The Prof G Pod with Scott Galloway - Office Hours: Fintech IPOs, Apple’s Search Game, Checking Your Morals, and Dating Post-Covid

Episode Date: June 21, 2021

Scott answers a question on SoFi’s IPO, plus the record number of Fintech companies going public. He also shares his thoughts on whether Apple should acquire Neeva and make it its default search engine. Scott then gives dating advice to the young and single in an era of dating apps, and tells us how to navigate working in an industry that challenges our values. Music: https://www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Join Capital Group CEO Mike Gitlin on the Capital Ideas Podcast. In unscripted conversations with investment professionals, you'll hear real stories about successes and lessons learned, informed by decades of experience. It's your look inside one of the world's most experienced active investment managers. Invest 30 minutes in an episode today. Subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Published by Capital Client Group, Inc. Support for PropG comes from NerdWallet.

Starting your credit card search with NerdWallet? Smart. Using their tools to finally find the card that works for you? Even smarter. You can filter for the features you care about. Access the latest deals and add your top cards to a comparison table to make smarter decisions. And it's all powered by the Nerd's expert reviews of over 400 credit cards. Head over to nerdwallet.com forward slash learn more to find smarter credit

cards, savings accounts, mortgage rates, and more. NerdWallet, finance smarter. NerdWallet Compare Incorporated. NMLS 1617539. Welcome to the Prop G Show's Office Hours. This is the part of the show where we answer your questions about business, big tech, entrepreneurship, and whatever else is on your mind. If you'd like to submit a question, please email a voice recording to officehoursatprofgmedia.com. Again, that's officehoursatprofgmedia.com. First question. Hi, Scott.

This is Mary Catherine, and I'm listening in from Southern California. I really love your two shows. And in fact, they were introduced to me right before your big appearance on Bill Maher. It was well-timed because I made a career shift from the automotive industry to the fintech world earlier this year. And your shows have been really helpful in understanding the more techie, I use techie with air quotes, worlds. But enough about me. I'm really curious to hear your take

on SoFi going public. I found your commentary on the Coinbase IPO fascinating and I'm eager to hear how you would juxtapose that with SoFi as both are disrupting the financial services industry, though in very different ways. So what's your take on SoFi's approach, both as a SPAC and also in giving retail investors early access, primarily their own members?

And lastly, what do you think on the growing number of fintechs going public, and are we going to reach a saturation point? Mary Catherine, thanks for the thoughtful question. So there's this great dispersion taking place. This is one of my kind of key themes. Three big trends in our economy, our modern economy. The first was globalization, or specifically the comparative advantage of nations. Second, digitization, the internet. And the third is dispersion, and that's reconfiguring the supply chain to, A, add more value and margin to the creator, the real source of value. And, B, reduce friction and cost for the

end user. And there's a dispersion, if you will, of trust and of products away from the middlemen, specifically banks and branches and all sorts of bullshit, redlining or inefficient mortgage brokers. There's just so much waste in financial services, and there's just an incredible dispersion of credibility and products to these online banking and financial technology companies. And it's really inspiring. I've got to be honest. I don't understand it that well. It's a space that I know is huge, and I try to understand it a bit better, but I don't. SoFi is basically sort of what I would almost call like a distributed bank. They position themselves as an online personal finance company, mobile first, and they provide a suite of financial products ranging from student loans, mortgages or student loan refinancing, mortgages, personal loans, I think, is a wonderful idea because, as has happened across almost every asset class, more and more of the games have been captured by the shareholder class, specifically venture capitalists, 93% of whom are white, and 40% come from Harvard and Stanford.

