Spaceman Explains to Earthman How Things Work (with Delian Asparouhov)
Newcomer PodAugust 15, 202300:56:2551.67 MB

Spaceman Explains to Earthman How Things Work (with Delian Asparouhov)

Last time I remember writing about Varda co-founder and Founders Fund partner Delian Asparouhov, I was giving him a hard time about his subdued impromptu Clubhouse run-in with then San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin who he’d been flaming on Twitter.

But since then, Asparouhov has mellowed out online. When I texted him after our podcast recording session and mentioned that his Founders Fund colleague Mike Solana was sassing me on Elon Musk’s social networking platform, Asparouhov wrote back, “Bro I’m tryna do 3 jobs over here. I don’t have time to pay attention to what Solana is up to.”

Besides Varda and Founders Fund, I wondered what the third job was.

He texted me back, “Fatherhood.”

On the latest episode of the Newcomer podcast Asparouhov and I covered a lot of ground. We talked about Varda’s satellite mission and its ambitions to manufacture in space. We discussed SpaceX’s reusable rocket and the media conversation around Starship’s explosion. Asparouhov mused about UFOs and missions to Mars. It was a wide-ranging conversation about space and technology.

The conversation started off digging into Varda’s excited research into LK-99.

Varda ran an experiment which they initially thought might show verification of room temperature semiconductors.

By the time we recorded our conversation, you could tell Asparouhov was more muted about Varda’s findings.

Later he tweeted, “alas, the rocks we made floated due to iron impurities.”

Highlighted Excerpts

The transcript has been edited for clarity.

Eric: What is Varda’s focus at the moment?

Delian: Our goal is to take some of the research that’s been shown on the International Space Station to have a ton of promise in terms of, as we’ve been talking about, solid state formulation. It turns out solid state formulation is significantly affected by gravity - that may also be true in superconductors. So one day down the line, if somebody does discover these formulations and they’re showing issues that we think gravity could actually solve, there’s a world where Varda flies a superconductor. You know, four or five years, definitely not anytime soon, given that the biopharma side is so much more preserved currently.

Eric: I’m gonna be dumb again. To me, solid state is like hard drives. Is that what you mean by solid state formulation?

Delian: If you look at what’s happening both in superconductors and what we do in the pharma world, you’re taking things that start as very fine grain powders or liquids and making solid state crystalline versions of them. In the pharma world that ends up looking like a little bit of table salt that you take, and it turns out that thing actually has drug cancer molecules and mRNA molecules. In the world of superconductors, it turns into these things that look like, I mean you’ve seen them on Twitter, they look like these kind of weird half ceramic, half metal objects. So solid state is just the form of the matter. Solid state in particular typically means a larger crystalline lattice structure, not just individual small molecules.

Eric: The whole story of milestones you’re talking about, what would be viable, reminds me of the SpaceX experience. Where a few months ago one of their rockets blew up. It’s so hard as a layperson, even when cheering these things on, to know as an external observer what signs show the company’s on track. What was your reaction to media like The New York Times framing the SpaceX explosion super negatively?

Delian: I think the layman’s view, particularly The New York Times, was clueless and off base. In aerospace, it’s easier to publicly verify traction, unlike software where companies just claim things. You can see did the rocket launch? Did the spacecraft enter orbit? Those are physical facts. SpaceX is developing an extremely ambitious new rocket alongside their workhorse Falcon 9 that has flown over 200 times without exploding. This new rocket is riskier but more capable. It’s interesting because even though Falcon 9 lands part of itself, it still loses the top section on every flight. So travel is expensive if you had to rebuild the cockpit after every plane flight. This new rocket Elon’s making aims to be fully reusable to lower costs.

Because it’s so ambitious, SpaceX’s approach is to test and fly rapidly rather than get stuck analyzing indefinitely. Their early Falcon rockets blew up but they learned. Nobody expected this new rocket to even get off the pad, but it went way further than expected before failing around stage separation. Calling it a failure seems crazy to me given this is the most ambitious project ever. It did way better than anyone thought, proving out concepts. Failures are part of pushing forward ambitiously. The NYT calling it a Space Shuttle-type failure shows cluelessness - this explicitly developmental rocket had no people aboard. To get to safe, you have to start unsafe and prove it out over time.

Eric: How much does Varda depend on SpaceX’s continued success in bringing down the cost curve? Could Varda work with today’s cost of satellite deployment? Or are you counting on further reductions in deployment costs?

Delian: At today’s launch costs, where we’re spending $1.5 to $2 million per flight, that is low enough for us to build a strong business around what we’re doing now. So I’d say none of our models or thinking depends on future cost drops. Obviously I’d be thrilled if something like Starship came online, though I think that’ll take time. I’d be excited for more players to start landing rockets - no one has really done that yet, even though it’s been eight and a half years since SpaceX’s first landing. So I’m not counting on it happening soon. We’ve architected our business so it doesn’t depend on further cost reductions.

.



Get full access to Newcomer at www.newcomer.co/subscribe

00:00:01
Hey, it's Eric Newcomer. Welcome to the Newcomer podcast.

00:00:04
This week I have Dalian Asperohav, the cofounder of

00:00:08
Varda and a partner at Peter Thiel's Founders Fund.

00:00:12
Varda has sent a satellite into space and is planning on

00:00:16
manufacturing drugs there. A really exciting company, and

00:00:21
we dig into space startups more broadly.

00:00:24
Give it a listen. Before that, a word from our

00:00:28
sponsor, This episode is brought to you by Juniper Square.

00:00:32
It's time to let go of the disjointed technology used in

00:00:34
venture and private equity today.

00:00:37
More than 1800 GP's now rely on Juniper Square to manage over

00:00:41
$700 billion in investor equity. Juniper Square offers a unified

00:00:46
solution for fund administration, fundraising and

00:00:50
investor operations. Work with an institutional grade

00:00:54
fund administrator you can trust and get a shared source of truth

00:00:57
for all your fund and investor data.

00:01:00
Learn more at junipersquare.com. That's JUNIPERSQU. are.com.

00:01:09
Juniper Square, thanks so much. Now for my conversation with

00:01:12
Dalian Dalian. Welcome to the newcomer

00:01:15
podcasts. Thanks for coming.

00:01:17
Thanks for having me Eric. Where I assume you're at Vardo

00:01:20
right now. What's the background scene

00:01:22
here? That's basically our facility in

00:01:24
the background. So this conference room has a,

00:01:25
you know, nice viewpoint and it happened to be the only one that

00:01:27
was available right now. So where is the facility?

00:01:31
It's about like 10 minutes South of LAX in this town called El

00:01:34
Segundo on Aviation Blvd. It's literally like a Blvd. that

00:01:37
is like filled with like we're on the same block as like the

00:01:39
Space Forces. The headquarters here in LA,

00:01:40
there's an Air Force Base down the street.

00:01:42
Northrop Grumman and Raytheon, etcetera, all have offices

00:01:44
within like, you know, 1/4 of a mile.

00:01:46
When did you open it up? We moved in this office May 22,

00:01:49
so-called a year and you know sort of 2-3 months ago and how

00:01:52
many people roughly are working there?

00:01:55
Right now we're about 8384 people fulltime.

00:01:58
I think that's with interns and everything.

00:01:59
Maybe gets up to like 8687. Somewhere around there.

00:02:02
Has it hit you? I feel like I run like this

00:02:04
little newsletter business. You know, I have an employee,

00:02:07
but I feel like being at home really changes the vibe.

00:02:10
And then when I go to like a friend whose company has like an

00:02:14
office and use Lord, you know, it's intense.

00:02:17
And then when I see this, I'm like, oh man, that must really

00:02:20
hit you. Or what was it like to, like,

00:02:22
open up an office like that? You know, at the time, I think

00:02:27
you was actually more like existential terror and that you

00:02:31
know it's going to be like a massive expense in that.

00:02:34
When we were considering the lease and actually signing it,

00:02:36
the amount that I was going to increase our burn was definitely

00:02:39
not insignificant. And I definitely, at one point,

00:02:42
you know, I think it's like the first time I'm revealing this

00:02:44
publicly, there was actually a point where after we had already

00:02:46
signed the lease, I almost wanted to like back out because

00:02:48
like we're not ready. Like the company isn't going to

00:02:50
do well enough to justify this. This is going to be the thing

00:02:52
that like, kills us because like we like moved into a too big of

00:02:54
an office too quickly. And then I actually called Matt

00:02:56
Grimm, the COO over at Anderl. And I was like, bro, like how

00:02:59
the fuck do you get comfortable with this level of like monthly

00:03:02
burn just on the office? You don't even like

00:03:03
accomplishing anything. This is just like like how is

00:03:05
the people you like, let alone like actually investing into

00:03:08
like the hardware and the things that like.

00:03:09
Our customers are actually paying for.

00:03:11
Yeah. And I think he's like, look, you

00:03:13
just, you're building a startup, Dell, you have to bet on upside

00:03:16
and the fact that it's going to work.

00:03:18
If you keep thinking about what's gonna happen if it

00:03:19
doesn't work, you're never gonna give yourself the opportunity to

00:03:21
work. And you guys are clearly packed

00:03:23
in like sardines to your prior office?

00:03:25
It's a lot of effort for this type of company to switch

00:03:27
offices. Like this isn't like a SAS

00:03:28
company where you're just like swapping over a bunch of like

00:03:30
laptops and desks. Like you can kind of see there's

00:03:31
a bunch of equipment out there. That equipment is not something

00:03:33
that you can like hire Joe's movers to go move.

00:03:35
That is equipment that like needs to be uninstalled by a

00:03:38
like a highly skilled engineer technician and then reinstalled

00:03:40
at the new location, right. And so if you don't move into an

00:03:42
office you can at least be at for like 2-3 years in the upside

00:03:45
case, then you're spending a lot of effort.

00:03:47
You know every single how many people could workout of this

00:03:49
office it? Depends on who you ask.

00:03:51
And you know what you know constraints You focus on you.

00:03:54
We probably run out of parking. Yeah, like the like, you know,

00:03:56
13140 mark, But we technically could jam in like, you know, 202

00:04:00
fifty in terms of like, you know, desks and like office

00:04:03
space. And so SpaceX did this back in

00:04:05
the day where they actually like got a parking lot nearby.

