Pivot - DeSantis Drops Out, Stock Market Soars, and Guest Aileen Lee

Episode Date: January 23, 2024

Kara and Scott discuss Ron DeSantis' departure from the 2024 race and the Biden/Trump rematch that everyone is dreading. Then, with the good news about the economy and the stock market, what's the best move for investors? Plus, Nelson Peltz continues his Disney proxy fight, and a new report sheds light on the anti-DEI movement. Our Friend of Pivot is Aileen Lee, the founder and managing partner of the VC fund, Cowboy Ventures. She also happens to be the person who coined the term "unicorn" for billion dollar start-ups and shares her latest analysis on those companies. Follow Aileen at @aileenlee Follow us on Instagram and Threads at @pivotpodcastofficial. Follow us on TikTok at @pivotpodcast. Send us your questions by calling us at 855-51-PIVOT, or at nymag.com/pivot. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Support for Pivot comes from Virgin Atlantic. Too many of us are so focused on getting to our destination that we forgot to embrace the journey. Well, when you fly Virgin Atlantic, that memorable trip begins right from the moment you check in. On board, you'll find everything you need to relax, recharge, or carry on working. Buy flat, private suites, fast Wi-Fi, hours of entertainment, delicious dining, and warm, welcoming service that's designed around you. delicious dining and warm, welcoming service that's designed around you. Check out virginatlantic.com for your next trip to London data, and a matching engine that helps you find quality candidates fast. Listeners of this show can get a $75 sponsored job credit to get your jobs more visibility at Indeed.com slash podcast.

Just go to Indeed.com slash podcast right now and say you heard about Indeed on this podcast. Indeed.com slash podcast. Terms and conditions apply. Need to hire? You need Indeed. Hi, everyone. This is Pivot from New York Magazine and the Vox Media Podcast Network. I'm Kara Swisher broadcasting from inside Scott's bedroom.

No, I'm not. I'm actually in a studio. Not a lot going on there. No, your lovely cleaning person is here, and they feel bad. Anyway, it's great. Cleaning person? Yes, person.

I'm being woke. I'm being woke. Anyway, I am enjoying your apartment. Thank you for letting me use it. I have some personal stuff, and also I'm going to see Madonna tonight. Do you know that? That's awesome, and I enjoy it when you're there. It makes me feel good that I have friends there.

Madonna, that's going to be really interesting. Yeah, she's being sued in Brooklyn, I guess, where her last show was. This is at Madison Square Garden tonight, but she was late. She was a couple hours late, and so some people felt that was rude of her to do or suing her. I don't care if she's late. I have to go to dinner and then I'll go see Madonna. Yeah. I forget who it was. All the heavy metal bands used to think it was kind of cool to show up four hours late. I'm like, I need to get home, put in my catheter and go to sleep. Let's get this show going. Her constituency is not young. So it's kind of interesting.

Before we'd be like, whatever, Madonna. So I'll be curious to see. She was always a performer more than a singer. Like, let's be honest. But always, like the songs were so fun. It'll be interesting to see if it's like the Rolling Stones, which I think people still find enjoyable, or it's kind of sad. I don't know. I bet it's going to be great. She has so many talented people around her. And I just think it's going to answer the question that everyone's asking, and that is, where are all the white parents of those Taylor Swift fans? They'll be at the Madonna concert.

It's going to be literally the land of 50-something white people. What was your first concert, Scott Galloway? I went to go see Squeeze with Maureen Burke at the Greek Theater. I love Squeeze. And do you know who opened? Who they opened for? Who? They opened for the Go-Go's.

And the Go-Go's, everyone in the crowd was so passionate and knew the songs so well from, I think it was Beauty and the Beat, that you couldn't hear the Go-Go's because the audience was singing so loud. I love the Go-Go's. Oh, they were great. My favorite was that they broke up for artistic differences. You got to ride that puppy. If you're that for the Go-Go's, you don't do that. Oh, yeah, you don't give that shit out. Like us, we ride that puppy. If you're that for the go-go's, you don't do that. Oh, yeah. You don't give that shit out. Also, that's- Like us. We ride that puppy. That's what we do.

I would argue those differences were not worth breaking up over. Can we have artistic differences? I think we should break up over artistic differences. Yeah. We have a difference. I fold. I agree. And then we move on. No. No, no, no. You do not. That's so true. My first constant, thank you for asking, was Kansas. Kansas? Dust in the Wind? Yeah, I was young. God. At least you got to be a good lesbian. Was this a date?

I know. Yes, I went with a boy. Yeah, I think it was like seventh grade. I don't know. It was at I think it was Jadwin Gym in Princeton, because that's where I grew up. And it was Dust in the Wind. You know, that's a good song. And I also went to Styx once. That's soon after Come Sail Away. Come sail away, come. Yeah, I had a much better musical upbringing. At UCLA, we had English Beat, R.E.M., The Clash. Oh, yeah, yeah.

I went to R.E.M. I saw Prince perform. I saw George Michael perform. Yeah, anyway. Anyway, it was great. Oh, yeah. Yeah. I went to R.A.M. I saw Prince perform. I saw George Michael perform. Yeah. Anyway. Anyway. It was great. It was great.

I did see Bruce Springsteen. He was amazing, too. Also, you know who was really good? Barbra Streisand. Barbra Streisand. I did not see Babs. A fucking hell of a concert. I did not see Babs.

She carpeted when I was younger. It was a cap center in D.C. That was after you came out. That was after you came out. It was me and the gays. It was me because I'm a gay man. But she carpeted all the cap centers. She carpeted it so it sounded better with white carpet.

It was such a move. It was such a baller move. Anyway, we have a lot to talk about. That was a nice little walk down memory lane. But let's break up over artistic differences. Today, we have so much to talk about. We'll talk about the shape of the presidential election heading into the New Hampshire primary. And by the way, lots of snow here on the East Coast in general. Major issue on the minds of voters right now, the economy. We'll discuss the good, the VC fund Cowboy Ventures. She used to work at Kleiner Perkins, the person who first coined the term unicorn

for startups with billion dollar valuations. And she's got some new things to say about that. So we're very excited about that. But for Scott, you'll like this one. Apple's Vision Pro will be lacking some key apps when it debuts. Netflix, YouTube, and Spotify have signaled they will not launch on the Vision OS software,

also causing Apple headaches. Software makers are not thrilled with Apple's new approach to App Store commissions. You know, we talked about last week. It has been forced to stop selling watches with blood oxygen tracking, and the AI team tasked with validating series accuracy is shutting down and relocating to Texas. Plus, the company has warned that revenue will be flat in quarterly earnings following its longest sales slump in decades. So we're going to try it out. I replaced you with some CNN people, including Chris Wallace. You gave away my spot? I gave away your spot to Chris Wallace. That's okay. We have a table for eight, a red lobster,

and we have seven. I'm giving your spot away. Well, okay. I like red lobster. Apple people are so sad you won't try it. Yeah, I bet giving your spot away. Well, okay. I like that. Well, okay. Apple people are so sad you won't try it. Yeah, I bet they're real disappointed. I went to that demo of their credit card, and they have this. Oh, I do remember that. They have this. They rent a loft in Tribeca that feels like the second home of a Bond villain. Yes.

And then a very high EQ person gives the seventh spiel in a row, who comes up in Vince's well-appointed clothing, someone who's, you know, very attractive, but not hot, who's also ethnically ambiguous if white was being ethnically ambiguous. And then they take you through all the stuff. And I sit there and I pretend to be polite. I think these things are so awkward. You know, this one you have to see. I'm sorry. You just do. It's a thing. It's a thing. Look, you don't have to wear it. I'm going to have it. You can try mine. I will let- You're getting one? They're sending you one? Yes. No, I'm buying it with the Zeiss lenses. I'm getting- But do you have access to it? Because the- Yeah, you can order it. It's actually orders are, it's coming in a month or so. It's on track for orders. I don't think it's like selling like gangbusters, but it's on track for orders.