Isn't it great they're finally making some money? But the idea of offering shares directly to the public such that they might, or retail investors such that they might participate in that one-day pop. The only problem is SPACs typically don't get a one-day pop. They're sort of trading initially. And I would argue that SPACs, while there'll be some well-publicized winners, SPACs are companies that traditionally can't get

through the traditional IPO process. The filter from Goldman and JP Morgan is just finer than it is for a SPAC. And there are so many companies looking to de-SPAC or so many SPACs that have raised an initial amount of equity trying to find targets that a lot of SPACs coming to market are not kind of your father's grade A or your mother's grade A tier one company. And as a result, I don't think you're going to see the same sort of pent-up demand and initial pop right out of the gates. And let's be honest, it's a racket. The investment bank says to Airbnb, hey, price your shares at $68 a share, knowing it's going to come out at least $80 or $90. And then they go to their biggest

institutional clients, whether it's BlackRock or Fidelity, who they earn a ton of fees from, or their high net worth family office clients and say, we'll get you allocation in this underpriced IPO. And the company oftentimes gets angry because it says, well, we sold 10% of our company for $500 million when we could have sold 10% of our company for $700 million had you priced it correctly. But they get a certain amount of momentum in a branding event when it pops. Because if a company pops on its first day IPO, there's a ton of press, it's seen as a leader, it gets momentum. And sure, maybe they got an additional 2% or 3% dilution, but it's probably worth the additional pop. Anyways, you didn't ask about the dynamics of IPOs. PayPal, Square, and Shopify are each worth more than $100 billion. Last year, there were a record eight fintech IPOs, and in the first four months of this year alone, we saw another seven go public. As a matter of fact, I got introduced to the CEO of UALA, which is trying to bank the unbanked in Argentina.

Less than 50% or more than half of Argentinians don't have a traditional bank account. So when you think about what it's like to conduct your life with no credit or just with cash all the time, it's inefficient. You don't have access to e-commerce. There's just a lot, it's more difficult. You spend more time paying bills in person, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. So this individual, the founder there is this 30-year-old, he's kind of an inspiring kid who's building this online bank for Argentinians and trying to bank the unbanked. And then when you talk about the democratization of finance as we disperse trading out onto our phones to grant the great dispersion, there's some very good things about it. One, for the first time, people of color have caught up to whites in terms of their participation in the stock market. I think that's largely based on how easy and how democratized investing has become because of some of these apps and decentralized or DeFi or defunance or cryptocurrencies, and also some of

these online banking platforms and these fintech companies. It's just the product innovation at Square is just dramatic. I wish the CEO there would be the CEO of Twitter. Oh, wait, he is, and he doesn't give a shit about Twitter. Another talk show, another talk show. But look, at the end of the day, I think you moving from automotive to fintech is really inspiring. And SoFi offering its customers access to these early IPOs.

I think, quite frankly, it's more of a marketing play for SPACs that'll get some attention. And okay, so it's great. It's a good thing. What I'd like to see is the tier one. I'd love to see a Goldman or JP Morgan offer more and more shares to kind of the small guy or gal and have their own retail trading apps. I think Goldman or JP Morgan should buy one of these trading platforms that already has millions of accounts of younger people and start offering more thoughtful, more responsible education. I think Robinhood is a menace. I think trying to gamify the whole process, if you just bought the 10 stocks

that Robinhood said are the most traded, you would basically trade your way to zero. And trying to encourage people just to trade all the time is a recipe for just losing money. So I think it would be great if one of these bigger players that has access to institutional grade IPOs tried to democratize that. But in sum, in sum, SoFi, Square, PayPal, these are all amazing companies. I would argue some of them are probably overvalued right now, but as long as they can keep the growth going, who knows? And offering IPO shares to retail investors is a great thing, even if they aren't, quote unquote, the tier one IPOs that we'd all want access to. Thank you for the question, Mary Catherine. Question number two. Hey, Scott,

this is Joe from just outside Philadelphia. You recently had the founder of Neva on, and I came away wondering if instead of becoming a player in the search game, they were instead a prime acquisition target for another privacy-focused, advertising-hesitant, Cupertino-based business. Apple gets a large payment from Google to be the default search engine, but would offering the services of Neva, perhaps rolled into a recently renamed iCloud Plus offering, be another haymaker to their competitors? Thanks. So, Joe from Philadelphia.