00:04:07
They would shuttle people. But I guess there was just some

00:04:09
level of like morale hit because like you could just like walk

00:04:12
out of the office and go to your car, you'd like walk out, wait

00:04:14
for the shuttle, then get to your car, etcetera, even at a

00:04:16
relatively small scale. So anyways, we have to, you

00:04:19
know, figure that out. But I feel confident we've got

00:04:20
at least another yeah. To two years at minimum in here

00:04:25
and we've already had been here for a year and a half and the

00:04:26
goal was it needs to be just something that lasts at least

00:04:29
three years. I feel pretty good about even if

00:04:31
we do have to upgrade in two years, you tweeted that you were

00:04:35
you had a month July maybe where you're cash flow positive, is

00:04:39
that right? What does that mean exactly?

00:04:42
Technically it could mean that we just like received investment

00:04:44
dollars and that was what caused our bank had to go up.

00:04:46
They're like you know very simple term of it is just like

00:04:48
if you look at you know sort of cash in the bank, you know the

00:04:50
31st of the prior month and then the 31st of the next month, did

00:04:53
basically that cash go up or down.

00:04:54
It's a very so is it about investment dollars?

00:04:57
Or it was not in theory one could have you know, done this

00:05:01
with investment dollars. So that's why it's not that

00:05:02
important of a metric because it confounds many of the different

00:05:05
variables, right. It's nothing like free cash flow

00:05:07
positive or even a positive etcetera there.

00:05:09
This is why you have these type of terms, because you can't.

00:05:12
Build this type of business just that simply however ours was a

00:05:15
customer payment from that Air Force contract that we announced

00:05:17
earlier this year and that payment was larger than our

00:05:20
total all in burn that month. And so our bank account did go

00:05:23
up because of customer payments. That's great.

00:05:25
Yeah, OK. We'll talk more about Varda in a

00:05:28
bit. LK 99, there is sort of the idea

00:05:31
that there is a superconductor at room temperature.

00:05:35
You know, people think a new maglev type train or certainly

00:05:39
consumer electronics. You know you're working in space

00:05:42
manufacturing. I'm sure you're thinking of tons

00:05:45
of different ways you could put it to use.

00:05:47
What was your initial reaction when you sort of read about the

00:05:51
research paper in the first place?

00:05:53
For the first 24 hours, it was definitely sort of like extreme

00:05:56
curiosity. You know, my first reaction was

00:05:59
go to our Chief Scientific Officer whose prior background

00:06:02
was actually at this company called Liam Research that does,

00:06:05
you know, phenomenal world class material science and helps

00:06:07
basically bring mostly semiconductors to market.

00:06:09
So he has a really strong background in the either sort of

00:06:11
exact type of sort of physics materials that the

00:06:14
superconductor was based off of. And so my first reaction was

00:06:17
like, this could be a fraud, but let me just like go ask our

00:06:19
Chief Scientific Officer. And his response was like

00:06:21
there's a there like, you know, I don't have the time right now

00:06:24
to like, you know, dig into this and validate it, but like at

00:06:26
first glance. It's definitely possible.

00:06:27
And so then I was extremely excited for the 1st 24 hours.

00:06:30
Did you just say negative about it or I forget?

00:06:32
No. I don't remember exactly.

00:06:34
I know my emotional states at the various times.

00:06:35
I don't remember my like tweet various times for the 2nd 24

00:06:39
hours. I was extremely skeptical

00:06:41
because there was a handful of the I think like if I'm

00:06:44
remembering it was like certain graphs in the original like

00:06:48
Korean paper just had some weird anomalies that made it look like

00:06:51
it was fabricated data. The, you know, authors then did

00:06:54
eventually respond and basically. 48 hours after the

00:06:57
paper was published, then the first handful of like you sort

00:07:00
of supportive comments started to come in and some of the

00:07:02
dynamics are like the coauthors what why the drama there started

00:07:05
to come out as well. So then I sort of got like more

00:07:07
and more bullish and then basically have generally gotten

00:07:10
more and more bullish basically since you know hour 48.

00:07:12
So it was interesting roller coaster where it was like first

00:07:14
24 hours elated 2nd 24 hours really depressing and then sadly

00:07:18
basically improvement over the past like you know sort of 10

00:07:20
days or so in terms of my and I mean you guys interest

00:07:23
replicated it, right, I mean basically in some form or why it

00:07:27
motivated you to sort of actually spend company time on

00:07:29
it? Yeah, you know, I believe we

00:07:31
were the first, yeah, at least like, you know, sort of public

00:07:35
verifiable attempt at the replication.

00:07:37
Yeah. I still think there's, you know,

00:07:38
work to be done to verify whether did we perfectly

00:07:40
replicated, did we get a sample, etcetera.

00:07:42
Obviously there's work to be done, but you had little things

00:07:44
standing up basically, right? There were some you know, and

00:07:47
this could be explained by you know, different effects

00:07:50
potentially. Yeah, I still say I think there

00:07:52
is a decent likelihood that we had some non just you know,

00:07:57
standard iron filings, ferromagnetic, you know, so

00:07:59
sample in there. There's some either extremely

00:08:00
strong diagnotism which is, you know, weird and of itself, a 1D

00:08:04
superconductor, or potentially actually superconducting

00:08:06
material in the sample. But yeah, we were the very first

00:08:09
basically I believe you know again publicly, you know

00:08:12
disclosed and verifiable Western let's say NATO country

00:08:16
replication attempt. Why did we decide to do it?

00:08:19
This is definitely much more on, you know, nights and weekends

00:08:21
project than it was like a whole company project or anything like

00:08:23
that. But yeah, there's just like a

00:08:24
handful of engineers that you know, in the 1st 24 hours

00:08:27
recognize that because of the type of chemistry that these

00:08:31
Koreans were doing and the skills that were necessary for

00:08:34
it, it had a oddly weird overlap with the work that we do with

00:08:37
Varda in relation to biopharmaceutical solid-state

00:08:40
formulation. And so we had all of the

00:08:42
necessary equipment to do the replication already in our

00:08:45
facility and some of the precursors were obtainable

00:08:48
within called 24 hours to three or four days via commercial

00:08:52
supply chains. So yeah, we basically decided

00:08:54
you know a handful of the sort of engineers said hey let's like

00:08:57
you know trying to do you know 19 weekends replication of this.

00:09:00
Obviously our Chief Engineer, Andrew Mccaleb got, you know, a

00:09:02
ton of attention on Twitter as he was publicly documenting.

00:09:04
Great recruiting marketing. Certainly worst case scenario I

00:09:08
imagine. Yeah.

00:09:09
If you can see how what we can do nights and weekends over the

00:09:11
course of eight days, imagine what we're doing here day in,

00:09:13
day out. Yeah, we're really happy with,

00:09:16
you know, sort of how it portrayed the company over the

00:09:18
past, you know, 810 days. And then at this point,

00:09:20
definitely sort of, yeah, handing off the project to sort

00:09:22
of the academic and national labs where this type of work is

00:09:24
sort of more appropriate to be done.

00:09:25
The goal is to produce like this the Meissner effect, right?

00:09:28
I would say the goal is to produce superconductors and then

00:09:31
obviously in effect that superconductors have.

00:09:33
Could be minor effect, but there's a wide set of

00:09:34
applications of superconductors. I mean, right now it sounds like

00:09:38
you're like this back to academia.

00:09:39
You're not like, oh, this is going to be important to Varda

00:09:42
in any meaningful way in the next couple years or?

00:09:45
No, this stuff is you know, where the like, you know,

00:09:48
transistor was, you know, in the, you know, very early days.

00:09:51
There's still a lot of work that needs to go into like

00:09:53
experimenting around the formulation of this, getting the

00:09:56
yields higher, understanding how to get this from like right now,

00:09:58
what is like crumbles of rocks into something that can actually

00:10:00
be like used commercially, right.

00:10:02
You know, even like the original sort of high temperature or

00:10:04
sorry, you know, they're called high temperature

00:10:05
superconductors. But the things.

00:10:07
That, you know, can you know, operate at the temperatures that

00:10:09
like liquid nitrogen is at. Those took like over a decade

00:10:11
from like initial discovery to actually like large scale

00:10:13
commercial use. And now they are use every MRI

00:10:16
machine in hospitals. You know, Commonwealth fusions,

00:10:18
you know Bill Gates's fusion company utilizes them at you

00:10:20
know, significant scale. But yeah that took like a year

00:10:23
to decade plus. And so it's just we're

00:10:24
fundamentally A venture backed, you know, commercial company.

00:10:26
You know, basic research is not necessarily the best place for

00:10:29
us to be doing this. I do hope somebody I was, you

00:10:30
know, texting with a friend earlier, lucky groom, about how

00:10:33
somebody should create the equivalent of like fast grants

00:10:36
for COVID. But you know, for LK 99 where

00:10:38
it's like this stuff is more fundamental, basic research, but

00:10:42
it could probably be done best outside of a truly traditional

00:10:45
academic or like national lab setting.

00:10:46
But it needs to be somebody that's like just funding it for

00:10:48
goodwill because you're not going to see return on that

00:10:50
capital for, you know, 5-10 years, you know, potentially

00:10:54
longer. After our conversation, deli and

00:10:57
tweeted, alas, the rocks we made floated due to iron impurities.

00:11:02
We did confirm we were able to synthesize the lead appetite

00:11:06
lattice, so it's not looking good for room temperature

00:11:10
superconduction. I'm glad you brought up COVID

00:11:13
because it felt on Twitter or X or a lot like that moment where

00:11:18
Silicon Valley felt like it had caught on to something in a way

00:11:23
that the rest of the world can sort of feel flat footed, right?

00:11:29
And clearly with COVID, it panned out big time and ended up

00:11:34
being a big prediction. It's harder to tell this.

00:11:35
You know, to some level, you know, there's nothing wrong with

00:11:40
just like enthusiasm on Twitter. It doesn't necessarily have to

00:11:42
be world predictive. I feel like in the case of

00:11:45
COVID, it became sort of a test case for, you know, media

00:11:50
blindness and and sort of Twitter accuracy.

00:11:54
But yeah, I guess, I mean you see the connection when I'm

00:11:57
getting at there. I'm curious like, yeah, how

00:12:00
predictive does this have to be? Or like, is it just like, it's

00:12:04
fine to be enthusiastic here, regardless of whether this is

00:12:07
like a world historical event or how much do you take sort of

00:12:11
your enthusiasm here to be a sign that this is truly a

00:12:15
significant research paper? Yeah, I think at this point it's

00:12:19
pretty clear that this was Ito, sort of a field of academia that

00:12:22
was somewhat discarded after the Soviet Union collapsed.

00:12:24
They were by far the sort of world class.