As long as you're getting regular sex from Amanda, I'm fine with you getting it. Okay. Thanks for that. Let me just say, you're going to try it. My mind. You're going to try it. Yeah, I'll try it. I'll absolutely try it.

All right. Okay. All right. When I have it. We'll have a little party over here at your apartment. I'll come in. We'll cuddle. We'll do a little cuddle puddle.

We'll do the thing. Okay. Neither of us are cuddlers, let's be honest. No. No, we're not. We're not. We reallydle puddle. We'll do the thing. Okay. Neither of us are cuddlers, let's be honest. No. No, we're not. We're not. We really are. I like to sleep by myself.

No. I'm always like pillows and Kara. No. I don't like cuddling. When I have sex and I climax, that's my way of saying, can I call you an Uber? Oh, my God. That's good. That's not good.

Anyway, Nelson Peltz is making a lot of noise over at Disney. I will push people to a Bill Cohen piece about this, what I thought was super smart about what's happening. He's been covering it really well. Peltz thinks that he and his former Disney chief financial officer, Jay Rosullo, could be, quote, Batman and Robin if shareholders would just elect them to the board. Peltz's goal is to boost stock performance,

partly by increasing streaming profit margins, which currently lose money under CEO Bob Iger, as if he's not working on it. Bill was making this point, is that Pelz has no particular expertise here to do a lot of the things that Iger is probably working on right now. It's this try-on fund. He's also got one of the other big, Pearlder shares. He's voting them. They're pushing back on Iger. I think Iger has made some good moves here by bringing in some very significant board members, including the former, I think, chairman of Morgan Stanley, who knows about one of the things is who's going to replace Iger. I don't know. What do you think?

Peltz keeps trying. If the question is, is Bob Iger this first ballot hall of fame CEO who looks to be doing the right things, or should they put Peltz on the board? The answer is yes. Put him on the board. He's purchased $3 billion worth of stock. No, he doesn't have $3 billion. He has some, and then he's using Ike Plumrodder's, which was, it was not well reported by the journal, but it's a little bit different. But go ahead. Well, he has beneficial ownership of $3 billion in shares, which I would bet, and I don't know this, but I would be willing to speculate that is more ownership than the entire board combined. Yes, it is, by a large part.

This is what a board is supposed to be. The non-management, but go ahead. Sorry. is what a board is supposed to be. The non-management, but go ahead. Sorry. A board is supposed to be fiduciaries for the stakeholders, which is Latin for shareholders, but in a woke world, we've expanded that to stakeholders. But 90% of the time, it means shareholders. And there's no better way to be a better fiduciary than to own a shit ton of shares. In addition, just strategically, it shuts him up. He's going to be pissing and heckling from the cheap seats for the next 12 months. Once you put my advice, and I've been through this a lot as both a person trying to get on boards and a person on boards where there's someone trying to storm the gates. The fastest way to get them to shut up is just put them on the board.

Come on in. Well, Bill is making, Bill Cohen is making the argument by this guy. He calls him the smiling crocodile or some other name for him. And that he, when he gets on boards, he gets rid of CEOs. He's got like, he's a very crafty fella. So he was saying it's not, he's only going to be on for a year. It's not going to matter. He doesn't have the expertise.

That was what Bill Cohen was saying. And I would tend to agree with him is that, you is that it worked for him to ignore him last year. And given the moves Iger has made, including putting these very qualified people on the board who have all the abilities in the areas they need help in, what do they need this guy for, just to shut him up? Generally, what you find when you get on a board after a hostile proxy contest and nobody wanted you on the board, especially the existing board, but they're forced to have you on the board, which is this is what the case would be. You find out, one, you're not as smart as you thought, and B, they're not as dumb as you'd hoped. I don't think he thinks Bob Iger's dumb, but go ahead. Well, you understand my meaning here. You recognize that the situations are complex, and these are usually smart people trying to do the right thing. Sometimes you do get on the board, and the first thing you do is kind of—there's two board meetings that happen at every company. There's the actual board meeting, and then there's the actual real meeting that happens in the parking lot after, where the two or three directors that matter get together and say, do we think this guy or gal is really the right person? That's the second board meeting. That doesn't happen with Bob Iker. He's such an accomplished executive. He's so smart. From all I can tell in terms of how he's moving around the chess pieces,

he's doing exactly what he should be doing. This entire thing is going to be a distraction for the next 12 months. And Nelson Peltz is smart and is going to have an army of PR people constantly shitposting the company, turning everything from chicken salad into chicken shit. Put him on the board. Make peace with this guy or put on a representative. I'm going to go opposite you. I think he's doing just the right thing. He's put two new people on the board who address the issues that Peltz has. Great directors. Yeah, great directors. You know, new ones. And I suspect he is moving very carefully towards who's going to take over him. And the guy from Morgan Stanley certainly did his changeover rather elegantly. So, you know, Peltz isn't obtuse.

He does understand what he's doing here with the jazz hands and everything else. But, you know, he's persistently not had him on there. And I don't know. I think Iger's, we'll talk about don't know i i think eiger's we'll talk about this later but i think eiger's strategy with desantis was correct like punch him in the nose and then just wait because yeah i just waited him out wait him out you know we'll get to that in a minute but we'll see what happens here i don't think he's going to put him on the board you think he should do you think he will i think there's so much ego involved now, and they're so angry at each other. I mean,

what it comes down to is this. If someone is willing to put that kind of capital at risk in your company, it automatically qualifies them as a decent fiduciary, and they should be appointed to your board. Okay. All right. We'll see what happens. One of the things we've been talking about in recent weeks, anti-Semitism on campuses and DEI initiatives. Well, according to new reporting by the New York Times, shocker, that's largely because of a very coordinated effort by a conservative think tank called the Claremont Institute. The Times obtained thousands of documents revealing the efforts of the group to fight what they call, quote, the leftist social justice revolution in American schools. You've got to read this piece. It's really, I mean, it's just, this is what we all thought. They did this with parental rights. They do this on every issue, and they're very good at it, including judicial, putting people in place, like that group, the Federalist group or whatever, that put judges in place. Also, there's, I've said this a lot, that it's a plan, and they've done, I think Hillary Clinton was right. There is a vast right-wing conspiracy. I don't think it's a conspiracy. I think it's a plan. In relation, and something

you wanted to talk about, Harvard announced task forces to tackle both anti-Semitism and Islamophobia last week. Former Harvard president Larry Summers blasted the university's choice of the person to lead the anti-Semitism task force because it's someone who he says, now I'm just going to use him, has downplayed the issue. And he said he lost confidence in leadership there. So Larry Summers is angry. So tell me what you think. I haven't read the Claremont, whatever it's called, papers. Can you give us a sense of what they're up to? This is how we're going to do it. These groups, whether it's Heritage or Claremont, have these thinkers, or Manhattan Institute's another one on the right. They come up with these plans of, you know, this is our 10-point plan to do this. This is how we're going to court politicians, how we're going to do this, how we're going to do that. And they act like it's a bottoms similar to everybody wants book banning. Everybody wants parental rights. That worked for a second and a half for Glenn Youngkin. And then voters were like, just a friggin second here. It doesn't, you know, I think it's, it's, it's, look, it's what Democrats do. Republicans happen to be very good at it, right? Especially right wing ones in terms of going from the bottom to the top to the bottom top and really using all the various levers to create a movement.

And in some cases, it works. Like with trans people and swim and athletes, it didn't work with the bathrooms, right? Their little effort didn't work because it didn't land well. But it's definitely not coming from grassroots anything. They create grassroots excitement. And so this is just like, look, this is how they do it. So it sounds like it's another what I'll call unproductive attempt to find a vehicle or a battlefield to engage in culture wars to try and make the other side look stupid as opposed to actually going after the issue. And the issue is, and I think there's some merit here, that universities have morphed from being centers of excellence to places of social engineering or some sort of political indoctrination.

