaker 3>without I really knew nothing about this business, and he

1:06:31.360 --> 1:06:35.480
<v Speaker 3>recognized that, you know, why not take a shot on

1:06:35.520 --> 1:06:38.040
<v Speaker 3>someone who's non traditional And he himself is a non

1:06:38.080 --> 1:06:43.680
<v Speaker 3>traditional thinker. He was a lawyer, and you know is

1:06:44.440 --> 1:06:48.160
<v Speaker 3>thinks very much outside of the box. So you know,

1:06:48.280 --> 1:06:52.480
<v Speaker 3>over the years he's challenged me in ways that have

1:06:52.600 --> 1:06:57.320
<v Speaker 3>been sometimes frustrating, but I learned from. He pushes me

1:06:57.560 --> 1:07:02.640
<v Speaker 3>in ways that sometimes I don't under stand, but again

1:07:02.720 --> 1:07:04.280
<v Speaker 3>I learn from and grow from.

1:07:05.120 --> 1:07:10.520
<v Speaker 1>So yeah, I think Dan is Dan's like my number

1:07:10.560 --> 1:07:11.120
<v Speaker 1>one mentor.

1:07:11.560 --> 1:07:14.040
<v Speaker 2>Let's talk about books. What are some of your favorites?

1:07:14.040 --> 1:07:15.120
<v Speaker 2>What are you reading currently?

1:07:15.720 --> 1:07:19.560
<v Speaker 3>So my favorite book is a book called Think Again.

1:07:20.600 --> 1:07:24.600
<v Speaker 3>It's by Adam Grant, who is an organizational psychologist. And

1:07:24.960 --> 1:07:27.600
<v Speaker 3>I know it's an odd us I think he was

1:07:28.080 --> 1:07:32.160
<v Speaker 3>har Wharton, I think, and I know it's an odd

1:07:32.160 --> 1:07:34.280
<v Speaker 3>book to have be a favorite book of mine, but

1:07:34.400 --> 1:07:37.560
<v Speaker 3>in context of business, it definitively is and in.

1:07:37.480 --> 1:07:39.520
<v Speaker 1>Part it's because.

1:07:41.480 --> 1:07:46.920
<v Speaker 3>It talks about how you can have a hypothesis, but

1:07:47.320 --> 1:07:50.720
<v Speaker 3>you have to be humble enough to understand that you must.

1:07:50.840 --> 1:07:52.960
<v Speaker 3>You can also change your hypothesis, but you have to

1:07:52.960 --> 1:07:57.600
<v Speaker 3>have the confidence enough to hold a hypothesis. And really

1:07:57.720 --> 1:08:03.640
<v Speaker 3>intelligence is about the ability two to morph and be

1:08:03.640 --> 1:08:10.240
<v Speaker 3>be nimble without without and and it's not about arrogance,

1:08:10.360 --> 1:08:16.000
<v Speaker 3>like it's not about our business requires a constant questioning

1:08:16.520 --> 1:08:20.559
<v Speaker 3>of what you think right and those that become very

1:08:21.400 --> 1:08:26.360
<v Speaker 3>uh tied to a thesis and uh, I think on

1:08:26.400 --> 1:08:28.720
<v Speaker 3>the wrong side of a lot of trades. And so

1:08:29.320 --> 1:08:31.679
<v Speaker 3>I just loved the book because the way he writes

1:08:33.280 --> 1:08:40.040
<v Speaker 3>about intelligence and the humility of questioning and of holding

1:08:40.520 --> 1:08:43.400
<v Speaker 3>conversations with people. And I think this is true for

1:08:43.439 --> 1:08:48.040
<v Speaker 3>society in general right now, of having conversations where you

1:08:48.080 --> 1:08:51.240
<v Speaker 3>may not you may not agree, but to hear other

1:08:51.280 --> 1:08:53.240
<v Speaker 3>people out even if they don't agree with you.

1:08:54.040 --> 1:08:56.080
<v Speaker 2>And any of the books anything you're reading currently.