00:12:26
In this particular call it like shake and bake chemistry, you

00:12:28
know sort of alchemy. Especially why you see that you

00:12:30
know should Russian, you know cat anime girl Irish GB actually

00:12:33
studied under one of the last Soviet Union professors that

00:12:35
previously you know had a lab that was running this.

00:12:38
And then the Koreans also had a connection to that original, you

00:12:40
know, sort of last, you know, standing Russian labs.

00:12:42
So I think it's sort of pretty clear that this is a, you know,

00:12:44
sort of academic field that needs to be revived and in some

00:12:46
ways again borrows a lot of you know, sort of analogies and you

00:12:49
know, potential techniques from the biopharmaceutical world

00:12:51
around. You can just make these like,

00:12:53
you know, very disparate, unique salt state formulations.

00:12:55
They're very difficult to predict in terms of how they

00:12:56
interact, but they can have like very weird, you know, sort of

00:12:59
effects. And again, it was just something

00:13:01
that like hasn't been a field of study because it's one that is.

00:13:04
Not particularly like theoretically sexy in that you

00:13:07
it's a very practically applied, you know, sort of science.

00:13:10
And then after you create things, you may be able to

00:13:12
understand the theory behind them to dumb it down and tell me

00:13:15
if this is wrong. But it's like you're saying in

00:13:16
medicine and drugs, it's like there's a lot of value in sort

00:13:19
of coming up with random drugs that might have uses without,

00:13:22
like a clear theory behind why, right?

00:13:25
And similarly here we could have an awesome material that could

00:13:27
be really good for industry without it proving something

00:13:30
about science that people are necessarily.

00:13:32
Yeah, The biopharma world has like.

00:13:34
No ego around. We're just gonna like throw shit

00:13:36
at the wall and see what sticks basically and then like

00:13:38
afterwards figure out basically what's going on.

00:13:40
And in materials world, for some reason, especially around

00:13:43
superconductors, that just hasn't been the way that people

00:13:45
have sort of thought about things.

00:13:47
And so I think what this has unlocked is in it or I would

00:13:50
hope that it unlocks, is like the NSF funds a billion dollars.

00:13:53
To basically create like if you look in like the early 2000s

00:13:55
especially around small molecules which is the you know

00:13:57
sort of primary drug category, think of like something like

00:13:59
ibuprofen, it's a small molecule.

00:14:01
In the like early 2000s there was a ton of effort basically

00:14:04
around doing basically mass scale robotic creation of small

00:14:08
molecules and screening of them that rather having to basically

00:14:10
like rely on individual basically scientists doing by

00:14:12
petting and process control and things like that.

00:14:14
You didn't said have this like mass scale screening and now

00:14:16
that's like an extremely standardized, like commoditized.

00:14:19
Offering Even so much so that like we actually exported a

00:14:22
decent amount of it to, you know, the Chinese like companies

00:14:24
like Wushi for example. This is basically like they're

00:14:26
either sort of bread and butter is like doing this stuff is like

00:14:28
a service until one would hope that basically the NSF is

00:14:30
recognizing, hey, there's a parallel pattern here here.

00:14:32
We actually need to invest like a billion dollars into

00:14:34
incentivizing people to actually go create this type of, you

00:14:37
know, mass scale robotics. And it is gonna have to look

00:14:39
very different than biopharma if you think about the temperature

00:14:40
ranges, the types of. Elements that you're working

00:14:43
with, they're very different than what you're working with in

00:14:44
either supply form of these things are obviously like non

00:14:46
organic, you know, metal compounds, they're being done at

00:14:48
much higher temperatures. Some of these things have

00:14:50
explosive properties And so there's like somebody needs to

00:14:52
go create a robotic facility that does this stuff basically

00:14:54
like you know at scale, you know safely to go figure out what is

00:14:58
eventually that chemistry that really does produce like kind of

00:15:00
like the blockbuster result. And then that's the thing that

00:15:02
one day can commercialize. But you know, if I had to like

00:15:04
put Finger in the Air guest gun timeline, it's like.

00:15:07
Minimum two years, probably closer to like five years for

00:15:10
that infrastructure to get built, somebody to find that

00:15:12
formulation that actually is sort of viable.

00:15:14
Then it's going to like begin the commercialization and like

00:15:17
you know the early places will probably just be where

00:15:19
superconductors are already used today like MRI machines like

00:15:22
fusion etcetera. And it's going to be like a ways

00:15:24
away until like you have like I don't know, you know, consumer

00:15:26
floating skateboards or you know, whatever you want to, you

00:15:28
know, think about, OK, so Varda, what is your focus at the

00:15:33
moment? What are you trying to build

00:15:35
today? So our goal is to basically take

00:15:37
some of the research that's been shown on the International Space

00:15:39
Station to have a ton of promise in terms of you know like we've

00:15:41
been talking about solid-state formulation, it turns out

00:15:43
solid-state formulation is significantly affected by

00:15:45
gravity. That may also be true in

00:15:46
superconductors. So one day down the line if

00:15:48
somebody does discover these formulations, they're showing

00:15:50
issues that we think gravity actually solve.

00:15:52
There's the world where Varda flies a superconductor and, you

00:15:55
know, four or five years. But definitely not anytime soon,

00:15:57
given that the biopharma side is so much more sort of prove.

00:15:59
Sorry, I'm gonna be dumb again to me.

00:16:01
Solve state I think of like hard drives.

00:16:03
Is that or what do you mean solid-state formation?

00:16:06
Oh yeah. So if you look at basically

00:16:08
what's happening, both the superconductors and what we do

00:16:10
in like bio farmer world, you're basically taking things that

00:16:12
were previously like very fine grained powders or liquids.

00:16:16
You're basically making solid-state crystalline like

00:16:18
versions of them. And so in the bio farmer world

00:16:20
that ends up looking like a little bit of table salt that

00:16:22
you take and it turns out that thing actually has like a either

00:16:24
drug cancer molecule in or mRNA molecules.

00:16:27
In the world of superconductors, it turns into these things that

00:16:29
look like, I mean, you've seen the monitors Twitter, they look

00:16:31
like these kind of like weird half ceramic, half metally shiny

00:16:34
kind of objects. So solid-state is just what the

00:16:37
form is. The matter, sort of in

00:16:39
solid-state in particular, typically means it's a larger

00:16:41
crystalline lattice structure, not just like individual.

00:16:43
Small thesis, then, is that solid-state manufacturing is

00:16:47
easier in space. Yeah, basically when you think

00:16:50
about what is solid-state manufacturing, it's not just the

00:16:53
individual atoms, right, being solids themselves, it's

00:16:56
specifically what is that crystalline lattice structure

00:16:58
that is formed as you're like melting down.

00:17:00
This is why for example the superconductors are having this

00:17:01
like yield problem where you have these like you know LAD and

00:17:04
then either that copper, phosphorus, you know atoms.

00:17:06
Occasionally they happen to arrange themselves in just the

00:17:08
perfect state where they, like you know, appear to potentially

00:17:10
creating a superconductor. You sometimes see the same

00:17:12
issues in biopharmaceuticals where things arrange themselves

00:17:14
in just the particular state where it then allows it to be

00:17:16
like dissolved in your blood or delivered through the blood Bay

00:17:19
barrier or allows it to be shelf stable on a shelf at a pharmacy.

00:17:22
And when you go up to gravity, basically what you remove or

00:17:24
what are, they're known as convective currents.

00:17:26
And so to explain those sort of really quickly, if I basically

00:17:28
light a candle in front of me here on the desk and I put my

00:17:30
hand above it, I basically taught that as a kid, hot air

00:17:33
rises. Why is that actually happening?

00:17:34
You basically have this like combustion reaction.

00:17:36
It's creating thermal energy. That atmosphere around it is

00:17:38
basically becoming less dense because it's basically got that

00:17:40
thermal energy getting transferred to kinetic energy.

00:17:42
And when you're in a gravitational field, right, less

00:17:44
dense gases or less dense liquids move to the top, right?

00:17:47
This is why you're not as a kid. Again, the hot air rises.

00:17:50
So let's take that same candle. Imagine you and I were on a

00:17:52
space station. I light it, you know, in front

00:17:53
of us. What actually happens?

00:17:55
You still can light the candle and it's still basically like,

00:17:57
we'll start that combustion reaction.

00:17:58
The gas around it still gets hotter and actually, you know,

00:18:01
becomes less tense. But there's no gravity to make

00:18:03
it, like, go up or down, right? And So what ends up happening is

00:18:05
instead basically that gas just very steadily diffuses

00:18:08
throughout the entire room. So think about both.

00:18:10
Again, This is why it's been kind of fun.

00:18:12
This is the first time actually talking about with in parallel,

00:18:14
but it applies to basically both, right?

00:18:15
Imagine you have a bunch of lead or copper atoms or you have a

00:18:18
bunch of like, you know, sort of, you know, carbon and the

00:18:20
oxygen and hydrogen atoms or whatever you have in bio from

00:18:22
the land. If you are thinking about what

00:18:24
is a solid-state formulation, you're basically typically

00:18:26
applying some level of like thermal energy to disparate atom

00:18:29
structures. And those atoms typically have

00:18:31
different weights. And so the lead might end up

00:18:33
starting to move faster or slower than the copper does.

00:18:35
And so because that one's less tense than the other.

00:18:37
And so, just like on a candle, where you have that hot air

00:18:39
rising. And they actually have cold air

00:18:40
coming in typically at these like crystalline lattice scales.

00:18:43
So not it's like the Super microscopic scale was just like

00:18:45
2 atoms attaching, but you're thinking about hundreds of atoms

00:18:48
and how they form lattices, They're like dominant basically

00:18:50
like what's knows, like a transport mechanism or basically

00:18:53
the dominant factor that affects.

00:18:54
How these atoms arrange themselves when you're in a

00:18:57
gravitational field is convective pressures.

00:18:59
So basically like how do they move either due to the thermal,

00:19:01
you know, pressure versus when you go up into zero gravity.

00:19:04
There is no up, there's no down, there's no convective pressures,

00:19:07
and so instead you can actually heat things up and they just

00:19:09
stay in a very basically like stable state.

00:19:11
So in some ways you can kind of arrange them how you want, heat

00:19:13
them up, cool them down, freeze them basically in that

00:19:15
solid-state form that you want. You don't have these basic

00:19:17
conductive pressures constantly moving them around.

00:19:20
So this has been, you know, proven on the International

00:19:21
Space Station. In the world of

00:19:23
biopharmaceuticals, you're decently well.