And a lot of people on the right feel that it's very one-sided. And I think there's some truth here, and when it goes too far, it can end up in bad places. And ultimately, the snake might eat on its own tail, and you might have instances of racism. And I think we've seen this on campus. Having said that, what is the solution where everyone can rally around as opposed to just giving people fodder from the extremes to try and shitpost each other? And where I move to is like, how do we move to solutions? And I think the following is to acknowledge that affirmative action is a good thing,

that some people need a hand up. The question is, should it be based more on the adversity you faced as opposed to some sort of race-based affirmative action? And then all of this, again, is a bit of a misdirect because there's a couple of things that need to be addressed that would solve these problems. DEI is not an issue or the problems with it. There are somewhere between 3,500 and 5,500 certificate

or diploma-granting institutions in America, if you include the technical schools, et cetera, junior colleges. 3,300 of those 3,500 have to go find students. In other words, their demand is not as great as their supply. The only time this becomes a debate is at the, quote-unquote elite universities that are in the habit of creating such scarcity and playing off the hopes and dreams of middle-class Americans that they got to send their kids to school, that it becomes very heated around who gets in. And so one, you solve a lot of these problems if you just force them, if you put them on the hook for bad student loans, and two, you force them to grow their freshman classes as fast as population or faster, they lose their nonprofit status.

The other thing we do need to address is there are now nine employees at MIT that are non-faculty for every tenured faculty member. The number of administrators at the University of California, my alma mater, has grown 60% in the last couple of decades. And the result is an explosion in cost. And if you is an explosion in cost. And if you want to talk about the ultimate vehicle for discrimination, it's making college inaccessible for the majority of the public.

So I want to move away from these culture wars and start talking about- They don't want to move away from the culture wars. They're not really interested in solving the problem. They're not really interested in how... The greatest DEI initiative would be to have more kids have access to the great on-ramp to the middle class known as higher education, but they're not interested in that. They want to find an empty vessel that they can

feel their anger into or their extremism, and they want to politicize it. It's just unproductive. Mm-hmm. So what's the problem? They moved from trans-bathrooms to trans-athletes to, and this is just the right. By the way, the left does it too, but the right is quite good at it, is the issue, to parental rights. Look at Moms for Liberty is exactly that. And look, it's collapsed on itself. Isn't that the threesome group? Isn't that the throuple? Now it's the threesome group. I'm in. Whatever it is, I'm in. Yeah, yeah. So it's just they, like, come up with these, like, what can we scare the American? And it isn't about sleuths. It's the same thing with immigration.

Nobody wants to do intelligent immigration. It's just a lot of screaming. And into that breach, which I think is why you should look at these, they move. They're like, what can we do to upset and disturb people such that it often doesn't work, actually. Because I think voters sort of are like, just like with the abortion stuff, like they're like, yeah, no, we don't we want abortions or, you know, or we don't want abortions, but we want to we want the abortion rights. People move, they move into these angry areas and take advantage of it. And it's not honest. It's not an honest discussion of it.

And that's why it drives me crazy. And they're always, they're just so frigging sneaky. I don't know what else to say. And that's what, when you read this, you're like, oh God, especially, but then these things do get out, like the Trump stuff. This is what Trump is going to do in so many, you know, in this many weeks of targeting people, loyalty tests, et cetera, et cetera. Now, if I was Democrats, I wouldn't want this out, right? Like, look what they're going to do. It's stupid for these people to write these plans, but they kind of have to have plans if that's, they have to be ready to go from, you know, day one, essentially, day one of the dictatorship, as Trump likes to say. So,

it's just, I don't know what to say. Tell me what you think of this. You were particularly struck by the Larry Summers thing. Larry Summers blasts a lot of stuff, but in this case, he really did. He did one of those Bill Ackman level tweets, which I'm like, just write an essay for the New York Times, Larry, or something. But talk to me about that, because that really, you thought that was important. I thought it was really damning because, you know, Larry's on the inside and he was the guy telling everyone in the midst of the controversy around President Gay to take a breath. So, you know, he's well respected, served in the Obama administration. So when he comes out and starts attacking from the inside, I think it's pretty damning. Just to go back to solutions, the scary part of all of this from the far right, in my view, is that they have noticed that they get a disproportionate number of people who don't go to college, which I think is a terrible,

a terrible objective, or to diminish the standing of higher education in the United States, which quite frankly is next to weapons and movies and men in capes, one of the things we do the best here in the United States. If you had a drug that made you dramatically less likely to be depressed, obese, get divorced, ever own a gun, and dramatically more likely to enter into long-term relationships, to vote, to have children, to be a big taxpayer, to run for office, you wouldn't want to hoard that drug. That drug's called higher education. So why can't Republicans... I mean, the key would be, I think, that would satisfy moderates on the right is to reinstitute a

zeitgeist at universities that said, look, one of the biggest, of course, bring this back to me. One of the biggest compliments I get after my class is people will say to me, oftentimes, I don't know your political views. And I'm like, that's the victory. You're not supposed to. I'm supposed to present both sides, have you argue them out and make your brain, the muscle between, damage the muscle in between your ears such that it grows back stronger.

And we should ask or demand that professors and administrators leave their politics at the door the same way we should ask students to say, we're not here to protect you from things that offend you. That's not our job. And if words offend you, you should call your parents and have them come pick you up because you're not ready for college. Right. And then dramatically, and then reduce all these departments that quite frankly never go away and are very expensive, focus on excellence and helping kids develop economic security

for them and their families, dramatically expand enrollments, dramatically reduce costs, and a lot of these heated issues go away. They could go away. In Summers' case, for people who don't know, he's subjecting to the person they made co-chair, and his name's Penciler, I guess, and he goes, Professor Penciler has publicly minimized Harvard's anti-Semitism problem, rejected the definition used by the U.S. government in recent years of anti-Semitism is too broad. Invoke the need for the concept of settler colonialism and

analyzing Israel. Referred to Israel as an apartheid state and more. While he does not support BDS, he made it clear that he sees it as a reasonable position. Now, he said this, none of this, in my view, is problematic for a professor at Harvard or even for a member of a task force. But for the co-chair of an anti-Semitism task force that is being paralleled with Islamophobia task force, it seems highly problematic. So I think he's trying to get rid of this one guy. And he thinks he's far from the ideal chairman, and he thinks they should have someone else. I don't know who he thinks that would be. But, you know, I think he's trying to make something happen by posting and putting pressure, sort of a Bill Ackman kind of thing, which, of course, has pretty much backfired quite a bit on Bill Ackman, I would say.

In any case, we'll see what happens. But you're right. I do believe we, you know, the right and the extremes have gotten a hold of the conversation. OK, let's get to our first big story. The New Hampshire primary is about to get underway, and the Republican field has narrowed down to two candidates, finally, Donald Trump and Nikki Haley. Very different over the weekend. Ron DeSantis dropped out of the race.

Bob Iger had a big party for him coming back to Florida. No, he didn't. Endorsing Trump, which is what Gavin Newsom said he would do within weeks, and also using a falsely attributed Winston Churchill quote. Well done, Ron, you had a shitty debut on Twitter, it didn't work. And now you misquoted Winston Churchill. Were you surprised by DeSantis's timing? And now that Nikki Haley gets a two person race, how long, you know, she's not going to win in New Hampshire from what the what the what the polls are saying? Thoughts? I was I was surprised. I thought he was going to win in New Hampshire from what the polls are saying. Thoughts?

