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.
