Every investment I have to ask myself, is this company a likely beneficiary of AI or not? If the answer is that they're a victim of AI, obviously it's an easy answer. But even if the answer is neutral, still the answer is probably no.
“And there's a lot of value being created, and there's a lot of value being destroyed, and there's a lot of value being shifted.”
And there's a lot of value being created, and there's a lot of value being destroyed, and there's a lot of value being shifted. The the one thing maybe you could argue that change, I don't know if it's twenty four months or thirty six months, is that every investment I have to ask myself, is this company a likely beneficiary of AI or not? The answer is that they're a victim of AI. Obviously, it's an easy answer. But even if the answer is neutral, still the answer is probably no. So I just have to ask this question, which is a question I wouldn't ask four years ago. Right? Four years ago, I would look at an opportunity. I wouldn't ask myself, is this a beneficiary of AI? But in the past three years, absolutely, I have to, ask this question.
Why this clip
Provides a clear, actionable decision framework for AI-era investing. The binary thinking (beneficiary vs victim vs neutral = no) is memorable and addresses the biggest question facing VCs today with specific methodology.
What they said next
The compensation that the GP gets from the management fee is typically greater than the upside. Let's say you have $10 billion and you charge 2%. The minute you close the fund, you already made $200 million.
41:26 - 17s · Bold/Contrarian
More from this episode
From the blog
Want clips like this for your podcast?
We find your top 5-8 clips, write the hooks, and deliver ready-to-post content. First 2 episodes are free.
Get 2 Episodes Clipped Free