I was surprised. I thought he was going to wait till New Hampshire. And what you just said is exactly right. The metaphor for his entire campaign was his launch event on X. It was awkward. It was operationally a total clusterfuck that came across as incompetent. And if you look back on it, I don't even remember Governor DeSantis being on it. And that's the perfect metaphor for his

campaign. It was awkward. It was logistically, it was so poorly prosecuted despite a massive amount of money. And I don't remember anything that kind of Ron did other than stories about how awkward he was and how bad the campaign was going. insulting Trump a little bit more than he was, which he should have been doing from the start, like really calling it, which Haley is doing right now. She's talking about him being adult Trump. She's really leaning into Trump is old, which is interesting. I'm not sure it'll work at this point because everyone does think he's kind of crazy Uncle Don. That's sort of baked into it. What crazy shit is he going to come out of his mouth at any one time? But he got her mixed up with Nancy Pelosi. He's been doing a lot of cognitively questionable things, right? I just think people are used to it. But DeSantis is just someone people don't like. The more you saw of him,

the less you liked of him. And I think that I'm sort of perplexed as how well he did in Florida. Like everybody loved him. People think he got COVID right. And he also deserves some credit for how he approached COVID. Yeah. But that's it. It didn't last very long. Because I'll tell you, on the national stage, he's deeply unappealing. And I hate to say that because he's not an unhandsome man. He's got a very handsome family. Like he's got all the pieces. But he just seems like someone, the best one I saw was when he was doing his speech

someone was like AI still has a long way to go because he looks like he does he has like I don't know what it is but it's this weird

affect that is just comes down to one word likable and he's not that word because if you look at him he's out of central casting served his nation in the military

Yale, Harvard he was an athlete he was captain of his baseball team. I mean, I know that sounds kind of trite, but if you're captain of a varsity athletic team, it means you know how to pull people together. He was in the Little League. He went to interesting about, or one of the things I noticed was sort of interesting, is that in state and even Congress and Senate races, whoever has the most money wins like nine out of 10 times. That's no longer true in the presidential race. Jeb Bush had the most money. Totally flatline. I think he spent, what did he spend? $55 million. Some enormous amount of money. So Haley has really broken through in a way, but she still doesn't have enough in the modern Republican party. In any other year, she'd be the winner, right? Because she's actually honing her message. People think she's a little cautious. But it looks like it's going to be Trump-Haley, but she's really leaning into... said, Ron, in three weeks, as you're insulting Trump right now, in three weeks, you're going to kiss his ass. You're going to get on the knees for it. I think he said on your knees. But Haley,

what do you think of her prospects at all in terms of, obviously, she's not going to win, but what can she do from a marketing perspective? I don't know. I'm so biased here. I really hope that she surprises. And I don't know if she's going to all the polls, but if you look at New Hampshire, they take pride in being independent. I mean, they take pride in if they like to be contrarian. New Hampshire never wants to match the poll. So I'm hopeful that her message resonates. They have a lot in the most interesting or the X factor about the New Hampshire primary is that independents can vote in it. Actually, anyone can vote in it. But I, you know, there's just no getting around it.

Every day we go on, the Republican primary looks oranger and oranger. And I hope this is kind of the last stand for the non-Trumpers in the GOP. And then it becomes a war between the justice system and Donald Trump in terms of what happens. What would you do? We're not experts in politics, but in marketing, what would she, to stay in long? Obviously, here's the one thing. She stays in and something happens to him, she's out front, right? That's the goal here is just stay in long enough so that something legally bad happens to him. Or he says something really nutty or something disqualifies him.

That's, I would assume the bet here is that, is I'm going to stay in until you fall, until you trip front runner, essentially. I would link him to Biden. And the linkage, I would use the connective tissue I would use his age. Which she's doing. I would run clips of Biden falling and of Trump making stupid comments. She's done that. And saying, isn't it time for vigor? Isn't it time for youth? Isn't it time for a fresh perspective?

These people were born. These people were born as, you born as our GIs were returning home. Each of these individuals has between a 6% and 10% chance of dying every year according to insurance actuarial tables. Isn't it time for something new? And I would absolutely clot him and clump him in with Biden around the notion of age. And I'd show pictures of her. She's very vigorous. She's very attractive. She's young. And just say, it is time. We are the most, America is the most innovative, aggressive, youthful culture in history. And your leader should be as well. She's leaning into this. What else could she do? She's also leaning into, he could go to jail. You

know he could go to jail, people, and we're going to lose, and then we're going to have Biden. That's her basic argument. Yeah, the secondary message is the only way we lose, the only way we lose is if you put up Trump. Put me up against Biden, this is a lock. And by the way, all those people on the left who play identity politics, the Republican Party, just as we're the party that freed the slaves, as we're the party that brought down the wall, we're going to be the party that says to the rest of the world, we're about merit. And the person who deserves to be president happens to be the person who's going to be the first woman in the White House. Well, here's the thing. A lot of voters have, there was some really interesting reporting on people worried about, I can't believe it,

there's been women leaders all over the world, but there's still an issue in this country about a woman leader. But one thing that's clear is a Biden-Trump rematch is something nobody wants.

It's just crazy. Voters' satisfaction. That's what we're going to end up with? That is really, it's like, no, no, no, no, oh. Like, that's where,

here we are. What's interesting, Biden is, I think, smartly first attacking Trump. He can't attack him on cognitive issues, but Haley's doing that. He's leaning into reproductive freedom, which I think is smart. Rallies this week. He's rolling out new ads. He's trying to do all these executive orders around abortion as much as he can. as much as he can. I think Trump's big hand-wavy thing will be the vice presidential candidate choice, and that could be Elise Stefanik, who, speaking of unlikable, like completely unlikable. She had a big moment with the DEI thing,

but she's really quite a, just a terrible person. I don't know what else to say. She's so unlikable. But there's also Tim Scott. There's Kristi Noem. There's a whole bunch of people. So that will be his big, he's got to have someone.

Senator Scott would be a good choice. Stefanik, I don't know. That seems like mean and meaner. And she's the only, no one had heard of her before until she refused to certify the election. And she's saying she's refusing to certify it again if Trump doesn't win. He needs a solvent. He needs someone credible, thoughtful, likable. He should absolutely pick a non-white or a female. That would inoculate him from all the accusations that deepen his heart. He's a bigot or whatever. Senator Scott checks a lot of boxes. He's a bigot or whatever.

Senator Scott checks a lot of boxes. I mean, the one I'm scared of is that Nikki drops out and that's his VP. I think they would win. She's really, I can't imagine him picking her now. She's like, he old. What is she going to say? Oh, what I meant when he was old was that he was not that old. Oh, VPs have said worse and been selected as VPs. Yeah, that's true.

That's true. Kamala did. She certainly did. Yeah. But this is, he takes this rather seriously. Oh, VPs have said worse and been selected as VPs. record. I don't think there's a lot of affection between the two of them. I don't know what's happened there, but it hasn't worked. And it's all about winning. I don't think they, and I think that's a mistake. I think they need to pick someone that they get along with, but they don't. They pick someone who can help them win. Yeah. Yeah. I will see what he does, but it'll be interesting. But nobody wants this election. Nobody wants it, which is really amazing. Everyone's like, ugh. It's like this show. And not only that, the whole world, with everything going on right now. I had Ian Bremmer on my podcast, and he said something that struck me.

He said, no one wants this election this year. Everyone wishes they could put it off a year. It's like the wrong year to add this into the mix. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. Just FYI, the latest episode today of On with Kara Swisher, I talked to historian Heather Cox Richardson about how we got there, being in the age of Donald Trump and the rise of authoritarianism. That was elegant cross-promotion. I know.

I was trying to do that. Please listen to Kara's podcast so she can afford a hotel when she's in Manhattan. No, no, no. Would you like me to stay in a hotel? I've already told you I like it when you're there. Well, you just, okay, fine. I like it when you're there. No, no. Otherwise the plants would die. Not that I have plants. I literally already told you I like it when you're there. Well, you just, okay, fine. I like it when you're there. No, no.