Philadelphia, 80% of New York for 50% of the price. Philadelphia is sort of the Old Navy of cities. That was initially the value proposition of Old Navy. I helped launch the Old Navy brand when I started a brand strategy firm called Profit in San Francisco. And the basic proposition that Mickey Drexler outlined that I thought was genius, it was so simple, was 80% of the gap for 50% of the price. Anyways, bottom line is I love Philadelphia. I think it's a great city. I spent a lot of time there. I was on the board of Urban Outfitters, the coolest headquarters in the world, the Navy Yard in Philadelphia, just inspiring, so cool, this juxtaposition of these cooled old industrial buildings and these parked aircraft carriers and

destroyers floating up and down in the bay there. Anyway, not what you asked, not what you asked. So yeah, 100%. I think the most obvious takeout here for Apple is probably going to be Neva. I used to think it was Peloton, and I still think that could happen if they continue to have supply chain problems. When I say they, Peloton.

I've never seen two brands that are more in harmony than Peloton and Apple, but Apple is going vertical everywhere. They're producing their own chips. They're getting further into content. Obviously, they have devices. They're taking more and more control of their supply chain in China. And I think they're absolutely going to go into the business of search. And whether they do that on their own with their own engineers or whether they acquire a company like Neva, I think the most likely acquirer for Neva, and it's still early, disclosure, I'm an investor. And just some

background, I can't stand these monopolies. I think it is crazy for one firm, Google, to control 93% of content discovery across the globe. I think that is unhealthy to have one group of individuals deciding the algorithms that serve up the answers to 93% of our queries globally. That's just not a good idea. So a subscription-based search engine that doesn't focus on people's getting people's attention and time, but focuses on value. Think about this. There are three times as many people at Google working on selling ads than working on the core technology of the search engine. And you have three parties. You have the searcher, you have the content creator, and then you have the advertiser. And when you cut out the advertiser, you end up with a much better search engine because you're focused on the person making this query and you're focused on the creator serving them up the best content.

So I tracked down the CEO of Neva who was on the show last week, Sridhar Ramaswamy, and I just love Neva and I'm using it. And I'm hoping at some point people say, I don't know, let's Neva it. But yeah, one of the things I thought about when I invest in this company is a logical acquirer here is Apple, who is moving towards privacy, wants to increase the amount of revenue it gets from subscription. If you look at Apple's PE multiple, it's gone from, usually trades between 10 and 15, and it's gone to 38. I think a lot of that is on the backs of the fact that it's now deriving 20% of its revenues from recurring revenue, whether it's Apple Music or Apple Arcade or Apple One. So incorporating a search engine into that subscription ecosystem that is privacy-based, a little bit more elegant,

I think makes all the sense in the world. So we'll see. But a fantastic question, Joe from Philly. Joe from Philly, the old navy of cities. We have one quick break before our final two questions. Stay with us. Support for this show comes from Constant Contact. You know what's not easy? Marketing. And when you're starting your small business, while you're so focused on the day-to-day, the personnel, and the finances, marketing is the last thing on your mind. But if customers don't know about you, the rest of it doesn't really matter. Luckily, there's Constant Contact.

Constant Contact's award-winning marketing platform can help your businesses stand out, stay top of mind, and see big results. Sell more, raise more, and build more genuine relationships with your audience through a suite of digital marketing tools made to fast-track your growth. With Constant Contact, you can get email marketing that helps you create and send the perfect email to every customer and create, promote, and manage your events with ease, all in one place. Get all the automation, integration, and reporting tools that get your marketing running seamlessly, all backed by Constant Contact's expert live customer support. Ready, set, grow.