00:19:24
So one of the blockbuster results was done by Merck by the

00:19:27
scientist Paul Reichardt. He basically showed that Merck

00:19:30
has his blockbuster drug Keytruda does $25 billion a year

00:19:32
of revenue for them. Right now it's a monoclonal

00:19:34
antibody biologic basically just it's a drug that is very large.

00:19:38
And simpler way of saying it and when this drug that is very

00:19:43
large, they try to make a solid-state form of it because

00:19:45
it's very large and basically flops around.

00:19:47
It moves a lot when it's being like basically crystallized

00:19:50
because it's particularly they does Merck make it in space or

00:19:53
they just showed they could but they end up making it?

00:19:55
Merck currently makes it on the ground and when they make it on

00:19:57
the ground, it flops around so much that it makes these really

00:19:59
large crystals that makes you are very varying in size,

00:20:01
diameter, etcetera. It's because that it's difficult

00:20:03
for them to control dosing when they give it to a patient

00:20:06
because it breaks down and disparate rates in your blood.

00:20:08
And so you end up having to go into an intravenous clinic every

00:20:10
single day for anywhere from like 1 to 4 hours and actually

00:20:13
have a nurse basically monitoring your dosing.

00:20:14
So you get it appropriately. They're able to show on the

00:20:16
International Space Station when they crystallize it because you

00:20:18
don't have any gravity there. It's not flopping around.

00:20:20
And so instead it basically just forms a bunch of individual

00:20:22
crystals that are basically all the exact same size.

00:20:24
And So what does that mean? I know exactly how it's going to

00:20:26
dose and how much I can give you second incentive to basically

00:20:29
send you home with a bunch of syringes.

00:20:30
So Merck and Paul Reichart from Merck in particular approved

00:20:33
this out on the International Space Station but they had no

00:20:34
way of commercializing it because fundamentally a

00:20:36
government run human rated space station is not not a place where

00:20:39
even a company like Burke and say hey shut down the like you

00:20:41
know, Dubai or you know, shut down like you know Saudi Arabia

00:20:44
sending you know astronauts up there or the Russians instead

00:20:47
let me take over this whole station and do mass

00:20:48
manufacturing. Merck both doesn't know how to

00:20:50
do that cuz they don't develop hardware and you know, NASA, you

00:20:53
know, wouldn't let them, you know, do so.

00:20:54
And Savarta's whole thesis was how do we take those types of

00:20:56
results and allow companies like Merck to scale them up.

00:20:59
And I think one of the most exciting moments for the company

00:21:01
was on the day of our launch, we had a CNN article come out that

00:21:04
unbeknownst to us, the journalist had actually reached

00:21:06
out to Paul Reichardt at Merck. This, like, you know, world

00:21:08
famous, you know, by the most famous scientists in

00:21:10
microgravity, you know, pharmaceutical manufacturing.

00:21:11
He had a quote in there, well, you know, tried roughly

00:21:13
paraphrase, which is basically like the International Space

00:21:15
Station was like a great place for me to do my initial

00:21:17
research. But there are significant

00:21:19
limitations and costs and cadence.

00:21:21
I'm really excited by what, you know, Varta is working on.

00:21:22
We don't yet have a contract, but we're looking forward to

00:21:24
basically like. You heard it here first.

00:21:26
Media. Good.

00:21:29
Accidentally. Good.

00:21:31
What's your capacity to do this right now?

00:21:33
Or like how close are you to actually being able to

00:21:35
manufacture anything in space? So we sent our first satellite

00:21:39
up on June 12th of this year on a transporter mission with

00:21:42
SpaceX. I think of those basically like

00:21:43
the rideshares. A lot of what enables a company

00:21:45
like Varda to work is the fact that, you know, even 345 years

00:21:48
ago you basically had to book whole individual rocket flights

00:21:50
entirely on your own. Those things were massively

00:21:52
expensive. Instead, now I can basically do

00:21:54
a rideshare flight which you know cost anywhere from caught

00:21:56
like 5000 to $7000 a kilogram. To think about something that

00:21:59
like Varta that you know weighs roughly 300 kilograms grams,

00:22:02
you're talking about us being able to go to space for like 1.5

00:22:04
to 2 million rather than like 30 or 40.

00:22:06
That is something that is like possible with like a seed in the

00:22:08
Series. A round versus obviously

00:22:10
previously was very much so not possible.

00:22:12
You're taking like a piece of manufacturing equipment for that

00:22:14
much money. So that is just the like ticket.

00:22:17
And then yes, we do also have to design the like manufacturing

00:22:19
equipment and everything. So yeah, on our basically first

00:22:22
mission it's about a 300 kilogram basically total

00:22:24
satellite. You can think of it, It is about

00:22:25
it like you know, a third of the satellite is basically what

00:22:28
looks like a standard satellite, basically the infrastructure

00:22:30
that you need to operate up there in orbit.

00:22:31
So this is everything from like solar panels to a satellite

00:22:33
radio to communicate with the software down at the ground, you

00:22:36
know reaction wheels that allow you to keep the satellite

00:22:38
pointed in the right place, basically all the infrastructure

00:22:40
you need typically for a satellite.

00:22:41
The second portion is basically yeah what you would think of as

00:22:43
like manufacturing equipment that actually has basically all

00:22:46
of the reagents and all the molecules preloaded on board.

00:22:49
And the third part is basically a small reentry pod that

00:22:51
basically brings those finished pharmaceuticals you know back

00:22:53
down amazing. So we launched on June 12th, we

00:22:56
executed that first manufacturing run I want to say

00:22:58
somewhere around like July 6th or 7th or something like that.

00:23:00
And then we're looking forward to hopefully being able to re

00:23:02
enter. Right now, we're still working

00:23:03
and collaborating with several of our government and commercial

00:23:05
partners to work on bringing the capsule back, but we're looking

00:23:08
to hopefully bring it back caught like you know late

00:23:10
August, mid-september. And somebody.

00:23:11
Paid you like the other companies, you're doing research

00:23:14
on behalf of companies and government agencies or this

00:23:17
first one was very much so like demonstration mission like show

00:23:20
our customers that this type of thing is possible.

00:23:22
Given that, you know, despite the fact that, you know,

00:23:24
companies like Mercury have been super enthusiastic about these

00:23:26
value propositions, I think they've been actually somewhat

00:23:28
skeptical there would ever be a way for them to commercialize.

00:23:30
And so they sort of needed, you know, an existence proof of

00:23:33
something like VARD actually showing it end to end either

00:23:35
before being willing. But.

00:23:36
Do we know any confident, do you know worked yet?

00:23:38
Or I mean, it partially depends on how it comes back, I assume.

00:23:41
But so we know that the satellite generally worked quite

00:23:44
well. We know that the manufacturing

00:23:46
equipment, the analogy that my cofounder likes to give that,

00:23:48
yeah, I like to use is imagine that in the world of farm and

00:23:51
manufacturing, imagine that it's basically like a kitchen.

00:23:53
And in the kitchen you have a whole series of appliances and

00:23:56
you might have everything from a toaster to a conduction oven

00:23:58
into a blender to, you know, a little scale that weighs your

00:24:01
beresito sort of ingredients. On this first mission, we very

00:24:03
much so built like a very basic, like toaster.

00:24:05
It is basically the simplest appliance, you know possible.

00:24:08
And all that I can tell you is that the like toaster did heat

00:24:12
up and cool down as we wanted it to.

00:24:15
I cannot tell you whether or not the toast inside got like fully

00:24:17
burned to a crisp or not toasted appropriately, etcetera.

00:24:20
But generally, as we know, toast does do certain things when you

00:24:24
apply certain temperatures to it.

00:24:26
So I feel pretty confident that the toast inside is like nicely

00:24:28
baked. And now that toast also does

00:24:30
need to basically survive reentry.

00:24:31
So I'd say there were like three or four things we want to prove

00:24:33
out on the first mission. We have been able to prove out

00:24:35
roughly half of them already, but there are some, you know,

00:24:37
future things we need to prove out.

00:24:38
But even if, like the mission were to like die tomorrow, we

00:24:40
still definitely, you know, sort of learned a lot that will make

00:24:42
it even more likely the future missions are able to do

00:24:44
everything that they need to end.

00:24:46
When's the toast come back home? Basically as are I mentioning

00:24:49
you know sort of working with our government partners to get

00:24:51
that you sort of fully lined up. We have to work with both the

00:24:53
FAA around approval and license to reenter the Utah Housing

00:24:56
rating range, which is a military range that allows us to

00:24:59
basically land in their land. And then Rocket Lab, which is

00:25:01
our partner that actually executes the actual deorbit

00:25:04
burn, basically the rocket small rocket engine that basically

00:25:06
brings us back from space into the atmosphere.

00:25:09
But we're, you know, normally targeting basically like a sort

00:25:11
of late August every entry date. I mean, it's amazing.

00:25:14
It's like a great thing you're doing.

00:25:15
I feel like it's such an unambiguously, like awesome

00:25:19
thing to be working on. I really from the outside, the

00:25:22
whole sort of story of like the milestones and you're sort of

00:25:24
talking about, you know, what would be sort of a viable thing

00:25:28
and like what you remind me of the whole like SpaceX experience

00:25:31
where I forget it was like a couple months ago where one of

00:25:34
their shuttles like blew up or something.

00:25:36
Do you remember that whole? What was?

00:25:37
You know much more about this than I do I yeah, about this

00:25:40
one. It's so hard for the, I guess

00:25:44
the sort of layman world, myself included, to know like and

00:25:48
believe like. Obviously, you know, my

00:25:50
experience as a reporter, like every company tells you

00:25:52
everything that happens in the most positive light.

00:25:55
So it's so hard, even when you're like cheering for these

00:25:58
things to know sort of as an external observer, what is a

00:26:02
sign that the company is like on track versus like?

00:26:06
What's not and like what's the level like yeah, I don't know

00:26:09
what was your reaction to sort of, I mean the media obviously

00:26:12
like the New York Times especially like frame that the

00:26:15
SpaceX like blow up like super negatively.

00:26:18
It seem right. Yeah.

00:26:20
I think the layman's view in particular obviously the New

00:26:23
York Times view is like completely you know sort of

00:26:25
clueless and off base. What I generally say, you know,

00:26:27
I'll maybe touch on a one part comment which is I think at

00:26:29
least in aerospace it's a lot easier to like publicly verify

00:26:31
how a company is doing in that the, you know, sort of the

00:26:34
traction is not like oh, we're not gonna tell you our revenue

00:26:36
numbers. We're like doing well and our

00:26:37
software is good. It is like did the rocket

00:26:40
launch, did the like spacecraft reenter?