1:08:56.560 --> 1:09:00.759
<v Speaker 3>The last book I read was, uh, the the recent

1:09:00.760 --> 1:09:03.559
<v Speaker 3>one by Brad Jacobs, which was how to Make a

1:09:03.560 --> 1:09:07.560
<v Speaker 3>Few More Billions. Brad Jacobs is the CEO of QXO

1:09:07.840 --> 1:09:09.320
<v Speaker 3>and he wrote his first book, How to Make a

1:09:09.360 --> 1:09:11.320
<v Speaker 3>Few Billion and then he wrote How to Make a

1:09:11.320 --> 1:09:14.760
<v Speaker 3>Few More Billions. And what I thought was so interesting

1:09:14.960 --> 1:09:18.120
<v Speaker 3>about the book, as the first two chapters, is about

1:09:18.280 --> 1:09:23.320
<v Speaker 3>how he centers himself. And he's an incredibly successful entrepreneur,

1:09:24.200 --> 1:09:28.519
<v Speaker 3>has built many businesses really from scratch. He's a self

1:09:28.520 --> 1:09:35.160
<v Speaker 3>made billionaire, and he starts every morning meditating, right, and

1:09:36.080 --> 1:09:41.559
<v Speaker 3>how he finds that center, And it just like to me, it's,

1:09:41.840 --> 1:09:44.639
<v Speaker 3>you know, we often don't talk about that aspect of

1:09:45.320 --> 1:09:49.320
<v Speaker 3>you know, investing in business. It feels sometimes really transactional.

1:09:51.400 --> 1:09:55.960
<v Speaker 3>But hearing that aspect of Brad, you know, it only

1:09:55.960 --> 1:09:58.040
<v Speaker 3>puts him in even higher regard for me.

1:09:58.960 --> 1:10:02.000
<v Speaker 2>Really interesting. What are you streaming these days? What are

1:10:02.000 --> 1:10:03.960
<v Speaker 2>you either listening to or watch it?

1:10:04.479 --> 1:10:06.160
<v Speaker 1>Oh, gosh, I don't. I don't watch much.

1:10:06.200 --> 1:10:08.160
<v Speaker 3>I don't have that much time, and usually when I

1:10:08.200 --> 1:10:10.559
<v Speaker 3>do watch something with my kids, I fall asleep.

1:10:11.240 --> 1:10:13.320
<v Speaker 1>So but but.

1:10:13.320 --> 1:10:15.080
<v Speaker 3>I am a runner, and so i have a lot

1:10:15.120 --> 1:10:19.320
<v Speaker 3>of time that I spend running and I'm constantly listening

1:10:19.360 --> 1:10:23.000
<v Speaker 3>to podcasts. My favorite ones happen to be Macro Voices.

1:10:25.040 --> 1:10:26.639
<v Speaker 3>I love the Knowledge Project.

1:10:26.960 --> 1:10:30.200
<v Speaker 2>Oh Shane Pash, Yeah, yeah, he's that's a regular on

1:10:30.320 --> 1:10:31.080
<v Speaker 2>Sunday mornings.

1:10:31.120 --> 1:10:31.360
<v Speaker 4>For me.

1:10:31.680 --> 1:10:35.519
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, and so I mean the variety of conversations that

1:10:35.560 --> 1:10:39.520
<v Speaker 3>he has with different people from you know, from wellness

1:10:39.640 --> 1:10:44.280
<v Speaker 3>and well being and I've saw I was listening to

1:10:44.360 --> 1:10:47.800
<v Speaker 3>one about the Alpha school and how how education should

1:10:47.840 --> 1:10:52.080
<v Speaker 3>be reshaped. There's just like an awesome amount of diversity

1:10:52.080 --> 1:10:56.600
<v Speaker 3>of thought the circuit which is all about semiconductors and

1:10:56.920 --> 1:11:01.439
<v Speaker 3>and chips. I think of other ones that I listened

1:11:01.439 --> 1:11:04.680
<v Speaker 3>to regularly. That's all that comes up.