Go to ConstantContact.ca and start your free trial today. Go to ConstantContact.ca for your free trial. ConstantContact.ca Hey, it's Scott Galloway, and on our podcast, Pivot, we are bringing you a special series about the basics of artificial intelligence. We're answering all your questions. What should you use it for? What tools are right for you? And what privacy issues should you ultimately watch out for? And to help us out, we are joined by Kylie Robeson, the senior AI reporter for The Verge, to give you a primer on how to integrate AI into your life.

So, tune into AI Basics, How and When to Use AI, a special series from Pivot sponsored by AWS, wherever you get your podcasts. Welcome back. Question number three. Scott, what is up, big dog? My name is Eric from San Francisco. I got a fun one for you today. What advice would you give to your earlier self or a young single male as far as dating in a post-pandemic era? And also, we got to tie it back to tech. So what are your thoughts on dating apps and the whole scene, Hinge, Bumble, Tinder, versus Facebook dating. Is there more disruption to be done in this area? Doesn't seem like it. And maybe even taking a lens beyond dating.

What would you double down on? Whether it be investments, relationships, soft skills, building those, building knowledge. And you talk a lot about empathy. So maybe what advice would you give your earlier self to double down on or just really to hammer in on? Okay, a lot there, Eric. We're going to need a bigger boat. So first off, I am not an expert on dating and relationships. This is one of those questions I'd love to need a bigger boat. So first off, I am not an expert on dating and relationships. This is one of those questions I'd love to have Esther Perel. So this is Pulse Marketing. I'll just give you some thoughts. I did not grow up in the dating app era.

So I don't know. I think dating has changed dramatically. And unfortunately, there's what I would call we're suffering from a tremendous mating inequality. And that is that typically when there's digitization of any sector, whether it's media, whether it's social media, whether it's digitization of retail, you incur a consolidation where it becomes kind of winner-take-most. And the same thing, unfortunately, is happening in mating. Specifically, and I'm going to look at this through the lens of a young man. You asked me to give advice to my 25-year-old self. But what you have on dating apps now, if there's 100 people on Tinder, if there's 50 women and 50 men, four of the men receive the attention of 46 of the women.

And that leaves 46 men fighting for the attention of four women. And there are really three things that women look for in a mate. And this is backed by research. The first is resources. And I know how terrible that sounds, but it's the truth. People are instinctively hardwired to want to protect their children. And as a mate, if you can bring to the table resources, you bring a greater likelihood that your children will survive and women find that attractive in a potential mate. The number two reason or the number two criteria for a mate from women or from the female side of the species is intellect. If you're smart and can demonstrate that you make good decisions, again, the family is more likely to survive. I think an interesting observation I made was the way I was

able to occasionally convince someone to date me was I would make them laugh. Laughter and humor is a sign of intelligence. And I've always said that if you can make someone laugh, that they will date you. And then the third thing is kindness. It really doesn't matter the resources you have and how smart you are if you're an asshole, if you don't demonstrate a certain level of empathy and kindness. So I would say dating or your success at night dating is a function of what you do during the day. And that is, I think, to focus on your career and demonstrate responsibility, hard work, and that you are and are going to be successful and be a good provider,

and I realize how 50s that sounds, is a component, is a function of how successful you will be. As a matter of fact, and it's scary on these dating apps, those four men that garner all the attention are able to signal resources either through the right degree from the right college or even living. If you geotag yourself in a high-income area, you're much more likely to have someone swipe right on you. And then the other thing is, I would say this for both men and women, is be aggressive. And we've conflated masculinity with toxicity. And I don't think that's true. I think being aggressive, which is a male attribute, is a wonderful thing. I think you should ask people out. I think you

should express interest in people. And if you don't know the difference between expressing interest and being aggressive than making someone feel unsafe or uncomfortable, then you got much bigger problems. And also, there's just no getting around it. If you take more swings of the plate, you're more aggressive, ask more people out, are more open to rejection and failure. The most successful people in the world have one thing in common, and that is they're willing to eat shit. And what I mean by eating shit is they're willing to put themselves in a place where they might be rejected. And if you want to punch above your weight class in terms of mating, it means approaching that strange person at a bar, at a restaurant,