00:26:41
Those are like physically verifiable facts or you know,

00:26:43
not facts. And so they can't really

00:26:45
sugarcoat it, you know, as much as you can.

00:26:47
And like software, you know world in relation to SpaceX

00:26:49
thing, you know, maybe I'll provide a little bit of context

00:26:51
here. So you know SpaceX is trying to

00:26:52
develop an extremely ambitious, completely new rocket, right.

00:26:55
So they have a rocket that we launch on Cuddle Falcon Nine.

00:26:57
That rocket is a workhorse. It is not now exploded for like

00:27:00
210 or 12 launches in a row, which is by far the most that

00:27:04
any rocket has ever done in a row, by far the fastest,

00:27:06
cheapest, etcetera, stay of this workhorse.

00:27:08
That is like the safest thing that humanity has ever developed

00:27:11
and is working really well. Yeah, they are trying to now

00:27:13
build a new very risky rocket, but it is a new rocket that is

00:27:17
even more capable. The reason this rocket is

00:27:19
particularly interesting is you may be familiar with the Falcon

00:27:21
9 in that it actually lands a portion of itself back onto a

00:27:24
landing pad. However, even though this is the

00:27:27
best that we've done and it's the cheapest, it still is not

00:27:29
perfect in that it still loses basically like the top fifth of

00:27:33
the rocket every single time. And that's just how it's

00:27:35
designed. Basically, that top fifth like

00:27:36
basically burns up every single time.

00:27:37
Is it like a one time use? So if you ever like heard, you

00:27:40
know, Elon's basically like, you know, imagine you were taking

00:27:42
like a 747 across the country and every single time, basically

00:27:45
the 747 like completely disintegrated when you like

00:27:47
landed on the other side. Air travel be pretty damn

00:27:49
expensive, right? So we've gotten better for sure.

00:27:52
Imagine it like most of the plane survived but like the

00:27:54
cockpit fell off every single time.

00:27:55
You'd like rebuild the cockpit every time.

00:27:56
That's basically like how rocket travel like works today.

00:27:58
So we definitely improved with this new rocket that Elaine's

00:28:00
trying to make is basically like the full 747 goes all the way up

00:28:04
to space, comes back and lands. It's a very difficult it's been

00:28:07
basically single stage reusable rocket you know orbital rocket.

00:28:10
So because it's so risky your SpaceX has taken the approach of

00:28:13
rather than certain groups where they get stuck in infinite your

00:28:17
decades long of sort of like analysis paralysis.

00:28:19
They like try to engineer the perfect thing.

00:28:21
Elon's approach which has worked very well if you remember the

00:28:23
early Falcon rockets definitely exploded it blew up.

00:28:25
His approach has been just, you know, ship things and do it and

00:28:28
you'll learn even from, like, what is perceived as failure.

00:28:31
And so if you were to pull most of hell, the Varda team or most

00:28:34
of the team with, yeah, SpaceX, they worked on Starship.

00:28:36
Nobody thought the thing was even going to get off the pad.

00:28:38
Like, they thought I was just going to blow up, like on the

00:28:39
ground. Basically before it even managed

00:28:41
to get in the air. It made it way further than

00:28:43
anybody expected. It made it through Max Q1 of the

00:28:45
most difficult things. They basically actually, like,

00:28:46
you know, basically failed around stage separation.

00:28:49
And so I think to claim that it's like a failure is, like,

00:28:52
insane to me, given that this is like the most ambitious project

00:28:55
that like, humanity has ever taken on.

00:28:57
It did way better than anybody possibly expected.

00:28:59
Like, people thought it was going to blow up on the ground,

00:29:01
let it up in the air. And then this is just like the

00:29:03
state of engineering. Like you need to test things and

00:29:05
obviously if it only works then you haven't been ambitious

00:29:08
enough and ever like pushing the way forward.

00:29:09
It's like the New York Times framing, but it is just like

00:29:11
complete cluelessness to even call it like a space shuttle.

00:29:14
Like you know failure type thing is like first the space shuttle

00:29:17
was supposed to be the workhorse safe thing and that blew up.

00:29:20
That is a different thing. Everybody in the space community

00:29:22
knows there are no humans anywhere near that rocket.

00:29:24
Like this thing is explicitly in development, right?

00:29:26
Right. And in order to get to something

00:29:28
that is safe, it originally has to be like unsafe to be able to

00:29:31
prove it out and build it overtime.

00:29:32
How much does Varda depend on Spacex's continued success?

00:29:36
Like bringing down the cost curve, like could Varda work

00:29:40
with the cost of satellite deployment today or are you

00:29:43
counting on sort of further reductions in the cost of

00:29:47
deployment? I would say at today's launch

00:29:50
cost where we're spending the 1.5 to $2 either sort of

00:29:52
per flight that is sort of more than low enough for us to be

00:29:55
able to build a really strong sort of business around what

00:29:58
we're currently doing today. So I'd say none of our business

00:30:01
models the way that we think about the world are predicated

00:30:03
on an any sort of future, you know, cost dropping.

00:30:05
Obviously, you know, I'd be thrilled for either something

00:30:07
like Starship to come online. I think that'll take some time.

00:30:09
I'd be thrilled for either sort of more players coming to the

00:30:11
market and actually start landing rockets.

00:30:13
Nobody's really either sort of done that yet even though it's

00:30:15
been, you know, 8 1/2 years at this point since SpaceX landed

00:30:17
their first rocket. So I'm not counting you know, on

00:30:20
it, you know, happening anytime soon and we've made sure to

00:30:22
architect our business. So it's not you guys are

00:30:23
predicated. On it, I'm going to continue my.

00:30:26
Spaceman explain to Earth man how things work.

00:30:30
But you know you hear people like worry about like, oh, is

00:30:34
the sky gonna get to like cluttered like we had a UFO

00:30:38
conversation that turned into like, oh satellite density.

00:30:41
Like what is the capacity like? How much more crowded can the

00:30:44
sky get with satellites? Couple of different ways to you

00:30:47
should explain this. First, let's just think about

00:30:49
like the Earth's crust. How crowded is it?

00:30:52
I'm sure you've flown on a like 747 flight at certain times and

00:30:54
you like stare down like the middle of like Kansas or even

00:30:56
like, you know, you drive them currently in LA, if you like,

00:30:59
fly two hours northeast of here, it is like a completely empty

00:31:02
desert, right? So imagine that you only had a

00:31:04
like single, you know, crushed equivalent of the Earth in

00:31:07
orbit. You had to fit all the

00:31:08
satellites on there. Well, the amount of satellites

00:31:09
we've said obviously way, way smaller than what we've built on

00:31:11
the entire Earth's crust. And even then, the Earth's crust

00:31:14
is pretty like not crowded. And in space, by the way, you

00:31:17
have a like a whole multitude of altitudes that you can be at,

00:31:20
right? When you're on Earth, you

00:31:21
basically really only be at a single altitude wherever the

00:31:23
crust is. Basically, when you're up in

00:31:24
space, you can be at 500 kilometers, 607 hundred, 800.

00:31:27
So imagine a bunch of, like shells of the Earth's crust,

00:31:30
each of which may hold its own individual satellite.

00:31:33
There's a lot of room in space when you think about that way,

00:31:35
especially because of the further way you get, the bigger

00:31:37
the shell becomes because like the larger the shell is

00:31:40
relative, you know, sort of to the Earth.

00:31:42
Now I'll provide the caveat that things are moving much faster up

00:31:45
there. And so because of that, even

00:31:47
very small things, you know, sort of coming close to you or

00:31:50
hitting you are much more dangerous than like a little

00:31:52
pigeon, you know, basically like hitting you when you're like

00:31:54
driving along a highway. So there are risks in that.

00:31:57
And then the last comment that I'll make is also people under

00:31:59
appreciate there are basically these like lower altitudes where

00:32:02
things will basically like naturally decay because space

00:32:04
isn't this like strict line of like atmosphere to no atmosphere

00:32:07
and instead like actually like steadily basically decays.

00:32:09
And so even satellites that are up in space still actually

00:32:11
experience atmospheric drag with certain altitudes and so they'll

00:32:14
basically like naturally decay. So there's sort of like this

00:32:16
like self cleaning mechanism that the Earth has basically for

00:32:19
a decent amount of the altitudes that we operate at.

00:32:21
Now once you get up to like geosynchronous, where you're

00:32:23
super far away from Earth, at that point, it's like, yeah, I

00:32:25
think on the order of like billions of years, something

00:32:27
like that to ever, like, clean itself.

00:32:29
So is it a problem? Yes, it is something that you

00:32:32
don't need to be managed with. Is it this existential thing

00:32:35
where humanity is totally screwed?

00:32:37
No. Is it well regulated right now?

00:32:39
You can set up a satellite, leave it there or you need to

00:32:43
sort of you're culpable if you're satellite collides with

00:32:46
something, Yeah. It's not particularly like you

00:32:49
know, there's some light regulations today.

00:32:50
And like I think eventually what you want to get to is basically

00:32:53
requiring people that send satellites to space either

00:32:56
deorbit themselves or they have to set aside capital as a bounty

00:33:00
for somebody else to come into orbit them.

00:33:02
That way you could have basically these I cleaned up

00:33:03
crews where you know, I send my satellite for, you know,

00:33:06
whatever $1.52 million. But then I leave a like $200

00:33:10
bounty and then whoever like you know, comes grabs me, ditches me

00:33:13
in the atmosphere and they go on to like the next guy can make

00:33:16
like money off of that. So I think that would be like

00:33:17
the ideal situation that you have like some sort of

00:33:19
regulating agency that handles the verification of that.

00:33:23
But that type of regulatory framework require pretty you

00:33:25
just sort of forward thinking probably like you know this is

00:33:27
something that it feels like a vice president would be doing

00:33:29
given the typically space stuff falls under the vice president.

00:33:31
And so who knows, maybe even in the, you know, whatever next

00:33:34
administration, there's a world where whoever ends up being VP

00:33:36
tackles this is a project because it is roughly starting

00:33:38
to become appropriate, timely to start to think about.

00:33:40
Yeah, something like this. But yeah, nothing really today.