Otherwise, the plants would die. Not that I have plants. I literally, you don't have plants. He has no plants. You have no plants. Oh, my God. Anyway, let's go on a quick break. When we come back, the economy and the stock market continue to defy expectations.

And we'll speak with a friend of Pivot, Aileen Lee, about the world of unicorn startups. Fox Creative. This is advertiser content from Zelle. When you picture an online scammer, what do you see? For the longest time, we have these images of somebody sitting crouched over their computer with a hoodie on, just kind of typing away in the middle of the night. And honestly, that's not what it is anymore. That's Ian Mitchell, a banker turned fraud fighter. These days, online scams look more like crime syndicates than individual con artists. And they're making bank. Last year, scammers made off with more than $10 billion. It's mind-blowing to see the kind of infrastructure that's been built to facilitate scamming at scale.

There are hundreds, if not thousands, of scam centers all around the world. These are very savvy business people. These are organized criminal rings. And so once we understand the magnitude of this problem, we can protect people better. we understand the magnitude of this problem, we can protect people better. One challenge that fraud fighters like Ian face is that scam victims sometimes feel too ashamed to discuss what happened to them. But Ian says one of our best defenses is simple. We need to talk to each other. We need to have those awkward conversations around what do you do if you have text messages you don't recognize? What do you do if you start getting asked to send information that's more sensitive?

Even my own father fell victim to a, thank goodness, a smaller dollar scam, but he fell victim and we have these conversations all the time. So we are all at risk and we all need to work together to protect each other. Learn more about how to protect yourself at vox.com slash zelle. And when using digital payment platforms, remember to only send money to people you know and trust. Thumbtack presents the ins and outs of caring for your home. Out. Indecision. Overthinking. Second guessing every choice you make. In. in plans and guides that make it easy to get home projects done out beige on beige on beige in knowing what to do when to do it and who to hire start caring for your home with confidence download thumbtack today

Start caring for your home with confidence. Download Thumbtack today. consumer happiness surveys. They're moving, it's ticking upward. It looks like the U.S. economy might be able to avoid a recession, according to a recent survey of economists, not even a soft landing. What do you think was going on? Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen was touting soft landing weeks ago and said, my hope is it will continue. I guess we're continuing to soft land, if at all. What is your take on all the good news? What strikes me is more so than all the good news, which is exceptional, is the consumer dissonance or the citizen dissonance. And that is, Americans have a unique ability to credit their character and their grit for the raise they're getting and then blame the government for inflation. And so even though that wages are

rising faster than inflation, now there's real wage increases. They still blame the government. Well, it's ticking up. It's ticking up. That Michigan survey just suddenly went the other direction. Yeah. But it's just very strange. The White House doesn't get any credit for it.

Yeah. It's starting to. I hope you're right. And this goes to my win. We literally have, now granted, it's not distributed equally. goes to my win. We literally have, now granted, it's not distributed equally. We have, no one could have predicted if someone had said, America is going to pull off this economy, they're going to figure out a way to have the lowest inflation in the G7. By the way, they're going to massively increase for all the shitposting and all the far right lights say,

drill, baby, drill. We're producing more energy than ever. We're the largest energy producer in the world. And if you look at our competitive advantage against China, if China decides to get into a hot war with anyone and at any number of choke points, their energy supply gets shut down. Yeah, they're gonna have to invade Russia. They're gonna have to invade Russia. They would be in such a world of hurt.

And we're energy independent. We're not only energy independent, we produce more energy than we consume, which is remarkable given what gluttons we are. So it's just striking that consumers don't feel better. It's getting better. It's ticking up. I think people still feel they're paying too much for food or the kind of the daily. But although I went and got gas and I was like, oh, this is low. This is like, I mean, I guess I'm one of those people who doesn't think about it that much compared to people who

have a really tighter budget. But I was like, wow, this is not expensive for the first time in a while. And I paid attention to like the four and five dollar gas. Employers added 216,000 jobs in December, which is a large and expected number. Weekly jobless claims reported were the lowest since September of 2022. There's a lot of layoffs in a number of sectors, but I think that's people cleaning up like all this stuff in tech

looks like it's around assistant, which AI, they're getting ready for AI and getting rid of stuff they don't need anymore. So that seems to be to be cleanup, right, of where things are going or getting ready for something else. Two things. If you were looking to invest right now, what advice would you give them? And then I want to ask you a quick question about the housing market. Where would I invest?

Look, my feeling is it's dangerous to listen to people like me and talking heads on podcasts make stock recommendations. And I like it because it's fun and I tell young people, take a third of your money and put it in stocks because A, you'll learn, you learn about the markets and also it's kind of fun and you can feel good when it goes up and beat yourself up a little bit when it goes down. But for the most part, what you want to do if this market has taught us anything, don't try and pick the needle in the haystack.

Pick the whole haystack and buy the whole market. The haystack approach. Go ahead. It's true. Unless you were a genius, and maybe you didn't have to be a genius, but people talk about their wins and they don't talk about their losses. Seven stocks were responsible for 70% of the gain last year. And you think you're smart enough to pick the seven of the 500? So instead, just buy the entire 500. And what do you know? What were you up in the teens last year? If you do that, if you compound going into your primary income earning

years what the market has done since 2008 at 11%, that means every seven years, you're doubling your money. And just from an emotional and mental well- wellbeing, this is what you want to do. You want to focus all of your mental, physical, and emotional energy on your day job. And you want to turn your investing over to an outstanding professional that is really good at what they do, but at the same time is really inexpensive. And that's called an index and an ETF fund. So if you could get someone, you're not good at building your own home. What if you could find someone to build your home that was outstanding at building homes and was really cheap? That's called an index or an ETF fund.

Don't buy a stock, buy the market. And the temptation to believe that you're smarter than everybody and all of these, the financial industrial complex, which will teach you that this old looking guy or all these Kwan people and PhDs have some sort of special insight or they're investing in ESG, whatever it might be, whatever the branding is, they are ripping you off.

They are ripping you off. So anyways, my recommendation on where to invest is just start investing and invest in index or ETF funds. You know, ask your wife. Yeah, that's in the stock market. The economy, the housing market is still kind of all over the place because of the interest rate and the 30-year interest rate is at 6.6%, higher than before the pandemic, obviously.

High prices are higher. But that's because I'm just talking to a friend of mine who's a very big realtor in D.C. And she was saying there just isn't stock. People, it's in the middle area. She goes in the top area and the cheaper area, it's doing okay. But there's no stock to sell. She said she didn't think people were as fixated on rates as they were. They don't want to move because of that. And that's one of the issues is not having enough in the market to move it around.

And she was thinking it was going to jump in the spring. She felt like people were just like, I feel I'm tired of waiting kind of thing or to move or to buy. But that's one area that's been sort of a laggard. Yeah, one of my predictions for my 2024 deck is that housing is going to boom, not price. What happened last year was sort of suspended that you had to suspend the natural order because what we unintentionally did was created these unexploded devices inside a home called a mortgage at 2.5% where no one wanted to leave. Life is aggregating at the dam. What I mean by that, death, divorce, disability,

people having kids, people needing to move for a job, whatever it might be. All of that demand is building. And the moment I think interest rates get kind of below six-ish, the moment that people start dying and more housing stock comes available, the moment that some of the supply that's being constructed comes on the line, I think in Q4, you had the lowest transaction in like decades. That's what she was saying. Yeah. She said it's right in the middle. She said it's not at the high. It's not at the low. You know what I mean? Like the apartments and things like that. But go ahead. I think you're going to see back half of this year, just a ton of people. I don't want to

say throw in the towel, but go, okay, interest rates are below. Maybe I can pick up a mortgage with a five handle on it. We've been talking about moving home. We just had our third kid. Oh, did you hear the house down the street? Mrs. Robinson just died. There's a house. I just think that all of that life doesn't stop marching on. And when you think about housing, the biggest component in housing are life events.