1:11:04.760 --> 1:11:08.200
<v Speaker 2>That's a nice list to start with. Our final two questions,

1:11:08.360 --> 1:11:10.960
<v Speaker 2>what sort of advice would you give to a recent

1:11:11.000 --> 1:11:16.240
<v Speaker 2>college grad interested in a career in either engineering, material

1:11:16.320 --> 1:11:17.760
<v Speaker 2>science or investing.

1:11:18.760 --> 1:11:23.679
<v Speaker 3>Oh wow, well, look, I think for any college grad,

1:11:24.400 --> 1:11:29.639
<v Speaker 3>make sure that you do something that you love right,

1:11:29.720 --> 1:11:32.759
<v Speaker 3>and it doesn't have to be you love it every day,

1:11:32.800 --> 1:11:36.320
<v Speaker 3>but you spend a lot of your time at work.

1:11:36.360 --> 1:11:39.080
<v Speaker 3>Your life a third, more than a third of your

1:11:39.120 --> 1:11:41.360
<v Speaker 3>life is going to be spent from here on out

1:11:41.479 --> 1:11:45.040
<v Speaker 3>at work. Make sure that you do something that you

1:11:45.200 --> 1:11:50.280
<v Speaker 3>believe in that gives you great gratification, that you feel

1:11:50.280 --> 1:11:54.679
<v Speaker 3>like you're contributing to society. Don't just do it because

1:11:54.720 --> 1:11:57.120
<v Speaker 3>you're on a treadmill of you know, I'm going to

1:11:57.160 --> 1:11:59.920
<v Speaker 3>go do this because I set out to do this past,

1:12:00.160 --> 1:12:04.120
<v Speaker 3>then you know, I just have to go trotting along,

1:12:06.000 --> 1:12:10.240
<v Speaker 3>allow yourself the grace to change and to change your mind.

1:12:10.400 --> 1:12:14.519
<v Speaker 3>I did, and it was probably the best risk that

1:12:14.560 --> 1:12:18.519
<v Speaker 3>I ever took. So the best gamble that I ever

1:12:18.560 --> 1:12:24.800
<v Speaker 3>took on was completely pivoting in my career. So you know,

1:12:25.120 --> 1:12:28.840
<v Speaker 3>allow yourself to explore because you change over time as well.

1:12:29.439 --> 1:12:31.320
<v Speaker 3>You know, what you want today maybe different what you

1:12:31.400 --> 1:12:34.639
<v Speaker 3>want in five and ten years, but definitively make sure

1:12:34.720 --> 1:12:37.439
<v Speaker 3>that you love what you do because once you know

1:12:37.560 --> 1:12:39.680
<v Speaker 3>that you love what you do, you will be the

1:12:39.720 --> 1:12:40.280
<v Speaker 3>best at it.

1:12:40.840 --> 1:12:43.960
<v Speaker 2>Huh. And our final question, what do you know about

1:12:44.000 --> 1:12:47.800
<v Speaker 2>the world of investing today? Might have been useful twenty

1:12:47.920 --> 1:12:51.920
<v Speaker 2>or so years ago when you were first starting out.

1:12:53.960 --> 1:12:58.479
<v Speaker 3>So you told me this question would stump me, and it.

1:12:57.439 --> 1:13:01.880
<v Speaker 2>Stump me because you know the answers that I'm not

1:13:02.000 --> 1:13:05.639
<v Speaker 2>looking for. Are you know buy Amazon in O two

1:13:05.680 --> 1:13:09.040
<v Speaker 2>when it was seven dollars? Yeah, it's it's what insight

1:13:09.479 --> 1:13:12.439
<v Speaker 2>might have been useful way back when? What have you

1:13:12.600 --> 1:13:18.479
<v Speaker 2>be what have you learned? What expensive lessons came along

1:13:18.560 --> 1:13:20.559
<v Speaker 2>that you know I could have saved myself a lot

1:13:20.600 --> 1:13:23.520
<v Speaker 2>of headache? Yeah, had I figured this out sooner.