00:33:42
In the Total Fun category and since I referenced it, do you

00:33:47
have a view on this UFO situation or have you spent much

00:33:50
time thinking about it? You know, I admit relative to,

00:33:52
like, you know, some of my colleagues like, you know,

00:33:54
Salana and crew, I definitely have not spent me to sort of

00:33:56
nearly as much time on this. So I can't claim that my views

00:33:59
are super sophisticated other than, like there's clearly some

00:34:01
weird data. There's also some like mixed

00:34:03
incentives in terms of like, you know, some of these people that

00:34:05
are testifying in front of Congress might be just doing it

00:34:06
for the attention. But yeah, they're also obviously

00:34:09
some like, weird anomalists, you know, sort of, you know, videos

00:34:10
and things like that have been published.

00:34:12
I don't have like a strong opinion other than like.

00:34:14
What's your percentage that the UFO's are aliens.

00:34:17
I have this like, you know, somewhat net new conspiracy

00:34:19
theory that like I actually think that what we're, you know,

00:34:22
seeing is actually an intelligent life that lives on

00:34:24
our same planet. But it's like a like, you know,

00:34:25
Atlantic style, like under the Pacific Ocean.

00:34:28
Because if you look at this recycle whole half of the Earth,

00:34:30
like you can actually look at the Earth.

00:34:31
If you look at just the Pacific, it's basically literally almost

00:34:33
entirely like, you know, water. And it could have not been

00:34:36
water. You know dolphins just.

00:34:38
Yeah. Or something that we like.

00:34:39
You know, yeah. Some off branch of humans that

00:34:41
like you know discovered, you know, some set of technologies

00:34:44
you know 10 years ago and like advanced very rapidly in

00:34:47
isolation and then decided to isolate themselves.

00:34:49
Or would you give that a percentage chance?

00:34:52
Hard to like give like a betting odds, but yeah, I don't know

00:34:54
15%. But you think majority, it's

00:34:56
like some military vessel or something or no, not

00:35:00
necessarily. Like I think it could be like

00:35:02
some sort of radionominally some sort of like physics phenomenon

00:35:04
that we don't appreciate or something where it's like you

00:35:06
know, ball lightning or something like that.

00:35:08
We're just like some crazy freak edge case of like

00:35:10
electromagnetism that we just don't totally understand yet.

00:35:13
So my guess is more like freak, you know, edge case of the

00:35:16
universe. You're convinced it is a real

00:35:18
physical phenomenon that people. Yeah, I think there is a real

00:35:20
physical phenomenon. There's like way too any, like

00:35:22
you sort of, you know, instances of this, but I'm not convinced

00:35:24
that it's necessarily like an intelligent, you know, thing

00:35:27
that is causing it. Back to our serious part of the

00:35:30
car. Like what's the Air Force and

00:35:31
what's NASA like paying you for? What are these contracts like,

00:35:35
given that you're still in the early development of

00:35:37
manufacturing? Yeah, so the Air Force and NASA

00:35:40
are not paying us for anything manufacturing related.

00:35:42
Basically if you remember I gave that you know, sort of three

00:35:45
parts spacecraft summary before the like satellite, the

00:35:47
manufacturing and the net reentry pod.

00:35:50
That reentry pod has been of significant interest to various

00:35:52
groups within the government. Because basically when we're

00:35:54
coming back, because we don't have any humans on board, we

00:35:57
come back basically at much higher sort of speed G load, you

00:36:02
know, sort of heat flux basically like they're on

00:36:04
thermal energy that's being, you know sort of created.

00:36:06
Then what a vehicle that has typically humans on board.

00:36:09
Like, if you think about the ones that have humans on board,

00:36:10
they're kind of trying to like surf their way into the

00:36:13
atmosphere so that they like just steadily slow down and

00:36:16
they, you know, astronauts don't experience too many G forces and

00:36:18
they keep everybody alive. We don't have a hues on boards.

00:36:21
We're just like screw it, rip it just like, you know, dig right

00:36:23
in. And so because of that, we

00:36:25
experience an environment that is very useful both for groups

00:36:28
like NASA to basically test out like new heat Shields that they

00:36:30
want to use for like a marvelous mission, as well as groups like

00:36:33
the Air Force. They want to actually be able to

00:36:34
use this as a way to basically test out, for example, like they

00:36:37
want to build hypersonic interceptors to intercept.

00:36:39
You know, China is basically hypersonic boost glide like

00:36:41
space missiles. And so they use us as a way to

00:36:44
test out, OK, how do we build out like sensors and navigation

00:36:46
equipment and heat Shields and wing shapes and things like

00:36:49
that. So you kind of think of it as

00:36:51
like imagine like you were trying to build an airplane

00:36:53
before there was a wind tunnel. And every single time in order

00:36:55
to test it, you basically just have to like throw it out in the

00:36:57
air. That's basically what we're

00:36:57
doing anytime we're trying to build these hypersonic like

00:36:59
interceptor systems. And so we're basically that wind

00:37:02
tunnel where instead you go and test things out that when you go

00:37:05
and build the full hypersonic interceptor, you feel really

00:37:07
confident. And so if like, you know, the

00:37:09
Wright brothers are like Boeing didn't have a wind tunnel to be

00:37:11
a huge pain in the ass right now, it's a huge pain in the ass

00:37:13
for the government. They basically don't have a,

00:37:15
like hypersonic wind tunnel. And VARD is basically they, you

00:37:17
know, sort of closest equivalent to what you can get to a

00:37:20
hypersonic wind tunnel, given how quickly we come in.

00:37:22
The wind tunnel is the you're the experiment that they can

00:37:25
test like they would in a wind tunnel or.

00:37:28
We are the wind tunnel. Or they're literally like

00:37:30
following behind you and using there ain't like, imagine that

00:37:33
our reentry capsule is the wind tunnel.

00:37:35
They're inside the capsule being rested.

00:37:37
So like they're the capsule is the wind tunnel.

00:37:40
Like blocking. Yeah, exactly.

00:37:42
So like they might test different things.

00:37:43
They might test a wing inside of that wind tunnel.

00:37:45
They might test like a piece of like sensors and equipment.

00:37:48
You know, it's basically, you know, each of the various like

00:37:49
government customers is different things that we touched

00:37:51
and we figure out where to put them in the wind tunnels that it

00:37:54
like gets the test that they want basically.

00:37:56
And so we basically do all our farmer manufacturing and we come

00:37:58
down and if we just only had our pharmaceuticals on board, we

00:38:01
just look like a you know, sort of boring, you know reentry

00:38:03
capsule. And instead we have a bunch of

00:38:05
things sticking out in like in various places, basically to

00:38:07
like touched out for the sort of DoD in NASA.

00:38:11
What's your. And I don't know how open you

00:38:13
would be on this now that you have government contractors.

00:38:15
But what's your general like view of what pieces of space are

00:38:20
best for like private industry and which parts are like best

00:38:25
sort of in government and like how effective you think sort of

00:38:28
NASA is today. I guess is it.

00:38:31
Yeah. If we're going to go like NASA

00:38:32
specific, you know, rather. Yeah.

00:38:33
I think you're asking like a broad government question.

00:38:35
But for NASA. If I were to, you know, sort of

00:38:37
give a general, you know, sort of pitch and philosophy on what

00:38:39
I think NASA should be doing, I think they should continue to

00:38:41
lean into the things that are just like very far out and

00:38:45
difficult true basic research and science.

00:38:47
So it's like you don't lean into like helicopter on Mars, super,

00:38:51
like probably the coolest thing that humanity's made in like the

00:38:53
past two or three years. Like take that like little drone

00:38:56
and turn it into like human scale helicopters that like, you

00:38:59
know, when we lay in humans there, we're doing that and they

00:39:00
are starting to already like work on that.

00:39:01
That team is getting like a huge boost in, you know, funding, you

00:39:05
know? Just like a helicopter works in

00:39:07
Martian atmosphere, basically. Yeah, we've already proven that.

00:39:10
So you know, they landed a mini helicopter alongside the Rover

00:39:13
in the last Mars Rover mission. That helicopter has now been

00:39:16
flying for like, you know, forgive me if it's taken, but I

00:39:19
probably guess like 15 or 16 months or so it is covered like

00:39:22
a more ground than all of our Rovers over the past 30 years

00:39:25
like combined, basically because it flies and by the way it flies

00:39:28
on a different planet, like it is a thing that humanity has

00:39:31
done. We like made it.

00:39:32
And by the way, in order to fly in like that thin of an

00:39:35
atmosphere, like it's like wing tips are going like Mach four or

00:39:38
something like that. So it's like I call it a

00:39:39
helicopter, but it's like closer to like a like jet engine

00:39:43
helicopter that you know is like just spinning crazy fast blades,

00:39:46
but it's like really like you. They literally, they have like a

00:39:48
video where they basically had the Rover filming the helicopter

00:39:51
taking off and landing. So like there are like videos

00:39:53
not from like it has onboard cameras that are like pretty

00:39:55
good, but there's like an off board camera like the Rover that

00:39:59
like does it. And like, watching a video of a

00:40:00
helicopter on Mars is probably like the coolest experience one

00:40:02
can have. So NASA do do that.

00:40:05
Yeah, keep doing, you know, sort of that stuff.

00:40:07
And then they have a portion of their mandate which is basically

00:40:10
like kickstart the like, you know, economic flywheel of

00:40:13
humanity expanding into space. They did a really phenomenal job

00:40:16
of that with basically like launch services, right.

00:40:18
So basically like rather than saying like here's how you

00:40:20
should go build your rocket, here's how you should go

00:40:23
basically like resupply the International Space Station,

00:40:25
instead, they said we'll pay you like, you know, $50 per

00:40:28
kilogram. Do you get to lower Earth orbit

00:40:30
and we'll pay you $200 per kilogram that you basically like

00:40:33
deliver to the International Space Station?

00:40:35
Without what you wish basically. And so that's how you've seen

00:40:37
the success of programs you know like commercial resupply, like

00:40:40
commercial launch. And so now they're starting to

00:40:42
think about how they do that serve basically for future

00:40:44
programs that I think they should continue to have this

00:40:46
like split world where basically like everything that is sort of

00:40:48
like close to earth and in the realm of what like venture

00:40:51
backed companies should do, can do, they should basically just

00:40:55
act as the first buyer in the marketplace.

00:40:57
And that's what kick starts to supplies that, you know, the

00:40:59
early days maybe NASA was buying most of SpaceX launches, but now

00:41:01
companies like Varda can buy Spacex's launches.

00:41:04
Do the same thing for these like you know, sort of Commercial

00:41:06
Services, be that first like guaranteed buyer and then don't

00:41:10
focus on engineering as much there.