And those have not stopped the last year. They're just building up. Which is why prices are higher. Are higher. Yeah. But you're seeing wages go up. You're seeing interest rates come down and life continues to march on. I think we're going to see an absolute boom in sales volume into the air. Yeah. It'll be interesting to see if the economy helps Biden. I think people, it may be perfect timing for him. I'll tell you that. We'll see. We'll see. Anyway, very exciting times, and I think it is moving down. But let's bring in our friend of Pivot to talk about where investing is going. managing partner of Cowboy Ventures, a seed-staged VC fund. Ten years ago, she famously coined the term unicorn, referring to VC-backed startups with billion-dollar valuations.

She's now assessing what's happened since then and also looking at the newest unicorns in a TechCrunch piece titled Welcome Back to the Unicorn Club Ten Years Later. And also, I really like Aileen. She's in my book that's coming up where I have a chapter of people I like. It's a very short chapter in Silicon Valley. You are mentioned in it very briefly. Honored. It's fine. So it's also you're one of the few women VCs, prominent ones. Too few.

Too few. And you worked at Climber Perkins. But a lot has happened since you first came up with the unicorn concept. I want to know what jumped out at you as the biggest change from 10 years ago. The number of unicorns has ballooned in the last decade, going from 39 to 532, as you note. But first, say why you picked that again to remind people, and then what was the biggest change? Yeah. First of all, thanks for having me.

I'm a frequent listener, so it's fun to be on. Okay, so 2013, I had a pretty new fund, I was just getting started, didn't have a lot of portfolio companies. And so I was trying to think and seed, there's not a lot of there's no, these are unknown companies, they're off the radar, you know, more than half the time when we're investing, the people need the money to start the company. So no one's heard of them before. And so I basically said, let me just, if I had started 10 years earlier, what are the best companies I could have invested in, and start making that list and then figure out like, how would I have met them? Where did they go to school? What did they do before? Where did they work? Did they pivot? You know, how, just what lessons learned, right? So basically came up with a list of 39 companies that were less than 10 years old

and had basically grown to be worth over a billion dollars in public or private markets, which I just US, because we just invest in the US. And so it's a different kind of definition than I think some of the unicorn lists you'll see out there where they basically track every company that's ever been started. And our definition is for companies that are less than 10 years old.

So we found 39. And at the time, they were mostly consumer. They mostly had exited. They mostly had gone public or been bought. And you know, Facebook, now Meta, was the big one at the time. And there's also a lot of commerce companies like Groupon and Gilt. And then basically, the term went up taking off in a way that I didn't really expect. Why'd you pick unicorn?

You know, it's funny, I, in writing the piece, because there was a lot of analysis and using the definition over and over again, like, you know, a company that was less than 10 years old and had been, had grown to be worth over a billion dollars. It's just a really annoying thing to have to write or read over and over again in a piece. So I tried to come up with a shortener, like Home Run, Monster Hit. And substituting in Unicorn made it so much more fun to read, but it also captured something that I wanted it to, which is that it's special. You know, it's rare. It's a little magical, like you have to have timing and luck and a bunch of other things. All right. So now, fast forward.

So 10 years later, we basically rebuilt the data set, and we have grown from 39 to 532. So it's 14x more. The pendulum shifted massively from being basically 80% of the value in the list was consumer 10 years ago. It's 80% enterprise now. And enterprise companies basically, the list grew 14x, enterprise companies, I think grew 26x in terms of the number of companies. But then when you kind of look under the hood, we realized that 93 versus 66% having exited 10 years ago, 93% of them are what we call paper corns, which is they are on paper only. They are still privately valued. And 60% of them are what we are calling Zerpacorns, where they basically raised their last round during the time when interest rates were basically zero. So 2020-ish, 2021. And so we basically,

and also, so then when you look at how many of them are paper corns, how many are Zerpacorns, over almost half of them are trading at below a billion dollar valuation in the secondary markets. So we basically did a lot of triangulation. We said, okay, this data set of 532 is probably going to shrink, you know, because a lot of these companies are running out of runway. is probably going to shrink. You know, because a lot of these companies are running out of runway. They raised in 2020, 2021, when valuations were,

and public market valuations were really high, and they are burning through their cash and trying, a lot of them, there are a lot of quality companies in this batch. So we think the batch will probably shrink to about 350. And so this set will get smaller. And the other thing that we noticed is capital efficiency really tanked. So one of the positives of the 2013 batch

was enterprise companies had 26x capital efficiency. So they were worth 26 times what they had raised. The capital efficiency got a lot worse. And they were two and a half times more capital efficient than consumer companies in 2013. This batch, across the board, whether you're a consumer or enterprise, the capital efficiency on average is 7x, which is a big decrease. And if you look at how much companies like Apple or Microsoft or Salesforce have grown in the past 10 years, you would have been better off investing in the public markets than a lot of these companies. But AI changed the unicorn game. You say there's also OpenAI looks through the first super unicorn or super corn. Yes. So we, in the first analysis, we coined this term super unicorn, which is a company that becomes worth over a hundred billion dollars. Which would have been Facebook in that.

Yep. Facebook was, and Facebook did it within 10 years, which is pretty unusual. But companies like Cisco or Intel, like other companies that basically kind of represent big, important new waves of innovation wind up becoming these mega unicorns. So it looks like OpenAI. And also in the first batch, we only had one meta, but then three more became super unicorns over time.

So OpenAI looks like it's going to be the first one, but I think there will be many. So really nice to meet you. I have a snarky question that's more of a comment than a question, because just listening to you speak inspired three or four questions. But with respect to you were talking about your analysis around how to generate deal flow and target in on the right individuals and the right concepts. 1,700 freshmen at Stanford, 1,500 at Harvard, so 3,200. 40% are male, so that's 1,280. 50% are white, so that's 640. Wouldn't the smartest means of establishing deal flow would just be to maintain relationships with the 640 white men from Stanford and Harvard that graduate every year? Isn't that where about 80% of all venture capital goes to those 640 people? No, not anymore. Actually, that was like, I would say, one of the positive things that came out of the new analysis was that, yes, in 2013, a high percentage of the people went to what we call like top 10 schools,

and a high percentage of them were technical. So they studied computer science. That has changed a ton. So in the new analysis, I think basically no school like Stanford, Stanford had the most market share of the founder set, which also went from 100 people to 1,300 people. But it had 5% market share. So there was kind of a, there has been, it looks like, a democratization of where people went to school. Is this the number of concepts or actual capital allocated? Oh, no, this is in the number of where the founders went to school. So if you look across

the 1,300 founders, they grew up in all different kinds of places. Actually, most of them were not technical in terms of what they studied. And also, they're in different geos. So in 2013, 70% of the unicorn companies were in San Francisco. And San Francisco lost market share. It's down to 45%. New York is almost 20%. Wow. But also Boston, LA, Austin, Denver, San Diego. Which is what we thought would happen. But you did note that in terms of gender representation, you said there are more founders named Michael, David, and Andrew than there are women unicorn CEOs.

At this rate, we won't reach gender representation until 2063, when we'll all be dead, by the way. Yeah, that's... Go ahead. I'm hoping that the democratization of schools and backgrounds is the leading indicator and that gender will follow, because that's definitely an area I would love to see more progress. I read that 80% of all capital allocated from the venture community last year was into AI or AI-related startups. Do you think there's a bubble in AI in terms of valuations in the venture market?

There is. I think there's going to be a lot of change in the next decade. I do think, what's that phrase? Like, you know how people talk about trends like short-term overhyped and long-term underhyped? I do think that might be the case in AI. Like, there's no question in my mind that AI is going to be kind of under the hood

of all the software we buy in the coming decades. But kind of who is building that software and short-term winners versus long-term winners, I think it's going to be very dynamic. In the analysis, one of the things that caused this huge run-up in Unicorns is just how much more money went into venture capital. Funds got really big and they raised a lot faster than they ever have before. So they've got all this dry powder. And instead of chasing recaps, they are putting it into the new hotness. Into the new hotness. So what are some other sectors outside of AI where there's the most successful unicorns? What are you seeing?