wherever it might be. And I'm not talking about in any way making someone uncomfortable. It's okay. If you approach somebody and they're not interested, they'll let you know and you can be respectful and leave. But I don't think there's anything wrong with approaching people and trying to establish relationships. In terms of, what would I double down on? I think young people, I just wrote a column in my blog on advice to graduates. I think in your first few years, I don't buy this balance. I think your 20s are about being a warrior, and that is being very, very focused on three things. The first is work. And by the way, balance, okay. If you're listening to this podcast, you don't want balance. You want relevance. You want to be a baller. You want to be more

successful than your average bear. And guess what? Guess what? That takes a ton of fucking work. It takes a lot of fuel to make the jump to light speed. So burn a lot of it. Don't do what you're asked to do. Do what you're capable of doing. Show that you come to play. Work really, really hard. And you have a chance of getting escape velocity. The trajectory of your career in your 40s and 50s or the ground you cover is a function of the velocity you establish in your 20s and 30s. The first is, I think your 20s and mostly your 30s are about work, quite frankly, and

trying to become great at something. Two, relationships. Try and invest, even if it's just a little bit, invest in relationships. I'm not just talking about romantic relationships. I mean, occasionally checking in on friends, pinging your parents, just checking in. Hi, mom. Hi, dad. Small investments, small text messages, congratulations to friends, checking in on people, helping people out.

It doesn't take a ton of time. It's more about making little investments. We talk about how small investments of money can grow to be huge things. It's the same way with relationships. And then third, be a fucking warrior. Be mentally and physically super strong. Try to work out. I've been working out four times a week for the last 40 years.

I think a physical, stronger version of yourself is a happier, more attractive, more confident version of yourself. You should be able to walk into any room, any room, and think you can overpower, outlast, or endure more pain than anyone in the room. And I realize how macho that sounds. I'm not talking about being ripped or being jacked. I'm talking about lifting heavy weights and running long distances, not only in the gym, but in your mind. Demonstrate a level of grit. Be kind, invest in relationships, and try and become mentally and physically tough. And again, again, your success, your success at night, your success in dating is a function of what you do during the day, what you do during the day, and to demonstrate kindness, to garner the resources such that you can be kind, a good citizen, a good person.

A lot of lecture there, a lot of lecture. Anyways, and the dating apps, I have no idea how that shit works. However, however, let's look into some of the stats. According to Statista, Tinder had 7 million downloads worldwide just in May. Globally, Tinder was the second highest-grossing app of 2020

with 513 million behind TikTok's 540 million. Oh my gosh, isn't that crazy? The Wall Street Journal reported that eight of the largest U.S. dating apps, including Tinder, Bumble, and Hinge, collectively saw more than a 12%

year-over-year increase in monthly active users in the final quarter of 2020, the biggest jump in nearly two years. Hinge's monthly active users increased a whopping 53% year-over-year. And there's a ton of interest in the market as well. Bumble's shares have jumped 64% after their market debut in February, fetching a $13 billion valuation. Oh my God. According to Pew, close to half of 18 to 29-year-olds say they have used a dating app or site, but only about one in 10 U.S. adults have been in a serious relationship with someone they met on a dating app. So I don't understand dating apps. I came of age where my dating life was before apps, which I actually am a little bit relieved about, but just some thoughts in

no specific order on mating, if you will. Next question. Hey, Scott, Chris from Cleveland here. I recently decided to go back to school to pursue my master's in finance and have the hope of getting an MBA one day. I've been feeling pretty discouraged lately about the industry I've committed my education to. I see McKinsey playing a major role in the opioid epidemic, JP Morgan and other top banks collecting billions in overdraft fees during a global pandemic, BlackRock scooping up homes for 20 to 50% premiums, effectively barricading the road to the middle class for millions, and too many other things to name. These are all top tier companies that I would be incredibly fortunate to get a job at. I want to make a lot of money and become incredibly successful to provide economic security for myself and my family.