00:41:11
Just be a buyer and then focus all the engineering, basic

00:41:14
science that are on the things that are like super far out.

00:41:16
Like who do you think would do a Martian mission like the

00:41:19
government or SpaceX? Right now it's just the

00:41:22
government that is like you sort of playing on those and I think

00:41:24
that is the place where they should continue to play in.

00:41:26
Same thing with like, you know, the first lunar base will be,

00:41:28
you know, done by the government as well.

00:41:30
I feel like one of the challenges when NASA or like the

00:41:33
government does something, like I feel like every American can

00:41:37
feel like some sense of like ownership over it because it's

00:41:40
like their money. It's their part of it in some

00:41:43
ways. Like, I don't know if I'm

00:41:44
incriminating myself with this view or not.

00:41:46
Like when SpaceX does something it can feel like you have to

00:41:51
like go and like say Elon's Grit.

00:41:53
Like it's like it's almost like you're obligated to like go

00:41:56
thank this sort of like strong man billionaire instead of when

00:42:01
the government like does something it feels like, oh

00:42:04
that's like us. Or like, do you think there's

00:42:06
like part of the barrier to sort of national sort of popular

00:42:11
embrace of sort of the space exploration stuff is this

00:42:15
private enterprise and that it's done in a way that sort of the

00:42:18
regular person feels like irrelevant to?

00:42:22
Well. I mean, there are plenty of

00:42:24
political polls that show that Elon Musk is the most favored

00:42:27
like public figure in the United States.

00:42:29
So I would argue that your entire thesis is flawed,

00:42:32
basically, which is, you know, Elon does the best job of any

00:42:35
figure of making the public populace feel like a part of

00:42:39
space exploration. Even better than any other

00:42:42
government. It's very much like it's a

00:42:43
strong man. Like he gets the credit for it.

00:42:46
Like even more. I don't even more than like the

00:42:48
SpaceX engineers and stuff. It's a very central like the

00:42:51
story that humanity is telling is one of the brilliant sort of

00:42:55
Elon Musk taking us there. Yeah, I mean, that's

00:42:58
collectivist. Always been true in history is

00:43:00
that like stories are. The Great Man is always the

00:43:03
easiest sort of story to tell rather than the collective, but.

00:43:07
Yeah, yes. I'm not sure entirely where the,

00:43:08
you know, sort of like how to answer the question.

00:43:10
Oh yeah, It's not a very pointed question.

00:43:12
It's just something I'm like I struggle with or it's like on

00:43:15
the one hand I want. I mean, yeah, I guess I'm not

00:43:17
gonna let ideology get in the way of cheering for something

00:43:20
that I'm. Yeah, I guess it's like

00:43:22
struggling with, like, the sky being blue.

00:43:23
Like I say like, you know, go talk to your therapist.

00:43:25
But like, you know, it's like a law of physics.

00:43:27
So I assume you watch Oppenheimer.

00:43:29
Like, I mean the reality of SpaceX is that there are a lot

00:43:32
of people like doing it. He's doing a lot of things.

00:43:35
Like some of it is there's sort of the myth building around one

00:43:38
person, but the reality is like they are collective endeavors.

00:43:41
Yeah, I don't know. I feel like just like the

00:43:43
stories that are paired with the scientific accomplishments of

00:43:48
our time is injure. The one telling the stories,

00:43:51
change the narrative. Go go interview.

00:43:52
Like you're telling the stories as well, I mean, yeah.

00:43:57
I mean we highlight our team members, you know, we have

00:43:59
Andrew Mccale up, you know, out and doing public interviews and

00:44:01
talking about things. We I think do a pretty good job

00:44:03
of like highlighting like the broader talent of art of beyond

00:44:06
just like the founding team. And I would you know put it on

00:44:08
the media of like, you know, I don't know like the information

00:44:10
did like this like profile police on Gwyn Shotwell who's

00:44:12
like one of the most like phenomenal executives, you know,

00:44:15
in the space industry. And like her article was like

00:44:17
half like a takedown article. So, you know, I would put it on

00:44:20
like the onus of like, yeah, being journalists should do a

00:44:23
better job of. Recognizing that there are a

00:44:24
collective of people that you know contribute significantly to

00:44:27
SpaceX, and they aren't highlighted or appreciated well

00:44:30
enough. Like people should be banging

00:44:31
down Gwyn Shotwell's door to be like routing books about her.

00:44:33
And people don't, I'm sure. Well, I'd happily write a book

00:44:37
about her, you know, I feel like she's probably hard to access,

00:44:40
but yeah. Maybe because people write

00:44:42
takedown pieces about her. How do you think there's, you

00:44:44
know, yeah, the media can't sort of help itself, but sort of have

00:44:49
sort of a negative angle at any given moment.

00:44:51
It does. For some reason, media loves to

00:44:53
destroy powerful women. I don't know why do you think

00:44:55
it's women specific or it's just yeah, I think stories.

00:44:58
There's definitely a trend of like every strong woman founder,

00:45:01
every strong woman like aerospace leader, like gets torn

00:45:04
down by the media for some reason.

00:45:06
Yeah, I mean, I agree. I agree that no quibble on that

00:45:09
that there was like especially you know the startup founder.

00:45:12
Period. Yeah, like the away story, the

00:45:13
Outdoor Voices story. Like there was so many of these

00:45:16
that were just like complete nonsense.

00:45:19
Do you, I mean, do you think are you supportive of like Musk's

00:45:23
time spent on X Twitter like or do you think it is sort of a

00:45:27
detriment to SpaceX? I think he's a phenomenal

00:45:31
entrepreneur and you know, it's not up to me to judge where and

00:45:34
how he spends his time. If he's like most intrigued by

00:45:37
and things that like X is going to be the most impactful, like,

00:45:40
you know, good on him and I think.

00:45:41
You know, he obviously is still a phenomenal visionary and

00:45:44
leader for SpaceX. But also the company is like in

00:45:46
a very mature state where it has a really great set of leaders,

00:45:48
including people like Quinn Shotwell and you know, seems to

00:45:51
be making really phenomenal progress.

00:45:52
So, you know, I don't think that like, you know, the marginal

00:45:55
hour that he spends on like Twitter is somehow like

00:45:57
preventing Starship from coming online or anything like that.

00:46:00
So, you know, I think Starship is just like a very difficult

00:46:03
project and that is just going to take a series of cycles and

00:46:05
iterations and it's really exciting to see what's happening

00:46:07
at Boca Chica and the progress that's being made there.

00:46:09
But you know, I don't think that like.

00:46:11
Twitter is somehow preventing that progress from happening.

00:46:15
You got promoted at Founders recently?

00:46:16
Yeah, Yeah. And it's like new set of funds

00:46:18
and I think we announced it late May, June time frame.

00:46:22
How do you do both? Or yeah, it's certainly a lot of

00:46:25
time. Yeah, I think it's mostly that

00:46:27
like 1 + 1 = 3 in that I think part of what allows me to, I

00:46:32
think do decently in both roles is.

00:46:35
There are times where when I'm working at VARDA, there's a huge

00:46:37
sort of upside to having the Founders Fund.

00:46:39
You're sort of brand and they like investing your sort of hat

00:46:41
on whether it be when I'm fundraising on behalf of VARDA,

00:46:44
when I'm on Capitol Hill meeting with particular, you know,

00:46:46
Congressional figures that may have a lot of respect for the

00:46:48
Founders Fund name but may or may not have actually heard

00:46:50
about, you know, VARDA quite yet to my ability to understand the

00:46:52
broader landscape and you know how things are going in

00:46:54
airspace, in the airspace world given that.

00:46:56
Not only do I know how VARD is doing but I also know how a lot

00:46:59
of the like you know near peer companies are doing as well.

00:47:01
And so that really unlocks an inside of like where are we in

00:47:04
terms of headcount, burn revenue etcetera relative to like you

00:47:07
sort of certain peers. And I think having that broader

00:47:09
perspective makes me very effective at VARDA.

00:47:11
And then on the flip side, you know on the Founders Fund side

00:47:13
of things, you know, being the man in the arena I think is I

00:47:15
think that makes me both the most helpful to founders that

00:47:17
are starting companies. And just significantly

00:47:20
increases, they're like it's a top of funnel of people that are

00:47:21
interested in working with me conversion rate you know all the

00:47:24
way down through making investing.

00:47:25
So although over the past year since starting Varda about three

00:47:27
years and if we spent less time on the investing sort of role, I

00:47:31
actually think I've been able to sort of deploy just to have a

00:47:33
pace and with just as great of IRR if not higher than where I

00:47:37
was sort of before. I think it's a unique set up for

00:47:39
two reasons. Which is 1, obviously, being a

00:47:42
part of a platform like Founders Fund, that is very encouraging,

00:47:44
basically, of this type of role, right?

00:47:45
If you look at our team, it's almost like half the team now

00:47:47
that is in this type of role where they're actively basically

00:47:49
building something alongside investors and Peterson, chairman

00:47:52
of, Yeah, Flexport, yeah. Trey Stevens, Keith Redboy.

00:47:56
I'd argue Peter Thiel as well. And then I think the other thing

00:47:59
that's Peter's company. You know I can't claim that I

00:48:02
have a specific one in mind right now more that he does

00:48:04
spend a lot of time with certain like biotech companies that is

00:48:06
this has been publicly reported on where he's like you know

00:48:09
Chairman and I'm not like super deeply familiar with it.

00:48:11
But there are like a handful of biotech companies where he goes

00:48:12
like very, you know, sort of deep the life extension type or.

00:48:16
I don't think any of them are life extension related.

00:48:18
One of them was like an antibodies company, but I'm not

00:48:19
even like that, Deeply familiar with the company, but OK.

00:48:22
Anyway, sorry. Oh.

00:48:22
Yeah, no problem. What I was going to say is I

00:48:25
think at least when I think about when is it sort of worth

00:48:27
incubating something and actually you're subjecting

00:48:29
yourself to the torture of two jobs.

00:48:31
You know, when you I think fit a certain set of criteria, one is

00:48:34
the company that you're going to incubate isn't something that is

00:48:37
already available on the market. You could just like invest in,

00:48:39
give it the opportunity. Cost of building something is

00:48:41
like massive. To it's something that is like

00:48:43
uniquely suited to be incubated and built by venture capitalists

00:48:46
in that it's something that either like your ability to

00:48:48
fundraise because it's capital intensive or your ability to put

00:48:51
together disparate talent that may not come together otherwise

00:48:53
makes it a company possible. And then third, ideally that

00:48:56
this is a company that is also any category that you're highly

00:48:59
interested in investing in. So that by basically working

00:49:01
deeply in this category you could assess things more easily

00:49:03
and you get basically the best top of funnel.