Obviously, enterprise is one. So consumer is not as represented? Not as represented? Not as represented. But we, you know, the first set was pretty like one size fits all products like, you know, meta or a workday or service now. The thing that we saw in the new set is we basically created 19 different sectors like climate or health care or mobility or logistics. And there are now unicorns in all these different sectors. So it's kind of like tech is spreading out across all these learning tech, ed tech, like all these different sectors of society that didn't exist 10 years ago, which I think is pretty exciting. Is there one that sticks out for you? I mean, I was just kind of amazed, like, I mean,

some of it I think is a reflection of kind of free capital in this Zerp period. But, you know, you've got unicorns. Like, there's a unicorn that sells software to parking garages to manage whether there are spots and utilization and stuff like that. So it's like there's companies that are being built in all kinds of sectors. My understanding is that the majority of returns are not only aggregated to a small number of firms, but a small number of people at those firms. Am I overstating it? When we talk about income inequality.

I think it's changed a lot. I mean, there's so many more firms now that, you know, it's funny when I, Kara mentioned I used to work at Kleiner and one of the Kleiner founders talked about the first fund. He said, basically, they made a bunch of investments and it wound up being like two peaches in a bucket of piss. Like, you know, you basically put together a portfolio, you invest in, let's say, 20, 30 companies, and one or two of them winds up being an outlier

that returns the fund or generates multiples of the fund. And I think there are so many funds. I don't think it's super concentrated anymore. It's really quite spread out where there's going to be a lot of funds that are pretty under the radar that wind up having. And a lot of it also is your fund size is your strategy. So depending on how big your fund is, it's going to have a big impact on returns. And the funds have gotten so enormous. a big impact on returns. And the funds have gotten so enormous. It just strikes me that I think I've read that General Callas is raising a $6 billion fund. I would imagine that the ideal scenario is they want companies that at some point will be very capital hungry. Do you think that's driven down returns, the impetus to put to work so much capital? I mean, isn't it? And my follow-on question is, one, is the torrent of capital

that's coming to venture, it just seems logical it would push down returns. And two, and this is anecdotal, but it doesn't mean it's not true. I'm now getting more calls from people trying to raise money or sell their stakes in companies vis-a-vis a secondary as opposed to finding fresh capital. So has capital pushed down returns? And what are your thoughts on the secondary market on these venture-backed companies? on these venture-backed companies? Yeah, I think when you go beyond a billion dollars and you're managing billions of dollars, it's just a different business. And I think the return expectations are going to be different. It's a different LP, right?

You've got big pensions, big sovereigns that want to have allocation across asset classes. They want to be in venture, but they have big checks to park, right? They want to park $100 million, $200 million. Like we're a seed fund, so we're focused on a more curated strategy, investing early and generating high returns. So our fund is $140 million. But if you've got a $2 billion fund, when you just do the math on what kind of return you can generate and how many $5 or $10 billion companies

there are going to be. It's just, I think it's a different return profile, but it's a different, LPs think about it differently. Yeah. So from your seat as the head of a firm, because you went off on your own, when you look at your analysis, where do you think about putting your money?

Where do you find? Because you were in a lot of consumer, you were for a while and you've done a lot of different things. Where do you think the opportunities are from your perspective? Yeah, I mean, when you look at the companies that we've invested in that are doing the best, a lot of them are kind of what we call category creators. So it's founders had an idea in a market that didn't really exist, or people didn't think was a big market. Like, I don't know if you've

spent time with Guild based in Denver, it's an upscaling company that partners with enterprises to help hourly workers get an education and get skills so that they can have career evolution to a higher paying job. Like what they do didn't exist. There was no competition and it was a wide open market, but there's a lot of questions about whether there was a big enough market and whether enterprise was, would adopt it. And it's, it's going great.

We're really proud and happy to, because it's also kind of a double bottom line company where it's actually, it's good for society and it can be a great business. You know, we were investors in a company called Drada in San Diego, two brothers who didn't work in traditional tech companies, didn't work in security, and they had an idea for a better mousetrap. And they were kind of like a third or fourth player in a space. And what they're doing at Drada is amazing, and customers love

the product. What does that do? What does it do? They are basically both a security and compliance platform to help enterprises get SOC 2 compliance or be GDPR compliant or HIPAA compliant, things like that. And it didn't really exist, like a kind of a real-time compliance platform. They had an idea for a new paradigm that people weren't doing it that way. And when you look at things, what are you most worried about? What is the ones you're like, oh God, this is a problem? And actually, I just want to go back to that. When you think about some of the companies

that are most valuable today, even the consumer space that a lot of people can relate to, like Airbnb and Uber, right? Like no one had a shopping list for, I want to invest in a company where people are renting out their couches. You know, and so I think that's what's really exciting is that you being open for business,

meeting founders who have these, like what seemed like crazy ideas and they wound up being huge businesses. Yeah, I remember when I was raising money in the 90s and I think that's why some of my questions are probably a bit, I don't know, outdated, if you will. But I remember thinking it'd be so great to be a venture capitalist

that there's just more these guys and it was almost always guys, always win or figure out a way to always win. And it's just so hard to start a company. I think it's entirely flipped. And I'm curious if you- Yes, it has. The power dynamic and the leverage,

like you weren't allowed to do secondary sales when I was an entrepreneur. Now they use it as a means of differentiating their offer. They're like, we'll give you 5 million bucks to take off the table. Anyway, I get the sense, and I'm kind of giving you a softball here. I don't think there's ever been a better time to start a company. I totally agree.

Capital, if you're in St. Louis, it doesn't matter where you are. With the cloud, you can get to letter M for what it used to cost to get to letter B. If you get any traction, a VC will find you. Make the case or tell me. So validate my thesis. There's never been a better time to be an entrepreneur in America. Yeah. I mean, also, if you look historically at the numbers, some of the biggest, most successful companies were started during downturns. Yeah, 100%. So I think just the, you know, it's just that, you know, the scrappiness, the grit, people know it's not, it's going to be a long game. It's a marathon. Everything's cheaper, easier to build a company.

Well, I mean, money is not as cheap as it was three years ago. No, what I mean is office space and people. Oh yeah, totally. And people can be anywhere. So I totally agree. I think, and venture has changed a lot. You know, we, I'm part of a nonprofit called All Raise, where we're trying to change the composition and culture of the venture industry. And we've made some progress. How's that going? We have a long way to go. When we started, women were 8% of the industry and 75% of firms had not a single female partner. Now we've almost doubled it. So we're almost at 16% women, but still that sucks. So we've got a long way to go, but it's changed. I think just the, there's a lot more specialists now. So if you do dev tools or enterprise infrastructure or commerce, like there are funds that just focus on what, you know, crypto, Web3 versus before you're right, Scott, like every, when I worked at Kleiner, they said, hey, your job is to do great

diligence and help with post-investment support. Sourcing is not part of your job because we see everything. You're not going to get promoted for sourcing something because we get it all. And that's not the case anymore. All right. So I have a last question for you, Eileen. If you were starting now, you've been through the big firms, the small firms, what would you do right now? I think a lot of people started companies because it seemed like a cool thing to do. And the people need to know, you know, things, economies go in cycles. And, you know, it's funny, I used to work in the fashion business, there's a lot more in common with the fashion business and tech cycles and economic cycles than I think people realize. But, you know, in the past five years, there was so much software, especially in enterprise, that we weren't in this best of breed zone where people could find an app that they thought was going to make their job more effective and then bring it in house.

you knew it, you had 500 or 600 different software packages inside an enterprise. And given what's happened in the economy and public market valuations and multiples, everyone's more focused on margins and budgets and security. So CFOs and CIOs and heads of engineering and CTOs are saying, hey, we need to shrink the number of people that are inside our walls. We need to tighten up security. We need to tighten up budget. So they're cutting. Budgets are tight right now for enterprise software. And so selling something new is tough. There's a lot more headwinds than there were three or four years ago. And so founders, if they have an idea and they know that they can deliver quick value, whether it's to a consumer or to an enterprise, because I think the bar is higher now.