The conventional path to do that goes straight through these companies that are doing genuinely evil things. As someone who has seemed to navigate it pretty well, what is a good path to wealth and prosperity without having to check your morals and ethics at the door? So a thoughtful question. I don't think these are unethical people. I think that the unethical externalities, so let me be clear, I think the people running Facebook are unethical. I don't think Jamie Dimon or Lloyd Blankfin or whoever runs McKinsey, I don't think they're unethical people. I think that the fault lies with us, and that is we have not been able to elect leaders

that have the backbone to push back on these companies and demand the same accountability we've held other companies to. And that is when it's raining money, it's hard to be – it's hard – you know, it blurs your vision. And you make a series of incremental decisions that result in externalities or bad outcomes for the commonwealth or people's general well-being because you become so focused on being successful and garnering your own economic security. So, I think it's more our fault that we haven't put in place regulation or that we don't hold these people accountable. And I think if you want to make a difference, the first thing you have to do is put yourself in a position of influence. I think there's sort of this pseudo-psycho relevance that people pursue as young people to try and signal virtue and worth to their peers as opposed to focusing on putting yourself in a position of influence. So you can hire more people of color or you can be more empathetic or you can force your company to make better decisions around their carbon footprint because you are in a position of influence. But just complaining about it as a young man or a young woman to seem more virtuous,

to me, just, I don't know. Yeah, we all know about the problems. We all hear about them every day. Everybody gets attacked on Twitter if they mention anything that's off color. But okay, we get it. Now, what are you going to do? Put yourself in a position to make a difference. And I think these companies are good companies. So, you know, these are very personal decisions. Some people decide to go to work for Ben and Jerry's or Patagonia because they like their social stance. But what you're also seeing in financial services is about a third of the alternative investment or funds raised have an ESG component. And I think there's a cartoon of rich people that they're bad people who want to destroy the earth and that they're Monty Burns. I find that the majority of the really wealthy people I've seen or come in contact with, and I do come in contact with a lot of them, are generally very civic-minded, thoughtful, generous people. So, I think it's more important you decide what you're going to do, A, to provide economic security for you and your family. I think you have to take responsibility for that. And also, what are you going to do to put yourself in a

position of influence? What inspires you? What do you think you'll, you know, I don't want to say love, but enjoy enough to be really good at it. And once you're really good at it, you'll start enjoying it more. And put yourself in a position to make some of that change. And also realize that these companies are a function of the markets they operate in. And the markets they operate in is a function of who we vote for and the guardrails or the lack thereof we put in place. But boss, if you have an opportunity to go to work for one of these platforms, I think that's an outstanding opportunity. And I just wouldn't buy into the notion that these firms are evil, except for Facebook.

Except for Facebook. They're a mendacious fox. We'll leave it there. That's all for this episode. Again, if you'd like to submit a question, please email a voice recording to officehours at profgmedia.com. Our producers are Caroline Chagrin and Drew Burrows. Claire Miller is our assistant producer. If you like what you heard, please follow, download, and subscribe. Thank you for listening to The Prof G Show from the Vox Media Podcast Network. We will catch you on Thursday. What software do you use at work?

The answer to that question is probably more complicated than you want it to be. The average U.S. company deploys more than 100 apps, and ideas about the work we do can be radically changed by the tools we use to do it. So what is enterprise software anyway? What is productivity software? How will AI affect both? And how are these tools changing the way we use our computers to make stuff, communicate, and plan for the future?

In this three-part special series, Decoder is surveying the IT landscape presented by AWS. Check it out wherever you get your podcasts. Support for the show comes from Alex Partners. AWS. Check it out wherever you get your podcasts. Thank you. available at www.alexpartners.com slash vox. That's www.alexpartners.com slash vox. In the face of disruption, businesses trust Alex Partners to get straight to the point and deliver results when it really matters.