00:49:05
And so for me Varta sort of fit all three of those categories

00:49:07
where there wasn't really anybody working on it.

00:49:08
It's going to be capital intensive and I can help

00:49:10
basically put together the financing.

00:49:12
And three, I was highly interested in investing even

00:49:14
more in aerospace than I was before.

00:49:16
And So what better way to basically have as much top of

00:49:18
funnel and like access an aerospace than starting a

00:49:20
company. And so I think you know, it's

00:49:22
rare to, you know, I feel very, you know, fortunately grateful

00:49:24
to find myself in this situation where I am able to balance these

00:49:26
two. You think there's you should

00:49:28
have a million different variations of this that you know

00:49:30
wouldn't quite work, but the particular variation that I'm in

00:49:32
right now sort of happens. It happens to work.

00:49:34
What are your main investments? I founders fun I've made.

00:49:38
If you look at top performing over the course of my entire

00:49:40
investing career, both at Founders Fund and Coastal

00:49:42
Ventures, at Coastal Ventures that led the Series A of Sword

00:49:45
Health and then continue to double down at it from Founders

00:49:48
Fund, that company was last valued at roughly $1.8 billion

00:49:51
and we originally invested in the Series A at 25 posts and

00:49:54
then it founders when I moved over it, I believe like 40

00:49:56
posts. I also, you know I worked

00:49:58
alongside Keith, but did Source Ramp Financial their original

00:50:02
basically both Seed and Series A round was the point person on

00:50:05
both of those where we originally invested again in

00:50:08
similar roughly price points to Sword and ultimately obviously

00:50:11
that company was last valued at $8 billion in their last

00:50:14
financing. These are probably the two,

00:50:16
let's say you know unicorns and there's a whole you know set of

00:50:19
like let's say mid stage companies that are you're

00:50:21
tracking relatively well. Lula for example insure tech in

00:50:23
Miami just and as their series be Hadrian another aerospace

00:50:26
company sort of down the block cover this home building company

00:50:29
in LA. Those are some of the examples

00:50:31
in the mid stage range. Don't want to deprive our

00:50:33
listeners of your wonderful tweets.

00:50:35
You had a great one. Imagine having to wake up every

00:50:37
day and work in sass while the world is regularly landing

00:50:40
orbital rockets, reading life into silicon and synthesizing

00:50:44
superconductors using Alchemy. And then Roon.

00:50:47
Always, the troll says. Now tell us how you really feel

00:50:49
about corporate cards. Are you guys writing off Sass or

00:50:53
like? I mean, I know that just comes

00:50:54
from you, but what is sort of the view over Founders Fund on

00:50:58
software investments right now? That's very much so my personal

00:51:01
view and it more has to do with my personal innovation than

00:51:03
necessarily like you know, where IRR is.

00:51:04
Obviously we've hired some phenomenal folks including, you

00:51:07
know, Sam Blonde who is formerly a CRO at Breck's that you know,

00:51:10
his primary focus isn't, you know, sort of sass and

00:51:12
previously had, you know, phenomenal SAS career before

00:51:15
Breck's. So no, does not fix way Parker.

00:51:18
Yeah, he was at echo sign back in the day under Jason Lemkin is

00:51:21
it. And then was at you know

00:51:23
Zenefits with Parker and then Brax with Henrique and I forget

00:51:26
the other guys name at Braxton and and then joined us.

00:51:29
So no, not at all. You know, obviously something

00:51:31
that we were going to continue to invest in.

00:51:32
It's just something that I personally at least prefer to

00:51:34
you know not spend time on. So I'm very glad we've hired

00:51:36
people like Sam. They can go get all the returns.

00:51:39
Somebody shit on you in the replies saying didn't you sell

00:51:42
tshirts for seven months or so? What was that?

00:51:45
I didn't even know that about you or what it was, your seven

00:51:47
month. Oh, yeah, I worked at a tea

00:51:49
spring for about Oh, yeah, Yeah. Would you learn from that

00:51:53
experience? I did learn a lot.

00:51:55
It was one of these examples where I was at the time I

00:51:58
believe 22 or 23 year old like single time sort of failed

00:52:00
founder. The company was in a little bit

00:52:02
of a floundering state where they basically had a very highly

00:52:05
priced and they are flying high. Let's say they were like the hot

00:52:08
startup darling of Silicon Valley in the call 20/15/16 time

00:52:12
frame. And then basically shortly after

00:52:13
that round, maybe like flatline in revenue for the next like 2

00:52:16
1/2 years, if not slightly declining revenue?

00:52:18
And so there was interest in you sort of making some more risky

00:52:22
moves. And so one of those moves that

00:52:24
the board was, you know, convinced of was let's give this

00:52:26
23 year old, you know, single time failed founder like a whole

00:52:29
department of the company just like seeing what he does with

00:52:31
it. So I really enjoyed it.

00:52:32
Like you know, I think I did a decent job of also like drinking

00:52:34
the kool-aid while I was there. So I really believed in tshirt

00:52:36
selling, even if you know, looking back, maybe it's not the

00:52:39
most exciting thing, but I was really appreciative for the

00:52:41
opportunity to like. Get to lead.

00:52:42
The largest team that I think to date is still the largest that

00:52:45
I've ever led in terms of like the number of direct reports

00:52:47
that I had that reported in to me and managed to grow.

00:52:50
You know, so the revenue line that I was handed from like

00:52:51
roughly 12 and a half million annualized GMV to about

00:52:54
75 annualizing GMV. And so I learned a ton during

00:52:57
that time, about just like how to manage, how to be the

00:52:59
executive price, you know, if you see string exit or whatever

00:53:02
happened. I believe there is still a

00:53:04
privately held company and they've been like even out

00:53:06
positive actually basically since roughly the quarter after

00:53:08
my laugh. Basically we like went through a

00:53:10
riff around the same time that I actually decided to leave and

00:53:13
the company's actually have been profitable now for instead a

00:53:15
period of time. And some of the stuff that

00:53:16
actually worked on back in the day, some of the things that are

00:53:18
actually like working the best for the company now.

00:53:20
So it's cool to see that finally play out.

00:53:21
What's your political involvement these days?

00:53:24
Or I'm very happy that we've made the piece you've come back

00:53:28
on. Like our first, I think, Silicon

00:53:30
Valley encounter was over that like Chesa Boudin thing when we

00:53:34
were all going crazy during the clubhouse era.

00:53:38
But then we got to see each other at Web Summit and I think

00:53:41
both are Twitter. Well, you're much more feisty on

00:53:44
Twitter than I am, though. I think also my combativeness

00:53:48
and time spent on Twitter has calmed down.

00:53:50
But are you active in, you know, looking out for the presidential

00:53:53
candidates or San Francisco politics stuff these days?

00:53:57
Yeah, I think at the time I was deeply passionate.

00:54:00
You know, back in even 2018, I want to say I actually was one

00:54:04
of the, oh, no, 2019. I was actually one of the

00:54:06
largest fundraisers for Leaf Douch, who was one of the DA

00:54:09
candidates. You know, I campaigned.

00:54:11
For him, you know, spent a ton of energy and resources, you

00:54:14
know, sort of personally trying to get people to understand

00:54:16
basically why this race was very important.

00:54:18
I couldn't get like the light of day from anybody, including

00:54:20
people like Solano, for example, who like, you know, came around

00:54:23
to how important it was. But at the time, Mike Solano,

00:54:25
who's also founders, fun and writes with tire wise, which is

00:54:30
always fascinating and worth at least having on your radar if

00:54:33
diametrically opposed and stylings to.

00:54:37
Exactly. But yeah, yeah, nobody really

00:54:39
paid attention. And so that was definitely, at

00:54:40
least for me, my breaking moment with like basically interest in

00:54:43
San Francisco sort of politics and that I felt like I put in a

00:54:46
ton of effort and like nobody in the tech community was basically

00:54:48
like paying any attention, you know, sort of do this.

00:54:50
And it ended up having a real impact on my life and obviously

00:54:51
ended up, you know, I started deciding to move away almost

00:54:54
like 2 years to the day after, you know, that campaign to

00:54:56
Miami. So yeah, since moving to Miami,

00:54:58
obviously, I don't feel like I've much insensitive to care

00:55:00
much about San Francisco politics.

00:55:01
I mean, credit to like, I'm sorry, Vard is in California.

00:55:04
Right. Vard is in Los Angeles where I

00:55:05
do about like four months of the year and then 7-8 months of the

00:55:08
year. I'm in Miami anyway, so credit

00:55:09
to folks like Gary Tan and then I forget the guys name Sachin

00:55:12
with like Grow SF maybe not pronouncing his name correctly.

00:55:15
So it's really good to see some people that maybe are starting

00:55:17
to get, you know, sort of more traction, although still doesn't

00:55:20
seem like there's, you know, sort of been the change that

00:55:21
people have been sort of hoping for.

00:55:24
And then you know beyond that, you know sort of particular

00:55:25
incidents I'd say I'm definitely not opposed to you know, sort of

00:55:28
becoming more politically involved over time, but at least

00:55:29
right now very narrowly focused in on basically Varda.

00:55:32
And so all of my political contributions go into the Varda

00:55:35
Pack. Of the Varda Pack contributions

00:55:37
basically go to our, you know, particular company policy

00:55:39
priorities that are very specific to, you know, basically

00:55:43
our work around reentry, hypersonic testing, you know,

00:55:46
the future programs of NASA. All right, great.

00:55:49
Thanks so much for coming on the show.

00:55:50
This was awesome. Cool.

00:55:52
Thanks for having me, Eric. That's our episode.

00:55:54
Thanks so much to Dellian for coming on the show.

00:55:56
Shout out to Juniper Square, our sponsor for the episode, Tommy

00:55:59
Herron, the audio editor, Riley Kinsella, my chief of staff,

00:56:03
Annie Wen, who's producing for the summer and of course, young

00:56:06
Chomsky for the theme music. Like, comment, subscribe on

00:56:10
YouTube, give us a review on Apple Podcasts, and please

00:56:14
subscribe to the sub stack newcomer.co.

00:56:17
See you next week. Goodbye.

00:56:18
Goodbye. Goodbye.

00:56:20
Goodbye. Goodbye.

00:56:20
Goodbye. Goodbye.

00:56:22
Goodbye. Goodbye.

00:56:24
Goodbye. Goodbye.