1:13:23.680 --> 1:13:26.120
<v Speaker 3>You know what, Barry, I don't think I would. I

1:13:26.120 --> 1:13:28.880
<v Speaker 3>would in my way back machine. I wouldn't go tell

1:13:28.880 --> 1:13:29.599
<v Speaker 3>myself anything.

1:13:29.800 --> 1:13:32.040
<v Speaker 2>Uh huh. So it's the path and not necessary.

1:13:32.120 --> 1:13:33.200
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it's the journey.

1:13:33.280 --> 1:13:37.920
<v Speaker 3>Like my most painful moments as an investor have been

1:13:39.080 --> 1:13:42.440
<v Speaker 3>the biggest learning moments for me that have had like

1:13:42.439 --> 1:13:46.040
<v Speaker 3>like they've branded me in some way with that, with

1:13:46.120 --> 1:13:51.680
<v Speaker 3>that experience, and so I wouldn't want to shortcut that

1:13:52.240 --> 1:13:56.120
<v Speaker 3>because it has shaped me. And every single time I've

1:13:56.160 --> 1:14:00.400
<v Speaker 3>fallen on my face, it has shaped me, and it

1:14:00.479 --> 1:14:05.240
<v Speaker 3>has reminded me of you know, the perils of not

1:14:05.280 --> 1:14:08.880
<v Speaker 3>paying attention to X, Y or Z or I won't

1:14:08.880 --> 1:14:12.680
<v Speaker 3>make that same mistake again because again, it is so

1:14:12.880 --> 1:14:15.280
<v Speaker 3>like it goes back to that first question you asked

1:14:15.280 --> 1:14:18.320
<v Speaker 3>me about like academic versus learning on the job.

1:14:20.320 --> 1:14:23.040
<v Speaker 2>You need the real experience, you need the scars.

1:14:23.040 --> 1:14:24.760
<v Speaker 3>You need the scars. And it's a little bit like

1:14:24.800 --> 1:14:27.439
<v Speaker 3>your kids. All Right, you can tell your kids, don't

1:14:27.439 --> 1:14:27.880
<v Speaker 3>do that.

1:14:28.120 --> 1:14:29.840
<v Speaker 1>You're going to get hurt. Don't do that, you're gonna

1:14:29.840 --> 1:14:30.240
<v Speaker 1>get hurt.

1:14:30.280 --> 1:14:32.400
<v Speaker 3>Well, sometimes they just have to fall down and get

1:14:32.439 --> 1:14:34.960
<v Speaker 3>hurt to realize they're going to get hurt, so it.

1:14:35.040 --> 1:14:37.559
<v Speaker 2>Makes a ton of sense. Encore, thank you so much

1:14:37.600 --> 1:14:41.599
<v Speaker 2>for being so generous with your time. We have been

1:14:41.640 --> 1:14:47.000
<v Speaker 2>speaking with Encore Crawford, portfolio manager at Alger. If you

1:14:47.160 --> 1:14:49.639
<v Speaker 2>enjoy this conversation, well, be sure and check out any

1:14:49.640 --> 1:14:52.519
<v Speaker 2>of the six hundred and fifty three we've done over

1:14:52.560 --> 1:14:58.120
<v Speaker 2>the past twelve years. We launched July twenty fourteen. You

1:14:58.160 --> 1:15:02.160
<v Speaker 2>can find those at iTunes, Spot, YouTube, Bloomberg, wherever you

1:15:02.200 --> 1:15:05.800
<v Speaker 2>find your favorite podcasts. I would be remiss if I

1:15:05.960 --> 1:15:08.520
<v Speaker 2>and thank the crack team that helps put these conversations

1:15:08.560 --> 1:15:13.120
<v Speaker 2>together each week. Alexis Noriega is my video producer. Jean

1:15:13.240 --> 1:15:17.679
<v Speaker 2>Russo is my researcher. Anna Luke is my producer. I'm

1:15:17.720 --> 1:15:21.680
<v Speaker 2>Barry Ritoltz. You've been listening to Masters in Business on

1:15:21.840 --> 1:15:22.799
<v Speaker 2>Bloomberg Radio.