But like Scott said, I think it's an amazing time. In general, we also looked at this thing that we call the software power law, where even though we think this herd is going to shrink, I think given how much investment is going into chips and in compute and in storage, that's just going to grow. And as a result, people are going to be able to build more and more powerful, capable software.

And we're going to have more exciting software companies in the future. Ah, perfect. All right, Aileen, thank you. We got to go, but you are the original unicorn. Thanks, Aileen. Thank you. You have to get credit. It's been a huge term.

It's been really important, even though some things can be reductive. I thought this one was enduring. Happy 10-year anniversary. Thank you. Thanks for having me on. Thanks, Aileen. Thanks so much. All right, Scott, don't you like her?

She's so smart. Very impressive. All right. One more quick break. We'll be back for wins and fails. As a Fizz member, you can look forward to free data, big savings on plans, and having your unused data roll over to the following month. Every month. At Fizz, you always get more for your money.

Terms and conditions for our different programs and policies apply. Details at Fizz.ca. Okay, Scott, let's hear some wins and fails. I'm going to start with my win. I saw, I'm interviewing Ava DuVernay, who I love, who's a great director. I've loved all her work. She has a movie called Origins Out that is about Isabel Wilkerson, who I interviewed at the New York Times, who wrote the book Cast, which is, it removes racism from the

discussions about why certain groups are pushed down by others. And she made this amazing connection between the caste system in India, the Nazis in Germany, and the American South that I thought was just brilliant, because she removed race from it. And she's talking about the caste system and all the different pillars of it, including controlling marriage, including inherent superiority. And it really started, nobody thought she could do it. And she's a Pulitzer Prize winner, a brilliant woman. And then Ava's done a movie about this very difficult and sometimes academic, you know, very thinky book that is wonderful

because it's about Isabel and her life and her family and her mother and her husband and this journey of this book. And I got it to, and she uses a documentary style, very up close. She takes a very difficult issue and makes it into the most wonderful of movies. And, you know, at the end,

which was one thing speaking of women investors And, you know, at the end, which was one thing, speaking of women investors, all of a sudden on the screen, Ann Wojcicki's foundation, Lorraine Powell Jobs, and Melinda Gates are producers, which means they funded some of it. And I was like, what? I had no idea they were in it. So I was like, wow, this is amazing. It is, I'm so excited to interview Ava. And it is, I have to tell you, it is so, such a good movie. I loved Mean Girls.

I loved American Fiction also, as I said, all these great movies. But this one is, I couldn't believe, at the end I was turned to a man, I'm like, she pulled that off. I did not think she could pull it off. It's a heartfelt movie about a very difficult issue around why we discriminate. And it was, I thought it was, it moved toward, like you were talking about solutions with people,

it moved toward, let's think about this differently. And I really appreciated that from, you know, let's think about this in a more complex way. Maybe it's not just racism, maybe it's something else that is, racism can be part of it in certain areas. It explains how we push people down. And last thing I'll say is, there's some very difficult scenes, especially around racism, that are, this little kid in a pool in Georgia, I think it's Georgia, is just so upsetting, as well as showing some, the way she shows the middle passage was so devastating and yet not, there wasn't a lot of it, but it was an astonishing display of directorial skill. One of the things that it ends on, and this is not a new fresh thing, is she somehow

makes it into a metaphor about this house that's in the book, too. And she says, let's not talk about how the house got this way. That's what we do a lot. Like, you know, saying I didn't do slavery. I didn't do Nazism. I didn't do the caste system in India. Let's not talk about how the house got here, but what we're going to do with it now. Now it's your house. So what do we, let's not talk about who did this.

We have the cracks. What are we going to do about it? Amazing movie. Amazing movie. And the fail, of course not talk about who did this. We have the cracks. What are we going to do about it? Amazing movie. Amazing movie. And the fail, of course, was Ron DeSantis. What a, he just, what a fail. Starting from the Twitter thing. Just a terrible, terrible candidate.

Deserved fail. Deserved fail. And Donald Trump in the courtroom, the way he's behaving is just astonishing that he's not in jail right now for contempt. But go ahead. I'll draft off your win. I liked it. My fail is, and I'm trying to put a lesson in here, DeSantis' speech where he suspended or announced he was suspending his campaign. I think there's a lesson in there, and that is people remember how you leave. You can spend 10 years working at a company. You can do an outstanding job. And 51% of your brand and how people remember you

is how you behave after you've decided you're leaving. And you should always absolutely resist the temptation to stick up the middle finger on the way out. You should be gracious. You should thank everybody. I mean, if they've treated you really poorly, you should lawyer up. But other than that,

you need to err on the side of grace and generosity. People remember how you leave, how you end a relationship. It might not be working out. You may not feel like you were treated very well, but you err on the side of grace. He really blew it on what he should have done, and I'll get to each of those. He said, I'm not, you know, and I don't, I'm worried about Nikki Haley's reheated corporate governance, govern, governism. Yes, he's now kind of a public figure, and he'll have influence. I mean, these people are just so poorly advised. Imagine if Governor DeSantis had said, you know what? First, I'm going to call out Vivek Ramaswamy for injecting new ideas into the race. What an impressive young man, but we haven't seen the last of him. Chris Christie says it how he is, you know, says, you know, calls it as he sees it,

injected an interesting voice into the campaign. And if he had said, and what a great race, the, you know, the former governor and ambassador, Haley has run, I wish her the best, and I look forward to working with her.

He would have burnished his brand and potentially set himself up for more success in Florida. It wasn't his advisors, Scott. It was him. This is him. He has shitty advisors. Let me just say his PR person is one of the most unpleasant. Well, supposedly it's supposedly his advisors, his wife. Yeah, I understand. But everyone around him is so unkind, ungenerous, unpleasant, and really shits. This is my lesson to young people. It is so easy to give into your instincts to take, now that you have nothing to lose,

to speak your mind and go after people and jab them. Don't. Don't. Real grace, real grace is being magnanimous, generous. And if he had done that, it would have gone viral. It would have been everywhere. And everyone would have thought, you know what? Maybe I'll give that guy another look.

Instead, he cemented his brand as an asshole. And every president that's won, maybe with the exception of Nixon, has a certain charisma or likability to them. has a certain charisma or likability to them. And this was an enormous opportunity to counter the image that people have of them on the negative side. I would say yes. Be likable.

That's my fail. That's a good one. All right, I'm glad that you dropped my mind. Again, see origins. You should see it, Scott. You would love it. I'd love to know what you think too. Anyway, thank you so much.

What a very full and rich show. And again, we want to thank all our questioners from last week's, all our audience who came and did questions for us in our call-in. We love that. We got great reviews for it, and we're going to do it again. But what a smart group of people listening to this show, and we really appreciate that. We want to hear from you, as we said. Send us your questions about business, tech, or whatever's on your mind. Go to nymag.com slash pivot to submit a question for the show or call 855-51-PIVID. Scott, that's the show and a fantastic, cuddly show it is. We'll be back on

Friday for more. Read us out. Today's show was produced by Lara Naiman, Zoe Marcus, and Taylor Griffin. Ernie Enjotot engineered this episode. Thanks also to Drew Burrows and Neil Saverio. Nishat Kerwa is Vox Media's executive producer of audio. Make sure you subscribe to the show wherever you listen to podcasts. Thanks for listening to Pivot from New York Magazine and Vox Media. You can subscribe to the magazine at nymag.com slash pod. We'll be back later this week for another breakdown of all things tech and business. Cara, have a great rest of the week.